When the Apple Watch launches next month it will mark the launch of Apple's first new product category since the iPad. The iPad was a game changer in terms of accessibility,
bringing numerous features designed for people with disabilities at
launch. How will the Apple Watch compare and what are some of the
challenges and possibilities for the Apple Watch related to
accessibility? A lot of questions remain unanswered, but the wait will
soon be over.
Apple Watch is rumored to include built-in software accessibility
features when launched, however these reports have not been confirmed by
Apple. It would make sense and align with Apple's patterns if they included features such as VoiceOver
and Zoom in the Apple Watch. While the inclusion of these features seem
likely, how these features are implemented will be key for people with
disabilities.
The Apple Watch could prove beneficial to people with various
disabilities. Apple has already demonstrated the navigation capabilities
of the Watch which include providing distinctive taps when a wearer
needs to turn left or right while walking. This feature could aid blind
and visually impaired users when navigating unfamiliar areas.
Additionally, the device could help remind users to complete daily tasks
like taking medication. The watch, which can be used for Apple Pay
purchases and other forms of authentication could benefit users with
physical disabilities who cannot handle a credit card for example.
Just like with the iPad, app developers will likely be key in coming up
with unique assistive apps. The initial developer tools have some
limitations that could hold back developers, but hopefully useful
assistive apps will still be made available.
With all the potential benefits there are some challenges that stem from
the device's small screen and buttons. First, the "digital crown,"
which is a small dial on the side of the Apple Watch, could pose
challenges to users with physical disabilities and dexterity challenges.
The "digital crown" which is used for scrolling and zooming may be
difficult if not impossible for some people to operate. It will be
interesting to see if Apple will devise a software solution to this
potential challenge. Similarly, the small screen with small icons may
prove difficult to press for some users.
Apple's new "force touch" gesture could also prove challenging for users
with physical disabilities to preform. A "force touch" is a harder
press on the touch screen display that invokes distinct actions from a
lighter tap. From Apple's demonstrations, this gesture seems vital to
the operation of the watch so hopefully a software solution will be
available for users who are unable to preform this gesture.
Hopefully the Apple Watch will follow in the iPad's foot steps and be a
game changer in terms of accessibility. If you are thinking of
purchasing the Apple Watch, but have doubts about your ability to
interact with the device due to a disability I would strongly recommend
heading to an Apple Store in April to try one out.
Windows 10 is going to be the last major revision of the operating system.
Jerry
Nixon, a Microsoft development executive, said in a conference speech
this week that Windows 10 would be the "last version" of the dominant
desktop software.
His comments were echoed by Microsoft which said it would update Windows in future in an "ongoing manner".
Instead of new stand-alone versions, Windows 10 would be improved in regular instalments, the firm said.
Mr Nixon made his comments during Microsoft's Ignite conference held in Chicago this week.
In a statement, Microsoft said Mr Nixon's comments reflected a change in the way that it made its software.
"Windows
will be delivered as a service bringing new innovations and updates in
an ongoing manner," it said, adding that it expected there to be a "long
future" for Windows.
'No Windows 11'
The company said it had yet to decide on what to call the operating system beyond Windows 10.
"There will be no Windows 11," warned Steve Kleynhans, a research vice-president at analyst firm Gartner who monitors Microsoft.
He
said Microsoft had in the past deliberately avoided using the name
"Windows 9" and instead chose Windows 10 as a way to signify a break
with a past which involved successive stand-alone versions of the
operating system.
However, he said, working in that way had created many problems for Microsoft and its customers.
"Every three years or so Microsoft would sit down and create 'the next great OS'," he said.
The developers would be locked away and out would pop a product based on what the world wanted three years ago."
Microsoft
also had to spend a huge amount of money and marketing muscle to
convince people that they needed this new version, and that it was
better than anything that had come before, he explained.
Moving to
a situation in which Windows is a constantly updated service will break
out of this cycle, and let Microsoft tinker more with the software to
test new features and see how customers like them, he added.
'Positive step'
Most
of the revenue generated by Windows for Microsoft came from sales of
new PCs and this was unlikely to be affected by the change, Mr Kleynhans
pointed out.
"Overall this is a positive step, but it does have some risks," he said.
"Microsoft
will have to work hard to keep generating updates and new features, he
said, adding that questions still remained about how corporate customers
would adapt to the change and how Microsoft would provide support.
"It doesn't mean that Windows is frozen and will never move forward again," Mr Kleynhans told the BBC.
"Indeed we are about to see the opposite, with the speed of Windows updates shifting into high gear."
Microsoft is releasing software tools that make it easier to run popular Apple and Android apps on Windows mobile devices.
By changing a "few percent", Apple app makers should be able to run code on Windows 10 mobile devices, it said.
And many Android apps should run with no changes.
Experts said the move was an "imperfect solution" to Microsoft's problems persuading people to use Windows mobile.
Popular vote
For
iOS, Microsoft has unveiled an initiative called Project Islandwood,
which has led to the creation of a software interpreter that works with
the development tools Apple coders typically pick.
By piping code
through this interpreter and changing a few other parts, it would be
possible to transfer or port iOS apps to Windows 10, Microsoft said in a
presentation at its Build developer conference in Seattle.
Already developers working for game-maker King have ported the massively popular Candy Crush Saga to Windows using these tools.
A
separate initiative, called Project Astoria, is aimed at Android and
involves code built in to Windows itself that spots when an Android app
is running and gives it the responses it expects.
Microsoft said this meant many Android apps would run with no changes on Windows mobile devices.
However, the way that Android is built means changes will have to be made to some apps.
The
tactic is seen as a way for Microsoft to to boost its popularity and
persuade developers to include Windows 10 in their plans.
While
many apps are already available on the Windows store, some popular ones,
such as Pinterest and Plants v Zombies 2, are absent.
Microsoft
has also added tools that let Android apps reach some parts of Windows,
such as its Cortana personal assistant, they would not otherwise be able
to use.
CCS Insight analyst Geoff Blaber said: "The decision to
embrace Android and iOS applications is an imperfect solution to an
undesirable problem.
"Nonetheless, it's a necessary move to attract developers otherwise lost to Apple and Google."
A
shoulder of lamb with the summer’s freshest green vegetables is a thing
of beauty. But almost better is what you can do with the leftover meat
and some crushed peas
Second coming: Nigel Slater’s roast shoulder of lamb with summer greens recipe. Photograph: Jonathan Lovekin for the Observer
The
Sunday roast is joyous, generous, and the pinnacle of shared meals.
It’s a gathering of family, in some cases the only one of the week, or a
long and leisurely meal for friends. For all its generosity and
pass-the-peas bonhomie, the dish itself splits into two halves: the hot
roast and the glorious leftovers. This last one, frugal, economical,
more humble than the carved roast, is sometimes as memorable as the
original. Whatever, it deserves a glass of wine.
Cold beef, pink and carved thin, shares a plate with pickled walnuts
and baked potatoes. Try cold roast chicken tugged from its bones, dipped
into a bowl of garlicky, tarragon-flecked mayonnaise. Or, as we had
this week at home, the remnants of a shoulder of lamb, seasoned with
rosemary and anchovy, sliced thick and piled on to hot toast. We didn’t
have garlic mayonnaise, but instead crushed peas seasoned with wasabi
and softened with butter, layered with cool, roasted lamb and salad
leaves.
I used the juices of the meat to cook summer greens – pink-stemmed
beetroot leaves, young red chard whose stems were barely pencil thick,
and peas from the pod. I also tossed in a few late shoots of sprouting
broccoli, as tender as asparagus spears. I could have boiled the
vegetables, but had instead decided to steam them in the roasting juices
and stock, still in the roasting tin over a moderate heat. They took
less time than it took the lamb to rest.
Roast shoulder of lamb with summer greens
I use shoulder for its flavour and the crispness of its fat. It is
often cheaper than the leg. I am the first to admit a shoulder is less
straightforward to carve than the other cuts of lamb, and I usually
resort to hacking off large juicy pieces of meat rather than the neat
slices you get from a leg. But do use a leg if you prefer.
Serves 4-5 shoulder of lamb 2kg olive oil anchovy fillets 8 rosemary sprigs 8, small thyme sprigs 8-10
For the vegetables: mixed greens 250g (purple sprouting broccoli, young beetroot leaves, red chard etc) shelled peas 250g vegetable stock or water 200ml
Set the oven at 180C/gas mark 4. Place the lamb in a roasting tin and
rub the meat all over with olive oil and season lightly with sea salt.
Pierce the meat in 16 or so places with the point of a knife, cutting
3cm or 4cm down into the flesh.
Stuff eight anchovies into half the holes, rosemary tufts in the
others. Scatter with the thyme, tucking a few underneath the meat.
