Height requirement
There was a time long ago, (okay, around spring-summer of this year) when fashion dictated a new measurement of elevation. Actually, it was more of a descent, a downplay of verticality, coming closer to the ground instead of aspirational uplift-ment.
Enter the kitten heel — and all across the altitude-loving female populace, a collective cringe was felt. Height will always be might. Power derived from a loftier vantage, towering over mere mortals in flats. The ideal has always been an illusion of a longer line, balancing out horizontal expansions with stretched proportions.
Us girls, we take it for granted that we’ve always been allowed to play dress-up from the get-go. We’re lucky in the sense that we have the freedom to do readjustments to current physical attributes: concealers to hide long nights (though sunnies do a better job during the day), midnight liners to make peepers pop, foundation for alabaster skin, Spanx to liquify muffin tops and of course, vertiginous skyscrapers for feet to add an instant five inches to height.
Like, that Miss Universe answer on how many islands there are in the Philippines (high tide or low tide?), stature should be pegged depending on the heel height of choice. In heels or in flats? I wish.
But happily enough, the mid-level invasion hasn’t taken hold of the local foot traffic, not yet anyway. As seen in Philippine Fashion Week Spring-Summer 2011, runways, as well as pedestrian style, still hold height as a key factor to put together looks. Fashion editors opted for four inches up while fashion directionnaires on ramp pegged it at five.
