Brand dresses that aren't lolita

[Not lolita dress No.8224435]

So this girl in my comm keeps wearing her Alice and the Pirates dress Ragnarok, but I don't think it looks lolita at all! There is no poof at all, the waist is really high, and the length is waay below her knees. What do you guys think? is it lolita?

Also, general brand dresses that don't look lolita.

[Anonymous No.8224439]

the general shape doesnt have to be a poofy knee length.

That's just more towards classic or aristocrat.

[Anonymous No.8224440]

who fucking cares you autist

[Anonymous No.8224455]

If you bothered to do any sort of research into the fashion you would find that lolita fashion is inspired by historical European styles.
Classic lolita often takes inspiration from the Regency era, (in which the OPs pic dress shape comes from)
Want proof? VM dress from 2001

[Anonymous No.8224496]

How fucking new are you OP?

[Anonymous No.8224509]

>>8224455
But lolita itself is a very distinct style; you can't call any old period costume lolita. That being said OP's pic of the Baby dress stil looks more like lolita than 90% of JetJ. AATP sees to be really hit or miss.

[Anonymous No.8224512]

Maybe the general would be better suited to this question, but could anyone recommend an a-line petticoat that would suit a skirt in the style of op's?

My (admittedly deflated) cupcake is too puffy up top and too short for my new jsk - making it look kind of sausage shaped.

[Anonymous No.8224513]

>>8224455
Just because a lolita made it doesn't mean it's lolita. If anything that VM OP is some variation of aristocrat.

[Anonymous No.8224525]

>>8224512
I use a slightly deflated Dear Celine petticoat (pic related) most of the time no problem. But for some of the narrower cuts, I wear the waistband around my hips and tie down the top with a scarf to keep the poof down.

Another thing I've found that works is to layer underskirts, but that gets really heavy really quickly.

[Anonymous No.8224537]

The bottom middle and right dresses by Juliette and Justine next to totally normalfag dresses people would cry foul at if you tried to wear it as lolita or made something similar claiming it's lolita. I know the pet peeve at the moment is people wearing skater dresses as lolita or full-skirted sundresses with thin straps that disqualify them. Although I think pulling any old thing from your closet and calling it lolita isn't great, but when brand makes something practically identical people think brand can do no wrong. If you didn't know some of these pieces were brand (thinking they were thrifted or handmade) they'd be nitpicked and held to much higher standards.

[Anonymous No.8224557]

>>8224435
Empire waist dresses are absolutely Lolita, OP. The petti on this model is probably the wrong shape though.

[Anonymous No.8224561]

>>8224557
I think empire waist and tea length which allows for little to no petti isn't lolita but it's not like it matters, I won't bitch at someone for wearing it.

[Anonymous No.8224570]

>>8224537
I think it's mostly the neckline, length and the way it's styled that makes the difference. Agree that many of JetJs pieces look more like general elegant fashion rather than lolita.

[Anonymous No.8224596]

>>8224455
I'd say that's aristrocrat, not lolita

[Anonymous No.8224601]

AP trapazoid dresses seem like the obvious thing to point a finger at. They do still have elements of lolita but the silhouette is way different from what I'm used to in lolita.

[Anonymous No.8224616]

>>8224537
That dress in the top middle could be coordinated in lolita. JetJ can be really hit or miss aesthetically, but they don't need to "try harder" to fit some completely arbitrary style standard that they never professed to be trying for every time.

[Anonymous No.8224670]

I'm gonna leave this one here

[Anonymous No.8224679]

Sure is spring break in here.

[Anonymous No.8224762]

>started writing a short response
>turns into epic essay
>it's past my bedtime and I can't be bothered to summarise

Here, enjoy my full essay. Hope it helps:

The trouble is that what girls here consider "lolita" is informed by the rules, hence the "silhoutte" and talk of how longer skirts look more aristo.

Why do we have rules? Because people have indeed tried to pass off their 80s prom dresses and and kid's clothing with puff sleeves/poofy skirts as "lolita since I was 4 years old, lookit at my kindergarten photo". So someone came along and said, "as a rule of thumb, this is what lolita looks like. If the skirt in your photo is longer, you're probably looking at Aristo". These rules do the double job of weeding out the idiots who want to join the fashion and be allowed to do whatever they want while calling it lolita, while at the same time telling newbies exactly how to achieve a lolita look ("if you follow all the rules you will most likely end up with an outfit that looks lolita")

In actual fact, the Japanese side has never had concrete rules. Brands and girls just kind of make things up as they go along.

