Ask Alexandra is my advice column. Have a question you want to ask me? Fill out the form here.

Hermès’ Jypsière bag costs $7,500 and is made in France.

Hi Alexandra,

Thank you for the wonderful article in dissecting the luxury brands. I have a question that relates to the article as well. Does “Made in China” influences the value of fashion brands? There are some name brands out there with their goods manufactured in other countries other than US or Europe, does the value of their goods deteriorate because of that? Michael Kors’ bags are manufactured in China, but it does not seem to effect brand popularity, is it because of their marketing campaign? Do independent designer’s brands that are manufactured in Asia or South America seem more inferior? Thank you in advance for answering my question!

Gucci bags are supposedly made in Italy, but I’ve been told they are mostly made in China, with the last few stitches being applied in Italy, which allows them to use that label.

Hi Vivien,

“Made in China” has a very different significance today than it did ten years ago, as manufacturing there has improved a great deal, and it is much easier to get high quality products from that end of the world. On that note, there is also a big movement towards locally made products, for example, American-made fashion, and if those brands are targeting the type of consumer who wants “American-made,” then that will be a major benefit.

Tory Burch’s shoes are made in China, which means she is making quite a big margin on these, which sell for $250.

There are a few factors affecting the impact of the “Made in” label. Here they are:

1. The brand. Consumers have different expectations from different brands. If you go into Walmart to buy a t-shirt, you expect it to be made in Asia, as that’s the only way for them to make t-shirts for $5. If you go into Gucci and buy a $1500 handbag, you expect it to be made in Italy. (Incidentally, brands like Gucci do get their bags partially made in China, but the final stitches are put on in Italy, which means they can put the “Made in Italy” label on them. That’s a bit deceiving, but, I digress…)

When luxury brands make things in China, it usually means that they know their customer is more interested in buying the brand and unconcerned about where it is made, so the country of origin doesn’t matter.

Lululemon’s groove pants are made in Taiwan or Vietnam.

2. The consumer: Some consumers care about where their products are made, others don’t. As I mentioned above, there has been a movement towards buying local, and there is a new(ish) consumer who is very keen on buying products that are made locally. For my company, The Sleep Shirt, one of our biggest selling points is that it is made in Canada. On the other hand, some consumers want to buy products that are made in what I’ll call “prestige apparel manufacturing countries” like France and Italy. Those kind of consumers want a product made in one of thee countries because they think it will be better quality (and usually, it is.)

The last type of consumer is the one that doesn’t care. And to be honest, I think that is most of us, most of the time, at least for part of the clothing we buy. When I am shopping, I will certainly be drawn to products that are made locally, but for things some things (like t-shirts and socks) I rarely look at the label. On the other hand, I feel like the factory in Bangladesh certainly drew attention to the plight of the garment workers in Asis, but its effect on our cheap clothing shopping habits is yet to be seen

3. The product: The last issue is the product. Certain countries specialize in certain types of manufacturing, for example, China and Brazil make a lot of footwear and India does a lot of beading. If you want to get shoes made in Canada, you are out of luck, we simply don’t have many good factories who can make this product, because of the specialized skill and machines involved in making footwear. So companies like Lululemon can get away with making a great deal of their product in Asia, and still consider themselves a “premium” brand, because there are a lot of big and high quality activewear manufacturers in that part of the world.

Seraphine’s slim fit maternity skinny jeans (left) and breastfeeding sweater (right.) I can’t believe I am actually getting excited about maternity wear, but this stuff is that good.

Since everyone I know right now seems to be pregnant or having babies, I’d thought I touch on maternity wear today. I was recently revisiting my blog post on buying maternity/post partum clothing, and if I have any readers out there that are pregnant, I suggest reading it as the advice is quite good (if I may say so myself…) I didn’t really name any specific maternity wear brands, so I thought Seraphine deserved a post of its own.

