How to look more sophisticated?


All the ladies look amazing in their pinks.

MD wow, and I would never have called her girly either (at least not to her face anyway).

And of course ERII has a style all her own, she certainly has a colouring that looks great in cool-toned pinks of all shades and strengths. I could totally steal that cape and headscarf from her in the last pic (I wouldn't though, otherwise I'd be off to the Tower).
 
Thanks for the examples! It must be a cultural thing, I don’t see many older women wearing pink where I live. I think that most of the women in your pictures look very classy in pink, but a few still look a bit over the top in my eyes. I think the important part is not to wear a full pink tracksuit :P

View attachment 3975690

I guess it depends on how they put together the outfit rather than the color itself. I especially like the last picture of the Queen :smile:

They prob have to be viewed within the context of the fashions and times they were taken.

I do agree though, and I've said it before, there is a 'pinkification' and engendered commercialisation of anything targeted towards foremost girls but also women. Funny to think in the Victorian nursery girls were 'coded' with pale blue and the boys pink. The pink = feminine/cute/young cult is hideous but it's not the poor colour's fault.
 
This is perhaps classic casual, 'effortless' and very nice but I wouldn't say sophisticated.

I'd agree... Even if I think Sofia Coppola can be very sophisticated. To me, there is elegant, stylish, sophisticated... and it doesn't all mean the same thing. Like, it is possible and perhaps frequent to be elegant and sophisticated at the same time, but it is not necessarily always the case. Sophisticated implies a high level of complexity, whether actual or conceptual. So a "simple" look is never really going to be sophisticated. Whereas one can be elegant hiking or even naked. It is more about the person, the poise, than the clothes. And then, stylish is all about the look. I would even add put-together as a category, as you could be perfectly put together but without being either elegant, stylish or sophisticated, and you could be any of the later in bed hair and no make up. At least that's how I see it :biggrin:.
 
me too. can't wait to see everyone else idea of a 'sophisticated' lass. the more different from my ideal the more interesting...but I do need to see photos because description dont really do it since they rely on ones own imagination to fill in the gaps... or chasms...

Fashion shifts and words often change in their meaning but words that actually incapsulate what something is by what it is not cannot change too much or it became meaningless.

Sophisticated is defined against what it is not because certain women used their sophistication against the feminine/female stereotypes of their day.

Sophisticated style is NOT and CANNOT look cute, cheap, young, pretty-pretty, conventional, bourgeois or casual because sophisticated actually defines itself against.

For me, this is the definition of sophisticated

PR1672---Le-Smoking-Helmut-Newton-p1__1__RNV1PRYCO7GM.jpg
 
@papertiger what’s bourgeois style for u? care to elaborate?

Bourgeois style has negative connotations (the term was coined as derogatory). I personally don't believe in such things.

Basically, it's a person who dresses from the outside-in and considers themselves above fashion within any timely or fashionable context wears expensive good (or 'good') taste with no deviation. Every generation has a new uniform. For example, in the early twentieth century Chanel's LBD and less-structured suit was seen as revolutionary, by the time of her death it was thought of as old fashioned, conventional and middle-class-boring. Street fashion and high fashion used to pride themselves on shaking and riling against this uniform but both have now been co-opted by the process of hegemony and incorporated into the present-day armour. It's very hard to see the uniform or an alternative any more as the old distinctions of what has been considered conservative or bohemian have merged more and more for 50 years, they are now virtually indistinguishable. This is presumably probably why people now have to ask how to look more sophisticated and there seems to be some debate about it. The only thing we can go back to is original definitions.
 
Last edited:
Bourgeois style has negative connotations (the term was coined as derogatory). I personally don't believe in such things.

Basically, it's a person who dresses from the outside-in and considers themselves above fashion within any timely or fashionable context wears expensive good (or 'good') taste with no deviation. Every generation has a new uniform. E.G. the early twentieth century Chanel's LBD and less-structured suit was seen as revolutionary, by the time of her death it was thought of as old fashioned, conventional and boring. Street fashion and high fashion used to pride themselves on shaking and riling against this uniform but both have now been co-opted by the process of hegemony and incorporated into the present-day armour. It's very hard to see the uniform or an alternative any more as the old distinctions of what has been considered conservative or bohemian have merged more and more for 50 years, they are now virtually indistinguishable. This is presumably probably why people now have to ask how to look more sophisticated and there seems to be some debate about it. The only thing we can go back to is original definitions.
This is such a clear & precise explanation. You could be a fashion prof! You are so right and every era and every tribe has its fashion uniform. For example everyone in lthis neon is curently wearing straight ( not skinny) jeans, cropped to show ankle, long overcoats and smart (non logo) bags ...
 
Bourgeois style has negative connotations (the term was coined as derogatory). I personally don't believe in such things.

Basically, it's a person who dresses from the outside-in and considers themselves above fashion within any timely or fashionable context wears expensive good (or 'good') taste with no deviation. Every generation has a new uniform. For example, in the early twentieth century Chanel's LBD and less-structured suit was seen as revolutionary, by the time of her death it was thought of as old fashioned, conventional and middle-class-boring. Street fashion and high fashion used to pride themselves on shaking and riling against this uniform but both have now been co-opted by the process of hegemony and incorporated into the present-day armour. It's very hard to see the uniform or an alternative any more as the old distinctions of what has been considered conservative or bohemian have merged more and more for 50 years, they are now virtually indistinguishable. This is presumably probably why people now have to ask how to look more sophisticated and there seems to be some debate about it. The only thing we can go back to is original definitions.
thanks! always a fan of your posts. i wish you update your blogspot more often, it is very interesting
 
Right, let’s see if I can phrase this in a better way than my other attempt.

Let me give you some examples of what I mean:

- Tidy nails
-Polished and shoes
- Neat hairstyle, not necessarily perfectly straightened or curled, I mean well combed, clean haircut, nice even color...
- Good posture
- Good fragrance/perfume


Etc?

You know, other than expensive bags or clothes, what are some other things you notice in a classy person? I sometimes think of the scandinavian/french girl stereotype.


Sent from my iPhone using PurseForum
 
Manners, polite demeanor, and being well-spoken were the first things that came to mind, although I think you're looking for something physical.

Well-tailored clothing
Cleanliness/hygiene/grooming
An elegant makeup look (not necessarily having to be minimalist or only limited to natural-looking, but very polished and not garish)