Information Security & US & Life & Love & Fashion & Hacking & Passion

In the absence of an economy that allows us to do any proper shopping these days, the only way to survive, of course, is to shop vicariously. Thankfully, the USA—nay, the world—now has the ideal model on whom to hang our shopping dreams: Michelle Obama. Literally, in fact. One of my favorite pieces of Obama paraphernalia that I have purchased (and believe me, there is substantial competition in this category) is a book of Obama paperdolls, featuring outfits for all the family, including Sasha and Malia, of course, but with particular emphasis on Michelle.

Anyway, I digress. Lest this look like the sad squeals of a fashion freak attempting to impose her own minority interests on an international event, put this anecdote in your pipe and smoke it. I was in Chicago during the election and had breakfast with a member of his campaign team on November 6, a mere 48 hours after the result was announced. This charming young gentleman spoke dutifully over our bagels and coffee about how plans were shaping up for the upcoming changes, etc. and so forth, when I made some self-mocking reference to my excitement about Michelle’s possible inauguration outfits. My friends, this wonk’s eyes lit up brighter than if I’d dropped some scurrilous gossip about Bristol Palin. “Oh, I know! We’re all talking about that,” he said, and that’s a direct quote.


And of course they are. Yes, part of the media excitement about having another stylish First Lady at last comes purely from relief at being able to brighten up dull news days on TV and in the papers with some pictures of Michelle looking fab. But there is also symbolic value. The last chic First Lady was Nancy Reagan, and she was stylish in a very eighties ladies-who-lunch way—all twig-armed couture skirtsuits and that sort of thing. Cindy McCain would have offered something very similar, which is fine in its way, but hardly suggestive of a new, modern world. Then we entered the age of Barbara Bush, who, like Laura Bush, took a defiantly “I’m the invisible wife, please don’t look at me; I’m only here to support my husband” approach to dressing, while Hillary Clinton’s phobic avoidance of anything that might be construed as feminine was just as old-fashioned.

With Michelle, we have a woman who is sufficiently confident in her intelligence, career, and personal status to know that enjoying how she looks will not signify that she is a bubblehead. So what should she wear on January 20, then? Well, newspaper reports are already claiming, unsurprisingly, that designers are nigh on falling over themselves to get her their wares. The comparisons between her and Jackie O are really just about their shared interest in style—their respective styles are actually very different. Jackie—and I don’t mean this as a bad thing—took a guaranteed, even safe approach to chic: She knew the conservative shapes that suited her and she worked them. Michelle fearlessly goes for something a little more awkward and, as a result, looks far more independent and modern and cool and appealing to women. This is not a gal to get out the cleavage. On the other hand, she doesn’t feel she has to wear a Comme des Garçons hunchback dress to prove her fashion-aware-but-still-cerebral credentials. Think of the red and black Narciso Rodriguez affair she wore the night of the election: not my cup of tea, personally, but you gotta admire a woman who worked such a number on the international stage.

So for all these reasons, I think she should stay with the smaller, niche designers. No, you cannot beat a de la Renta for guaranteed elegance, but Michelle strikes me as much more of a Milly gal—retro, but with a modern kick (and anyway, Oscar would have been Cindy’s choice, which rules that out). She’ll presumably have to stick with an America label—although it would be awesome if she picked up something from Swedish high street behemoth H&M, as she did when she was on the campaign trail, or maybe even Topshop. But a canny little Marc Jacobs number would make me very happy, too. Definitely a shift dress—that woman can really work a dress—and in a gorgeous block color, like the nigh-on-historic purple Maria Pinto one she wore earlier this year. And that, I think, is the likeliest scenario: something from her mate Maria, a plucky designer from Chicago pretty much no one had heard of at the start of this campaign but who by now has become very famous indeed and everyone is asking, how the hell didn’t we notice this piece of class before? I mean, really—is there a more apt choice for the Obama inauguration?

NEW YORK (AP) -- When Laura Bush and Hillary Clinton arrived at the White House, they brought with them styles that suited their hometowns in Texas and Arkansas, but that wouldn't have held up in any fashion capital.

Laura Bush's Sunday-best peacock blue coat didn't get high ratings in 2001.

1 of 4

Tastemakers have higher hopes for Michelle Obama, who is expected to fill her closet at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue with sophisticated styles that match her modern image but maintain the sensibility inherent to Chicago.

The image of Obama walking the inaugural parade route in something like the domed, wide-brimmed hat that has haunted Clinton since 1993 seems unlikely. And she probably won't show up to the inaugural ball in mother-of-the-bride-style gowns with dyed-to-match pumps like Bush has worn -- twice.

Over time, both Clinton and Bush did grow more accustomed to their new surroundings, and their wardrobe reflected that. Learn more about inaugural events and history »

For example, Bush wore a Sunday-best peacock blue coat with sensible shoes to the chilly inaugural ceremony in 2001, but chose a chic winter-white coat ensemble with camel-colored high heels -- a top pick of fashion insiders -- in 2005.

Clinton also chose a modern, luxe gold lace gown by Oscar de la Renta for her second tour of inaugural balls unlike the fussy purple princess number the first go-around. (Remember the sparkly belt buckle?) Watch how extravagant should Obama's inauguration ball be? »

Still, Bush and Clinton fit into the expectations of what earlier generations thought a president's wife should look like. Obama has the opportunity to break the mold.

"Most previous first ladies have appeared to believe that displaying an interest in fashion and style undermines the importance of their role. They've subscribed to the old-fashioned view that a woman should de-sexualize herself or dress like a man if she wants to be regarded as intelligent and of good conscience," says Mandi Norwood, the former editor in chief of Shop Etc. who is now writing a style guide directed to Obama for publisher Avon A.

"Mrs. Obama, however, has a much more modern view," Norwood says. "She's demonstrated that it's smart to be stylish; that strong and positive statements can be made through the right choice of outfit."

The right outfit can't be too cutting edge, though, says Andrea Reynders, chair of the fashion department at the Art Institute of Chicago. This is where Obama's roots will come in handy.

"Trends seem to happen on both coasts, but in the Midwest we look for the value in clothing. Chicago is a wonderful place where you can find women buying garments with wonderful fabrics, detailing and fit. It lends itself wonderfully to a strong classic fashion with a lot of independence -- and not being too trendy will serve Michelle well in Washington," Reynders says.

While Clinton also grew up in the Chicago suburbs, her pre-White House adult life was largely spent in Little Rock and her eye adjusted to the local look, says communications consultant Ruth Sherman, who advises business leaders, celebrities and politicians.

So far, Obama has chosen designers that alternately appeal to style insiders and everywomen. They range from retail giant J. Crew to fashion favorite Narciso Rodriguez to Chicago's own Maria Pinto.

Pinto, who was a student of Reynders, epitomizes what Chicago style is -- and what Obama needs to do, the professor says: Take a good silhouette, embellish it enough to get noticed, but don't go over the top.

By making some off-the-radar choices, Obama already greatly reduces her risk of making the same faux pas as Bush did at a 2006 Kennedy Center Honors event when she wore the same red de la Renta gown as three other women.

There is so much to consider when developing a first lady's wardrobe -- and the rush to do it in a few short weeks between Election Night and moving day further complicates things, says Michael Faircloth, the Dallas-based designer who outfitted Bush.

He says he tried to add touches of Texas by using bright colors and native fabrics such as cotton and mohair.

"In creating Mrs. Bush's inaugural wardrobe, I wanted to convey confidence and graciousness, but there's a certain level of femininity and appropriateness that needs to be there too, and you need to strike a celebratory tone," he says.

A first lady should simultaneously appear graceful and formal, Faircloth adds, and the garments themselves must photograph well.

(Obama may have learned that lesson firsthand when the black sides of her red Rodriguez dress seemed to disappear into the backdrop in Election Night pictures.)

Once she arrives in Washington, Obama should stay true to herself, says Sherman, author of "Get Them To See It Your Way, Right Away."

But Sherman also wonders what will happen to Obama's sometimes-sportier look, one that likely resonates with the younger people who so strongly support her and her husband.

"If the Obamas are being considered the next generations of leaders, will the Obamas reflect that this generation is so much more casual? What does it mean when you see Michelle Obama in jeans? ... Are people's tongues going to be wagging or is it part of her job to appeal to that generation?"

Reynders hopes Obama will look further back in first-lady history and follow the model of Jackie Kennedy -- whom Obama has already been compared to many times.

"There was not a `don't' in the lot of Jackie's wardrobe. She matched the figure and fashion of the time," she says.