ByKat Hours Updated
Comments 167 Comments

Wednesday’s TPS Report: ‘Kenola – Windowpane’ Shirt

· ·
Our daily TPS reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices. Today we're liking this classic button front from Theory. We love the light blue windowpane, as well as the slightly wide collar. We'd wear it with a white camisole beneath it, though — the description notes it's “slightly sheer.” It's on sale at Nordstrom — was $190, now $113, available in sizes petite, small, large, and XL. Theory ‘Kenola – Windowpane' Shirt (L-2) Incidentally — we will be a bit busy this week (traveling today, helping to run a conference on Thurs. and Fri., and appearing in MN for an AK Anne Klein appearance on Sat.) so comment moderation may be a bit slower than usual. We'll do our best!

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:

167 Comments

  1. The shirt is fine, but not liking the patch pocket … Not good for those of us who are larger-busted.

    1. Blouses in general are a tough fit if you’re larger-busted (like me as well) — the gap-age between buttons is never office appropriate :-(

      1. True. Sorry, you who don’t like t-shirts. I’m talking to you, frump and grump.

    3. Theory shirts have the top button (not the one under the collar) too low, so not only do they gape, they also are very revealing on top. Even a cami would show too much, a look I don’t like.

      1. I’ve only owned one theory shirt (gifted to me). Beautifully-tailored, high quality material, but definitely revealing. It was very snug to the body, semi-sheer, and ditto what M said about the low neckline. I ended up only ever wearing it under a sleeveless, high-necked sheath dress (solved the opacity problem as well as the neckline).

        1. I might add that the classic Club Monaco white button-down shirts are a much better fit, although they are somewhat narrow in the shoulders.

    4. Sharon, I think the patch pockets are ok if in the same print as shirt/blouse. I am large-busted, and wearing a DvF blouse today with patch pockets and you cannot even see them unless you get within 2″ of my ‘girls’ – and that won’t be happening at work!!

  2. Not a fan of button down shirts myself, but it looks great on others….

    Off topic question: as summer is approaching, I’m seeing all of these really cute sleeveless dresses in stores. Can someone please recommend a cardigan to wear over a dress? I don’t like the look of a cropped sweater , and I’m looking for an alternative to a black blazer.

    Would one of those cardigans that doesn’t have buttons and just flows work? I don’t know. I would love some specific recommendations. Maybe Kat could do a post on this.

    1. If you want a more classic style, I like these:

      http://www.jcrew.com/AST/Browse/WomenBrowse/Women_Shop_By_Category/sweaters/cotton/PRDOVR~85613/85613.jsp

      http://www1.talbots.com/online/browse/product_details.jsp?id=prdi23715&rootCategory=cat70008&catId=cat110042&sortKey=Default&section=Regular&conceptIdUnderSale=cat70008

      http://www.anntaylor.com/catalog/product.jsp?productId=23657&N=1200006&categoryId=181&pCategoryId=3939&Ns=CATEGORY_SEQ_181&Nty=1&No=14&loc=TN&defaultColor=Dusty%20Mauve&defaultSizeType=Regular

      On a side note, I am really sick of the cardigans with silly frilly details added on. Ann Taylor Loft especially has a ton of these, like dozens of little tissue-weight fluffy circles sewn on to a sweater.

      1. Thanks for the suggestions. I’m sick of the frills too!

        Wouldn’t these types of cardigans end up hiding a lot of the neck/front detail? I think that’s what my problem is, most cardiagns with a crew neck and buttons seem to cover up a lot of the dress.

        This is the dress that I’m looking to buy:

        http://shop.nordstrom.com/S/3088838/0~2376776~2374327~2374331~6014144?mediumthumbnail=Y&origin=category&searchtype=&pbo=6014144&P=1

        I feel that most cardigans would end up covering this beautiful neckline. If others have suggestions, please share, thanks!

        2. Ann Taylor Loft and Ann Taylor both have nice V-neck cardigans that don’t cover up the details. I have one very similar to this:
          http://www.anntaylorloft.com/catalog/product.jsp?productId=22381&N=1200006&categoryId=200&pCategoryId=3359&Ns=CATEGORY_SEQ_200&Nty=1&No=15&loc=TN&defaultColor=Black&defaultSizeType=Regular
          I saw this one in the store and the flower is removable:
          http://www.anntaylor.com/catalog/product.jsp?productId=24599&N=1200006&pCategoryId=3939&categoryId=181&Ns=CATEGORY_SEQ_181&loc=TN&defaultColor=Riverbed&defaultSizeType=Regular

          And I own this one, which is on sale:
          http://www.anntaylor.com/catalog/product.jsp?productId=24019&Nr=AND%28CAT_SALE_FLAG:Y%29&N=1200042&pCategoryId=3944&categoryId=419&Ns=CATEGORY_SEQ_419&loc=TN&defaultColor=Periwinkle&defaultSizeType=Regular

          1. I’m a fan of Ann Taylor Loft’s v-neck cardigans as well – I have a black one that I wear a lot in the office, and despite several washing the black color and shaping have held up very well.

          2. Legally Brunette: Great dress and Eponine’s cardigan suggestions are fabulous. I think I am going to break my “not going to purchase” resolution thanks to you two.

        3. I would think you would want to wear more a vneck cardigan with that, and make sure you put the ruffles overtop of the cardigan if that makes sense.

          I think a longer v-neck cardigan would look nice belted with that, and would draw attention to the detailing on the dress. Also if you buy the cardigan a lot more fitted…it shouldn’t naturally fall over top of the details then.

          Maybe something like this style, not necessarily this cardigan (don’t like Jcrew featherweights personally): http://www.jcrew.com/AST/Browse/WomenBrowse/Women_Shop_By_Category/sweaters/cotton/PRDOVR~25701/25701.jsp

        6. Thanks all for the suggestions.

          AbbyA – I’m waiting (hoping) that dress will eventually go on sale. Can’t quite stomach paying that much for a dress. :) If you end up buying it, please report back on what you think!

        7. White + Warren have some nice open cardis if you are looking for a great cashmere/long-term investment piece. And there is a pretty Hayden cardigan at Bluefly in ivory that would look pretty over the dress. Love the dress, BTW! Good luck!

          http://www.bluefly.com/Hayden-ivory-cashmere-open-cardigan/cat170028/302310102/detail.fly?referer=ca_shopping&cm_mmc=ca_shopping-_-na-_-womens_sweaters-_-302310102&PROMO=promo850016&mr:referralID=7ee1f423-5870-11df-a218-0026b9571fcb

    2. I feel your pain.
      Sometimes the problem with cardigans and dresses is that the cardigan lacks shape. I like the idea of such a pairing, but it can be difficult to execute w/out looking like a tube, regardless of weight. (I don’t care for belts on me.) Any thoughts on cardigans with a little waist definition?

      1. What about a cardigan with a self-tie waist? Like a wrap sweater? Or is that too akin to a belt?

        1. Thanks, although that may be too close to a belt. I’m very short waisted (heck, I’m short all over), but also have a very large chest. It definitely makes my fashion life harder.

      2. Find cardigans with a single button just under the bust. Or simply button a cardi in the middle only. Make sure the cardi is fitted/small enough so that it has a shape. Buy a size down if needed. Ribbing high enough on the cardi will help. Shorter cardis also–not that “boyfriend” cardigan silouette (sp?) that is so popular this season.

        1. Hmm, a single button. That’s interesting. I don’t think I’ve seen that style. I’ll have to look more closely the next time I’m shopping. Unfortunately, I don’t think I can size down b/c of my chest.

    3. Target has some great 3/4 sleeves cable knit cardigans. I have one in white that I wear with a printed red & white dress, and always get compliments.

  3. Target has some great 3/4 sleeves cable knit cardigans. I have one in white that I wear with a printed red & white dress, and always get compliments.

  4. I can’t fathom why this cotton shirt costs $113 at 40% off. I know this is “Theory” and all, but if I saw this hanging on a rack at Target or Wal-Mart for $12, it would look equally plain and boring.

    1. Some people enjoy “plain” and “boring,” which is actually fairly hard to get nowadays b/c so many manufacturers like to add detailing to everything (see comment about fluffy circles sewn onto sweaters above).
      Also, whether it’s personally worth it to you or not, but quality plays a role. A theory “basic” is going to (usually) be done a lot better than a wal mart version of the same — cut, fabric, stitching, small details, etc. is what makes a difference.
      It’s a matter of personal style & preference, obviously, so if you don’t like it, you don’t like it . . . but I, personally, always look for very simple, clean-cut items like this to add to my work wardrobe because I find out that I get a lot more use out of them, for much longer, than with busier, more initially “interesting” items. But to each their own.

      1. You can get very high quality, equally simple button-front shirts at Lands End for less than 1/2 the price. I like their wrinkle-free ones.

      2. It really does amaze me how many people here diss quality. Do they really think senior people at work can’t tell a cheap item from a quality one? Do we not all work our asses off so we can afford better things than when we were starting out? I’ve had shirts from Target, and I’ve had shirts from Thomas Pink. Guess which ones look better.

        1. The recession has caused me to re-evaluate the quality quotient. I’ve gotten nice, tailored white blouses (cotton/spandex) at Ann Taylor Loft, NY & Co., and Loehmann’s for less than $30. Maybe Theory and Thomas Pink is higher quality, but to my discerning eye, that slight quality increase is accompanied by a huge price premium for the BRAND and all that it signifies. And I’m not paying for it.

        2. Most people here seem to be dissing the quality of this item with respect to the price. It appears see-through and the styling isn’t all that flattering even at the $113 price tag. Furthermore, just because something is expensive doesn’t mean it is going to look better on you. Thomas Pink shirts don’t flatter my figure at all while many Target pieces do.

          Even though the Target pieces are less expensive, they are going to look better on me straight off the rack. I’ve gotten items at target that are better quality than items I’ve bought that started out at 5-10x the price. I just think it’s silly to assume that just because something is expensive, it must necessarily look better and be of a better quality.

        3. @DS, so true. Quality items are worth the cost, though there are limits – I will pay for an Armani suit over a Theory suit (though if I had to wear suits every day that wouldn’t/couldn’t be the case), but I will buy a Theory shell over a $700 Armani shell anyday.

        4. But price does not necessarily equal quality … I do think that the Target/Old Navy family of blouses don’t look that great on because they aren’t that fitted, but I find that brands like Lands End and LL Beans often are far better quality for 1/2 to 1/3 of the price of the Theory’s of the world.

          I love the look of a lot of Theory things, but they use thin material and never line anything, and I don’t konw what exactly you are paying for with their brand.

          1. The cut. My theory suit, while unlined–which I’ve never minded–makes me look like a million bucks. It’s my knock ’em dead suit and I love it.

        5. Also – I think it’s important to consider how long you’re likely to own/use an item —

          A $600 Burberry trench coat is VERY expensive, yes BUT – it will be in style and last forever, so if you can afford it, and like the style, then it’s worth it.

          A $100+ blouse with a lukewarm pattern and strange pocket — Not worth it… especially since I’ll get tired of the pocket/check pattern/see through-ness/baggy fit of the shirt very fast. Quality is definitely subjective when it comes to design (not so much for the fabric part, but the fabric part of quality doesn’t account for most of the much higher price point usually)

      3. SO TRUE, AIMS. I personally love plain and boring — except I call it clean-lined and tailored!
        I specifically dislike frills and such because (1) I am particularly well endowed in the chest area and feel that such details draw undue attention to that area; and, (2) I am a relatively young attorney working in a very male-dominated, conservative office and try not to appear to “girly.”
        oh, and I just don’t care for frills too much! ha.

    2. I think it’s overpriced. You can get Facconable or Brooks Brothers (both are far superior to Theory, imho) on sale for less.

    3. “Plain” and “boring” can also be more expensive to produce because if something is plain, it has to be perfect – there are no ruffles, buttons, sequins, etc. to hide flaws or distract the eye.

      I tried on a Theory button-down once (their basic Larissa one) and it was life changing. I’ve worn Pink, Brooks Brothers, and Banana button-downs and the Theory one was the nicest. I can’t even explain why, but the fabric and cut just made me look and feel amazing.

  5. Maybe it looks less “country” in person, but I am not a fan of this. Don’t like pockets on my shirts either.

  6. I’m sorry, but this piece looks plain and very un-tailored to cost so much. I think it looks- dare I say?- sloppy.

    Sorry. I usually love your picks, but this didn’t do it for me at all!

  8. Threadjack:
    What does everyone think about the “shorts suits” that a lot of retailers are showing? The banner ad at the top this morning linking to Ann Taylor identifies them as a “wear to work” trend. I work in a fairly casual office, where our president is pretty fashionable and trendy, and I know that look would never fly for us. Shorts just don’t equal “work attire” for me, even if you make them out of wool and top them with a blazer. But, I’m curious if other people do work in offices where they could wear a shorts suit, or if they’ve already bought one. Thoughts?

    1. I have not seen anyone actually wearing one of these in NYC – and I’m constantly looking at what people on the street wear. (And nope, this would not fly in my business casual office.)

    2. No and no. I can’t imagine wearing a shorts suit to any office I’ve ever worked in (corporate America, law firm, chambers).

      I also don’t get the appeal. Unlike a pantsuit, I’d have to shave my legs, and unlike a skirt suit, colleagues would doubtless be gawking if I wore it.

    3. Seems too incongruous for me!

      Shorts are inherently uber casual, suits are the opposite — too mismatched to be attractive! (and too trendy to work next year)

    4. Absolutely not appropriate in any office. Can’t imagine EVER wearing shorts to work.

    5. Nope, couldn’t wear a shorts suit (or shorts, period) at my office. And we are business-very-casual M-Th and casual on Friday. Apparently, you used to be able to wear shorts on Fridays, but they had to nix that when it became clear that some people had a difficult time remembering that daisy dukes aren’t work-appropriate.

      1. Worked in an office that had the same problem when they tried casual (jeans) Friday and the low rise jean/ripped jeans were just too much.

    6. I see women wearing them who do not have to wear business attire, but want to wear it to be trendy. Most of these women are receptionists, administrative assistants, etc (although in my office this would violate the dress code, period). Shorts absolutely do not work in a business attire environment. IMO A skirt suit with a short-sleeved jacket is work appropriate, though, on a hot day. Nice cropped pants are fine too, IMO, for a business casual environment.

    8. I have no idea why all of these retailers think short suits are a good idea for work. I see them on celebrities for events and I think they look ridiculous. Shorts are casual.

      Check out how sloppy Gwyneth Paltrow looks. And this is supposed to be a Look of the Day.

      http://www.instyle.com/instyle/celebrities/lotdpopup/0,,20364826_20778444,00.html?count=0

    10. Marketing people are so pathetic sometimes. “Shorts for work, ladies! It’s the new thing!” Gimme a break.

      1. I know – this is totally one of those ploys to get women to buy something they “don’t have.” Even if I COULD wear shorts to work, it’s not the authority statement I want to make, you know? I predict outlet stores will be flooded with “short suits” come fall. Which will be fine, as at outlet prices, some of the jackets will probably be worth a look, and I can just ditch the shorts entirely.

        1. Outlet stores were definitely flooded with short suits in 2007, the last time they were the latest “new thing.”

          1. I am wondering why it’s coming back when it was such a failure the first time. From what I remember from the 2006 trend, most of the shorts had very short inseams. Even if you’re in the most casual workplace imaginable, short shorts are typically not acceptable.

    11. Anyone see the article in WSJ about leather shorts? It was hilarious. The headline: “In Search of the One Item Shoppers Can’t Say They Already Have, Designers Channel Lederhosen.” The article also mentions that new Senator Scott Brown wore pink leather shorts on his first date with his wife in the 1980s. Oh my.

      1. oh dear. I’m pretty sure that anything that was worn in the 80s just shouldn’t come back.

        1. It wasn’t the charisma. Did you see the naked Cosmo centerfold from when he was a law student?

      1. Obviously short-shorts are out as far as office attire. But what are people’s thoughts on the knee-lenght shorts (I’m thinking the ones that were popular in 2007-2008)?
        I admit to having rocked that look once during a summer job – but only on a casual Friday (w/ a sweater and heels).

        1. I kind of still have a problem with them. I don’t know. Something about shorts says “way casual” in a way that a skirt of the same length does not. I find it hard to explain why. I don’t think I’d ever see a guy wearing shorts to work, even on casual day. I also think that women think too much about “getting away with it” at work, regarding clothes. Witness the people above talking about how people abused liberal dress rules on casual days. If someone is wondering “I wonder if I can get away with this at work” – I’d say it’s probably the wrong outfit. I am also a firm believer in the “dress for the job you want, not the job you have” theory. If you would never, ever see a female superior wearing shorts of any length, I would definitely skip them. However, only you know your office – and so if you can wear long shorts and rock them, not just “get away with it,” and it won’t hurt how you’re perceived – go ahead. How’s that for some wishy-washy advice. :)

          1. I think that if your office permits them, and your superiors wear them, then go for the shorts. We can’t wear shorts on casual fridays anymore (a casualty of the daisy duke problem) but if we could I would absolutely be here in bermudas, a polo shirt, and flats. No question.

  9. I think pockets on women’s shirts are fine, although I don’t think they are necessarily the most flattering (if you picture this shirt without it, doesn’t the model look even longer/leaner?). Also, the placement is really hard to get right — on this shirt it looks too high, but much lower and it might draw attention to the chest.

    The pocket also reveals just how sheer the shirt is — for $190 original price I’d think they could make the entire shirt that opaque… I’m curious to hear others’ opinions on the cami. My instinct is that the cami/slightly sheer sweater works fine, but not the cami/sheer blouse, but I have no idea why!

    1. Too casual maybe? Wearing a cami under a button down makes me think of weekend attire… as in paired w/ jeans not a pair of dress pants.

    2. My opinion on a cami is that it should never be visible if you are wearing it to make an otherwise sheer top appropriate.

      I have a few blouses and shirts that I need to wear a (nude) cami under or you can very slightly see the outline of my bra. Add the cami and you can’t see the bra OR the cami. Perfect! I am, however, not at all comfortable with the visible-cami-under-top look at work. It’s a bit sexy imho.

    3. I think camis under these kinds of shirts are great for hot climates where any bit of sweat can make them completely see-through. In my area it’s so hot/humid in summer that you’ll already be sticky from a 15-second walk to the mailbox, so it’s good to have that extra layer when you have to do any sort of walking at all- either to lunch or to/from your car.

  10. On a somewhat related topic (since we’re talking about slightly sheer shirts) – can anyone recommend a white button down that is actually opaque? I’ve tried all the usual suspects for my button downs over the years (Brooks Brothers, JCrew, Banana) and I’m stumped – either you can see my bra, or if I layer a cami underneath, you can see the cami.

    The best (worst) was the one where you could see my belly button through the shirt – FAB that is just what I look for in a work shirt! :)

    I love the look of a crisp, white button down, and I’m frustrated as heck that I can’t find one that is office-appropriate.

    In case it matters for your suggestions, I’m tall and thin and small of bust.

        1. If you live near the outlet, the prices there are typically pretty reasonable. When I was there everything was in the $59-79 range and it definitely wasn’t during a big shopping season. I didn’t find that they were particularly flattering for busty women. I either had the gap or the waist area was far to baggy. I think I tried on all the styles Pink offers too.

    3. Women’s shirts tend to be more sheer than a man’s shirt and I don’t know why. I’ve heard good things about the Pink brand, although I’ve never tried them. Most people think they’re just for men, but they do have women’s shirts. A friend of mine swears by them. A little pricey, but maybe an option.

      1. It’s been a few years since I tried them, but I found Pink’s fit similar to Brooks Brothers “classic” tailoring, viz. too short in the sleeves and torso, and hugely baggy around the bust and waist.

      2. T. Pink is Da Bomb. (Can we still say that? I worked with teenagers during the late 90s, and my slang seems to be stuck there, sorry.) Their cotton is non-sheer. It’s the sort of item where I’d buy fewer, but the quality means they look good for a long time, don’t collapse after a couple of dozen washings, and therefore worth having tailored if need be.

      3. But all men wear a shirt under their dress shirts–and if they didn’t–you’d likely see chest hair under white shirts. I think camisoles are par for the course under white dress shirts.

    4. Edit – I’m looking for something in the same price ballpark as JCrew, Brooks Brothers, etc.

      1. I got some white button down shirts from Uniqlo (Japanese co., has stores in NY, not sure if it’s available online) a few years ago — they were inexpensive, not even slightly sheer (very nice, sturdy cotton), & they were very reasonably priced. The ones I have not ruined with coffee stains, I still wear & they still look great. I highly recommend.

        On an aside: make sure you’re wearing a flesh-colored bra with your white shirts; white is always going to show through.

          1. Just making sure — that was my problem for a while :)
            Try Uniqlo if you get a chance. Haven’t been in a bit, but if they haven’t changed anything too much, they’re thick, clean cut & very reasonably priced.

    5. We have similar builds, so if you can find it, I have had good luck at H&M and Uniqlo. Also, if you are willing to dig, TJmaxx and Marshalls have shirts as well, although a lot of them have funny belts attached to them.

      1. Have found some excellent bargains at TJ Maxx, Marshalls, Filene’s, Burlington Coat Factory… and once when I had an hour to kill in a not great area, AJ Wright where I found Ann Taylor tops and Ralph Lauren pants for $4 each…

        Have time and patience though – and try everything on, since some items are overruns, but a few may be rejects due to missing buttonholes, zippers, etc.

  11. I love Theory and I love this, but unless Theory shirts have some incredible quality of which I’m unaware, I just can’t justify the expense in this case. I’d be interested to hear from anybody who thinks they are worth it.

    I know it’s not everyone’s style but I love work clothes that are menswear-ish, classic button downs with pockets like this and tortoise rimmed glasses. Of course that makes tailoring extra important, so you don’t look like you are wearing men’s clothes, and this shirt seems a little boxy.

  12. I like the idea of this shirt – women’s take on a classic men’s windowpane – but something is off in the execution. Particularly at that price point. It’s a miss for me today, but looking forward to tomorrow!