Roast the lamb for 1 hour and 30 minutes, until the fat has turned
translucent and pale honey-coloured, and the meat is light rose-pink.
Remove the roasting tin from the oven, lift out the meat and place
somewhere warm, covering lightly with foil. Leave to rest for 15
minutes.
Trim the sprouting broccoli and beetroot and chard stems, removing
the leaves and setting them aside. Pour any excess oil from the tin,
leaving the roasting juices in place. Place the tin over a low to
moderate heat, then pour in the stock or water and bring to the boil.
When the liquid starts to bubble, stir with a wooden spoon or spatula to
dislodge the roasted meat juices and herbs, then add the peas,
sprouting broccoli, and chard and beetroot stems. Leave the vegetables
to steam in the roasting juices for three or four minutes, turning them
from time to time.
Add the leaves from the chard and beetroot to the pan, turn them once
or twice in the hot liquid until they have wilted, then lift the
vegetables out and into a warm serving dish. Turn the heat up under the
roasting tin and reduce the liquid to a thin, deeply flavoured dressing.
Carve the lamb on to a warm serving dish or directly on to plates, then
serve with the vegetables and roasting juices.
A roast of two halves: Nigel Slater’s leftover lamb sandwiches with
crushed peas and wasabi recipe. Photograph: Jonathan Lovekin/Observer
Roast lamb sandwiches with crushed peas and wasabi
Advertisement
Lamb
works very well when eaten as a cold cut, but I think it benefits from
being used at room temperature or, even better, still slightly warm,
rather than fridge cold. So that’ll make this a recipe for a Sunday
evening sandwich rather than Monday night.
Enough for 4 open sandwiches peas 250g wasabi paste 1 tbsp butter 40g sourdough bread 4 thickish slices olive oil salad leaves mustard, watercress, little gem lettuce, micro-leaves leftover roast lamb 4 handfuls roasting juices optional, but good if you have some leftover
Put a saucepan with 100ml water in it on to boil, salt it lightly,
then add the peas. Cook until the peas are tender (3-4 minutes only if
you are using frozen peas, but 4-10 minutes if using fresh, depending on
their age.)
Drain the peas, add the wasabi paste and butter, then crush with a
vegetable masher. I like them to retain quite a bit of texture, while
others may prefer to mash them to a smoother consistency. Taste the
mixture and season if necessary.
Toast the pieces of sourdough bread lightly on both sides. I have a
preference for a few charred edges on the crust. Sprinkle the surface of
the toast with a little olive oil, then lay a few of the salad leaves
on each slice. Place a couple of spoonfuls of the crushed pea mixture on
top of the leaves then add some slices of the cold roast lamb. Salt the
lamb generously, then trickle over a few spoonfuls of either olive oil
or the delicious hot roasting juices.
Oprah
is appealing because her stories hide the role of political, economic
and social structures in our lives. They make the American dream seem
attainable
In Oprah Winfrey
lore, one particular story is repeated over and over. When Oprah was
17, she won the Miss Fire Prevention Contest in Nashville, Tennessee.
Until that year every winner had had a mane of red hair, but Oprah would
prove to be a game changer.
The contest was the first of many successes for Oprah. She has won
numerous Emmys, has been nominated for an Oscar, and appears on lists
like Time’s 100 Most Influential People. In 2013, she was awarded the
Presidential Medal of Freedom. She founded the Oprah Book Club, which is
often credited with reviving Americans’ interest in reading. Her
generosity and philanthropic spirit are legendary.
Oprah has legions of obsessive, devoted fans who write her letters
and follow her into public restrooms. Oprah basks in their love: “I know
people really, really, really love me, love me.” And she loves them
right back. It’s part of her “higher calling”. She believes that she was
put on this earth to lift people up, to help them “live their best
life”. She encourages people to love themselves, believe in themselves,
and follow their dreams.
Oprah is one of a new group of elite storytellers who present
practical solutions to society’s problems that can be found within the
logic of existing profit-driven structures of production and
consumption. They promote market-based solutions to the problems of
corporate power, technology, gender divides, environmental degradation,
alienation and inequality.
Oprah’s popularity stems in part from her message of empathy,
support, and love in an increasingly stressful, alienating society.
Three decades of companies restructuring their operations by eliminating
jobs (through attrition, technology, and outsourcing) and dismantling
both organized labor and the welfare state have left workers in an
extremely precarious situation.
