Search Results

The nearly 50-year-old punk label is retooling for the modern age. When news hit the HALOSCOPE office that BOY London  was going to be digitizing their visual archive for the first time, we were absolutely chomping at the bit to get our eyes on it first. Founded in 1976, BOY London has been emblematic of underground subcultures from Punk to Acid House for nearly 5 decades now. Made famous through their connection to major celebrities like Madonna, Boy George, Andy Warhol, Rihanna, and Beyoncé, BOY is fanning the flames of their ever-burning cultural relevance with their Fall/Winter 2024 collection. I had the chance to meet up with the BOY London team to talk all about their inspirations for the collection, their vision for the future, and to answer the age-old question: Is punk really dead? Here is our conversation: This interview has been edited for grammar and clarity. KAITLIN OWENS:  I’m seeing a lot of utility wear and racing-inspired looks. How did you go about designing the collection? What were your inspirations? BOY LONDON:  For Autumn/Winter 2024, our racing inspiration came from Bosozoku . It’s a Japanese youth culture associated with customized motorcycles and outlaw biker gangs [that] turned against the Westernized business suit-and-tie and adopted their own uniform style called Tokkōfuku , modelled off military wear — hence the utility references in the collection. We looked carefully at the slogans and symbols that were used by these gangs and interpreted them in the “BOY” way — always reverting back to our punk heritage and DNA. KO: I am obsessed with the vibrant reds and chunky knits in this collection. How were the red-and-black textiles featured in many of the looks constructed?  BL: [The featured textiles] are a red-and-black knitted Tiger intarsia using merino wool for the base and what's called an eyelash yarn technique in mohair. KO: Are there any plans to revive looks from the early days of BOY? Or is your team looking more towards the future of fashion?  BL:  We are always looking back at our extensive history which is rich in diversity — there is a huge amount to pull from. However, we are always looking ahead and evolving the collections, but always being mindful to create [sic] the core DNA of the brand. KO: As your visual archive becomes available to the media for the first time, I’m curious — what are your favorite collections? BL: Which do you return to as a touchpoint for the DNA of the brand? We always love the simplicity of how BOY was used in the ‘80s and ‘90s — bold logos that are remembered so clearly on caps and T-shirts worn by the likes of Elton John, Rihanna, Pet Shop Boys, and Andy Warhol. The logo is iconic and we enjoy reimagining this in more modern applications. KO: I would love to hear your opinions on the legacy of Brit Punk fashion. We’ve heard ad nauseam that “punk is dead”— what do you think? BL: Obviously, we love the rich and exciting history of “British punk” with the amazing associations with some of Britain's most famous and influential punk artists like Sid Vicious. Whilst these are always very clear in our minds when designing new collections, it's obviously important to evolve with the times and what people are actually wearing and buying into. To us, “punk” is an attitude [that] comes with certain beliefs and idealisms — it's not about safety pins through a ripped jacket but more about how you carry yourself and the life choices you make. Punk will never die because it belongs within us — it's not an image or a particular look but a way of life. For more information about BOY LONDON and to take a closer look at their archive, please visit their website here. 🌀 Kaitlin Owens is HALOSOPE's Archival Fashion Editor and the Editor-in-Chief of Dilettante Magazine. For a closer look at her work, please visit kaitlindotcom.com .

How much of a chokehold does the “fear of looking bad” have on our favorite fashion girls? Each time a new award season approaches (which usually is right after the Emmys), the discourse on how the fashion community will be inevitably disappointed resurfaces. I am all for the referential premiere looks that we’ve seen on Zendaya , Margot Robbie , and Dakota Johnson . I’ve even been surprised and pleased with Ayo Edebiri and Greta Lee’s well-tailored Loewe and Prada looks. However, when I look at pictures from the Hollywood of years ago, it’s easy to see that a fearlessness and lack of polish are lost. I hate to reference a very obvious moment but it’s such a memorable look for a reason. I don’t even need to add a visual, but I will: Julia Roberts  looks joyous in every picture from the 1990 Golden Globes. Her hair is curly, her gray suit is almost too big on her, and she’s wearing a men’s tie. It’s the bravery and naturalism that makes it one of the oft-repeated images on many a mood board. As much as I enjoy romanticizing the ‘90s and what that era meant for red carpet events, the real task on our hands translates to all corners of the beauty world: what does glamour mean to an online community that doesn’t really know what it wants to see? We love drama, archival looks, and when muses truly embody a designer’s vision and brand palette. But we don’t really love when there’s too much going on; when the pieces don’t look wearable or comfortable on the person; when the subject tries too hard or doesn’t risk enough; or when we know contracts on celebrities restrict them from wearing something flattering or less safe. We (I) also don’t know how big a stylist’s role truly is from celebrity to celebrity. Some take a hands-on approach (Law Roach); others merely offer small suggestions. Do they have the power to dictate what celebrities cannot wear? I don’t think anyone can say how much of what we see on a red carpet is the star’s true taste, even when it comes to glamorous looks where they have the chance to showcase their most personal style.  Though the public (online, offline, anyone who consumes pop culture) could have expectations that are too high, they’re still very much based on the pendulum of what’s trending. Right now, the more effortlessly flawless the makeup, hair, and attire are = the more glamorous. This is much more evident than before, in the sense that the look has to deliver on all fronts: while moving, in a close-up, in flash photography, on video, on high-speed slow-motion cameras, and in candid pictures. Achieving that is nearly impossible. It’s unrealistic, but we adore when it does happen, when it clicks and satisfies what we had in our heads for a premiere look, for the Oscars or the Met Gala. Effort is loved but unreasonably looked down upon when noticeable. This could be a greater societal taste indicator, but I would like to keep a mindset that’s as least judgemental as possible. What causes excitement and admiration is obviously very personal, and if we gravitate towards the public figures whose style we admire, maybe the universal term of glamour is no longer useful. These events are the only ones that can really fulfill our craving for glamour, and remind us why we still (kind of) revere Hollywood. Maybe now the truth is that celebrity is no longer this mysterious, magical, all-encompassing prism. Nowadays, we know the reality of how much effort goes into red carpet looks — and the real feat is making them look easy.  What is holding back these appearances could be a lack of jewelry, as has been mentioned many times on social media: the art of wearing a good necklace is lost. Anne Hathaway  is one of the last celebrities to understand its importance, thanks to her Bulgari contract. And, too, consider the fact that the presence of natural curly hair on the red carpet is lost. But what could also be the cause of celebrity fashion’s degradation is simply the notion of how effortlessness can never be the same as flawlessness. A look being effortless itself already makes us believe it is flawless — not because it looks polished in every angle, but because its distinct characteristics have aligned and shown personality, beauty, and fashion sense all at once.  In an interview with blog WORTHY in 2021 , celebrity jewelry stylist Michael O’Connor mentions specific eras that show how the pendulum has swung: “Throughout the late 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s, celebrities still wanted the ‘WOW’ factor, but they wanted a more modern feel. This era seemed to herald the ‘death of the necklace,’ in an effort to modernize and minimalize a look but still create ‘wow!’ As a result, earrings became the most important piece for many celebrities.” He mentions 2009 as an important year for the return of the necklace, with both Nicole Kidman and Amy Adams opting for statement pieces for the Oscars.  This makes me believe it takes a select few necklaces to start the trend again. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a maximalist moment (see Ayo Edebiri’s and Jenna Ortega’s simple silver chains at the 2024 Emmys), but it has to add some kind of “glamour” that we don’t get to see anywhere else. It adds to the new definition of glamour of our time, and it can be the rounding out of an already tasteful look. 🌀