A similar thing is sort of happening over in the gyaru thread, where some girls are debating the softer new looks that a lot of the gyaru brands are putting out; this is simply how fashion evolves, it changes according to the people who wear them and the brands that cater to them. You can even see how offhandedly some of the "rules" are being formulated on that thread, someone asked about the differences between romagyaru and himekaji, the responses gave some general rules of thumb to go by.

If you want to ditch the rules and talk about the unifying look of lolita, then it's going to get a lot harder. In the first place you need to realise that lolita has undergone a lot of changes, in the second, you also need to realise that at some point lolita split off in different directions, and then each direction continued on their merry way.

[Anonymous No.8224765]

>>8224762

Old school lolita was more about looking like a victorian doll. Hence a lot of lacemonsters, ringlet hair and rectangle headdresses, because they're modified from what some of the "porcelain antique dolls" look like (I didn't say they were genuine). In that era even JetJ dresses had a lot of lace and details.

Next the fashion took a turn, and in the sweets heyday, it was more about being sugary sweet and cute. Unnatural-coloured pastel hair added to the "made of sugar, so sweet it'd give you diabetes to look at me" look.

From 2011, 2012, a few topics about how lolita is dying started popping up in random places -- egl gets it nearly every year, cgl occassionally, and someone even translated a Japanese lolita's blog where she wrote a post about how lolita outfits are all starting to look the same and she couldn't get excited about wearing lolita in cooler weather. This may have been the impetus for the recent trend of longer/shorter skirts in lolita, part of why lolita has been stagnating is because the lolita silhoutte with the poofy knee-length skirt has become too predictable and formulaic for the fashion.

2015, and now a lot of girls involved in the fashion have grown up, again the fashion has changed with them. The changing silhoutte did bring about more exciting creativity, the focus is has now shifted to be more about decadence, being unusual, and richness (in materials, in culture, in style) rather than the silhoutte. So aatp Ragnarok draws on some old Norse lore instead of slapping photos of random trees onto a dress, and then embellishes it with oodles of rich lace. There's a story behind the print of the dress, referencing a richness in culture.

[Anonymous No.8224766]

>>8224765

Then there's JetJ. JetJ doesn't just take old paintings because the artist is dead and there's no royalty to pay, they make some efforts to be unusual and culturally rich. Hence the use of fairly famous old paintings, sometimes with some scandalous story or weirdness to them, so that you can get into the culture and not just "wear a printed dress". A few times egl has tracked down the names and artists of these paintings, they aren't obscure random paintings by nobodies. Even with their cliparts, most of them strive to be off kilter and really weird. The gnome dress sparked a debate on egl about some tradition where folks collected random objects to show off how culturally rich they were. So there's some unusualness and culture in there that you won't find by buying a random floral print dress from a mainstream clothing brand. JetJ and mainstream brands only superficially look the same because you haven't looked deeply enough into why girls would buy specific JetJ dresses but not a floral dress from some mainstream store.

Now, the other substyles. While you can debate about Mana (not)/having invented the fashion, Moitie was built around his idea of being the elegant, young, cute version of an emo goth as opposed to the Western version, which was heavy-handed and not really big on being kawaii. Moitie's style hasn't really changed at all, because Mana himself, as well the girls buying Moitie, haven't really changed much. (they might have dwindled in number though). In the beginning the look was certainly unified with the old school look, only more gothic, but while the rest of lolita went on with sweet and onto looking rich and decadent, Moitie just continued catering to the Mana fans and fans of the Moitie look. It's not less lolita just because the rest of the fashion changed and Moitie didn't.

[Anonymous No.8224770]

>>8224766

On the other hand, just because Moitie didn't change, doesn't mean the other brands that changed their styles to adjust to what lolitas now want, are no longer lolita. The brands that make it and girls that bought it still identify as lolitas, and they still style it with lace and frills as some kind of throwback to the days when old school lolita was about copying dolls wearing lacy frilly dresses.

Similarly (but on the opposite side), AP's clientele has always been built on the sugary sweet pastel look, so while the other brands are going towards putting stories into their dresses and being unusual in their designs. AP continues the logical progression of where the "made of sugar" look would have gone. So when they make a floral print, it's not going to be some famous painting with some weird story behind who painted it, it's going to be sugary sweet Sweetie Violet. And when they make an astrological print, it's not going to be a stuffy print related to a famous clock in Europe, it's going to be a really short dress that looks sugary cute on someone who looks young and cute, hence Cosmic sailor jsks. When they make a dark crosses print, it's not going to be a dark and moody Moitie lookalike, it's going to be Celestial, with a young and cutesy high-waisted cut to compensate for the darkness of the print. AP's current state is just the logical progression of that time in lolita where "made of sugar" was the "in" thing. It's no less lolita just because the rest of fashion decided to evolve in one direction and AP took the sugary sweet phase of lolita and continued with it.

[Anonymous No.8224772]

>>8224770

There's nothing un-lolita about any of this. Especially if you've been around for a while and watched the brands evolve. JetJ and aatp has always been weird and kooky. VM's style has always been more inspired by historical garments, which explains long-length dresses and fishtail skirts that they consistently make. AP has always been sweet and getting sweeter even when they're getting less sweet. A lot of the different silhouttes is because brands were stagnating when they stuck to the knee-length lolita silhoutte (notice how we're no longer getting "lolita is dying" topics)

All that happened is that you came into a fashion when the substyles are getting further apart and somewhat splintered. If you find it all very vexing, just relax, take a deep breath and realise (a) you don't need to be a lolita, so long as you enjoy the clothes just buy them and wear them, and (b) it's all going to change again in a few year's time. So enjoy the clothes and don't worry so much. So long as you aren't mouthing off to someone else it's perfectly okay to say "I have no idea what I'm doing but I really like this dress".

>end

[Anonymous No.8225138]

>>8224435
In my opinion, it depends on how you think of lolita.

If you want to think of lolita as a set standard of rules and a very strict aesthetic, then no, those dresses are not lolita. It can have a lolita-esque look since all the shoes, headwear, accessories, blouses, socks, etc are exactly like the ones worn in lolita, but its not lolita to a T. Its an inspired look that is generally accepted by the community because of the reputation that the brand holds.

If you want to think of lolita as a feeling, an art, an experience, a way of expression: then yes, to you those dresses are lolita, BECAUSE of how well they match with the socks, blouses, etc as I mentioned above. The dress itself has no change on *how* you would generally coordinate something. Same shoes, same way to balance colors, same make up, same headwear.. Same goes for salopettes. Some people consider them lolita because of how well they fit the "feeling" of (for example) sweet lolita.

[Anonymous No.8225146]

>>8224601
and yet these dresses are some of the most popular AP dresses

[Anonymous No.8225166]

>>8224772
read your essay and enjoyed it. not necessarily agreeing but good stuff to think about so thanks!

[Anonymous No.8225273]

>>8225146

Yeah, sure. I mean they're great dresses, of course they're popular. They're a big deviation from the traditional lolita silhouette however to the point where it's questionable whether it's even really still "lolita."

Ultimately it's irrelevant though.

[Anonymous No.8225299]

>>8224616
It's Ted Baker, as are the other dresses

[Anonymous No.8225301]

>>8224765
You just described the stylistic timeline absolutely perfectly

[Anonymous No.8225314]

>>8225146
I think that this is happening because of sizing. It's been a while since AP's releasing one of this free waist cuts on their most popular prints... They sizing range is humongous.

>inb4 this cut is not for everyone
>just because you can get into it doesn't mean it fits

[Anonymous No.8225319]

>>8224435
i didn't know this dress existed, and now i want it so goddamn badly.

on top of being qt lolita, i'd wear the shit out of it to a rennfest.

[Anonymous No.8225577]

>>8225319
>viking themed dress
>to a rennfest
>rennisance = 1400s -1600s, italy
>viking age = 700s -1000s, scandinavia
????
also imo the stock photo for this is really bad, heres a better one

[Anonymous No.8225580]

>>8225577
This dress seems like it's so unforgiving/unaccommodating to any amount of boobs.

[Anonymous No.8225589]

>>8225580
Most of Baby's higher-waisted cuts are reserved for members of the itty bitty titty committee

[Anonymous No.8225595]

>>8225577
renaissance festival =/= only the renaissance

at least, the big texas renaissance festival in mind. they have varying weekends, one of which is "barbarian invasion" aka, vikings.

which i would gladly wear this to.

on top of being INCREDIBLY into norse mythology, the want is so real.

[Anonymous No.8225596]

>>8224537
How is Rosery solennel (bottom right) not lolita? I think it fits the lolita aesthetic perfectly when coordinated well.

[Anonymous No.8225597]

>>8225589
That's very true, but that doesn't even look high waist; that's like a mid-tit cut.

[Anonymous No.8225615]

>>8225597
I think it's supposed to be literally right under the breast.

[Anonymous No.8225623]

>>8224772
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Your explanations make perfect sense to me and your essay-length response makes me miss old school blogs so much.

[Anonymous No.8225635]

>>8224772
I love your posts anon, you're like a breath of fresh air amidst the madness. I wanna high five you so bad right now, if you have any kinda online presence elsewhere, I'd really enjoy following you.

[Anonymous No.8225660]

>>8225623
This is how I view it. I like a lot of the dresses, but always felt I shouldn't bother because of how so many of the lolitas on here act when someone wears brand and doesn't care about following the actual fashion and instead just wear it to wear it and to feel cute or pretty or royal.

[Anonymous No.8225663]

>>8224616
Yeah, no. It would never work for lolita, it looks like something you'd wear to work.

[Anonymous No.8225680]

>>8225299
I'm aware. Ted Baker is a brand I buy, like JetJ. The one in the middle is just the only one that has any aesthetic similarity to any JetJ pieces.

[Anonymous No.8225685]

>>8225615
I love babydoll cuts in lolita and I'm so damn glad I'm a 30C. If my boobs were any bigger those kind of dresses would look like shit.

[Anonymous No.8225696]

>>8225635
Dittoing this sentiment. I know many people don't feel comfortable saying they go to 4chan--feel free to pimp yourself out the next time someone asks for tumblr recs etc. if you don't already do so.

[Anonymous No.8225709]

>>8225166
>>8225301
>>8225623
>>8225635
>>8225696

Wow, glad a lot of people got something useful from my late night ramblings.

I never did have a lolita-specific blog, unfortunately. This is probably the longest essay I've ever written about the fashion. I don't think I could keep up a whole blog of posts like this, unfortunately.

[Anonymous No.8225739]

>>8225660

Even outside of lolita, I think you're always going to be running into people who get angry at you for not treating their favorite brand or hobby with the same reverence they do. Right here on cgl, there's still argument from people who make their own costumes (and treat cosplay as some artisan craft) vs the people who buy their cosplays and then attentionwhore for photos or other freebies. Outside of cgl, I once stumbled across a heated discussion about celebrities "desecrating" their own handbags by decorating them.

Lolita is actually much easier. So long as you aren't trying to join a lolita community (in which case it makes sense that you *do* have to look enough like a lolita in order to be allowed into the community), or gain asspats for wearing a particular brand, there's always some girl that's quick to point out an outfit is not neccessarily intended to be lolita even if it was head-to-toe brand. Even the girls posting in the ita thread will ask if an outfit was lolita or something else, they pretty much leave alone anything that doesn't have the lolita tag on it.

I will tell you something else, though. When you follow all the rules, that's when the lolita brand dresses look their best. Even though I wear lolita brands without being fully lolita in my daily life, I still use a lightweight petticoat because some of the skirts look like sad wilted flowers without a petticoat.

[Anonymous No.8225959]

>>8225577
When people started showing up to renfest in pirates, witches and Dr. Whos this might be one of the better dresses to wear.

[Anonymous No.8225988]

>>8224561
You can wear a petti with tea length and empire waists, though, anon.
Tea length is probably my favorite cut, and I've never gone a day in lolita without a decent amount of poof.

[Anonymous No.8226000]

>>8225595
>barbarians
>aka vikings
No...
Barbarian = north African
Vikings = Still Scandinavian

[Anonymous No.8226007]

>>8226000
Also it's true that Barbarian was a general term for foreigner and was sometimes used to refer to Germanic people but the Vikings and the ancient Romans were 100s of years apart, so...

[Anonymous No.8226106]

>>8224772
Thanks, anon. This was a good read.

[Anonymous No.8226568]

>>8226000
as >>8226007
said, the term "barbarian", in this case, is not region specific. I went to that rennfest during the barbarian invasion weekend, it is literally vikings. just because you want to be pedantic and argue about semantics doesn't make you right, sorry.

[Anonymous No.8226578]

>>8226000
>>8226007
arguing that the theme of the weekends isn't about vikings simply because it's named "barbarian" is being pedantic as fuck, considering 99% of people who use the word "barbaric", is in analogy to the barbarians, in reference to being uncultured or savage. like damn, if you actually went to the festival, you'd see that it's literally the weekend for fur covered warriors with axes, and blades, from all parts and ages. primarily vikings, because they, currently, are the most popular. "barbarian", in this case, is used as the non-literal, secondary meaning that most people will immediately recognize.

sort of like "heathen" is used to conduct the same thing, even though it most literally means pagans, since they are listed as synonyms.

don't be a semantics arguing asshat.

[Anonymous No.8227087]

>>8226578
The Vikings may have been Barbar-ic but they were not Barbar-ians. It doesn't matter if they call it a Barbarian event, and it doesn't matter if people dress as generic warriors to it, it's still the wrong word. That's like someone making a Lolita event that's actually a western goth event, and people going to it dressed in frilly but still casual clothes. Just because normalfags can't tell the difference doesn't make it right.
Just don't "wear the fuck out of" Viking-themed lolita to a Renaissance fair. Lolita doesn't even have anything to do with the Renaissance. It's as bad as coming to a renfaire in Steampunk.

[Anonymous No.8227113]

>>8227087
You know the just said what the event is called in quotation marks even and you're going on a completely off topic rant about it?

[Anonymous No.8227384]

>>8227087
sorry, but being a pedantic fuck doesn't make you right. everything you say is false equivalency, but you're so absolutely anal about the entire, completely literal meaning of words that you wouldn't even grasp it.

barbarian is also an adjective, but you can't seem to understand that. "barbarian invasion", in the context, would mean the same damn thing as "savage invasion". barbaric and barbarian are both usable, synonymous adjectives.

[Anonymous No.8227485]

>>8227113
Has anyone really been far as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[Anonymous No.8227490]

>>8227384
nice tumblr meme

[Anonymous No.8227501]

>>8227384
>everything you say is false equivalency
How is it false equivalency?
And I guess using the actual dictionary definition of a word makes me an "absolutely anal", "pedantic fuck". :/

[Anonymous No.8227527]

>>8227501
It does, considering the adjective meaning of barbarian is also an "actual dictionary definition", and constantly insisting that the meaning you're arguing for is the only true and right definition.

[Anonymous No.8227671]

>>8224772
Your essay pretty much explains how polyester disco shirts evolved in the 1970's.

[Anonymous No.8227691]

>>8227527
>constantly insisting that the meaning you're arguing for is the only true and right definition.
Constantly insisting like once and it wasn't even insisting.

[Anonymous No.8228206]

>>8224772
Hey, lolita PhD anon-sama... This was an awesome read. I'm a huge nerd and when I decided to start wearing lolita I researched like crazy and this is a perfect summary of everything. I wish this existed back then, I saved your text for future reference. You are awesome.

Btw, what do you think personally about the "end of lolita"?
Mainstream fashions tents do die eventually, will it happen with lolita? I've saw an interview with one of the responsible for Fruits magazine and although he was talking about decora I think what he said fits nicely with lolita too. He sad something among the lines of "what happens on fashion outside the group doesn't matter to them", the fashion continues to happen and evolve and it is not affected by common sense of fashion. But, with lolita you do have major brands that play a major role on the fashion development. Will those brands eventually be gone too? Will a new brand rise to the power or nah?

I hope I made sense, I'm on mobile and it's hard to review the text.
Pic of an AP salopette, the always controversial salopettes.

[Anonymous No.8228207]

>>8228206
What's the deal with Salopettes? Heard a lot, didn't make much sense.

[Anonymous No.8228217]

>>8228207
Most of them are too short and do not follow the lolita silhouette of puffy knee length skirts. I can't recall right now if this ever happens on major brands but some salos are made to be just like any other lolita dress, with the addition of having a much more forgiving size.

>pic related
>tfw the salo cut it cuter than the jsk

[Anonymous No.8228226]

>>8228217
Ah right, thanks anon. I just googled AP salopettes and ... they are really short. Or maybe that girl is just a giant.

[Anonymous No.8228230]

>>8228226
On my first post I was going to say bigger girls get salopettes because they "fit" them and try to pass this shit as lolita but I didn't want to start a thing... But as we are at it... Girls should just stop and accept they don't have the body for brand. And that's not a bad thing, it's bad to be delusional about it.

[Anonymous No.8228236]

>>8228226

It doesn't help that she's an apple shape, she has a big belly which hikes it up even more.

[Anonymous No.8228238]

>>8228230
What's the reason behind salo's anyway? I'm guessing towards a more casual lolita look or ...?

Have a nice looking coord with the milky planet salo. Will kill for those tights though.

[Anonymous No.8228241]

>>8228236
The same thing happens with those loose cuts we saw a lot last year. If you have big tits you will have a bad time.
I do like the look of a free waist op with a super puffy petticoat, but it's not a popular opinion.

[Anonymous No.8228242]

>>8228238
you're in luck, dream dresses thread anon is here

>http://page5.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/e159154439
>literally just opened that auction and refreshed cgl

[Anonymous No.8228245]

>>8228238
Salopettes work wonders in other j-fashions like fairy kei that don't have rules like lolita but still aim for cute pastel look.
>pic related

Btw, cute coord you posted! Who do we have to kill for those tights? I'm up for it.

[Anonymous No.8228246]

>>8228242
Talk about timing.

[Anonymous No.8228260]

>>8228242
fuck anon, you're the best! Now go find holy lantern OP in red for me...

>4100 yen
>fuck I want these but I don't NEED this...
>I can't justify it cause I don't wear sweet
>fuck

Anon you're TEARING ME APART

>>8228245
take it anon, take it before i spend my money on stuff I can't even coord with.

[Anonymous No.8228265]

>>8228260
Hahaha
I've been staring at it and thinking of how to coord it. And now I'm sad.

>wants it too much
>needs to get stuff to go with it
>concludes it's not worth it

[Anonymous No.8228267]

Back on track,
>>8228245
Ah right, I'm not into fairy kei so I didn't know that!
I'm just interested in what everyone else thinks about salos. Is it lolita to you or nah?

[Anonymous No.8228273]

>>8228267
I personally think it depends. It can be dressed up or down. I started getting into fairy kei recently and it will be awesome getting salopettes to work with both lolita and fairy.

>pic of a salo coorded into lolita
Not the best coord though, but you get the idea.

[Anonymous No.8228276]

>>8228267
Nah unless it's got the puffy skirt shape.

[Anonymous No.8228289]

>>8228260
will post if i see it, or i may buy it myself-

>>8228273
>>8228276
i own 2 AP salos, and they look terrible with too much puff, a little is cute though
it might have to do with the material of the salo, chiffon could look alright with an underskirt to extend the skirt length, but i don't think that would work with my chocolate heavier fabric ones

[Anonymous No.8228310]

>>8224435
>complaining about a dress that's undebatably lolita-acceptable instead of the shit AP's been coming out with that barely covers most girls nether regions
For real, OP?

[Anonymous No.8228313]

>>8228273
damn those are some amazing eyes

[Anonymous No.8228320]

>>8224537
>La Biblioteque not lolita
You really need to spend more time researching the fashion because you honestly just don't know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.8228327]

>>8225663
This shouldn't have to be explained, but a dress doesn't have to be extremely elaborate to qualify as lolita acceptable. It's about the shape more than anything. You can totally fit a petticoat under that dress and it's not too short. It would definitely work with the right side pieces.

[Anonymous No.8228339]

>>8225596
I think what OP was trying to say is the last 2 are lolita and the other ones aren't

[Anonymous No.8228340]

>>8224455
This looks like it could be used either way for a long length lolita outfit, or possibly an aristo outfit. More lolita though than anything. BABY have released full length Empire-cut dresses like this that have been most definitely lolita, not aristo. Same goes for IW - just look at their recent tulips maxi dress. That wasn't aristocrat at all. Longer length does not automatically equal aristocrat on a lolita dress.

[Anonymous No.8228341]

>>8228339
No, they're trying to say the two JetJ dresses aren't lolita by comparing them to normalfag brand dresses. They're saying the only reason they fly in lolita is because they're JetJ. Reread it their post.

[Anonymous No.8228342]

>>8228339
also goes for >>8228320 - assuming it's the one with the books. I know absolutely fuck all about brands and brand prints so

[Anonymous No.8228348]

>>8228341
right I really don't see how that makes sense, the shapes are very different to me from lolita. in that case I absolutely agree with what I replied to, OP is an idiot

[Anonymous No.8228366]

>>8228341
Pretty much. Or, if you're going to consider those dresses lolita, you can't exactly disqualify the almost identical ones just because Muh Burando. But that's a slippery slope. It all feeds into general argument of where the line can be drawn with other 'loliable' offbrand items (or even indie brands). Shit flies because it's X brand, but I also understand you can't drag any old shit out of your closet or WalMart and call it lolita.

[Anonymous No.8228369]

>>8228348
>the shapes are very different
because the women wearing them don't tend to wear petticoats, the dresses are the same

[Anonymous No.8228374]

>>8228320
I've been in lolita for 8 years. I know there are some elements I just have to get over (fashions change, that's the way it is) but the current lolita is still so strict about people mixing offbrand into their wardrobe but at the same time the lines are becoming INCREDIBLY blurred when brand pieces start looking like offbrand. Lolita has changed drastically over the years.

[Anonymous No.8228384]

>>8228217
That's really cute. I like salopettes in lolita when then they are the right length and shape. If you're short, they're a great alternative to a jsk that would otherwise look like a sad tent.

I don't think this >>8228273 works though. Alot of salos appear to be more a line and this looks overstuffed with awkward underskirt ruffles halfway down, giving the whole thing a huge lower case n/upside down u shape. It would be nice if the girl was shorter allowing for less underskirt tiers and not so much poof. I really want this salopette myself actually. Just going to check the length now.

[Anonymous No.8228442]

>>8228369
Those dresses are a good deal shorter than Rosery Slennel and none of them are comparable enough to La Biblioteque to justify that image.

[Anonymous No.8228458]

>>8228206

lol, that praise is too high, the summary's missing some parts, eg the brief fling with gyaru that paved the way for big hime hair and better makeup to enter lolita (if you compare the earlier GLBs they tend towards barely any makeup). Salopettes are commonly explained as AP's dalliance with fairy kei, miniskirts were also credited to fairy kei's influence.

Personally I don't consider salopettes as being strictly non lolita, like you said, the design is very lolita-like on a few of them. But with regards to the definition of what is lolita, it's a very difficult line to draw -- a little too wide, and we open the floodgates for all kinds of snowflakes and unrelated companies to come in and tack on the label onto whatever. Meanwhile the other side of the world simply keeps exploring different ways for lolitas to express their style.

Almost all of the problems with defining what is lolita boils down to this dilemma of trying to keep out those only want the label for their own selfish reason, while trying to keep in all the odd things brands keep inventing.

As for the death of lolita, the brands that are heavily invested in lolita will certainly do their best to prevent it since it would mean the end of their company, but future lolita trends might not be anything we recognise. Hence we now have salopettes and tea-length dresses, because that's what lolitas now want. Tea length dresses have actually been around for a long time (aatp's Hymn jsk, 2006), they just weren't as popular as they were now.

Or to put another way, "lolita" has already died a few times, with each major change in style the older style died off and the newer one took up the name and continute marching on. Some old school lolita are now considered ita by the newer lolitas. As someone on egl once said, future lolita might not be anything we recognise.

[Anonymous No.8228516]

>>8228458
Thanks for the answer, anon-sama.

I have noticed the lack of makeup on early lolita, but I thought it was to emulate the porcelain doll look and never quite thought about the influence of gyaru on lolita fashion. I know that the influence for the now standard silhouette comes from 60’s fashion but that’s all I had. I’ll look more into what influenced lolita so I can understand this better.