Oprah in the early days of the show. Photograph: Everett Collection/Rex
Today, new working-class jobs are primarily low-wage service jobs,
and the perks that once went along with middle-of-the-road white-collar
jobs have disappeared. Flexible, project-oriented, contingent work has
become the norm, enabling companies to ratchet up their requirements for
all workers except those at the very top. Meanwhile, the costs of
education, housing, childcare, and health care have skyrocketed, making
it yet more difficult for individuals and households to get by, never
mind prosper.
Advertisement
In
this climate of stress and uncertainty, Oprah tells us the stories of
her life to help us understand our feelings, cope with difficulty and
improve our lives. She presents her personal journey and metamorphosis
from poor little girl in rural Mississippi to billionaire prophet as a
model for overcoming adversity and finding “a sweet life”.
Oprah’s biographical tale has been managed, mulled over, and mauled
in the public gaze for 30 years. She used her precocious intelligence
and wit to channel the pain of abuse and poverty into building an
empire. She was on television by the age of 19 and had her own show
within a decade.
The 1970s feminist movement opened the door to the domestic, private
sphere, and the show walked in a decade later, breaking new ground as a
public space to discuss personal troubles affecting Americans,
particularly women. Oprah broached topics (divorce, depression,
alcoholism, child abuse, adultery, incest) that had never before been
discussed with such candor and empathy on television.
The show’s evolution over the decades mirrored the evolution of
Oprah’s own life. In its early years the show followed a “recovery
model” in which guests and viewers were encouraged to overcome their
problems through self-esteem building and learning to love themselves.
US President Barack Obama presents broadcast journalist Oprah Winfrey
with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Photograph: Mandel
Ngan/AFP/Getty Images
But as copycat shows and criticisms of “trash talk” increased in the
early 1990s, Oprah changed the show’s format. In 1994, Oprah declared
that she was done with “victimization” and negativity: “It ’s time to
move on from ‘We are dysfunctional’ to ‘What are we going to do about
it?’” Oprah credited her decision to her own personal evolution: “People
must grow and change” or “they will shrivel up” and “their souls will
shrink”.
In an appearance on Larry King Live, Oprah acknowledged that she had
become concerned about the message of her show and so had decided to
embark on a new mission “to lift people up”. Themes of spirituality and
empowerment displaced themes of personal pathology. For Oprah, the
transformation was total: “Today I try to do well and be well with
everyone I reach or encounter. I make sure to use my life for that which
can be of goodwill. Yes, this has brought me great wealth. More
important, it has fortified me spiritually and emotionally.”
A stream of self-help gurus have spent time on Oprah’s stage over the
past decade and a half, all with the same message. You have choices in
life. External conditions don’t determine your life. You do. It ’s all
inside you, in your head, in your wishes and desires. Thoughts are
destiny, so thinking positive thoughts will enable positive things to
happen.
When bad things happen to us, it’s because we’re drawing them toward
us with unhealthy thinking and behaviors. “Don’t complain about what you
don’t have. Use what you’ve got. To do less than your best is a sin.
Every single one of us has the power for greatness because greatness is
determined by service—to yourself and others.” If we listen to that
quiet “whisper” and fine-tune our “internal, moral, emotional GPS”, we
too can learn the secret of success.
Janice Peck, in her work as professor of journalism and communication
studies, has studied Oprah for years. She argues that to understand the
Oprah phenomenon we must return to the ideas swirling around in the
Gilded Age. Peck sees strong parallels in the mind-cure movement of the
Gilded Age and Oprah’s evolving enterprise in the New Gilded Age, the
era of neoliberalism. She argues that Oprah’s enterprise reinforces the
neoliberal focus on the self: Oprah’s “enterprise [is] an ensemble of
ideological practices that help legitimize a world of growing inequality
and shrinking possibilities by promoting and embodying a configuration
of self compatible with that world.”
Nothing captures this ensemble of ideological practices better than O
Magazine, whose aim is to “help women see every experience and
challenge as an opportunity to grow and discover their best self. To
convince women that the real goal is becoming more of who they really
are. To embrace their life.” O Magazine implicitly, and sometimes
explicitly, identifies a range of problems in neoliberal capitalism and
suggests ways for readers to adapt themselves to mitigate or overcome
these problems.
Does your 60 hour-a-week desk job make your back hurt and leave you
emotionally exhausted and stressed? Of course it does. Studies show that
“death by office job” is real: people who sit at a desk all day are
more likely to be obese, depressed, or just dead for no discernible
reason. But you can dull these effects and improve your wellness with
these O-approved strategies: Become more of an “out-of-the-box thinker”
because creative people are healthier. Bring photos, posters, and
“kitschy figurines” to decorate your workspace: “You’ll feel less
emotionally exhausted and reduce burnout.” Write down three positive
things that happened during your workday every night before leaving the
office to “reduce stress and physical pain from work”.
In December 2013, O devoted a whole issue to anxiety and worry. The
issue “conquers a lifetime ’s worth of anxieties and apprehensions”, an
apt subject given rising levels of anxiety across the age spectrum.
In the issue, bibliotherapists Ella Berthoud and Susan Elderkin
present a list of books for the anxious, prescribing them instead of a
“trip to the pharmacy”. Feeling claustrophobic because you’re too poor
to move out of your parents’ house? Read Little House on the Prairie.
Feeling stressed because your current project at work is ending and you
don’t have another lined up? Read The Man Who Planted Trees. Worried
that you won’t be able to pay the rent because you just lost your job?
Read The Wind-Up Bird Chronicles. “Instead of feeling depressed, follow
the lead hero Toru Okada, who, while jobless, embarks on a fantastic
liberating journey that changes the way he thinks.”
Oprah recognizes the pervasiveness of anxiety and alienation in our
society. But instead of examining the economic or political basis of
these feelings, she advises us to turn our gaze inward and reconfigure
ourselves to become more adaptable to the vagaries and stresses of the
neoliberal moment.
Oprah is appealing precisely because her stories hide the role of
political, economic, and social structures. In doing so, they make the
American Dream seem attainable. If we just fix ourselves, we can achieve
our goals. For some people, the American dream is attainable, but to
understand the chances for everyone, we need to look dispassionately at
the factors that shape success.
Oprah Winfrey gestures during the taping of “Oprah’s Surprise
Spectacular” in Chicago May 17, 2011. Photograph: John Gress/Reuters
The current incarnation of the American Dream narrative holds that if
you acquire enough cultural capital (skills and education) and social
capital (connections, access to networks), you will be able to translate
that capital into both economic capital (cash) and happiness. Cultural
capital and social capital are seen as there for the taking
(particularly with advances in internet technology), so the only
additional necessary ingredients are pluck, passion, and persistence—
all attributes that allegedly come from inside us.
The American dream is premised on the assumption that if you work
hard, economic opportunity will present itself, and financial stability
will follow, but the role of cultural and social capital in paving the
road to wealth and fulfilment, or blocking it, may be just as important
as economic capital. Some people are able to translate their skills,
knowledge, and connections into economic opportunity and financial
stability, and some are not—either because their skills, knowledge, and
connections don’t seem to work as well, or they can’t acquire them in
the first place because they’re too poor.
Today, the centrality of social and cultural capital is obscured
(sometimes deliberately), as demonstrated in the implicit and explicit
message of Oprah and her ideological colleagues. In their stories, and
many others like them, cultural and social capital are easy to acquire.
They tell us to get an education. Too poor? Take an online course. Go to
Khan Academy. They tell us to meet people, build up our network. Don’t
have any connected family members? Join LinkedIn.
It’s simple. Anyone can become anything. There’s no distinction
between the quality and productivity of different people’s social and
cultural capital. We’re all building our skills. We’re all networking.
This is a fiction. If all or most forms of social and cultural
capital were equally valuable and accessible, we should see the effects
of this in increased upward mobility and wealth created anew by new
people in each generation rather than passed down and expanded from one
generation to the next. The data do not demonstrate this upward
mobility.
The US, in a sample of 13 wealthy countries, ranks highest in
inequality and lowest in intergenerational earnings mobility. Wealth
isn’t earned fresh in each new generation by plucky go-getters. It is
passed down, preserved, and expanded through generous tax laws and the
assiduous transmission of social and cultural capital.
The way Oprah tells us to get through it all and realize our dreams
is always to adapt ourselves to the changing world, not to change the
world we live in. We demand little or nothing from the system, from the
collective apparatus of powerful people and institutions. We only make
demands of ourselves.
We are the perfect, depoliticized, complacent neoliberal subjects.
And yet we’re not. The popularity of strategies for alleviating
alienation rests on our deep, collective desire for meaning and
creativity. Literary critic and political theorist Fredric Jameson would
say that the Oprah stories, and others like them, are able to “manage
our desires” only because they appeal to deep fantasies about how we
want to live our lives. This, after all, is what the American dream
narrative is about – not necessarily a description of life lived, but a
vision of how life should be lived.
