Margaret Ritchie writes: "My mom was a style icon in the truest sense! She modeled in New York City for a period of time in the late 50's and early 60's, before I was born. Our family has been able to hold on to this one photograph, but all the others from then have mysteriously disappeared…We all cherish this image of her!"
I cherish that hat. Not to mention that pose--which you have to be able to pull of if you're going to wear a hat like that. They're not mutually exclusive.
For those confident enough to carry a floral centerpiece on top of their brains, consider one do and one don't.
DO:
This Navy blue straw hat from Mainstreet Vintage, with an arrangement of purple and violet flowers is the closest thing to Margaret's mom minus the natural-born elegance. Notice, the mannequin has a Celtic back tattoo. The hat itself has a 32 inch circumference, so doorways may be a problem.
DON'T: This hat came up on a simple search for 1950's floral hats. Do I have to explain why this is the wrong choice?
I hope not.
3 comments:
It appears that the Don't Hat is actually Photoshopped onto the model's head, suggesting that it was so awful they couldn't get anyone to pose with it.
It's not even on a mannequin. Maybe it was so awful that they couldn't even get a store dummy to agree to wear it??
I feel an extreme need to cover my head with flowers now!
Also, if the circumference of the DO hat is 32 inches, it's diameter is only 10 inches, so doors shouldn't be a problem.
Margaret Ritchie might like to look at "Women" by Lillian Bassman published by Abrams New York, where she will find many more elegant ladies in hats and maybe even her mother among them, who knows?
Post a Comment