  13. Somewhat off-topic, but I bought 2 camisoles during the massive Ann Taylor sale, and I LOVE them. So thanks to all who have previously given positive reviews. Though I am somewhat tall, the camis are lengthy enough that I can tuck them in and they stayed tucked! I also feel like the fabric gives a slight bit of welcome compression, without being uncomfortable.

  14. Hijack

    I bought a gorgeous orange cotton satchel on holiday and have been using it religiously. However it is now getting a little bit scruffy and I need some advice. It is supposed to be dry clean only (100% cotton). Seems a bit expensive to do this all the time. Any alternatives to this which won’t destroy it?

    1. I’d get it dry cleaned, because it might have elements inside – like a cardboard bottom – that would be destroyed by water. But to keep it looking nice in the future, spray it with Scotch Gard, and then spot clean as needed with something like Tide To Go. I use Scotch Gard for all my fabric bags and my outerwear and it works well.

        1. Fairly OT, but some of my bags I’ve turned inside-out and painted the interior with cheap acrylic craft paint, in white. So many linings are black, which = I can’t see to find anything. And the painted surface = easy to clean with a rag.

  15. Annoyed that comments are closed on the sponsored suit post. You’d think AK would be curious about feedback?

    2. I’m wondering if that was a mistake. She also put L-0 at the bottom, when it’s obvioiusly nothing but sponsored links.

      I’m sure we can just threadjack and post comments here. I personally don’t mind the sponsored post since Kat wrote it herself, but I’m a bit concerned that she’ll be discouraged from posting recommendations for clothing made by AK’s competitors.

      2. Hi guys — I responded to Eponine’s comment on today’s “Previously” post also (https://corporette.com/2010/05/05/previously-on-corporette-21/) but just to clarify here, as well —

        a) There is no one particular sponsor who is “taking over” any particular feature here — the AK Anne Klein thing was a one-time deal; part of the “package” that I agreed to. The regular posting schedule will resume tomorrow.

        b) In general, I’ve turned down other advertisers who wanted to sponsor posts — I am very protective of my relationship with you guys (and appreciative of whatever trust I’ve built) and won’t let just anyone come on here and take over a post. (Full dislcosure: there will be another sponsored post coming within the next month, from Ann Taylor.)

        c) If and when I do a sponsored post, though, it is my strong feeling that comments should be turned off on it, because I would not allow any unmoderated comment to go up on it. In that case, a) I’d have to change the commenting system for the whole blog, in perpetuity (which is no fun for anyone), and b) what kind of editorial policy would I enforce on the sponsored post? (And how much would I have to negotiate that with the sponsor?) I’d rather just let you guys speak your mind in other posts — thread hijack away.

        d) The L-# designation actually wasn’t in error either — there are no affiliate links in that post (meaning, I don’t get paid if you click through and buy something I recommended) — but hopefully I disclosed enough times in the text of the post itself that it was a sponsored post, meaning that I was paid to write it. I’ll amend the “Notes” section of my Affiliates page (https://corporette.com/affiliates) to reflect that.

        Hope that helps clarify any confusion… and as always, thank you for reading.

        1. Re. your comment b) — I am glad to hear there will be sponsored posts from other companies as well. If it was only one company I’d wonder if I could really trust your recs or if you were ignoring that company’s competitors. And on a purely personal note, I like AT way better than AK.

        2. Some unsolicited communications advice:
          – The transparency should have come before the closed-comment post, or in the post. This is the first “closed comment” post I’ve ever seen on this blog and it threw me for a loop as well. Since it was an Anne Klein post, I immediately thought to myself “well, I guess she doesn’t want anyone upsetting the corporate overlords.” Fair or not, that’s what I thought. People’s perception is their reality.
          – I don’t understand this statement:
          “If and when I do a sponsored post, though, it is my strong feeling that comments should be turned off on it, because I would not allow any unmoderated comment to go up on it.”
          Why not? Most stuff on the comments threads doesn’t go through moderation. Why have this attitude about corporate-sponsored posts and not about the rest of the content on the blog? If this is a sponsor request, it is a crappy one and something you can (and should) push back on. Most bloggers don’t allow sponsors to dictate the level of their readers’ interaction with their content. As you can see, it didn’t do any good anyway. People are still trashing the clothes, just not on the blog post. And they’re also questioning your integrity and independence. Now you have a personal perception problem. See comment above about perception and reality.
          – I think posting about clothes from a sponsor and not allowing comments is a weasel move. I am not saying you are a weasel, but it is a weasel move. If you are being “encouraged” by AK to do this, all I can say is it’s your blog, meaning you are both the taste arbiter and the advocate for your readers. You have both the ability and responsibility to push back when a sponsor asks for something that isn’t germane with the tone or content of the blog. The best blogs are the ones that have maintained their independence while monetizing their content. I’m interested in what you and other working women think about what to wear to work, not what Anne Klein pays you to say. Sorry to be blunt about it, but that’s where I’m at. And in communications, you have to communicate with people where they’re at, not where you want them to be. I think this audience on Corporette is going to prove remarkably resistant to messages they perceive as being “advertising,” and I think a blog post you have been paid to write, with comments disabled definitely comes across to me as an ad. May be time to rethink what you want some of these sponsor relationships to look like.

