Friday, January 23, 2009

To tuck in or tuck out, that is the question?

Tucking in has always felt to me the height of nerdiness. It shows a want of style and a sort of fastidiousness that borders on the obsessive. You tuck a baby's clothes in to keep its little belly warm but no self-respecting fashionista goes around with her clothes tucked in - or does she?

Leafing through the Guardian fashion section I see, to my surprise, a model wearing jeans with her blouse tucked in. On her it plays stylishly on the border between prim and sexy, mostly on account of her endless legs, washboard stomach and small waist. Believe me, if I walked around with my blouse tucked in my jeans, I'd look like I was playing with the boundaries between care in the community and Bonne Marche.

To reject tucking in denotes loucheness, the idea that you've had to put your clothes on in a hurry because you've been doing something much more interesting, that you're abandoned, artistic and really rather sexy. Tucking in is for wimps, for people who are dressed by their mothers and for grey men like John Major was was said to tuck his shirt into his underpants - nuff said really.

To be honest, there are times when tucking in does come into its own. I sometimes tuck my thermal vest (I know, but it is quite a chi-chi one, if I do say so myself) into my trousers but always make sure I have something untucked on top so that I'm not caught committing the tucking in crime.

But when it comes to it, if tucking in is the new tucking out, this woman's not playing.

No comments: