In today's (Sunday April 25) Los Angeles Times, the weekly "Image" section devoted to matters of style and fashion (usually overwhelmingly female-oriented) has much of it devoted to the revival of the "Preppy" style, mostly, I fear, 1980s neo-preppy. There was also a discussion of "Preppy" in Los Angeles--schools, shops, neighborhoods. Of course, most were very familiar to me. Larchmont Blvd. was described as an epicenter of "preppiness," which I think was much more true 20 or 25 years ago than today. Once upon a time Larchmont was a great hangout for me. I did my banking, my grocery shopping and a fair amount of other shopping (books, clothes, etc.), had my dry cleaning done there and more. My dentist was even on Larchmont. Anyway, for those of you in the greater Los Angeles area and don't get the Times, you might pick it up today if you're interested. Maybe some of it will be posted on the Times' website.
http://www.latimes.com/features/image/la-ig-0425-prepmain-20100425,0,4930080.story
http://www.latimes.com/features/image/la-ig-preppy-20100425,0,6405217.story
For those in need of a bit of light reading.
Way too much has been written about trying to explain the the difference between Ivy and Preppy. This article would seem to vividly display why Ivy is, to many, a way of life, and Preppy is essentially a costume, for insecure poseurs.
Last edited by Matt (2010-04-26 06:52:48)
Amen.
'Trad' at least yearns for Ivy, even if it needs to learn a bit more about it. 'Preppy' was just fashion.