I've long admired her cohort for the way they wear leggings--as opposed to some adults out there who think that semi-sheer footless tights are pants. I've worn leggings as a tights substitute in cold weather for years (or rather, layered them over tights, then layered socks, boots and dresses/skirts over them), but I stuck to black.
Inspiration for a change came from a somewhat unlikely source, J. Crew's Fall 2011 preview, where a pair of rust/navy striped leggings were paired with a dress. Like my niece and so many 3-year olds, these leggings had visual interest, looked warm and delightfully offbeat. I wear bright coloured tights and sometimes add patterned pairs, so I decided these leggings would be added to my closet this fall. I adjusted this plan slightly when I discovered said leggings cost $80. I demurred further when I saw them in person--with no stretch, they looked like pajamas.
But the desire to have striped leggings (preferably in some kind of red-rust/navy combo) persisted. Ironically, I found the solution at a great price--and in far better fabric (a proper leggings cotton spandex) at the J. Crew factory site. At a shade under $15 each, I got the red/blue (alas in a large which is a little big as the Medium had sold out) and the navy/white. These work with patterned Rachel Comey dresses and with little box pleat skirts and boots. And they are warm enough for the early cold now coming our way.
1 comment:
leggings without stretch? what on earth is jcrew thinking?? i actually prefer leggings to tights in the winter because the waistband tends to be more comfortable. i also pair them with knee-highs or wool hiking socks, so i prefer not having two layers on my feet. plus, i tend to wear holes in the heels pretty quickly.
as much as i like the mociun and shabd leggings, prints seem to make my legs look twice as thick. i'll have to think about stripes, though.
Post a Comment