ShareThis Page

'80s acid-washed denim in again?

| Sunday, Oct. 8, 2017, 9:00 p.m.

There were some good-looking clothes on the Paris runway at Stella McCartney's spring 2018 collection. She cut some fun, billowy dresses using waxed cotton with a customized African print. They came in cheerful fuchsia and a happy shade of green. And nobody does faux leather like McCartney, whose company's ethos is focused on sustainability and environmentally sound production practices.

But it is hard to recall these moments. Because there was something on the runway that was so jarring, so unnerving and, for those members of Generation X, so terribly haunting: acid-washed denim. For the love of God, Stella McCartney, what have you done?

Now, technically, McCartney's denim was “overdyed, washed denim.” But the effect was the same. It had that familiar speckled faded look of the 1980s. It was oversized and unwieldy and exuded all of the awkwardness of junior high.

Fashion often tries to reclaim ideas that history has declared impractical, outdated or just plain “ugh.” Sometimes it works. Ideas like the maxi-skirt and grunge have been reborn and celebrated. It took our eyes a little time to adjust to bubble skirts, but they finally did. Designers stubbornly insisted that drop-crotch trousers were a good idea and after some tweaking and a lot of patience, they beat consumers into submission. Now they are part of our classic, Western vernacular.

But these faded, boxy denim jackets and vests, onesies and jeans? No sir. No ma'am.

No doubt you will see this denim on some celebrity who will look cool because she has styled it juuust right. How'd she do it? With a village of assistants helping her out. Most people don't have a squadron of professional fashion whisperers. You don't.

Avoid ‘80s denim, people. Be strong. Don't do it.

Robin Givhan is the Washington Post fashion writer.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.