When the stories that manage our desires break their promises over
and over, the stories themselves become fuel for change and open a space
for new, radical stories. These new stories must feature collective
demands that provide a critical perspective on the real limits to
success in our society and foster a vision of life that does fulfill the
desire for self-actualization.
This is an extract from New Prophets of Capitalby Nicole Aschoff, published by Verso Books.
Dating
app says it’s not rife with married flirters: ‘simple logic should
reveal that it’s essentially impossible for any of these claims to be
accurate’
Tinder is pushing back against research claiming lots of its users are married.
Photograph: Alamy
Dating app Tinder has rejected research that estimated that 42% of its users are either married or in a relationship.
A spokesman told the Guardian that the figures by GlobalWebIndex
strongly contradicted its own internal numbers, and criticised the
methodology of the survey.
“The results of this tiny, 681 person study in the UK is a totally
inaccurate depiction of Tinder’s user base – this firm is making guesses
without having any access to real data on our millions of users
worldwide,” said the spokesperson.
The single largest age group on Tinder,
making up more than half of our entire user base, is 18-24. More than
93% of UK residents in that age range have never been married, according
to the UK’s office of National Statistics.
Without revealing any data about our users, simple logic should
reveal that it’s essentially impossible for any of these claims to be
accurate. Their methodology seems severely and fundamentally flawed.”
GWI’s report claimed that 38% of Tinder’s users were aged between 16
and 24, while another 45% were aged between 25 and 34. It also suggested
that 30% of Tinder users that it surveyed were married, while another
12% were in a relationship.
Is it “essentially impossible” for GWI’s claims to be accurate? If
30% of Tinder users were married, it is theoretically possible for them
to fall into the nearly half of the app’s users that are older than 24,
by Tinder’s own figures.
This, however, would indicate that nearly 60% of Tinder’s over
24-year-old users are married, which seems unlikely. It is unclear
whether Tinder’s “user base” figures refer to active or registered
users, which may also have an impact on the data.
GlobalWebIndex has defended its methodology, in its own statement provided to the Guardian.
“GlobalWebIndex data is based on interviews with a panel of more than
170,000 internet users worldwide, the largest on-going study into the
digital consumer - it’s not guesswork, and not just the UK, as Tinder
has suggested,” said GWI’s spokesperson.
“Our Tinder findings came from a recent study of 47,622 internet users aged 16-64 across 33 countries.
Reference to ONS marital data is irrelevant, and of the 621 who say
they use Tinder, almost all are from the 16-34 age group. Tinder’s
assertion that our methodology is severely and fundamentally flawed is
simply not correct.
We only publish statistically robust numbers, and self-reported
survey data is widely recognised as an effective way of understanding
consumer behaviour.”
The new statement from Tinder follows its separate rebuttal to the
original report, when another spokesperson told the Guardian that “those
statistics are completely inaccurate. I’m not sure how they sampled
that specific group of people, but it does not represent Tinder’s user
base”.
“More than 50% of Tinder’s userbase is age 18-24. And altogether, 85%
of our users are age 18-34.” A statement that was not so out of kilter
with GWI’s claim that 83% of Tinder users are aged between 16 and 34.
It’s the image of Tinder as a hookup app for people who already have
partners that appears to be most concerning the company, however.
Throughout its history, Tinder has maintained that it is not just for
arranging sex – or even for dating – preferring to pitch itself as “a
social network” that people use for platonic reasons too.
Was
Sarah Jessica Parker’s headdress offensive? Is the bottom having its
day? Can you be too subtle? And why are Beyoncé and Kim Kardashian
morphing into one? We answer these and other sartorial questions
Beyoncé with Jay Z and Kim Kardashian with Kanye West at the Met Ball 2015.
Photograph: Getty Images
Did anyone dress offensively?
The big question hanging over the Met Ball’s red carpet ahead of the
event was: how much guests would embrace this year’s Chinese theme and
who would cross the line into offensive sartorial stereotype dressing.
Each year, the Costume Institute Gala has a focus, and sometimes a dress
code, based around the exhibition. This year there were no rules and
red carpet watchers braced themselves for a car crash of cultural
appropriation. In the main this didn’t happen. “China: through the
looking glass” inspired twists on Chinese dressing – designer cheongsam,
headgear and gowns in auspicious yellow all made an appearance. Sarah
Jessica Parker’s headpiece by Philip Treacy was arguably too close to
the stereotyping bone. Her flaming-red number was more dragon costume
than chic, despite the actor having form for extravagant headdress on
the red carpet. SJP claimed that the real story was her dress which she
helped design with the H&M Conscious collection (not buying that,
sorry). The internet disagreed, and christened the headdress a homage to
Heat Miser. Meanwhile what Rihanna’s dress lacked in taste in one
sense, the “cheese omelette” gown
made up for it in another. Designed by Chinese couturier Guo Pei, it
showed how support for Chinese designers is way more powerful than
literal dressing.
Sarah Jessica Parker attends the ‘China: Through The Looking Glass’ Met
Ball in a Philip Treacy headdress and her own dress design in
collaboration with H&M. Photograph: George Pimentel/WireImage
But who did the theme well?
Anne Hathaway was careful. Her liquid-gold hoodie gown was designed
by Ralph Lauren, whose collection had been inspired by a Chinese artist.
Meanwhile, designer Michael Kors dubbed his dress for Kate Hudson as
“Traditional Asian with a Californian twist”, which sounds like fusion
cuisine at its most expensive. But the winners included Georgia May
Jagger, whose lilac Gucci embroidered dress made her look louche,
modern, traditional and hot, and Grace Coddington, who proved that there
is nothing more chic and confident than a woman in a pair of pyjamas.
Anne Hathaway in Ralph Lauren at the Met Ball 2015. Photograph: John Lamparski/Getty Images
How fashion was it?
Capital F, obviously. The Met Ball is tiresomely dubbed “the Oscars
of fashion”, but it is true; guests here have licence to put pushing the
style envelope ahead of the studio paycheck. Witness Alexa Chung
looking divine in Erdem and showcasing a pair of haute sideburns, which
will have appealed much more to a Wintour crowd than a Weinstein one.
FKA twigs meanwhile wore one of Christopher Kane’s lace lovers dresses,
which is this season’s get-it-or-go-home challenge. Special mention for
Solange Knowles’s Giles Deacon Star-Wars-meets-moules-marinière dress.
FKA twigs in Christopher Kane at the Met Ball 2015. Photograph: Broadimage/Rex Shutterstock
Who missed the memo?
Amal Clooney,
Dakota Johnson, Reese Witherspoon, Carey Mulligan, Uma Thurman, Hailee
Steinfeld … basically if you weren’t prepared to wear a Chinese
designer, engage with the theme or go Fashion (see above), then you
shouldn’t have been granted a $25,000 ticket. Risk-averse dressing is
not an option at the Met Ball.
George and Amal Clooney – wearing John Galliano for Maison Margiela. Photograph: Startraks Photo/Rex Shutterstock
Is half-arsed the new side-boob?
If you thought the red carpet had exhausted its roll call of the body
parts it is fashionable to flaunt, then you were woefully wrong. Right
now the bottom – or some of it – is where it’s at. We’re calling it the
half-arsed look – half-arsed also because it doesn’t really cut it in
style terms. Jennifer Lopez’s Versace number flashed the side of her
rear, while Beyoncé flashed her upper bum. The main objection to the
latter being not the risque factor but the Girl’s World ponytail which
made her head look like a spinning top at rest.
Jennifer Lopez in Versace at the Met Ball 2015. Photograph: Broadimage/Rex Shutterstock
Are Bey and Jay morphing into Kimye?
The gauzy dress, the over-the-shoulder pose, the spill of a back hem
and the dinner-jacketed date. It’s all getting rather repeat play for
our liking. Because for all their beauty and sparkle, both women are
starting to look forgettable. Kim claimed her inspiration was not
Beyoncé at the Met Ball in 2012 but Cher at the first Met Ball in 1971,
and everyone knows that you try to out-Cher Cher at your peril.
For a whole year now, Khloe Kardashian has been all about "waist training," and she shows no signs of tiring of it.
On Friday, the 30-year-old reality star took to Instagram to share a split-screen photo of herself
in a waist trainer, highlighting the insane hourglass figure the
contraption (it's a belt made from thick latex and cotton lining, which
just basically looks like a corset) helps her achieve.
Of course, Khloe isn't the only Kardashian to jump on the trend. Sisters Kim and Kourtney, as well as other celebrities, have also been open about their attempts to whittle their waists via the trainers:
