There are many many things one might say about this photo.
But I’ll stick to: the shoes. Why? How?
Your turn.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, June 15th, 2010 at 3:28 pm and is filed under Fashion.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely 
June 15th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
… Cannot… be… unseen…
June 15th, 2010 at 3:58 pm
She always gives way too much forehead. Put some bangs on that thing gurl!
June 15th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Why is her face so shiny? Was the seamstress drunk when she cut the skirt? What’s with the hardware hanging off her neck?
June 15th, 2010 at 4:04 pm
I rarely ‘get’ this woman or what she wears. I just don’t find her attractive in the slightest and yet she is considered by so many the height of fashion. Nothing she has on here appeals to me at all….well, maybe the little purse.
June 15th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
I’m presently having physical therapy for a bad ankle (ancient high school field hockey injury teaming up with family history of arthritis)– and just last Friday, the PT was talking (while he was working on repositioning the ankle bones) about the amount of damage shoes like that do to the human foot. He said that if women could see the x rays of some of the feet he’s worked on, they’d never buy those contraptions. He also said that there have been cases of models falling off catwalks in the last few months while trying to walk in shoes with heels that high. The professional PT journals are full of case studies of stiletto heel-related injuries.
June 15th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Ouch. Are those 6 inch heels? I didn’t think they made heels that high. One more inch and she will most certainly pitch forward onto the red carpet.
I’m also reminded of that fashion maxim…when you are finished dressing for the party, take off one piece of jewelry. In SJP’s case I would start by taking off the necklace and keep going with the belt buckle. This is especially true when you are wearing a garden of cabbage roses.
And I don’t know about the beehive/bun. I just don’t know.
June 15th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
the shoes match what came out two years ago on the runway… as gay designers who cant think up new ideas keep dipping into sex deviance for inspiration. haute coutre at some point seemed more to be answering the question of “how can we normalize latex, ballet shoes with heels, and fetish wear?”…
by the way. i have taken pics of her, and she is emaciated, and has always been. once again, a woman’s ideal of women tends to be slimmer than anything a man would actually want (anorexia is neither pretty nor fecund).
however if your ideal ideological inner woman is a man, then the best you can do is starve to be a boy and meet some greek ideal of androgyny as equal normed sex.
June 15th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
“”I just don’t find her attractive in the slightest”"
dustoffmom
She reminds me of a ferret. Or either my ex wife’s girlfriend i couldn’t stand. Lol
June 15th, 2010 at 4:28 pm
Artfldgr: she does seem quite anorexic, or at least borderline so. Of course, some people are that thin naturally, but I think one can usually tell the difference, and her thinness seems forced and unnatural. I don’t get her “look” at all.
On the other hand, I wore platform shoes in the late 60s and early 70s. But much less extreme ones than that. I doubt I could wear them today, but I’m not planning to try.
June 15th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
Where is Tatyana? I look for her responses on posts like this.
June 15th, 2010 at 5:46 pm
Manolo! Where is the Manolo of the Shoe Blogs to write about the superfantasticness of the shoes of the thin woman of the thinness?
June 15th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
And also of the shininess.
June 15th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
Who authorized curtains?
June 15th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
I could swear that the back bedroom of my Grannie Jessie’s house had wallpaper in that same exact pattern!
June 15th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
mizpants:
sorry, just got home after a wonderful day in the city (Palladio and Romantic Landscapes exhibitions @Morgan, scoring 2 great bargains – Adrienne Vittadini- in an unlikely place, and a high marks from my Dr at annual check-up visit) – I’m in no mood for criticizing anything!
Maybe just a small note: I think thre is a hidden platform inside the fronts of those shoes. Otherwise she’d have to be on pointe.
June 15th, 2010 at 7:00 pm
Wow, I usually hate everything SP wears and can’t stand her looks or the public aspect of her personality, but I love that dress. Shoes and necklace not so much.
June 15th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
Of course, some people are that thin naturally, but I think one can usually tell the difference, and her thinness seems forced and unnatural. I don’t get her “look” at all.
Remember when she did the sexy display spread in some major mainstream magazine about a month after she gave birth?
That was such an aggressively narcissistic display. Really offputting. She had just had a baby, but everything still had to be about her and her body publicly.
June 15th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
mizpants: and just now an Art Deco Church across from my yard have opened their side door and I can hear a rehearsal of a fantastic wind-instrument 17th century music.
and the weather is gorgeous.
and I do like Sarah’s dress. Paging Michelle O: see, this is when a belt is appropriate! Observe and learn: small waist, sufficient bosom, voluminous layered skirts – almost rococo style (look it up).
June 15th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
The general effect of the head and hairdo reminds me of this, from “The Adventures of Baron Munchausen:”
June 15th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
Hello Splice.
June 15th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
PA Cat Says:
June 15th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Field hockey? Are you female? For some reason, I’d always assumed that you were male.
June 15th, 2010 at 8:49 pm
She is the homeliest woman on TV not playing a homely woman. I don’t get it.
June 15th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
Dear Neo, I like the fashion spots and enjoy Michelle Obamas Mirror blog also. I think she is wearing shoes like GaGa. She also must have taken ballet, but most of all, I think the accessories are to take your eyes off her face.
June 15th, 2010 at 9:44 pm
rickl–
Yep, I have the requisite two X chromosomes. But for obvious reasons (mostly on other blogs), I prefer to keep that fact quiet.
June 15th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
Tatanya’s right: there’s a platform (about an inch and a half, from the look of it) under those shoes.
June 15th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
Dress? Shoes? Nope. Neither.
The jaw. Why? How?
June 15th, 2010 at 10:11 pm
“Sarah, your great aunt called. She wants her tablecloth back.”
June 15th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
I don’t get her TV character either. Not good looking, bad fashion sense (even in character), broke from spending beyond her income bracket, with crazy commitment issues on top. Why should I believe she has men pursing her??? It’s just not believable and it makes her character totally uninteresting / unsympathetic (i.e., I really don’t care about her relationship issues… since I don’t care about her character).
June 15th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
I like the cut/shape of the dress, but not too fond of the fabric. The necklace competes with that dress rather than enhances. It would be great with a much simpler, straight, dark-colored solid gown… something with austerity.
There’s just no reason for platform shoes like that. What’s next? Chopines?
June 15th, 2010 at 11:25 pm
I like her. She’s happy and spreads cheer. She looks good. Lots of color.
The dress might be bad, and the shoes. As a man I don’t really know. They look good to me thogh because they are on her.
June 15th, 2010 at 11:47 pm
I kind of like the dress, from the waist down anyway. The neck(boob)line is horrible. And the shoes are ridiculous. My husband can’t stand her. I hate her for her skinniness. Not that I would ever want to be that skinny. I’m sick of the whole Hollywood thing, so I’m not really commenting on this photo.
June 16th, 2010 at 1:41 am
What? The Green Goblin got a bleach job and a new wardrobe?
June 16th, 2010 at 7:55 am
Whaaaaa???? You guys don’t like stripper shoes or something?
June 16th, 2010 at 10:00 am
To this crowd, weird is modern because its different.
when they run out of weird, then how will they then express modern, they have already gone through minimalism and sterility, and soviet gray…
at some point the inanity of their affectations is outside the bubble of contemporary life, but is not outside but in a bubble in which contemporary life is a bubble inside it in which what is not weird is inside it and what is weird is outside it, yet all inside existence.
the sad truth is that ancients not plumbing the depths of weird or perverse or fetishes was not some overlooked area of discovery that no one had the courage to enter as the left pretends.
one never needs to roll in s**t to know one will stink when one is done and returns… unless one is a leftist and believes the secret to life is hidden in some disgusting hinterland which no one dare go.
sad to think that there is no needle in their haystacks.
June 16th, 2010 at 11:07 am
If there were health and safety laws in USA as in Britain, such dreadfull shoes would be prohibited long ago. To wear them is more dangerous than ride in a car without safety belts.
June 16th, 2010 at 5:17 pm
The real catcher, this photo was taken while she was bowling.
June 16th, 2010 at 6:57 pm
OMG Bob from VA, I just laughed out loud and scared the cleaning guy in my office!
June 17th, 2010 at 8:20 am
Bob, that’s supposed to be funny?
Do you often take bowling balls with you when you go to a red-carpet event? Then you’re …er…lived in a logwood cabin in the woods for way to long.
She looks fine.
Her dress is gorgeous and suits her figure.
Her shoes are a bit over the top – but not outrageously so.
I wonder, Bob, what your wife wears and how she looks at 45.
June 18th, 2010 at 1:23 am
Way too much eyeliner (at some point it makes your eyes disappear, and hers are already small and close-set). She needs a softer hairstyle, not one skinned off of her face. The dress is pretty, but she’s too old for it. The shoes are bondage gear, and about as attractive as a Chinese bound feet.
I’m afraid I agree with the people who say she looks insectoid. I’d be more inclined to be merciful if the Industry didn’t constantly shove her in our faces and try to sell her as a 20-something sex kitten.
Want to age gracefully? look to Lauren Hutton.
March 3rd, 2011 at 11:43 am
We do the finest in custome jewelry at http://stoverlane.com/, so hit me up at gene@stoverlane.com .