They contacted my and their press angle was all about the celebrities that wear their clothing, which was immediately a major turn off for me (as it always is.) But then I tried their product and I was hooked. Their maternity jeans are the BEST EVER. In addition, I have one of their breastfeeding sweaters, which is also great. This is a rare type of maternity clothing that you don’t actually want to set on fire after you’re done having babies. They have a huge range of essentials, including nursing tops and maternity tights, as well as fashionable items for formal events and the office. As I explained in my original blog post, I don’t recommend spending too much on pieces that you are only going to wear once or twice, but their jeans are VERY worth it. I wore mine at least four times a week during pregnancy.

Seraphine ships worldwide.

Two weeks ago I went to NAFFEM, a large fur tradeshow in Montreal. I was invited as a blogger, to check out the beautiful pieces and choose some of my favourites items for sale at the show. I am a huge supporter of the Canadian fur industry (read about my reasons here) but I’ve been less vocal about the seal hunt, primarily because I didn’t have enough information to make an informed opinion about it. Well, now I do, and I would like to share it with you because I think it is important.

Seal skin dyes really well, I love this pink pelt.

1. Seals are a sustainable resource and are in abundance. We live in a world where resources have become an issue, and many of us are choosing to consume products that come from renewable resources. Seal is a great example of this – there are tons of them in Canada and they are not at all at threat of becoming endangered. Speaking of sustainability, seals are part of the reason why fish stocks are very low (although overfishing is also a big issue) and the seal hunt not only provides jobs and resources for the hunters, but also allows the fish populations to regenerate (a bit.) All major conservation groups will agree that a responsible use of resources (like hunting seals for food and clothing) is a good thing, and is often the central principle of modern conservation.

2. Seals are local. The green topic is a big one right now, and part of the green movement focuses on buying local. Canada has a lot of great resources, but when it comes to fashion, few are 100% Canadian. Nearly all of our fashion products are in some way sourced from overseas (where it be raw materials or construction) but seal skin and wild fur are 100% free range, local products.

The seal skin mittens I bought for my son.

3. The seal hunt supports Canadian communities. There are two major seal hunts in Canada, one in the Arctic sea (seals hunted by Inuit people) and one on the East Coast (a commercial seal hunt.) Both provide jobs and resources for those people. The meat is eaten, the fat is used for a variety of products, and the skin is sold so that these people can support themselves. Food, as you may know, is extremely expensive in the Arctic, and there are limited jobs in that area, or in the Maritimes. The seal hunt is a very important Canadian industry for the people who depend on it.

4. The seal hunt is not inhumane. The animal rights activists will have you believe that the seal hunt is inhumane, but this is not the case. First of all, most seals are killed with rifles (not clubbed to death.) Secondly, there have been numerous studies done on the seal hunt, and biologists and veterinarians have all agreed that the seal hunt is no less humane than any other hunt.

Seal skin slippers for babies and toddlers.

5. The media paints an unfair picture. My question, after having learnt all the above, was why does the seal hunt have such a bad reputation? There are two answers to this. First of all, seals are cute, and people are more likely to be protective of cute animals. If we were all truly concerned about cruelty and sustainability, why aren’t we doing more to save fish? Many species of fish are far more at risk than seals, yet their not-so-cute appearance doesn’t exactly inspire people to campaign for them. (Notice how we care more that our tuna is “dolphin safe” but so much if that particular tuna is endangered.) Secondly, the seal hunt is a much more visible than other hunts, and the access to it allows for more imagery. The seal hunt happens in certain places at very specific times, and so it is very easy for activists to turn up and take photos of blood on the ice. Those same activists aren’t invited into abattoirs, and therefore we don’t have the same images in our head of cows or sheep. The fact that seals are cute, and that we have access to photos of them being killed, means the seal hunt has been very unfairly portrayed by the media and activist groups.

Many of us are so far removed from nature, farming, and hunting, and it is so easy to forget that our food comes from the land. While I will admit I don’t like seeing photos of any dead animals, I do appreciate the process and am under no illusions about the realities of eating meat and wearing animal products. For those of us who do choose to consume animals, the best we can do is consume sustainable resources that are treated humanely – and the seal hunt is just that.

Here’s a video of me at the fur trade show. Just to remind all my readers… I am totally open to comments from people who disagree with me – but please don’t be rude!

