Elegance is knowledge. Integrity is elegant.
Being able to discuss with others current events and allowing others to have their due opinions comes from knowledge.
Elegance would make a women aware of what is going on in the country and to make an opinion from experiences and logic. You can change your opinions over time due to your changing experiences and with new information that comes to light.
Each person has their own view of what is going on in Washington.
Currently, there has been a lot of discussion of the procedure of government. That is the most important part, showing what they are made of.
The founding fathers signed their names to a treasonous document. They knew by signing this document it could cost them their lives.
Now congress is willing to go with "deem and pass". They are unwilling to have a yes or no attached to their name. This is the most important vote that most of these "leaders" will ever take. All they could loss is their livelihood, unlike the founding fathers.
This blog is here to shine the light of elegance onto those in Washington. Their current behavior with the light of elegance on them shows them with: a greasy mullet, cigarette butt hanging out of their mouth, a belly shirt, hot pants, shoeless with mud between their toes, no matter how polished they try to look in front of the camera.
Their behavior strongly shows just how classless they are and their lack of integrity. They have spent this week to quote Ms. Pelosi "whipping" other members. "Whipping' is convincing them to see the bill the way Ms. Pelosi wants them. What kind of 'leaders' are they if they can be "whipped" my the speaker but unmoved by those who sent them and unwilling to make an actual stand pro or con.
All is see is a lack of integrity and it is ugly.
If you have an opinion stand with that opinion. If you are a leader - lead with the mind of those your leading.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Watch who you trust
Ms. Hunter,
All I can say is DUH!
Really?! Why did you pose that way? You trusted the photographer. Fine. But you haven't learned anything over the years. If you dont want a picture published then dont pose for the picture. "No photo control", but you do have control over yourself and your image.
All I can say is DUH!
Really?! Why did you pose that way? You trusted the photographer. Fine. But you haven't learned anything over the years. If you dont want a picture published then dont pose for the picture. "No photo control", but you do have control over yourself and your image.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Way to go Brooks
Brooks' post is a clear example of etiquette vs. elegance in our fast moving world.
These women were certainly old enough to know proper etiquette. I am positive they would tell you about wearing white gloves to church and never wearing white shoes after labor day and the importance of hand written thank-you cards, which fork or spoon to use, etc, etc, etc.. But these women couldn't figure out the simplest idea that there are people around you that have as much a right to a quiet conversation with their table mates as you have to answer you phone and talk with your friend.
Plus, what is it with people? They have a normal voice when talking to the person beside them but when they answer the phone their voice turns into an overactive 4 year old's? Etiquette is rules, elegance is behavior.
These women were certainly old enough to know proper etiquette. I am positive they would tell you about wearing white gloves to church and never wearing white shoes after labor day and the importance of hand written thank-you cards, which fork or spoon to use, etc, etc, etc.. But these women couldn't figure out the simplest idea that there are people around you that have as much a right to a quiet conversation with their table mates as you have to answer you phone and talk with your friend.
Plus, what is it with people? They have a normal voice when talking to the person beside them but when they answer the phone their voice turns into an overactive 4 year old's? Etiquette is rules, elegance is behavior.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Cell phone conversation sharing?
So, here is my first post and this is a post that needs to be done, in my humble opinion. What I am about to write, is it ettiquete, common courtesy, or what-not?
Here is the scenario. Astor and I are at the local coffee/bake shop enjoying a non-typical morning. We got drinks and decided to sit down to partake of these refreshing drinks. Looking around, I notice other people also enjoying the bright and sunny morning that it was with their coffee, tea or other refreshing drink with nibbles of their choice. Here was a father and daughter chatting away, three older ladies talking away, catching up on their lives, soccor mom's and dad's with uniformed players preparing for sportsman competition. In the background, the cheery chatter of employee and patron interaction, the light sound of jazz playing for ambiance and sun shining brightly through windows clear of any and all dirt.
Then, it happens. A cell phone rings. Now, this is not the issue. Most people will answer these devices that many of us now consider as part of our daily lives in a timely manner. That is not the issue as this phone was answered. But, here this phone rings at the table with these older ladies and the conversation can be heard not only by our table, which was next to these ladies, but also beyond. Why? This conversation with the caller was placed on speaker phone. This conversation was carried on as if a fourth acquaintance had joined the table of these three ladies. Though, as some people in the mind would logically conclude that a call on speaker phone needs to have the volume of their voice raised, this added to the electronic voice emminating from this cherry red electronic doo-hicky.
Is this proper? Is this really needed for all to also have this disruption of cheery background noise of this establishement and music resonating from the speakers? No, I should say not. I am sure that many of the patrons did not enter for a pick-me-up and hope that they too can catch up on the latest gossip of these ladies. OMG!
Should this be a part of ettiquette for those that have cell phones to limit this type of conversation? I have my personal opinion about this and it say do not allow it. Though, as understanding what ettiquette is about, it is not about me or you. Rather that of a concern for others around you. I am sure these ladies are at this liquid and bake emporium to also partake in the ambiance that others also entered to do. Ladies, for your age, I wish you too had the refienement to have that respect for others.