    3. Agreed. We can’t even talk about fit, etc.? I don’t have a problem with a corporate-sponsored suit of the week, but I’m really disappointed in Kat and in AK for closing comments.

      1. My experience with AK is that the fit is less than stellar. Also, I am not a fan of the fact that you can’t buy items as separates.
        I wrote additional comments below but my thoughts are awaiting moderation (to sum up, I am not a fan of these suits).

        1. I actually have one AK suit that just freakishly fit me perfectly out of the box. Pants the right length for heels, everything just perfect. Not my favorite material, but made up for in fit. And I kind of like the gray suit. But the closed comments makes me not want to buy anything. So, no $300+ suit expenditure for me today.

  16. Agreed! Totally turned me off. Are we not allowed to speak ill of the corporate sponsor? :)

    1. I think it is strange as well.

      And fwiw I definitely don’t think that dress has a safe-for-work neckline. More like a come-hither neckline!

      1. Re: neckline — I think it’s the fact that it curves in that results in that “come hither look.” Besides exposing extra cleavage, there’s just something about it that does not exactly say “professional” (or maybe it’s just that it is glaringly meant to expose extra cleavage). Would have been much better for work with a straight across neckline, I think.

        1. Agree — I’m guessing it’s supposed to be a work-to-after-work transition-able dress but it just seems too out of place and that neckline can look too young on a lot of women, which has the overall effect of aging us.

          1. Actually, tried on the dress myself Tuesday night and it is totally acceptable — and I’ve got a chest. NO cleavage.

          2. Glad to hear there’s something for the … “larger busted” (is that the right phrase) amongst us (which includes me!) :-)

            A lot of items you have to try on to know – but I would never order it online.

    2. I am going to speak ill of them anyway :)

      The gray suit looks cheap — no buttons? Looks like something you would get at a Dress Barn.
      The navy pinstripe also misses something in execution. The pinstripe is a bit too pronounced perhaps?
      Love the way Kat wore the coral jacket, but it strikes me as a bit dowdy overall, and way too much effort would have to be exerted on my part to feel even remotely fashionable in it, so pass on that too.

      Final gripe: AK suits often look good to me from afar, and I love that they have so much come in petite sizing, but I have never once been able to actually get a suit from them b/c there is always 1 awful detail — whether it’s a weird bow, an odd belt, tacky buttons, etc. AK — if you’re reading, simple is best — stop being so busy.

      1. Agree with all of this 100%. I am wearing a gray AK pencil skirt right now that I love (one of two AK pieces I own – the other I don’t like very much and almost never wear), but I’ve never liked a single suit.

        1. I might like AK if they carried anything whatsoever in Tall, but they don’t…

          -Sad Leggy, Lon-armed Tall Suit wearer

          1. They do have a 33″ inseam, and my one AK suit is the only suit I’ve ever bought that I didn’t have to have the hem let out. It is perfect on me with 3″ heels. And I’m 5’8″ with a short waist and long legs (33″ inseam in flats normally). I was really pleasantly surprised on the length of the pants.

        2. just to clarify — there are snaps in that gray blazer. they’re just hidden. the jacket looks better worn open, IMHO, but you can also “button” it up the way the model did.

  17. I don’t understand why K would decide to close comments on the sponsored post. I guess it’s her prerogative, but this is a change in policy that most of us, loyal readers, would appreciate knowing about. More troubling, are we now losing the regular “suit of the week” post and will not be subject to AK-sponsored posts, on which we cannot even comment?

    For what it’s worth, I hate pretty much every suit that was promoted in the AK post. So boring. Please bring back the regular suit of the week posts!

    2. AK has never impressed me on either fit or quality. They also usually sell their suits together, which just doesn’t work for most of us. I’m generally a size smaller on top, for what it’s worth. I do have one suit, but it got for around $75 at TJ Maxx so it doesn’t count!

      1. That’s exactly how I think of them — a potential purchase at TJ’s for $100 and under — would not pay full price for any of it.
        And based on my prior experience, there’s is always something off with their suits so even for $100, it probably wouldn’t happen . . . and the no comment thing just made me mad & cemented my initial misgivings.