I’ve been meaning to try the MaskerAide masks for months, but unfortunately the directions are extremely complicated for someone who has a newborn, as they require that you “relax for 10-20 minutes.” That wasn’t an option until a few weeks ago when I went to Montreal for a fur trade show (more on that later this week) and spent the night in a hotel room with no toddler or newborn to worry about.

MaskerAide has a range of facial sheet masks which are easy to apply and wear, since the sheet holds everything in place and you aren’t dripping product all over the place. Using a clear based serum or a cream, the masks replenish and hydrate skin and can be used in the evenings or even before makeup. Choose from formulas like Detox Diva that absorbs impurities or I Don’t Wanna Grow Up that helps combat the signs of ageing.

And of course, like most of my favourite beauty products, MaskerAide has no parabens, mineral oil, glycerins or benzophenone. $6 each at Beauty Mark.

For the past few years, I have been working as a consultant for Carizzi, a luxury swimwear brand based in London. The vision behind this brand is high end swimwear with a great fit. Sounds like a no brainer, but sadly, that is not the case. Amazing swimwear requires a well thought-through design, perfect fit, flawless pattern, and skilled construction. Carizzi has managed to achieve this all thanks to her factory in France, who also make swimwear for Hermès and Eres (pretty much the best swimwear brand in the world.)

What’s even more exciting is that her spring summer 2013 collection has a print designed by yours truly! No, I am not trying to become a print designer, but we had an idea of a bright, bold print and couldn’t find anyone to product it for us, so I had a go. The print is below, if you look closely, you can see rainbows, clouds, aces, spades, clubs, diamonds, crowns, and lightning that were inspired by some 60′s place mats I have. I’ve bought three for summer, now all I need to do is fit into them (sigh.) Shop the collection here.

Now that Mother’s Day product pitches have stopped coming into my inbox (well, a few brands pitched late this week – they must be the ones with disorganized PRs) it is time for the next big event: Father’s Day! And that’s how I came upon these offensive, revolting men’s jeans by Earnest Sewn, as they were pitched to me as a Father’s Day gift.

Not only do these jeans look unbelievably gross, but to make things worse, they are priced at $325. I don’t know how anyone could even consider spending that amount of money on a pair of pants that look like they will stain your legs with toxic rust. They are an indication of how effed up the fashion industry has become, a sad reminder that brands can charge hundreds of dollars for disgusting jeans that look like they need to be thrown in the garbage. What’s next? Trousers that have been vomited on, for $500? Depends on who vomited on them, I guess.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s spring show is entitled PUNK: Chaos to Couture, but don’t get excited. It isn’t about vintage punk clothing, it is about punk’s impact on high fashion. Which pretty much sums up the mood on the red carpet at last night’s gala, lots of fancy, overdressed people trying to add a bit of punk to their outfit (along with a lot of people who completely ignored the punk theme.) The worst part of the red carpet was probably the (failed) attempts at punk makeup and hairdos, worn with super fancy gowns. If you are going to try and do punk, do it. If not, don’t bother. Because a half ass attempt looks really bad.

(And as usual, I had to massively edit the number of red carpet looks I featured here – so I chose what I thought to be the really good ones and the really bad ones. The rest can be seen on The Cut.)

I love…

Christina Ricci in Vivienne Westwood. Although I’m uttelry bored of Westwood’s corset gowns because she does them EVERY SINGLE SEASON, given her association to punk, someone had to wear one at this party. And Ricci wore it well.

Anja Rubik in Anthony Vaccarello. She looks hot.

Carey Mulligan in Balenciaga. The perfect little cut outs and a nice detail at the neck, this is ultra chic.

Florence Welch in Givenchy. This is very her.

Gisele Bundchen in Anthony Vaccarello. He is in charge of putting the models into super sexy outfits, and he is doing it well.

Gwyneth Paltrow in Valentino. Best part? We won’t have to hear about bikini lines or side butt or whatever.

Karolina Kurkova in Mary Katrantzou. A bit punky and a bit interesting.

Katy Perry in Dolce & Gabbana. This dress was clearly made for her.

Madonna in Givenchy. I’m so over her dressing like a teenager, but at least she attempted the punk thing.

Rooney Mara in Givenchy. Has this woman ever looked bad?

Sienna Miller in Burberry. I like her hair, and I like the studded jacket over white gown. It suits her, and its the perfect nod to the evening’s theme.

I loathe…

Anna Wintour in Chanel. There is nothing wrong with this outfit – she pretty much always looks good – but could she have not at least done something punk-y? A diamante safety pin? A black dress? A raw edge?

Alexa Chung in Erdem. She looks like she is wearing rags, and not in a cool, punk way.

Anne Hathaway in Valentino. Where do I start? The side boob? The see-through dress? The horrible hair? The terrible eye makeup?

Beyonce in Givenchy. This is too much: too much boob, too much train, and too much pizzazz. Chill out, lady.

Chloe Sevigny in Proenza Schouler. I’m sad to say it, but she looks old and fat.

Kim Kardashian in Givenchy. Speaking of fat, I don’t want to be the mean one dissing the pregnant woman, but it goes without saying that wearing a print like this, when you are the biggest you have been in your entire life, is a MAJOR NO-NO. Pregnant or not, this is NOT OK.

Donatelle Versace in (you guessed it) Versace. Donatella, stop dressing like a sexy twenty year old. ‘Cause you’re not one!

Elle Fanning in Rodarte. This is a punk exhibition, not a hippy tye-dyed exhibition. And by the way, that makeup looks ridiculous.

Emma Watson in Prabal Guring. Blah…. And can someone please teach her how to pose for the red carpet?

January Jones in Chanel. This would be totally fine but the makeup HAS TO GO!!!!

Katie Holmes in Calvin Klein. Prissy face, stupid hair, giant wedding gown train, and side boob are not a great combination.

Kristen Stewart in Stella McCartney. The most unflattering pant suit, ever.

Mary Kate Olsen in Chanel Couture and vintage Balmain. She looks like a homeless person.

Miley Cyrus in Marc Jacobs. She sort of looks naked, and sort of looks idiotic.

Sofia Coppola in Marc Jacobs. Another major Marc Jacobs disaster, forcing your friend to wear cheap looking shiny pajamas on the red carpet.

Nicole Ritchie in Topshop. She looks like an alien!!!!

Images from The Cut.

I’m not sure this should be titled “Pretty Pictures,” instead, it should be “Loathe: Helena Christensen Looks Effing Amazing and She is 45.” Because I’m jealous. Although I must say that I am very happy she isn’t overly retouched in this shoot. There are a few shots where her skin looks like that of a thirty year old – which doesn’t exactly make me feel like she is normal, but at least she’s slightly human. I’m not even going to speculate about her “secret” to looking this good because I’ve learnt one thing about models from my many years in the fashion industry: they are freaks of nature (albeit beautiful ones) and there’s no point trying to emulate them, even one who is forty five. Shot by Xavi Gordo.

See the rest of this shoot at Fashion Gone Rogue.

A few weeks ago I had this sudden urge to declutter. Not in a I-need-to-tidy-up way, I did need to tidy, but this was different. I felt this urge to make a change. To get rid of my stuff. A lot of it. And to become that person who was no longer weighed down by her stuff. It stemmed from a conversation from a fellow Mom of two, whose second was born around the same time as mine. She talked about how when you are sitting in a chair breastfeeding (which can take 8 hours or more a day) you look around your house (which, for both of us, was filled with toddler AND baby mess) and you hate everything. HATE EVERYTHING.

I want my house to be clean and uncluttered.

So I decided to start clearing things out, in a dramatic fashion. I went though a drawer and ruthlessly got rid of things. Then, an hour later, I went through it again, and got rid of more. A week later, I got rid of even more from that same spot. A month after this urge began, I discovered The Minimalists (a blog all about minimizing and simplifying your life), and I decided to book a mentoring session with one of the authors, Ryan Nicodemus. I need to be more extreme in my de-cluttering, and I need someone to help me. Although I can’t do the “extreme minimalizing” he has done (kids are one major hindrance to this, amongst others) I want to reduce my personal belongings by at least a quarter, if not, a third.  Here is why I really want to become a minimalist.