Here is the scenario. Astor and I are at the local coffee/bake shop enjoying a non-typical morning. We got drinks and decided to sit down to partake of these refreshing drinks. Looking around, I notice other people also enjoying the bright and sunny morning that it was with their coffee, tea or other refreshing drink with nibbles of their choice. Here was a father and daughter chatting away, three older ladies talking away, catching up on their lives, soccor mom's and dad's with uniformed players preparing for sportsman competition. In the background, the cheery chatter of employee and patron interaction, the light sound of jazz playing for ambiance and sun shining brightly through windows clear of any and all dirt.
Then, it happens. A cell phone rings. Now, this is not the issue. Most people will answer these devices that many of us now consider as part of our daily lives in a timely manner. That is not the issue as this phone was answered. But, here this phone rings at the table with these older ladies and the conversation can be heard not only by our table, which was next to these ladies, but also beyond. Why? This conversation with the caller was placed on speaker phone. This conversation was carried on as if a fourth acquaintance had joined the table of these three ladies. Though, as some people in the mind would logically conclude that a call on speaker phone needs to have the volume of their voice raised, this added to the electronic voice emminating from this cherry red electronic doo-hicky.
Is this proper? Is this really needed for all to also have this disruption of cheery background noise of this establishement and music resonating from the speakers? No, I should say not. I am sure that many of the patrons did not enter for a pick-me-up and hope that they too can catch up on the latest gossip of these ladies. OMG!
Should this be a part of ettiquette for those that have cell phones to limit this type of conversation? I have my personal opinion about this and it say do not allow it. Though, as understanding what ettiquette is about, it is not about me or you. Rather that of a concern for others around you. I am sure these ladies are at this liquid and bake emporium to also partake in the ambiance that others also entered to do. Ladies, for your age, I wish you too had the refienement to have that respect for others.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Little Black Dress
The little black dress shows that the definition of what is stylish and elegant does change over time. Coco Chanel is to thank for this change. The little black dress, little black suit are staples in most women’s closets. The L.B.D. has caused some issues in finishing off the look, specifically nylons. Nylons have been the bain of my existence. It was not until I was older and found back-seam, garter less, thigh-highs that I could bear to wear them. The late Princess Diana was know for going bare legged, you would have thought it was going to cause a international incident. I loved it. I remember the picture on the day her divorce was finalized. That beautiful L.B.D., amazing necklace and her beautiful smile and oh my the bare legs. If she had put on shear black nylons that look would have been ruined. Balance, is what I am talking about. Her arms were bare, and to have bare or bare looking legs kept you eyes following. Your eyes weren’t drawn to one portion of her outfit, the whole outfit was one display. To have bare arms and covered legs you eyes are drawn to the dark color. If you want to wear nylons go with the nude color, this will keep the extremities all in the same hue. Now, look at the pic to the right side in this blog you might say “ Well look at that black dress and black nylons, she just broke this rule”. One, this isn’t a rule just a comment. Two, there was one word in this paragraph that makes a huge difference - Shear. The nylons in the picture are as dark as the dress and shoes. Keeping the eye moving and not stopping at some different color. Then the final finish are the gloves and beret.
Black shear nylons with the black suit is different. In the suit your arms are covered, so covering the legs with black nylons looks just fine. Even nude nylons looks fine with the black suit. Your not drawing the eyes to a shocking color. Oddly enough dark black nylons with black suit could make it look much to Macomb.
Black has become the color to hide in. Black is supposed to draw the eye to the eye away from what is covered in black and to the lighter color. But when you all in black (dress and shear nylons), and you have a large section of two colors (your arms vs. your legs) it is shocking to the eye. Plus, if your sleeveless the thought is that it is warm enough to not need to cover your legs. Its like combining winter and summer in one outfit. To see it on the red carpet, a beautiful black dress with a slit to the high part of the thigh only to reveal shear black nylons. Ouch, that hurt my eyes. That was it for me. I was tired of seeing a small amount of women taking on this look. The modern look of boots with L.B.D. is exactly that, a modern take on it. But when I’ve seen women with this look its for a more casual event, and they are not wearing black shear nylons. The boots are dark in color just like the dress.
Keep your L.B.D.’s clean and balanced and it will be amazing.
Black shear nylons with the black suit is different. In the suit your arms are covered, so covering the legs with black nylons looks just fine. Even nude nylons looks fine with the black suit. Your not drawing the eyes to a shocking color. Oddly enough dark black nylons with black suit could make it look much to Macomb.
Black has become the color to hide in. Black is supposed to draw the eye to the eye away from what is covered in black and to the lighter color. But when you all in black (dress and shear nylons), and you have a large section of two colors (your arms vs. your legs) it is shocking to the eye. Plus, if your sleeveless the thought is that it is warm enough to not need to cover your legs. Its like combining winter and summer in one outfit. To see it on the red carpet, a beautiful black dress with a slit to the high part of the thigh only to reveal shear black nylons. Ouch, that hurt my eyes. That was it for me. I was tired of seeing a small amount of women taking on this look. The modern look of boots with L.B.D. is exactly that, a modern take on it. But when I’ve seen women with this look its for a more casual event, and they are not wearing black shear nylons. The boots are dark in color just like the dress.
Keep your L.B.D.’s clean and balanced and it will be amazing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