        1. Agree with AIMS! Bought an AK suit at Annie Sez (also a discount store, not sure how many of them there are outside NY) for under $100 and after getting it tailored it’s still a bit off.

    3. Especially the orange one on the bottom… If you aren’t guest starring on Golden Girls then I can’t see that being a good look (or a professional one).

        1. To be fair if I look like Cindy McCain when I’m her age (what is she, 60s?? Older??) I’ll be A-OK with life! ;-)

    4. What is up with the arm of the model in the black pinstripe blazer (the arm where the hand is cut off)? The suit looks huge on her arms…and yet at the same time makes the model look pretty large too.

      1. I think the jacket is just too big for the model and has been clipped to make it more form-fitting in the midsection. Unfortunately there isn’t too much you can do for the sleeves and the shoulders, so the whole thing just looks really off.

  18. Regarding the AK post. WHAT A TURN-OFF! How can you post such ugly pictures and then not allow for comments?!?! Those are some of the ugliest suits I’ve ever seen!

  19. I gotta give it to Kat, she did wonders with that orange jacket. When I first saw it, I was like, fugg … then I saw her in it… nice! ;-D

    1. Agreed. Hated it in the AK picture. Really, really liked it on Kat – to the point of considering buying it. I don’t hate AK, and I don’t mind a sponsored post, but I am turned off on the closed comments.

      1. Thanks guys! Particularly since I just flew 3000 miles and am totally planning on wearing that outfit for Day 1 of the conference.

        See my comments above — Suit of the Week will be back, unsponsored and with comments on — next week — and there are technical-headache-plus-I-don’t-want-to-try-to-enforce-an-editorial-policy-in-comments reasons for closing comments on that post. Feel free to express your opinion here.

    3. i agree: i thought it was awful in their pic, but looked great on Kat. dear AK: rethink who you’re using to style/shoot/model your photos!

  20. On a happier note, is the blonde model in the black pinstripe suit the same one that was Blair’s Columbia friend on this week’s Gossip girl?

  21. Uh-oh, I think you guys aren’t helping Kat’s new business venture here, if her AK client reads these comments! I, too, would have appreciated being able to comment on them. I was actually ok with all of them except the coral one, which was very Golden Girls.

    1. Love Kat. Don’t love that AK apparently doesn’t care what its target market thinks about its clothes.

    2. I do hope that AK reads these comments. Maybe they will reconsider their suit designs.

      1. Hopefully, but having the comments closed on the suit post makes me question whether AK has been paying attention at all to the comments. If they had been, it should have been pretty easy for them to predict that: (1) closing comments would not go over well with a number of people, AKA their potential customers; and (2) people would just make any comments they wanted to in the morning post.

        Btw, I think the first few suits are OK, but nothing special. I actually thought the coral/pink was nice in terms of style/fit, but the color is horrid and definitely very Golden Girls, and one of the other commenters said.

        1. see my comments above re closing comments — really did not realize it would cause such a stir. i can’t think of any blog that allows comments on a sponsored post.

          2. Part of it is that this is the first time I recall your closing comments on a post, and the other part is that, sponsored or no, suit of the week is a regular feature that we normally can comment on. It was a surprise, and it genuinely does not make sense to me. What makes you think comments on a sponsored post would require moderation when comments on other posts do not? Is it that AK doesn’t want comments about their competitors or comments critical of the clothing?

            At any rate, I think that if you keep the sponsored posts separate from the regular features, people will care less about having comments closed.

    3. I think it’s good for them–now they know what they need to change; it’s not Kat, it’s not us, it’s the dowdy suits they’re trying to sell!

  22. Agree that the no comments decision is weird, but I will say that I have one Anne Klein gray skirt suit that I bought a few seasons ago, and really like — it’s very tailored (not boxy like all of the suits pictured) and I always get compliments when I wear it. I wish the skirt were a smidgen longer (it’s slightly above the knee) but it’s overall lovely.

  24. Seriously ladies, let’s all give Kat a break re: the closed comment post and the sponsored posts… It’s just an occassional thing, so no big deal.

  25. I agree with SUCL 3L. It’s enough for me that Kat discloses when she is paid to showcase a brand.

    1. Well, she has to disclose her association with companies that she’s talking about under FTC guidelines – that’s a legality, not an option.

  26. …and if you truly want AK to hear your opinions on their clothing, send an email directly to the company.

  27. I like Ann Klein NY much more than the AK brand…. But it’s also double the price :O/

Comments are closed.