ByKat Hours Updated
Comments 55 Comments

Suit of the Week: J.Crew

For busy working women, the suit is often the easiest outfit to throw on in the morning. In general, this feature is not about interview suits for women, which should be as classic and basic as you get — instead, this feature is about the slightly different suit that is fashionable, yet professional.

We haven't done a roundup of lightweight, summer suiting in a while, but J.Crew's stretch linen is usually good for the hottest of days (the ones where you curse having to be in conservative office attire). They have a bunch of fun colors right now, and this bright, happy red looks like it would pop nicely on Zoom — I'd try it with a light blue accent like a necklace or tank beneath it if you wanted more of a “look.”

(The pieces also come in white, beige, “golden sun” yellow, and certain sizes and pieces may also be available in navy and a light blue “sea spray.” The Parke blazer has been around for yeaaaars, so it's a solid investment. 

Both the pants and blazer are in the big J.Crew sale, coming down to $49-$100; they're available in classic, petite, and tall sizes 00-20 (pants up to size 24). Nice. 

Psst: lucky sizes left but I love this collarless gray Boss suit, 40% off at Nordstrom; all of the pieces are at this link.

(FYI: J.Crew has extended their return and exchange period to 60 days for all orders placed starting March 1, 2020.)

This post contains affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. For more details see here. Thank you so much for your support!

Sales of note for 12.5

Sales of note for 12.5

And some of our latest threadjacks here at Corporette (reader questions and commentary) — see more here!

Some of our latest threadjacks include:

55 Comments

  1. A happy question — what is your favorite dance like no one is watching song?

    Apparently unlike all the other grownups out there, I can’t work out at home with a class/app. Yet yesterday ended up dancing to a song, had my Fitbit on and was surprised that 1 song resulted in 0.25 miles of steps. Maybe dancing it out is my workout.

    1. I am currently obsessed with Roses – Imanbek Remix by SAINt JHN. No idea who that artist is, found it on Spotify but I start dancing everytime.

    2. I am really loving Watermelon Sugar by Harry Styles from One Direction. I know nothing about One D, but I heard this song on a story of someone I follow on IG. I Shazamed it and I just love it.

    3. Currently, Anna Sun by walk the moon.
      I also picked my cardio up a notch when my teachers (used to, sob) play classic 90’s anthems (Violet, Smells Like Teen Spirit, Machine Head, Damnit, Seether, etc.) in class but those really aren’t ‘dance’ songs per se.

      1. This will age me, but Baby Got Back! I agree that Watermelon Sugar is a great song and Harry Styles is going to have a very long career, IMHO. I say this having lived through years-long One Direction Infection in my house and having seen them live multiple times. I didn’t even hate the concerts.

        I really love this suit and can see myself in it, if I ever wear business clothes again.

          1. That is going to be one beautiful child. And I like his voice even better than Harry’s.

    4. Shut up and Dance — Walk the Moon. IDK why but I get up and starting dancing if that song comes out.

    5. Oh, I needed a fun distraction today. A lot of mine are mostly oldies – I’m an old, at least on this board, but my Spotify dance party playlist has more than 300 songs. A few all-time favorites:

      September, Earth Wind & Fire

      Hip to Be Square, Huey Lewis & the News (this was kind of the theme song to the law revue show in was in at my law school in the late ‘80s)

      Love Shack, the B-52s

      New Attitude, Patti LaBelle

      Got to Give it Up, Marvin Gaye (the song playing when I first got my now dancing-fool SO onto the floor)

      Give up the Funk, Parliament

      Don’t you Worry ‘Bout a Thing, Stevie Wonder

      Juice, Lizzo

    6. Ooooh, I’ve got a few!

      Sun Is Shining by Axwell^Ingrosso
      Build Me Up Buttercup (any version but I like The Foundations best)
      Kiss Me Darling by Twin Forks (great lyrics too!)
      +1 to Shut Up and Dance by Walk the Moon
      Cheap Thrills by Sia

      1. For me that’s not necessarily a dance along, but definitely a mandatory sing along.

    8. Vogue – can’t listen to it without the hand movements. Even if it’s in my car or on the Muzak in a waiting room …. so I guess it’s not technically true no one is watching haha

    9. Pretty much anything I listened to in high school….loooooots of Kesha.

      I also have an embarrassing love of Low by Flo Rida and the office wedding dance song that I always forget the name of. Also, Crank That (Soulja Boy).

      I’m going anon for this. Longtime poster. :P

      1. Oh, right, it’s Forever by Chris Brown. And I know Chris Brown is a horrible person but I really really like that song to dance to. :/

      2. I’m adding those all to my running playlist as I type…! In exchange, I can suggest Ridin’ Solo by Jason Derulo.

    10. Gopher Mambo by Yma Sumac, and other sixties mambos and rhumbas and nineties and noughties punk.

      Slightly more current: Old Town Road with Lil Nas X and Billy Ray Cyrus, Tempo by Lizzo, Milkshake by Kelis, Mundian To Bach Ke (Jay Z remix), Happy by Pharrell Williams, Get Ur Freak On by Missy Elliot, Word Crimes by Weir Al Yankovic, Alors on Dance by Stromae, Single Ladies by Beyonce.

      1. OMG my kids (7 and 5) play Old Town Road and Uptown Funk approximately 5,345,456 times per day during lock-down. It is sort of hilarious (esp because my 5-year-old calls it “Old Town Funk”) but I am also losing my marbles.

    11. I have many, but I’m currently obsessed with Blinding Lights by the Weeknd.

    12. Not necessarily dancing, but under the category of songs that immediately lift your mood:

      1) If You Really Love Me – Stevie Wonder
      2) What is Life – George Harrison. Google that song along with the word “ballet” and you’ll find the official music video featuring a SF ballerina in a yellow sweater. This sweet video brings so much joy!

    13. Right now, Blinding Lights by The Weeknd!! Great 80s sound to it and I just have to dance to it asappp!!!!

    14. Right now, Blinding Lights by The Weeknd!! Great 80s sound to it and I just have to dance to it asappp!!!!

    15. Juice by Lizzo, Get Ur Freak On and Work It by Missy Elliott, and Baby by Justin Bieber.

  2. I’m seeing this orange-red color everywhere right now, and I LOVE it.
    Just bought this suit, which I’ll more likely wear as separates, and I am already eager for a world in which I can wear this!

    1. It’s sold out in red in my size so I may or may not have bought it in yellow…

      1. If I weren’t so enamored of this color, I would probably have gone for the yellow. And if I thought I would have any occasion to wear suits (or even just jackets) frequently this summer, I probably would have gone for both.

      1. I had a lipstick from Sephora that was very similar to this color in high school. I love the color, but looking back at photos now I realize how absolutely horrific the color was on my face…I can wear it as clothes, but as lipstick it does not work at all with my coloring.

      2. Yes! This has been one of my favorite lipsticks for years. Too bad I don’t know when I’ll be in a position to wear lipstick again…

    3. I wish I had a place to wear suits, or even separates but my office dress code is so casual that it looks out of place to wear separates unless you’re doing something that requires dressing up (like giving a CLE or going to court, although obviously not in orange if you’re going to court). I love all of the colors this suit comes in, but especially the light blue.

    4. orangey-red lipstick rec: Nars Heat Wave. Used to be all over the JCrew models back when Jcrew was on top of its game. I wish I still had it!

    5. You autumns/warm springs with your orangey reds and your springy yellows are making this cool summer/deep winter jealous.

      1. Are you me?! (Anon at 6 20) I was just thinking this…
        Rock the orange red, ladies! I’ll just enjoy watching it on other people.

  3. Went to the grocery store for the first time in 3 weeks. Wow things look different/better. The only things they (as I expected) did not have were cleaners/sanitizer. But they even had hand soap, paper products etc. I went at 10 am and have never seen the store that empty. I’d posit that’s what stores used to look like at 10 am on a Wed; just some retirees and some people that looked like they were college/grad school age. I think the only negative of going “early” was that delivery of certain things had not arrived — eggs and milk were pretty empty but I got some; cheese was being restocked; lots of cereals weren’t in stock though there was a TON of cereal — you’d just be out of luck if you decided if you wanted one particular brand as that truck may not have come thru. And more importantly every single shopper had a mask on, as did every employee and even the regional manager/higher ups from the chain who were coming in as I was leaving. In North Va.

    2. My store today (Mariano’s) did have toilet paper, but no flour and most cleaning supplies were gone. There were employees who walked around ensuring people were social distancing, and they would politely tell them to stand apart if they weren’t. I would say 80% were wearing masks (we have a mask order from our governor).

    1. The article says “officials believe it is too early to say whether the lifting of restrictions caused the increase.” Also the article says R0 in Germany is still below 1. As we ease restrictions, we’re going to see ups and downs over time that will possibly lead to shorter, more localized lockdowns. Of course it’s not as simple as cases decreasing steadily towards zero, and nobody said it would be.

      1. +1 – so long as it is manageable by the hospitals (and older people in nursing homes, etc. are staying sheltered), then that’s okay and we should prepare ourselves for that

      2. +2. The important thing is they are keeping a close eye on it. The easing of lockdown is not going to be turning the lights back on and expecting numbers to keep dropping even as more people are interacting… it will be managing it and being aggressive with localized lockdowns as needed.

    3. Agree with the points above, but also I’m not even sure the data in this article is right. According to this s1te (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/germany/) Monday was the lowest day for new cases in Germany since March 14, and there was only a slight uptick in new cases on Tuesday. Deaths have increased this week but since it takes ~3-4 weeks at least from exposure to death, that can’t be attributed to the easing of restrictions in the last couple weeks.

  5. This is not the whole story. New cases are still falling in Germany week-over-week. RKI have been announcing the most recent expected value of R from their model at press conferences lately, and since the government has said further restoration of normal life is dependent on this number, there was a lot of controversy on Tuesday when they said it was at 1. So they reported the value to two decimal places, 0.96. Wednesday’s status report from RKI cites 0.75 as the current expected value. But if you look at their modelled R over time, the expected value has oscillated between 0.7 and 1 other times since the middle of March. I wish they would just give the confidence interval and stop reporting on it daily, honestly. With the variability in incubation time and reporting, I have a hard time believing these day-to-day fluctuations are meaningful. RKI at least changed to excluding the most recent four days instead of the most recent three, as a result of this controversy, to better account for case reporting delays and avoid another media uproar. Other institutions (notably a branch of Helmholtz Institute, a semi-public research org) are using a different calculation and arriving at lower values, I think 0.65 or 0.7 currently nationwide.

      1. Of course journalists aren’t scientific experts but there were experts quoted in the story (that you ignored when posting it for shock value), and I don’t understand what facts you’re alleging the journalist got wrong.

        1. Honestly, what is with the constant rudeness of some of the posters here? It’s exhausting and unnecessary.

          Journalists don’t need to get facts wrong in order to write inaccurate stories. Context is important, and journalists can report accurate facts while still missing important context that only experts can provide. The clear implication of the article was that because R-naught was approaching 1 again, relaxing social distancing might be failing. There are a lot of other article from other publications implying this as well. None of the quoted experts in the article mitigates this implication, so I’m not sure what “experts” you are contending I ignored.

          1. You’re the one who basically called all journalists (which includes me and surely some other readers here) uninformed idiots. Look, I fully understand and agree with Louisa’s point that daily updates about fluctuations in cases and R0 may not actually be that enlightening, but any announcement the government makes about the virus is newsworthy and as long as the government keeps making these announcements, journalists are going to write about them. It’s our job. I completely disagree that the “clear implication” of the article was that social distancing is failing. That was your takeaway, but the article stressed that the government officials said that the overall R0 on that day was determined to be 0.96, which is below the crucial 1.0 threshold but not as far below 1 as they would like, so they encourage continued social distancing. Yes, context is important as well as facts, but the article gave plenty of context and clearly communicated what the German officials were trying to say. The headline is misleading, I will give you that, but journalists don’t normally write headlines, editors do.

            Also, for the record, journalists aren’t subject matter experts but the vast majority of us are subject matter specialists. We are never going to know as much about viruses as virologists (and I don’t think you would want us to be actual virologists, because then our articles would be filled with scientific jargon that’s unintelligible to the general public) but most of us who are writing about COVID-19 focus exclusively on science, if not even more specifically on life sciences and public health. It’s not like we’re writing about sports in the morning, politics at lunchtime and infectious diseases in the afternoon.

    3. Thank you, Louisa, for your posts today. I hope you will treat yourself to something this evening.

Comments are closed.