1. I can think clearer. I’ll know where my things are. I’ll be able to focus. Ever since I “discovered” I want to minimize, I’ve felt very weighed down by my stuff. I’ve wanted to come home from work and just throw things away, because my stuff has been distracting me. I’ve been unable to properly focus because what now feels like piles of stuff (my things used to be a positive, they aren’t anymore) is getting in the way of me thinking clearly. And one massive benefit of this clear out is that I will have less stuff and all of my current stuff will have a home. A proper home/shelf/drawer/space that it will not have to share with piles of other crap. I want to know where things are, and I don’t want to stress about finding them – when they are needed.

Imagine walking into a room and knowing that everything has its place?

2. I won’t be tied down by stuff. My husband and I have talked about moving to Europe for a year, once the kids get to school age. Just the thought of packing up our house to rent it for a year  puts me off this idea completely. But once I’ve minimized, it will be easy for me to get up and go. I moved so many things to Europe, and SO much back again, and the bulk of those things were useless. All they did was make it more difficult for me to move freely.

I want my closet to look like this.

3. I’ll spend less money and be less wasteful. The strangest thing about my decision to try and become a minimalist is that I’ve lost the urge to shop. In fact, a huge weight has been lifted off my shoulders, because I no longer have to save a ton of money for our trip to Sweden this summer, because I won’t feel the need to buy a ton of clothes. Normally I go to Europe with the aim to buy as many clothes as possible. Now, I’m going to Europe to relax, hang out, and enjoy myself. Of course I’ll buy a few things, but those will be meaningful, interesting things that I really want. Not piles of fast fashion.

4. And I’ll get to buy better things. And of course spending less money on things means I’ll have more of it, and I’ll be in the position to buy a few really nice things occasionally, instead of buying tons of things frequently.

I’ll be spending my summer relaxing in a Swedish country house, not consuming cheap clothing.

5. I won’t spend my weekends clearing up. My husband will be thrilled at this prospect. Once everything has its home, and there are fewer things in the house, it will be easier to clean up. Yay!

I’m starting my mentoring with Ryan on Monday, so I will let you all know how it goes.

What does this mean about the blog? Just because I am minimizing, doesn’t mean I am no longer searching for style. And I have always tried to talk only about product I love and believe in, so I’ll still be sticking to that mantra. But maybe there will be a little less fast fashion and a little less of the frivolous  short-lived trendy pieces we all don’t need more of. And that’s not only going to be a good thing for our closets and wallets, there are a lot of other things wrong with our desire for over consumption.

Image sources: room, kitchen, closet, and swedish summer house.

I suppose if Gwyneth Paltrow was one of my clients and she constantly talked about me on her (addictive) newsletter Goop, then I too would try and capitalize on it by growing my business in every which way possible. That would not, however, include a collection of bumster leggings. Celebrity fitness guru Tracy Anderson claims that her clients come in with Spanx-like clothing on to work out, and that the body needs to be able to jiggle around, so she has launched these EXTREMELY low waisted workout pants. These are scarily low, and will most likely induce massive plumber’s butt paranoia during exercise. I’d be afraid to bend down, and that’s usually an integral part of exercise. I’m all for Brazilian bikini waxes, but I don’t feel anyone should be forced into one so that they can wear a pair of stretchy tartan capris.

In fact, these are so low that I am not even sure you can wear underwear with them. I also think that having your ass and stomach jiggling around during exercise is both distracting and probably not great for the skin (isn’t that one of the reasons people wear bras?) The irony here is that only Tracy Anderson devotees are going to be able to get away with wearing these leggings. Anyone who really NEEDS her help will be such an eyesore in these groin-revealing pants that they are likely to be banned from entering her trendy workout studios. It seems that we have to face some tough choices these days when dressing for exercise: have the world see your privates while you downward dog, or have the world see your belly and ass crack while you try and get a Gwyneth Paltrow body. Let’s just crack open a bag of Cheezies.