Calling your partner “stinky” suddenly has a whole new meaning. In 2016, Arabelle Sicardi wrote a story for RACKED  on Smell.Dating , the world’s first mail-in, smell-based dating service. The bare bones of the service were this: the company sends you a T-shirt, you wear that T-shirt around town, get it nice and stinky, then mail it back to them. They will then send you a handful of other, pre-stinked shirts sent in by potential love matches. You sniff the shirts, rank your favorites, and then Smell.Dating connects you with partners who also noted that your B.O. was especially primo. A genius idea, right? Our pheromones dictating whether or not two people will be compatible mates has been a prevailing theory  for decades. Now, while there is some controversy on exactly how much  our natural musk affects our dating batting average, there’s certainly some degree of olfactory communication going on between lovers.  Why else would “stink” and “stinky” be such common pet names for those who are sweet on each other? The scent of your partner’s body has long been a tentpole for expressing one’s own attraction and devotion. Does Napoleon’s “Home in three days, don’t wash” letter to his darling Joséphine ring any bells? My own husband enacts a time-honored practice he calls “whiff dosing” (read: shoving my face into his smelly armpits while he laughs with glee) and I will admit (privately, to you, my dear HALOSCOPE reader — and not to him) that despite my pleas for mercy, I do secretly love this little routine of ours. There’s something comforting about the way your partner stinks — it’s alluring and familiar and one of the things I miss most when he’s out of town. In popular media, bodily scent has been featured a few times as the catalyst for sexual obsession and violent crime. The 1985 Patrick Süskind novel and subsequent 2006 motion picture Perfume: The Story of a Murderer  follows a man who becomes so obsessed with recreating the scent of a woman’s body that he goes mad. A Season 6 episode of Criminal Minds  features a killer who distills the bodies of his female victims into scented candles — all the better to smell you with, my dear? So it’s safe to say, that while we cannot definitively prove in a scientific sense that smell is directly linked to romantic or sexual attraction…. there’s certainly something   in the air. All that being said, it’s no wonder Smell.Dating wanted to capitalize on this virtual hotbed of stinky attraction in the name of online matchmaking. But here’s the question on everybody’s lips: Did it work?  I went straight to the source and asked. Arabelle Sicardi has written extensively on scent and its relationship to seduction, power, and identity politics (I would highly recommend their essay on “Perfume, Power and God” ), so I figured, aside from their direct involvement in testing out the Smell.Dating platform, who better to reach out to about a sexy smelly story than the Fashion Pirate themselves? KAITLIN OWENS:  I know it was way back in 2016, but do you remember how any of your Smell.Dating dates went? Was it a love connection or just another dating gimmick? ARABELLE SICARDI:  I do remember going on a few dates — honestly it was fun and a great method of "blind dating" because it brought me into a situation I wouldn't necessarily have chosen for myself. I ended up going on two — two?  — dates with a firefighter who smelled marvelous. But I am, in the end, gay as hell, and I didn't want to date a man, regardless of how cute, capable, and delicious he might have smelled. For the record, I would stand by the fact a gimmick can still be a marvelous adventure. App dating is horrific — I would not say smell-based dating was any worse than any other kind of date I've been on. KAITLIN OWENS: There’s an entire industry centered around pheromone perfumes which amplify or alter your natural scent in order to attract a partner. What is your opinion on these products? Do they work? ARABELLE SICARDI : I've used and have written about pheromone perfumes before, early in my journey of smell culture and desirability politics. They're a fun concept, sure, but just that alone — totally marketing. I'm not mad about it — all of beauty is storytelling. But it's a lie, you know? The science isn't there. And there are simply better perfumes. KAITLIN OWENS: So what makes smell sexy? Is there a particular perfume you wear to attract a mate? ARABELLE SICARDI : Sexy is completely individual. I don't really pick perfumes based on seduction the way it's typically marketed — which, currently, means an edible gourmand. Seduction, to me, requires open-hearted intimacy and familiarity — choosing to be who you are with the person you choose, and the ability to ask for exactly what you want without apology. I don't wear fragrance to seduce. Fragrance is a public garment to me. Knowing what I actually  smell like is a gift few people get to open! I’m inclined to agree! Personally, for me, I use scent as a tool for “sexiness” — but not so much for “attraction” or “seduction.” I’m aiming to be beautiful and alluring but I don’t necessarily want to catch any spiders in my web — the same way you’d wear a low-cut dress or a pair of uncomfortably high shoes. It feels cliche to say “I wear it for me!” but I really do. It doesn’t really matter much to me if my husband likes my perfume or not — he’s not the one wearing it! Now, for the part we’ve all been waiting for: consumerism! Here’s my list of Go-To Sexy Perfumes: Fat Electrician  by Etat Libre d’Orange Babycat  by YSL Odile  by Marissa Zappas Sì  by Giorgio Armani AMBER  by Marc Jacobs Kaitlin Owens is HALOSOPE's Archival Fashion Editor and the Editor-in-Chief of Dilettante Magazine. For a closer look at her work, please visit kaitlindotcom.com .

Why on Earth has Vogue  not digitized this collection yet? The photos went triple platinum on Pinterest: undone hair and tired eyes , giant knit cuffs folded over  inky black zip-up gowns, sumptuous hand-knit scarves spilling over top of a delicious velveteen coat . Autumn Goth Fantasy, who? Practical Magic obsession, where? Yohji Yamamoto knows what the girls want: soft and cozy fall garments that make you feel only a tiny bit like a Salemite Witch. For some mind-boggling reason, this collection has yet to be digitized in Vogue Runway’s archive. They have Fall/Winter 1998’s ready-to-wear  show (great turtleneck inspo btw!) and they even have Spring/Summer 1999’s ready-to-wear collection  (featuring THIS look , which feels shockingly similar to Celine Dion’s backward Galliano suit for the 1999 Oscars ), but no FW99… Speaking of a Galliano similarity: this isn’t the first time we’ve seen the two designers in artistic lockstep with one another. Actually, Look #94 in the collection in question (Fall/Winter 1999) featured a  gaggle of tilted 1890s-inspired hats and billowing coat dresses  that felt very reminiscent of classic Galliano — although some could argue this is a bit of a “chicken or the egg”-type phenomena. Who tackled the late-1800s “loose woman” fantasy first: Yohji or Galliano? You could make a strong argument for either. Safe to say, they both had their fingers HOT on the same sartorial pulse for quite a while. FW99 was a triumph for Yamamoto. It featured not only his signature elegant simplicity  but also more daring, sculptural silhouettes  and bold pops of color.  It’s surprising how well this collection has stood the test of time. There are certainly elements of ‘90s fads present here ( a quick poncho moment , anyone?), but they don’t read as hacky or overly contrite. "Fashions fade, style is eternal," Yves Saint Laurent said — and Yamamoto knew (and still knows) that all too well.  We saw these same styles and silhouettes reawakened during FW24. The brand Cos showed quite a few drapey black maxi coats and oversized men’s suiting  looks, Miu Miu played with bold pops of color alongside more hearty, neutral knits  and Y/Project nailed the same flowy, vampiric, witchy silhouette  we saw in Yamamoto’s vision. This fall, why don’t you take some inspiration from Yohji Yamamoto’s insanely decadent archive? eBay is a treasure trove for Yohji knits  — with some of them at very reasonable price points ! If you liked the maxi looks from the show, they have some 3-piece knit sets  along with a whole bunch  of incredible  long coats  and  dusters.  They even have a suit jacket made of the same delicious, caramel-colored velour fabric! If anything, let this runway retrospective serve as a reminder that you CAN have beautiful fashion. These spectacular vintage shows and archival treasures don’t exist in some far-off fantasy land. They’re sitting in resale shops all across the world, just waiting for you to rediscover them — sometimes at unbelievably low price points. Don’t be afraid to look! 🌀 Kaitlin Owens  is a vintage fashion writer, movie buff, lover of good eats, and a women’s size 7.5 (if any shoe brands are reading). She is the Editor-in-Chief of Dilettante Magazine. You can find her on socials @magdilettante .

Some progress was made, but not nearly enough. After a five-year hiatus and one failed rebrand, the long-anticipated comeback of the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show was streamed live from Brooklyn’s Duggal Greenhouse on October 15th. The theme of the night was aggressive girl power. With all-female performances from Lisa, Tyla, and Cher, Victoria’s Secret seemed to want to shift our focus away from pretty girls in pretty lingerie and towards this ephemeral idea of “female empowerment.” “...we’ve transformed so much as a business. We felt that we wanted to celebrate our product…and we just wanted to celebrate women,” said Janie Schaffer, the brand’s Chief Design Officer, on the event’s Pink Carpet. The Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show has always been aspirational — a glittering production of gorgeous models in gorgeous lingerie, selling the fantasy that you (yes, you, the average viewer) could look just like these stunning supermodels (but only if you buy Victoria’s Secret).  However, there was something noticeably different about the return of the show. While the brand brought back its OG angels like Adrianna Lima, Candice Swanepoel, Jasmine Tookes, Taylor Hill, and Tyra Banks — t he show's styling was much more…. pared down this time around . Bouncy blowouts were replaced with slicked-back hair, and glowy, baby-pink makeup was absent in favor of neutral, matte faces. Despite VS’s attempt to revive the show to become the brand it once was, it seems its heyday has long passed. The brand will never be the same as in the early aughts — because the culture surrounding it has changed so much. Unfortunately for Victoria’s Secret, its history is often synonymous with (the now much-reviled) early 2000s extreme diet culture. Many Victoria’s Secret angels (i.e. models hand-picked by the brand) have revealed that they fasted days before the show and engaged in unhealthy eating habits  (read: starved themselves). Not to mention that the brand has been criticized for its lack of diverse models featured in its fashion shows and ad campaigns, further fueling the harsh and uncompromising Eurocentric beauty standards that ruled the early 2000s.  The brand attempted to correct this undesirable labeling by rebranding in 2021 to be more size and race-inclusive but completely lost the glamorous allure of the brand that was celebrated with thinner, and whiter, models. People today expect more out of loungewear and intimates. They expect inclusivity and comfort alongside beauty and glamour – not despite it. Consumers seek a style that serves their lifestyle, not clothing that forces them to conform to a rigid sense of beauty. The brand’s inconsistent sizing has made it harder for women to find a bra that fits properly, and customers often complain of thin fabrics and poor construction of the garments , raising questions about brand quality. It’s obvious that this year, Victoria’s Secret did not have its usual 12 million dollar budget for the fashion show . The downgrade was most noticeable in some of the small details the show is known for — the plain, warehouse-style runway (instead of the customary glittery catwalk ), the lack of bedazzled bras, the boring slip dresses, and the sometimes downright tacky angel wings. The overall collection felt uninspired, with no clear creative direction. Perhaps the brand wanted to play it safe as it reentered the market with a fresh start, but it forgot that the glamorous and seductive appeal of past shows was what initially set the brand apart from its competitors. At least on the inclusivity front, there was some improvement. Plus-size models like Ashley Graham  and Paloma Elssener  got to walk the runway, along with Alex Consani , the first-ever transgender model to walk for the Victoria's Secret Fashion Show.  The return of the V ictoria’s Secret Fashion Show marks a new era for the brand. If Victoria’s Secret aims to be a major lingerie and loungewear competitor in 2025, it must find a way to combine inclusivity and style. They need greater innovation in their loungewear (beyond simply following the trends), more creativity across the board, and more plus-size models featured on both the runway and in ad campaigns. In 2024, everyone can be a bombshell. Victoria’s Secret must realize that “body positivity” and bombshell glamour are not mutually exclusive. 🌀 Niya Doyle is a writer based in Brooklyn, New York. Her work has been featured on Autostraddle and Editor & Publisher . She loves writing about all things beauty, and topics centering about black femme and queer identities. When she’s not writing she’s probably scrolling through Depop searching for the latest thrifted drops.

They ate. Listen — if you’re going to be soaked in blood, please make sure it goes with your outfit. Lee and Maren from Bones & All (2022) It certainly helps the aesthetic vision of this film that both main characters are played by people who otherwise belong in modeling campaigns. Director Luca Guadagnino has been commended for his decision to dye Mike Faist’s hair blond for his role in Challengers. It seems to me Guadagnino has an eye for hair — as I’d argue the raggedy mullet that Timothée Chalamet sports in Bones & All, with the grown-out hot pink curls, is an equally inspired choice. Lee (Chalamet) and Maren (Taylor Russell) both have wardrobes that strike you as authentic and individualistic. They look just like teenage runaways in their familiar denims, off-white jersey tops, flannel button-ups, and oversized canvas coats. Pale pinks and soft florals lend these two cannibals an innocent touch. Maren’s brown lace-up boots and Lee’s cowboy hat are the perfect leather details. Everything feels worn-in and precious — like these are really the only few clothes they carry with them, on their lonely adventure through the American Midwest. 8.0 Hannibal Lecter from The Silence of the Lambs (1991) When we first see Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins) in The Silence of the Lambs , he’s wearing something, to put it in a kind way, bland. If you put a Lucy & Yak  logo on his forest-green jumpsuit you wouldn't be able to escape it in your local coffee shop. But after Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) walks past all the depraved and sick criminals that line the hallway before Lecter, his appearance seems instead unsettlingly clean and put-together. Lecter spends most of the film in these clinical get-ups. His white T-shirt and white trouser combination strikes me as incredibly chic and well-fitted, but the bright orange jumpsuit the FBI put him in for his transfer is egregious. I can only imagine he’d agree with me — if he could fully express himself through his iconic plastic and metal muzzle. Of course, you can’t talk about things Hannibal Lecter wears without mentioning his most iconic accessory. I wonder if there were any moisturizing properties to his unconventional face mask. During the ending scene of the film, Lecter is wearing a quite dashing oatmeal-coloured linen suit, with both matching shirt and tie. He pops a straw-coloured fedora on his head — sometimes a man just wants to wear a hat. All in all, not too bad for a guy who was behind bars almost the whole runtime. 6.9 Jennifer Check from Jennifer’s Body (2009) She eats boys and looks good doing it. Jennifer (Megan Fox) has not one but two iconic oft-replicated looks; one is her iconic B aby Gap heart zip-up hoodie , and the other is her blood-soaked bridal-esque prom dress. I’d argue that Jennifer’s purple-and-yellow cheerleading uniform and her concert outfit — with the denim mini skirt and cropped puffer jacket — should also receive some attention. Jennifer’s outfits serve more as a juxtaposition to her gorey ways — the perfect girl-next-door drenched in blood. It’s not until her prom outfit that Jennifer starts looking like something more supernatural and ghostly, yet there’s something tragic about it still. The idea of Jennifer once having planned to wear her pretty white dress to Prom and now attending being turned into something she did not wish to be and cannot control is surprisingly tragic, for an anti-hero whose last words are: “My tit”. Big silver hoops, pink lipgloss, a heart locket, and a flip-up phone make this cannibal a teenage dream. 7.7 Leatherface from The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) Love  the detail of his graphic tie. The apron is understandably a practical decision, though I feel a lost opportunity for some colour blocking. Would love it if we could see some of the whimsy of the tie injected into other areas of Leatherface’s outfit. Perhaps a patterned shirt, a la Lisa Says Gah . And although I won’t judge the whole wearing-someone-else’s-face-on-your-face thing he has going on, I think a quick brush through the hair would do some wonders for the overall impression. 5.5 The Girls from Yellowjackets (2021) For some reason, in my mind, the girls from Yellowjackets  and The Last Dinner Party  are the same people. I don’t know why, exactly, but it implies something quite sinister regarding this last dinner party they are having. For ( spoiler alert! ) eating their friend Jackie, the stranded girls in Yellowjackets  imagine themselves as having dressed up in white ceremonial garb for a Grecian feast. This is, of course, not what they actually look like when devouring their friend (and team captain) in the raw wilderness. This delusion strikes me as profoundly relatable. Who hasn’t had a sip of wine with closed eyes to pretend they are on holiday in a French wine district? I like the gold details and draping on their robes, and I like that all the girls are wearing different iterations of a similar outfit — no embarrassing, accidental matching in my Greek banquet fantasy. Their flowing hair and gold-leaf accessories add to the regal antiquity feel. And while the outfits strike me as slightly costume-y, I guess this can be forgiven as after all, well, it is a fantasy. 6.5 🌀 Olivia Linnea Rogers  is a Norwegian-British writer, fringe enthusiast, film watcher, and poet, if you're lucky. Based in London. She can obviously be found online on   Instagram  (@olivialinnearogers) and   Twitter  (@olivialinrogers).

The stars say “Undertaker Chic” is going to be huge next season. Wouldn’t it be nice to know the trends ahead of time? To know exactly   when to snatch up that eBay Betsey Johnson slip dress before the price skyrockets?  Sure, we can always predict  the next big thing based on past trend cycles (styles always come back around!) or based on what the niche fashion cool kids are currently wearing — or really even what the dozens of professional trend forecasters are predicting….. but what if we could know?  What if there was some kind of crystal ball we could look into to see exactly what everyone is going to be drooling over a couple of months from now? Well, I tracked down the leading Fashion Psychics in the industry (yes, there is such a thing) and asked! Inbaal Honigman  is a celebrity psychic whose work has been featured in Elle , Cosmopolitan, and MTV. She uses Tarot, astrology, palmistry, clairvoyance, and other methods of divination in her readings.  Here’s what she had to say about next season's fashion trends: “… The ‘80s revival isn't over,  and now expands to oversized silhouettes. The 7 of Cups Tarot card predicts frayed edges and vintage washes for denim styles, and tops sporting undone hems and effortless rips. Floral patterns will add detail. Rather than bright ‘80s colors, the runway will debut hazier shades such as aloe, daisy, and lavender. Leaning into the darker side, some ‘Undertaker Chic’ is predicted  by the 5 of Disks Tarot card. Every dark hue except black will make up the palette. Midnight blue, ink gray, and aubergine purple, with flashes of burgundy and amber. Structured shoulders and long layered skirts will complete this sophisticated style, paired with sturdy black court shoes for red carpet evenings, or clunky boots for every day.” I don’t know about you, but to me, that sounds like we’re all going to be dressing like sexy ‘80s New Wave rock stars next season. I feel like I’ve been prepping for that trend my whole life. Get me some shoulder pads — STAT! Now, as with all good psychic advice… you gotta get a second opinion! I caught up with Abigail Soltis , a creative writer and psychic from New England. Her divining background is a little bit different from Inbaal’s— she derives her inspirations from Christian Mysticism, the natural world, and the occult feminine.  Here’s what the spirits told her  would arrive next in fashion: “…I'm seeing futuristic, architectural designs. I'm seeing them as slate grey, but pops of neon patterned within. An example that I was seeing was using  shoulder pads  to create a castle wall structure.” (Hmmmmm — sounds a little bit like an extension of the Weirdieval trend!) Abigail continued, “…I was also seeing full-body wear with hoods — they look a little bit like morph suits, but upscale. This type of fashion reminds me of Kanye's Yeezy and some of what Grimes may wear (I see she's following [ Rui Zhou ] on Instagram so I'm pointing to there), and I'm also seeing lace included in these full-body suits. I feel like where we have seen crochet grow huge, lace may be what replaces it.  Lastly, I'm seeing some drop-waist dresses, accordion pleats, and animal motifs (I saw a moth specifically! Maybe a Whimsigoth connection?).” TWO shoulder pad mentions from two different psychics? Oh... there isn’t a vintage Claude Montana jacket in the world that’s gonna be safe from me… Also! Pantone, if you’re reading, this part of Abigail’s reading is for you: “…For colors? Neon yellow (#d0fc01), orange (#c05b0d, #fa9900), teal (#b5e5d4), and some sort of electric pink like (#fe00c4) feel huge.” So, with all this in mind, here’s what I’m going to be on the hunt for next season: Vintage Claude Montana ANYTHING (Obviously) Sturdy Black Court Shoes (maybe some Miu Miu Mary Janes ?) Anything in Shocking Pink And, as always, anything that could’ve been used as a costume in Practical Magic… 🌀 Kaitlin Owens is the Archival Fashion Editor for HALOSCOPE. She is also the Editor-in-Chief of Dilettante . For a closer look at her work, please visit kaitlindotcom.com .

I don't have time, but I do  have taste. Halloween comes with an overwhelming pressure: a pressure to be sexy or silly, to rally a group together for a party, or to convince a reluctant beau to hard launch in a couple's costume. But every niche fashion girl knows the most intense pressure of all: the desire to be niche .  What is the perfect IYKYK costume? And how niche is too niche? Because really, there’s no point in dressing up if you have to spend all night explaining your costume over loud music, or in the dark, or to a boy who probably doesn’t actually care. He just won’t understand! These costumes are for the girls, and, most of all, they’re for you .  I’ve curated an elite list of iconic fashion and art moments that can be executed in a few days, hours, and some even in a few minutes. Each idea allows for some personal interpretation so that you don’t need to place any overnight online orders, but some might require a run to your closest Spirit Halloween. This list is organized from least to most effort and materials required. Phoebe Philo You need: Turtleneck, black trousers, white sneakers Phoebe is one designer with a distinct uniform that can be easily adopted after a few minutes of digging through your or your roommate’s closets. Top it off by tucking your hair into a turtleneck, the chicest hairstyle of all. She always wears her white sneakers, a staple I know you have, and you can avoid conversation for most of the night by imitating the furtive mystery that she maintains despite being such a prolific fashion figure. This costume may raise some eyebrows as it doesn’t look like much of a costume, but the girls who get it, well, they get it. Jane Birkin You need: White T-shirt, tailored jeans, wicker basket, bangs (optional), a Serge Gainsbourg (optional) Jane Birkin is the ultimate simple cool girl — and it’s a look easily achieved in just a few minutes. You can switch up her look by wearing a white shift dress, or tights under shorts, but the wicker basket is what’s most required for this to be a successful Halloween look. Bangs are a plus if you have them, and you can opt for a blowout if you want, but the Birkin look is best achieved with as little effort as possible. This outfit can be converted to a couple’s costume if you have a second half who tousles their hair, pops the collar of a slightly unbuttoned collared shirt beneath a blazer, and chain-smokes Gitanes cigarettes all night long as Serge Gainsbourg. Marina Abramović and Ulay, Rest Energy (1980) You need: White button up, black skirt, black stockings, black shoes, a bow, a beau This look can be executed solo but it’s better with a partner, especially if you have an incredibly tragic and complicated romantic relationship with them. Bonus points if they make you cry. A bow and arrow can be purchased at most Halloween stores, but I’d recommend leaving the arrow at home so that there’s no risk of a punctured heart when alcohol is inevitably consumed. A broken  heart may not be easily avoidable though, so proceed into this costume with caution, and prioritize fun over flirting. If you do this look on your own and spot a fellow art nerd of interest, invite them to pull your bow’s string to reenact this piece and start a conversation. Perry Ellis by Marc Jacobs, Spring/Summer 1993 You need: Florals, flannels, black boots This iconic collection may have gotten Marc Jacobs fired from Perry Ellis, but you will surely be the niche queen at any party you attend. This was the beginning of grunge on the runway against the ‘90s backdrop of Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love, so there’s no wrong way to recreate these looks yourself. Simply combine stripes, florals, plaids, silver jewelry, and skull caps until you reach a state of Nirvana. It’s easily adapted to a group costume if several of your grungy girlfriends want to join in, and similar to the Birkin effect, the less effort you put in the better. Just layer, layer, layer. Naomi Campbell doing community service in Dolce & Gabbana (2007) You need: Silver dress, heels, orange construction vest (optional) Model Naomi Campbell was sentenced to five days of community service and anger management courses after admitting to throwing her phone at her maid. She finished her hours with the sanitation department in New York City, and on her final day of service, she famously arrived in a silver Dolce & Gabbana gown. The dress is now displayed in the “NAOMI: In Fashion” exhibition at The Victoria and Albert Museum in London. She truly went out in style, and that’s why this is a great last-minute Halloween costume (actual Dolce not required). Throw on a sparkly silver dress and heels, and take some artistic liberty by adding a bright orange construction vest, perhaps even a hard hat. If you’re feeling crazy, get one of those trash pokers. It might require a day to gather the supplies, but this moment is silly yet still stylish. Liv Tyler & Stella McCartney at the Met Gala (1999) You need: W hite tank tops, Sharpies, a brunette, a redhead The moment when I knew I’d met my best friend in New York City was when we both simultaneously said that we’d been dying to do this Halloween costume. You can get as granular as you want with it. She and I bought white tank tops, cut one sleeve off, glued studs over our meticulous Sharpied letters, and even laced up the sides like Liv and Stella did. I wore a black skirt and she wore brown trousers. I even wore green earrings. Our height difference also contributed to this costume turning out perfectly. If you have less time and dedication, a simple Sharpie on a tank top works — because this costume is all about the graphic shirts as an homage to the original rock royalty. Shalom Harlow for Alexander McQueen (1999) You need: Bedsheet, tutu, belt, spray paint Perhaps the fashion moment of all fashion moments, you are undertaking a legacy by choosing to recreate this look. It requires some arts and crafts, along with sacrificing some bedding, but who uses a top sheet anyway? All that’s required is some black and yellow spray paint on a white fabric layered over a tutu, secured on your bust with a buckled belt. For the ultimate McQueen effect, I recommend slicking your hair down, extending your arms, and wandering hauntingly throughout the night as if you’ve just been violated by robots with spray cans. You must embody the entire moment, not just the look. No matter what costumes you choose for Halloween, whether they’re sultry or modest, comical or horrific, a fashion moment will always be remembered. An unknown costume can be the best conversation starter. Or the love of your life might find you in a crowd because they also happen to love Phoebe Philo’s era at Celine (just kidding, this only happens in movies). There are so many costume options that are neither angels nor devils, so I encourage you to be unique and inspired, because the sexiest thing a girl can be on Halloween is a niche reference. 🌀 Jane Lewis is HALOSCOPE's Runway Editor based in New York City. She grew up on farms in Southern California but now she always matches her shoes to her bag.

On plastic surgery, Ozempic, and body modification as body horror. Stage 1 – Desire The caricature of the “mad scientist” type hails from the character Victor Frankenstein, from Mary Shelley’s eponymous 1818 novel. Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus  is widely regarded the beau ideal of both the science fiction and classic Gothic genre, concerned with themes of fear and haunting, featuring religious symbolism, images of forgotten castles and dilapidated ruins, and plenty of stark contrasts. Victor Frankenstein creates his monster because he wants to aid the betterment of humankind, through a thorough understanding of the secrets of life and death. Or so he tells himself. This is his desire.   A few months into 2024, I stand in the fluorescent light in the bathroom of my dilapidated East London flat and brush my teeth facing the medicine cabinet mirror. I suddenly notice, with repulsion, how yellow my teeth look in the light. I don’t think much about how I haven’t had this thought while looking in any other mirror. I am immediately convinced of this one singular reality — where I have a flaw and it must be dealt with. I am haunted by the mistake I perceive in myself and wish to rectify it. This was my desire.   Stage 2 – Intervention In The Substance , directed by Caroline Fargeat, Demi Moore plays Elisabeth Sparkle — a television fitness instructor, and, too, a woman who has been newly informed that she has aged out of being the person she wants to be. Elisabeth resorts to using a new experimental procedure called ‘The Substance,” which promises her a newer, better, younger, more beautiful, more perfect version of herself. In this story, Elisabeth is both the mad scientist and the Creature. She experiments with herself but also creates a new life form, Sue. In this sense, The Substance  takes the notion of a “new self” literally.   Moore’s presence in the film is particularly poignant as the actress has previously been mocked and ridiculed for the cosmetic interventions she has undertaken. In 2021, after walking for Fendi at Paris Fashion Week, she was described as “unrecognizable.” Not the kind of unrecognizable the public enjoys. The language we use about women who have had plastic surgery, and other cosmetic interventions, is to describe ruins. She ruined  her face. What I find hard to understand is why we only say this about the result and not the procedure itself. There is an understanding that nobody can “ruin” their body or face into being better. I’m not trying to be deliberately obtuse, I understand the difference we are referring to, but I think the narrative that cosmetic intervention is only detrimental when it is seen to have “failed” obscures the real, complex, questions at hand. It is far too easy to say that something is good when we like it and bad when we don’t.   There are three main imagined aims of cosmetic intervention – to change , to preserve,  and to unveil . To change – to go from one thing to another, for example using Ozempic to lose weight. To preserve – to stop time and remain or return to a younger version of oneself, for example, Botox to prevent and smooth wrinkles. To unveil – the idea that there is a more beautiful version of yourself hiding behind the current version of yourself, for example, a nose job to “straighten” the bridge. But the truth, of course, is you cannot preserve, or unveil, without also committing to change. All of these aims are different, but the core aim is the same – to fix . Something is missing, something is broken, something is to be improved upon, something is to be rectified.   Stage 3 – Reveal In a previous HALOSCOPE essay, Moodbored , I wrote how in the practice of digital moodboarding the public gets to play pretend with mascots of wealth and their possessions. I find this to also be increasingly true in the conversation around cosmetic surgery. We, the public, enjoy living vicariously through our celebrity counterparts and this extends into the arena of changing appearances. We exact ourselves over their looks. We become the chorus pointing out the blatant tragedies and ironies as we see them fit. The buccal fat removal discussion  from a few years ago saw this come to a frustrating head — where every day there seemed to be a new woman on our screens being marked with a big ugly F . We discuss fresh facelifts and newly injected baby Botox with irreverence. Do we like it? Do we not like it? When a woman intervenes in her appearance, she becomes free game. We are all suddenly allowed to track what she does to her body, and when we find her at prime vulnerability, we hunt and dissect. There is nobody else to blame so we blame the woman who has the ruin, the stark contrasts, the haunting, on her face. The truth is when a celebrity goes under the knife, they’re never planning on coming out the other side “worse.” The general public often can’t afford these procedures, so we live vicariously through faces of fame. All the while telling, and perhaps promising, ourselves that we would never end up like the celebrities we revile for what we deem their ill-advised choices. The end scene of The Substance  mimics this endpoint of cosmetic intervention. Elisabeth’s desire for youth and beauty has met its monstrous end — and the audience who she did it all for, that used to love her, viscerally hates her. They call her a freak, doused in her blood. This is why I find it hard to make a definitive judgment on the place of cosmetic surgery in our society — because the victims of it so often become the transgressors, the mocked, the ridiculed. The creatures. The haunted. Look at her: she ruined her face .   Stage 4 – Fix The mad scientist trope is “mad” in their morality —  an unethical character that takes things too far, who jettisons the ethical and moral values society prioritizes over their own clashing desires: progress or perfection. The female celebrity who sacrifices her “natural” beauty in an attempt to achieve a better kind of beauty is regarded in the same sense. But this character, when female, is seen less as evil or dedicated, and more like a fool. Hoisted by her own petard. So, where is the line between aesthetic enhancement and extreme transmogrification drawn?  Everyone seems to know and agree in hindsight, but these poor celebrities just keep falling short of what is so obvious to us. In a sense, we end up pitying them, regarding them as cautionary tales, the same way we pity Frankenstein’s monster, and ward ourselves with Gothic admonition. When have we taken it too far? These are the questions we are constantly trying to answer. Ozempic  hit the culture like a nuclear bomb. A miracle weight loss drug  — something that previously would’ve been regarded as pure science fiction. And the question on everyone’s lips was once again: is this  going too far?   This summer, at the age of 22, I undertook my first “permanent” cosmetic procedure — I did end up having my teeth whitened. I am quite a prude when it comes to fillers, plastic surgery, or other appearance-enhancing procedures. I just can’t shake the feeling that any industry that profits off of, mainly, women’s insecurities is deeply, deeply, deeply evil. And I can’t help but feel that having these procedures done is not empowering — it is barely even committed with free will. And so this is why when having my teeth whitened, which is obviously a quite minimally-invasive procedure regardless, I felt like a massive hypocrite. You see: I don’t really have a good understanding of where I  even think the line should be drawn. I struggle with makeup. I struggle with skincare. I even struggle with fashion, occasionally. Because I believe in the power and freedom of women and abhor anything that can, will, or does suppress us.   And I find it theoretically difficult. In theory , I love the fact that we can do anything to and for ourselves. I love the idea of body modification. I love the idea of tattoos and piercings. I love the idea of gender-affirming surgeries. These are all procedures that figure in the “unveil” category. Then there is a stranger middle ground that complicates things: braces. Accutane. Lasik. Procedures that are not commonly thought of as cosmetic but often align more with the medical genre of human intervention into appearance. These procedures figure in our minds more as normality leaveners than as “enhancers.” They are commonly thought to swiftly fix — but to be necessarily  fixing “real” flaws, not imagined ones or deeper personal insecurities. They are aspiring towards a certain level of normalcy. But where, and how, do we define normal ?   This is why I personally disagree with the common notion that minimally-invasive procedures, like fillers, used to move our facial features around by mere millimetres, are somehow “better” than larger procedures, like breast augmentation. Or anything that will make you look, in the public’s opinion, “worse.” Because the “minimal” is a lie. If you are changing your appearance, you are changing your appearance. I have a certain respect for a cosmetic procedure that doesn’t seek to “perfect” someone into normalcy — and instead seeks to make one different. I have an adoration for women who use cosmetic surgery to create a new self that is not aspiring for the ideal version of “normal.” The freaks, one could say. (Though I remain aware that, at the end of the day, these women are still contributing to the economic machine that keeps the wheels of cosmetic surgery turning, and subsequently normalising the act of paying vast amounts of money to change your appearance). The filler industry feels, to me, more like a façade. A get-perfect-quick scheme. The lipstick economy becomes the filler economy. Heal your life temporarily by amending an imagined ruin in your face. Similarly, questions of medical intervention bring to mind different kinds of bodily autonomy, like abortion rights, which are under threat in the US and beyond .  I guess what I’m trying to say is that, despite being largely ethically opposed to cosmetic interventions, I cannot simply agree with the idea that being untouched, pure, or “natural” is better. This line of aesthetic theory takes us very quickly into very treacherous territory. And I don’t think it's a coincidence that the “natural” ideal often follows a conservative line of thinking. Even a comedic phrase like “big naturals” emphasizes God-given features as superior. But I also don’t believe that this argument not being true means the opposite is inherently true. Take, for example, the bizarre world of “looksmaxxing,”  which rarely encourages full surgical interventions and is more focused on daily “soft” interventions like diet, exercise, and facial exercises like “mewing” or gua sha. “Looksmaxxing” is another intervention process that emphasises the “unveil” aim. Find and bring forth a better self with relatively “natural” steps. But anyone who has followed the “looksmaxxing” rabbit hole knows it is anything but a wholesome, or even sane, approach to appearance, being rooted in incel communities.   When I had my teeth whitened, this paradox became incredibly clear to me. I liked living in the bubble where I was somehow natural, but when I was having bleach applied to the inside of my mouth, to the teeth I have carried around in my face for, essentially, my whole life, I was forced to reckon with the question of how this was in any way different on a moral and ethical level, and in any way more “natural” than other cosmetic interventions.   Stage 5 – Cha-ching! I think the conversation around cosmetic surgery is worthless when it leaves out the fact of profit. These procedures cost money — and this money is gained by someone . Therefore, there is profit to be made in inspiring insecurities in others. The cosmetic surgery and injectables industry is anticipated to exceed $59.54 billion by 2030 . The age of the mad scientist doesn’t come to fruition without the mad scientist, or the mad scientist’s assistant, or the mad manufacturing scientist, or the mad scientist’s social media manager. No purchase exists outside of the web of capitalism — and that includes cosmetic procedures. We can’t afford to pretend they do.  So, if we are to draw this metaphor — The Age Of The Mad Scientist — who is really Victor Frankenstein? The conversation around cosmetic surgery is thorny. It includes several different parties with warring desires within them. There is no clear villain slaving away in their lab, bringing life to our worst desires. As for the victims, personally, I always end up thinking about the Demi Moores, the Pamela Andersons, the Kristen Davises, the Janet Jacksons. Women who are mocked for having work done, and eventually branded as scary  and ruined  for wearing the haunting of this twisted system on their faces. A system they are only trying to appease — to appease us, such Gothic readers. I like to imagine a world where we can embrace cosmetic intervention and body modification as a practice uncomplicated by knee-deep societal tensions, a world where being your own mad scientist can truly be empowering, but I just don’t think this is that world. Stage 6 – Desire Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein ends with Victor Frankenstein wishing he would have destroyed his creation. This is his dying desire.   Immediately after having my teeth whitened, I freaked out. I was so befuddled by this decision I had made to permanently alter my appearance that I vowed to never do it again. The hypocrisy of it sat in me like molten lava. The irreversibility was haunting. A few weeks after I have my teeth whitened, I get used to it. The entire world that makes way to the process begins to normalise in my mind. I look at my teeth and think I could’ve gone lighter. I think maybe in a year. Maybe in a few years. Maybe before a special occasion. The intervention has not curbed my insecurity — it has only further convinced me of its one singular reality, where I have a flaw and it must be dealt with. I am haunted by the mistake I perceive in myself and wish to rectify it. This is the desire. 🌀 Olivia Linnea Rogers  is a Norwegian-British writer, fringe enthusiast, film watcher, and poet, if you're lucky. Based in London. She can obviously be found online on   Instagram  (@olivialinnearogers) and   Twitter  (@olivialinrogers).

How's this for a center spread? John Waters knows what it means to be a freak. The famed Baltimore-based director has spent his decades-long career catapulting other ostracized freaks into stardom — From his neighborhood drag queen-turned-actress, Divine, to groveling artists like the author of Walking Through Clear Water in a Pool Painted Black , Cookie Mueller. Waters’ cult classics are a paradise for fans of American trash. Waters lines his films with this sort of obtusely out-of-place glamour that is offset by grotesque violence and body horror. Drama, dirt, degradation, and depravity are key elements of his subversive movies, but these themes never seem to get in the way of a gaudy ensemble. Multiple Maniacs  (1970) Multiple Maniacs is an early Waters film that tells of radicalization and the coming of a revolution through the perspective of a murderous circus act.  Cookie Mueller wrote that at the time they filmed Multiple Maniacs , “...everybody wanted to act in John’s films, all the Maryland Art Institute students, all the druggies, even the redneck honkies, and John put them to work [...] John was allowing a lot of people to fulfill these urges. He always had new featured people, new discoveries in each film”. Think of this film as a confession; Waters put together his own circus of people who want to be known for their off-beat talents in his movies. In Multiple Maniacs , Lady Divine and her entourage star in "The Cavalcade of Perversion,” a traveling freak show for exhibitions of the unsavory. Subverting the idea of the ‘60s hippie movement, Waters aimed to be provocative and political: “Violence was this generation’s sacrilege, so I wanted to make a film that would glorify carnage and mayhem for laughs.” One way that the film achieves this is through religious imagery and its accompanying fashions like rosaries and robes, desecrating biblical scenes with sexual reenactments that you’ll have to watch to understand.  Pink Flamingos  (1972) In a competition for the title of “Filthiest People Alive,” two Baltimore families battle one another with scenes of bestiality, kidnapping, and forced impregnation. Despite the film’s squeamish depravity, its characters assert their unique weirdness through their clothing choices. Costume designer Van Smith (who passed away in 2006) is credited not just with having created the infamous looks of John Waters’ movies, but for externalizing the director’s desire for what he deemed “inner rot.” Smith not only brought the Ursula-inspired red dress that has become synonymous with Pink Flamingos  to life but later dirtied up Divine’s look when the descent into anarchy bleeds all over her elegant white gown (at the expense of some chickens). Female Trouble  (1974) When Dawn Davenport doesn’t wake up to a shiny new pair of Cha Cha heels on Christmas morning, crime ensues. Vain and immature, the high school student sets out on a murderous hitchhike. The film follows the idea of beauty on the inside, but interpreted literally; Dawn consumes makeup products to become more beautiful. If there’s one thing that John Waters does right, it’s encroaching real struggles into the realm of surrealism.  Excess becomes exorcized and the character’s vapid soul becomes physically undeniable; the courtroom scene shows Dawn with a burned face and mohawk, but she shows up with her signature blue eyeshadow look to match her blue mini dress. The worst crime of all? "She forced me at gunpoint into her crummy little house, made me wear a feathered dress, locked me in a birdcage, and made me exhibit myself in front of her!” Desperate Living (1977) Baltimore native Mink Stole stars as Peggy Gravel in the 1977 black comedy Desperate Living . Peggy, a neurotic housewife, murders her husband with the help of her maid Grizelda, and the two are exiled to a town called Mortville that exists on the fringes of society. Upon its release, The New York Times  called the film a “pointlessly ugly movie” — and they meant this as a compliment. Desperate Living  is a hedonistic fairytale coupled with commentary on what it feels like to resent the confines you’ve found yourself in, whether that’s environmental or corporeal. Neuroses, body dysmorphia, sexuality, and gender identity comprise the subtle substance of the film amidst the drug and infection-riddled landscape of Mortville. Tyrannical leader Queen Carlotta reigns in unbridled extravagance. Fuchsia brocade, mountains of tulle, oversized bows, and the ever-flattering exposed ankle and kitten heel combo prop the fascist ruler up high on her throne to exert chaos upon her people. Polyester  (1981) Waters once said of his leading lady: “... beauty is looks that you can never forget, and I’ve walked down the street with Divine and seen car accidents happen.” Not exactly a kitschy tale of a perfect 1980s housewife, but perhaps a fable on the fruitless pursuit of perfection; floral pantsuits, roller updos, and high-waisted latex are the mark of a dysfunctional woman in a John Waters film. Macramé, in all its flower child glory, is used as a weapon of strangulation. Lu-Lu Fishpaw, who used the knotted knitting pattern to heal her mind after a miscarriage and become “gentler [now] and more creative,” loses control over her deadly desires: “I never wanted to use macramé to kill!” Hairspray  (1988) Before the 2007 musical starring Nikki Blonsky and Zac Efron that we all know and love, there was John Waters’ interpretation of the 1962 dance scene in Baltimore. Although a more subdued offering from the infamously profane director,  Hairspray  (1988) still shocked its more mainstream audience with its earnest confrontation of race and size. This was also the first time that many viewers would experience the on-screen grace of Divine, who played Edna Turnblad, with her bouffant and bathrobe. The fashion of the ‘60s-inspired dance flick pays homage to traditional retro cocktail dresses and pop art patterns, but with classic Waters sartorial touches — like the director’s cameo as a psychiatrist who attempts to put Penny Lou Pingleton in a straightjacket for being in an interracial relationship with Elijah “Seaweed” Kelley. 🌀 Erica DeMatos is a writer and editor based in Boston who finds herself interested in the art of listening more than that of speaking. She searches for meaning in everything and is most interested in memoirs, diary entries, words written in Sharpie on bathroom stalls, and other shared secrets that were once held close to the heart. When she is not writing or reading you can find her at the beach, no matter the weather.

From The Birds to The Shining, horror classics have guided McQueen’s spooky, subversive design sensibilities. Andrew Bolton, curator and author behind Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty , remembers Lee Alexander McQueen once saying,   “I don't want to do a cocktail party. I'd rather people left my shows and vomited .” McQueen was aware of the vomit critics sometimes spewed on the page and the creaking of seats as uncomfortable guests shifted around during their first McQueen show. But the “pink sheep” of his family never really cared. Andrew Groves, designer and former boyfriend of McQueen, once said that whatever Lee was doing, “he could not help but subvert it. He always wanted to undermine the idea of authority and the establishment.” What most found ugly or strange inspired McQueen, and this was no exception when it came to the perception of women. Since his 1992 graduate collection, Jack the Ripper Stalks His Victims , McQueen sought to embody female beauty through the darkest of qualities and circumstances. Female victimhood was subverted into power, the confines of patriarchy into tight skirts and sleek tailoring.   “When you see a woman wearing McQueen, there's a certain hardness to the clothes that makes her look powerful," he said. "It kind of fends people off. You have to have a lot of balls to talk to a woman wearing my clothes."  In 1999, amputee Paralympian Aimee Mullins opened McQueen’s Spring/Summer show:   No. 13 in a pair of custom-carved solid wooden boots.  The place where the boots and Mullin’s legs met was covered by a flowy raffia skirt and many in the audience asked when they could purchase them, having no idea they were prosthetics. "I want to be seen as beautiful because of my disability, not in spite of it," Mullins said of her modeling pursuit. Luckily for her, McQueen’s philosophy fell right in line.   "I suppose the idea is to show that beauty comes from within, he said. “I wouldn’t swap these people I’ve been working with for a supermodel… I think they’re all really beautiful, I just wanted them to be treated like everyone else." McQueen’s clothes were never about covering up or disgracing women, rather, they were about enhancing and emphasizing them by perverting the customs of beauty. Whether it was women's trauma, physicality, emotions, or her natural desires, McQueen always found the dark side and pushed it into the light. He knew that savagery was just as much a part of feminine beauty as anything else. To McQueen, there was very little he found ugly.  In her academic article , “The Fantasy of Ugliness In Alexander McQueen Collections,” Mélissa Diaby Savané said that ugliness “can be defined as the things we reject, the things we most fear; it is not objective, but a projection from the spectator.” It’s likely that most of those who find McQueen’s fashion horrid fear not the macabre or danger or death, but the possibility that they themselves could look like a McQueen woman, failing to take the duality of femininity into account. As Savané wrote, “McQueen’s femme fatale is as deathly as she is desirable: she is both violent and hyper feminine.”  Citing 1954’s deeply perverse sadomasochist novel by Anne Desclos , McQueen asserted that “there is a hidden agenda in the fragility of romance. It's like a Story of O .” There is too much to be said here about the relationship between sadomasochism and female empowerment, but what can be said, in short, is that there is certainly power in women finding pleasure and agency in perversion. When a woman honestly expresses an affection for pain, violence ceases to be a tool to hurt her because it is, now, a known source of satisfaction.   “I am not big on women looking naive,” McQueen went on. “There has to be a sinister aspect, whether it's melancholy or sadomasochist. I think everyone has a deep sexuality, and sometimes it's good to use a little of it and sometimes a lot of it, like a masquerade.”  This same conversation on the femininity spectrum can be seen clearly in the ever-evolving discourse surrounding horror films — and the rise of the Final Girl. Coined by Carol J. Clover in her seminal article, “ Her Body, Himself: Gender in the Slasher Film,”  the Final Girl is the character archetype of the last woman (and often person) left alive in a slasher film. The concept, Clover believes, rose to prominence around 1974’s The Texas Chainsaw Massacre  and Black Christmas , as well as John Carpenter’s 1978 film Halloween . The latter came just two years after Alfred Hitchcock’s final film and two years before his death, which ended his legacy of horror films based on the torture of women. “The idea of a female who outsmarts, much less outfights — or outgazes — her assailant is unthinkable in the films of [Brian] De Palma and Hitchcock.” She continued,  “Although the slasher film’s victims may be sexual teases, they are not in addition simple-minded, scheming, physically incompetent, and morally deficient in the manner of these filmmakers’ female victims.”  Looking at the history of Western cinema, Clover mapped out the basics of victimhood prior to the slasher. “Those who save themselves are male, and those who are saved by others are female,” she wrote. Development is split into two phases: 1. Victim (always male) suffers at the hands of an adversary; and 2. Victim defeats or destroys said adversary to save himself and others. But then came along the Final Girl, who subverts this tradition by enduring tribulation and saves herself. It’s Nancy in A Nightmare on Elm Street , Sidney in Scream , Karla in I [Still] Know What You Did Last Summer , Jody in Cherry Falls , and Maxine in the X  trilogy. As the last ones standing, these Girls are seemingly their own saviors, the heroes of the film — but Clover argues that they are not actually feminist icons. The only reason we root for them and celebrate their triumph is because of her torture in phase one; a Final Guy would not garner equal sympathy from the audience, as Clover believes the audience’s gaze is defaultly male. On the whole, Clover believes the Final Girl is simply “a vehicle for [the male viewer’s own sadomasochistic fantasies.” In some ways, she is correct: Laurie in Halloween  is saved by her virginal tendencies, and even though she fends off Michael Myers, is saved in the end by a man. In other ways, Clover’s theory falls through: Gale Weathers in Scream  is vilified throughout most of the film, but is still regarded as a true Final Girl by the end. Whether or not Clover’s theory is in fact applicable to all slasher or horror films, it’s this need to box in female victimhood as good or bad that is so similar to the critiques of McQueen’s work and the quickness to write off his violence as misogyny.  As part of the Met’s Savage Beauty  exhibition, Mullins spoke about her collaboration with McQueen and their shared journey of envisioning the “unique body” in fashion. “ He loved the complexity of a strong woman,” she said. “That a strong woman knows that her vulnerability is necessary and she's not victimized by it and he did, he had these fantastic women around him.”  At his eponymous label, McQueen used horror films in his earlier collections as embodiments of female suffering, sexual desires, sources of beauty, and a place to yet again subvert the norms of victor and victim. As he once said, films “can bring alive an idea like nothing else.”  Of all his horror film-inspired collections, The Birds , The Hunger , and The Overlook  mark three critical periods in McQueen’s early career, each bringing a significant change to the way he and critics viewed his work.  The Birds – Spring/Summer 1995  On the making of The Birds  — Alfred Hitchcock’s 1963 horror film about fleets of birds wreaking havoc on a California town — the director is said to have cited the philosophy of playwright Vincent Sardou as inspiration: “He said: ‘Torture the women!’ … The trouble today is that we don’t torture women enough.”  He wasn’t exaggerating, actually. Hitchcock tortured lead actress Tippi Hedren both on and off the set of The Birds , where live birds were sicced on and tied to Hedren over five days of filming. Her skin was pecked at and her eye was nearly poked out, an experience she called " brutal and ugly and relentless ." Hedren believed this was punishment for her dismissal of Hitchcock's aggressive, nonconsensual sexual advances. In the film, Hedren’s character Melanie is outfitted in fitted pencil skirts and sophisticated 1950s womenswear. “Tippi is made vulnerable through the hobbling effect of her clothes in the movie,” said McQueen’s longtime friend and collaborator Simon Ungless . “This beautiful, sexy woman placed into a different environment and put at extreme risk but winning in the end. All very McQueen.” The collection heavily features form-fitting midi-skirts and plastic wrap garments. The latter was inspired by a previous sexual encounter Groves had divulged to McQueen: by way of a personal ad, Groves ended up in a bit of a tight situation. He arrived at the house of an American man who answered the door dressed as a cop who then led Groves into the attic where he proceeded to bondage him in pallet wrap. McQueen was inspired to use plastic pallet wrap to embody the suffocation of Melanie’s clothes, the birds, and the film’s famous phone booth scene. McQueen incorporated black silhouette prints of bird flocks into the collection as much as he did exposed breasts. Tire tracks ran across shoulder-padded jackets and the skin of the models themselves. The notable “Bumsters” trousers made numerous appearances, most notably paired with an open-back tailored jacket that revealed the model’s spine from neck to tailbone.  Simon Costin, jewelry and set designer on The Birds , designed the show’s set, which, for cost reasons, ended up being a pretty plain remake of an asphalt road. Costin also designed a black feather collar for one of the looks. All the models wore cream contact lenses that whited out their eyes and most had blown-out hair with puffed-out ends. They all appeared battered and run down (literally) but, thanks mostly to form-fitting silhouettes, maintained a polished, attractive look.  “I loved the combination of the highly sexy undertone and this surreal violence,” said model Tiina Laakkonen, who walked in the show. “But it was never at the expense of women, like: ‘I’m trying to belittle women.’ I never felt that Alexander made women seem like victims. I never got that vibe from him in his work.” From a legacy standpoint, The Birds  is said by critics and friends to have solidified McQueen’s place as fashion’s new l’enfant terrible . “It is strange to see so talented a designer committed to the unwearable," said the New York Times  of the collection,  before adding that McQueen was “easily the most talked-about designer to be showing this year.”   The Evening Standard  called his tailoring “sharp enough to draw blood,” adding this violent “homage to Helmut Lang” gave “fashion victim a whole new meaning.” The Hunger – Spring/Summer 1996 In early 1996, hairdresser and friend Mira Chai Hyde played McQueen the soundtrack of Tony Scott’s The Hunger , a risqué horror vampire flick starring David Bowie, Catherine Deneuve, and Susan Sarandon. McQueen loved the gothic score so much, so he watched the film and decided to name his upcoming collection The Hunger . It was the first time that McQueen included menswear on the runway and the last time, he said, that his label would be so “reckless” (though debatable). Designing on an über-tight budget, McQueen crafted another sharply tailored collection with minimal flounce and maximal fear. Regarded as a sleepy but sensual vampire movie with just a handful of murders, the film amusingly pales in comparison to the vulgarity of McQueen’s collection.  Cutouts in the shape of knife slashes were a prominent motif and Bumsters and bare breasts reigned supreme. Clean-tailored button-downs were stamped with bloody hand prints, and latex or leather cropped up virtually everywhere. Most notably, McQueen rode the clear craze wave and made a transparent bodice filled with live worms that wiggled across the torso of its wearer. The collection showcased McQueen’s affinity for the natural world with visions of leopards, feathers, and tree branches. The color palette was predominantly black, red, and white with touches of blues, pinks, and yellows. Before the show, he said, “The audience is going to see a side of McQueen they've never seen before: wearable clothes.” For business reasons, McQueen wanted the collection to be approachable, using sleek, sexy tailoring as reinforcement. Though it’s hard to imagine in what world a shirt that read “Fist to Hole” helped commercial business. The models’ hair defied gravity, either gelled into a dyed Mohawk style or simply piled upward. Almost all of them were styled with long, pointed eyebrows and colored eye shadow. It was, as far as beauty standards are concerned, ugly, and yet the anger and violence that pierced McQueen’s designs brought a kind of feral power to the wearer that was sensual and intriguing.  At the end of the show, Lee popped onto the runway and showed his ass (really) to the audience. “I showed my bum to the press because I thought I was getting a very raw deal,” McQueen later said. “I was on my own, I didn’t have a backer and I couldn’t do as much as the British Fashion Council wanted me to do.” When McQueen returned backstage, he began “sobbing his heart out,” according to friend and critic Suzy Menkes. “He was tremendously overwrought,” she said. “At that time, he always cared so much. He really put his heart and soul into everything.”  The collection was ill-received by critics who lauded him for his risk-taking but chalked the collection up to an “ill-thought-out mess.” Still, some critics could articulate the aesthetics of McQueen’s designs, like the  New York Times  who wrote that McQueen “offers the kinkiest, most fetishistic clothes on any runway.” What was most evident was that McQueen wasn’t designing only for women, not just here, but in all his collections. The addition of menswear echoed the figurative injection of McQueen’s personal frustrations over his lack of support. It was becoming increasingly clear that these were not just displays of female power, but exhibitions of internal struggle. As McQueen later said, “I would go to the end of my dark side and pull these horrors out of my soul and put them on the catwalk.” The Overlook – Fall/Winter 1999 On the invitation to McQueen’s 1999 Fall/Winter show was the sentence “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy” typed over 40 times, just as it was in Stanley Kubrick’s 1980 psychological horror film The Shining . McQueen’s collection, titled The Overlook , took overt references from the Stephen King reimagining.  The show itself was one of McQueen’s most inventive and theatrical at the time. Models walked on ice inside a lucite box that resembled a snow globe and guests shivered in overcoats. Ice skaters performed on icy runway. Snow fell, wolves howled, and wind whistled. McQueen wanted to evoke a sense of romance through  isolation and obscurity. “It's still the softer side of McQueen,” he said before the show, “but with the sinister edge being Jack Nicholson.”  The Shining  is, like The Birds , a case study of a tortured woman and isolation. Though rumors have long swirled that Shelley Duval was psychologically abused on set by Kubrick, she always maintained up until her death that this was not the case. But for her character Wendy Torrance, it certainly was. Wendy isn’t technically the Final Girl, she is the only  girl: a mother who endures her husband's slow descent into insanity until he goes after her and their son Danny with an axe. She becomes paranoid and frantic but always maintains a level of submissiveness. McQueen made garments that personified everything else, from red-headed twins walking down the runway hand in hand to an ice crystal bustier to a long, fitted leather coat with a pattern resembling the Overlook’s carpet. Models showed minimal skin which brought a martial quality to the looks. Rather than force women to fight the cold, McQueen suited them up for battle in the same way Wendy suited up to brave the storm as she and Danny escaped. Jeweler Shaun Leane's "Coiled Corset" is a beautiful representation of this. The corset was crafted out of 97 aluminum coils stacked from hip to neck and down to the biceps. “It looks quite like armor,” said Leane. “But then it’s very flattering to the female form, and it’s a really beautiful silhouette of the female form.” Model Frankie Rayder remembers how special this collection felt before she even saw it. When it came to walking McQueen, “You would kind of have to put your ego aside,” she said, and accept that “you weren’t going to look gorgeous. But everyone was willing to do that.” While that might have been true of other collections,  The Overlook  feels like one of McQueen’s most enchanting of the 20th century, and maybe, despite loopy braids and cyborg makeup, the most beautiful.  Anna Wintour was in the audience that night for what was her first-ever McQueen show. Through shivers, she said, "I adored it.” 🌀 Sophia Scorziello  is a freelance writer from Connecticut who misses living in Los Angeles. Follow her on Twitter  for unsolicited takes and Spotify links.

Inside: a round-up of the legendary party girl's most genuinely helpful beauty tips over the years. Sitting down to re-read Cat Marnell’s notorious memoir, How to Murder Your Life,  feels particularly apt after we just had Brat Girl Summer dominate the collective consciousness. Marnell was truly the first IDGAF Brat Girl. In her poignant memoir, Marnell details her battle with addiction, her rise (and fall) in the beauty editorial sphere, and, too, passes along some juicy beauty tips.  Based in New York City, Marnell’s bylines are as extensive as they are impressive. From working at Condé Nast to being a beauty editor at both Lucky  and XoJane , writing a column for Vice , and being published in Self , Nylon , and Glamour,  she’s the beauty guru many millennials and even in-the-know Gen Z continually look to for honest, unfiltered advice.  She gives you advice like a messy best friend who’s been through it all would. And boy, has she been through it all. Her teenage discovery of Adderall would send her into a downward spiral of addiction that would eventually spill into cocaine, heroin, and the occasional use of other substances. Her addiction would be in a tailspin throughout much of her career and severely impact it. Yet, throughout her journey with addiction and her eventual sobriety, her love of beauty never faded. In her memoir, beauty tips are bequeathed throughout like gifts of gold from a benevolent leader. Below, we’ve selected the best It girl-approved beauty tricks out there, used by Marnell herself. The Best Eyeliner for an It Girl If you’re hunting for the best eyeliner to give that smudgy "I’ve been out all night feel," try out this charcoal one from Smashbox . Marnell swears it's the easiest one to mess up and still look put together. The Concealer for Hard Workers (or Party Girls) This is one of Marnell’s “Take the beauty tip, but don’t do as I did” moments in the book. If you have some MASSIVE dark circles under your eyes, the only concealer Marnell swears will hide them is Givenchy’s Mister Light . Trust it — she used this to hide the dark circles after a four-day cocaine binge. Try a Hint of Cigarette Eau Florale As we learn more about her formative years, we also get this nugget of information — the only perfumes that can hide the scent of cigarette smoke are these two: Elizabeth Arden Sunflowers and Versace Blue Jeans . Get a Healthy Glow… Even When You’re Not Want to have your legs glow all night? Try Marnell’s multi-step process for getting the perfect fake tan. Start with a base of Kiehl’s Sun-Free Self Tanning Formula , add on a little of Lancôme’s Flash Bronzer , and then apply both The Body Shop’s Coconut Body Butter and Banana Boat’s Tanning Oil . With that amount of lotion and bronzer, you’ll be sure to glow like you just returned from Ibiza. How to Get a Lip Stain for $3 (WARNING: Theatre Kids Might Get PTSD Flashbacks) Lip stains are going viral online now, but Marnell has been doing them for years. How? The costume make-up company Ben Nye and their fake blood! "If it’s a pretty, natural stain you're after, there's nothing better than a little stage blood dabbed just so on the lips," Marnell writes. It’s Time to Leave Your Party-Girl Hair Era Run to Amazon, because Marnell just told us how to fix damaged hair. Whether it’s bleached, highlighted, or permed, washing your hair with Nounou’s shampoo and conditioner will recover your hair to silky perfection. 🌀 Sydney Yeager  is a fashion writer and content creator who explores luxury fashion and trends with the gaze of how it can be accessible to the everyday consumer. As much as she adores avant-garde fashion, elegant and feminine looks will always have her heart — this is seen in both her writing and on her Instagram,   @sydselegantfinds .