So, if you draw a parallel with mainstream fashion lolita has evolved the same way longer skirts evolved into mini-skirts. There was a demand and the market fulfilled it and now we have both styles of skirts. (Ok, I know that there’s a lot more to it, I’m just trying to make a simple comparison here.) In lolita you had oldschool styles that adapted so much that turned into something different, making now two things that walk side by side.
Between lolita substyles there’s always one on vogue and others soon to be. The styles don’t disappear completely, they just get less usual and start to be considered “ita” and they even might come back.
In the same way we have “70’s themed parties” we do have “oldschool meetups”, but there are some fashion elements that float between newer and older styles like wristcuffs or the use of waist ties and that’s what ties it together and defines lolita.

>Almost all of the problems with defining what is lolita boils down to this dilemma of trying to keep out those only want the label for their own selfish reason, while trying to keep in all the odd things brands keep inventing.

In mainstream fashion you have brands that cater to subcultures and they both are led by the definition of the style while creating the style itself. Lolita is a subculture itself that branches out to other substyles in the same way, idk, goth does. So it all really boils down to what you said, it has to reinvent itself and still remain lolita.

I don’t know if I made a lot of sense here, I’m just trying.

[Anonymous No.8228677]

>>8228516

You're not doing too badly, and yes, people have compared old school lolita with older fashion styles. The changing skirt length thing is new, for a long time lolitas just preferred to say "not everything brands release is lolita, miniskirts and salopettes obviously aren't". We're getting so inundated with shorter-than-short AP dresses and tea-length skirts at the moment that it's getting hard to ignore that, though.

You can check the time that gyaru started influencing lolita by checking around the time Btssb released their Marie Antoinette jsk, I believe that one took influence from hime gyaru. AP had several releases that were gyaru-influenced -- Lady Rose, Fleur Humming, and this one cutsew that was a halter tank top with bare shoulders and bicep-length armwarmers (so you definitely had to show off bare shoulders).

I haven't heard about 60s being the influence for lolita getting poofier, though. Would you like to elaborate on that?

>defining lolita

Ah, another history lesson/time for grandma to reminisce (cont. next post)

[Anonymous No.8228693]

>>8228677

The trouble lolita has that mainstream fashion doesn't have, and why it needed a definition that kept outsiders out, is that a lot of individuals had their own reasons for identifying as lolita, but had zero interest in what the fashion was all about.

There were girls who just wanted to belong to a group, any group, so they'd take any dress with a flared skirt and declare themselves lolita. Mostly this involved ordinary dresses that didn't even have enough flare for a petticoat, and office blouses that looked like office blouses. From here came most of the lolita rules, and the dislike for "offbrand" or "loliable", because these girls didn't actually wear lolita, in fact, they didn't wear anything except mainstream fashion. They just wanted to "be lolitas".

When that didn't work, they'd declare themselves "lifestyle lolitas" and said that even though they didn't own a stitch of fashion they were "lolita at heart" because they liked to bake and read, apparently both are lolita pastimes. This is the origin of disdain some lolitas have for "lifestyle lolita" or "lolita hobbies", and why you must own some lolita clothes if you wanted to call yourself lolita.


Then there are the girls who pulled out their kindergarten photos (I'm not kidding), pointed to the puff sleeves and flared skirts, and then used this as an argument that they've been into lolita since they were four, and _then they used this to pull rank by saying because they had been in the fashion for a lot longer, their opinions were automatically more correct than anybody elses. All this based on a photo of their children's dress.

[Anonymous No.8228699]

>>8228693

There are those that try to make money off us by using the "lolita" label. At one point eBay was lousy with cosplay-makers who made lolita replicas out of cheap fabric and even cheaper, stiff lace. This was back during old school days, so imagine a dress made of cheap, tacky material, covered in stiff, scratchy lace, and outsiders getting the impression that lolita is a cheap fashion because they mistook a cheap eBay replica for the real thing. Those were the original "lacemonsters", because all that cheap lace looked very ugly next to the real thing, and from those terrible replicas lolitas started putting emphasis on quality and good lace.

And then there's this blogger (sorry, I don't want to mention her name or give her blog any traffic) who used the label like some sensationalist springboard to try and get herself into some kind of fame, book deals, tv deals and so on. I think she tried selling clothes to newbies for a little while hoping nobody realised she wasn't really into lolita and was a terrible ita. She has done things like crash a lolita fashion show for publicity. And by crashing the show, I don't mean she simply showed up. She had a friend film herself jumping up on stage and disrupting her show, editing it to sound like the audience applauded her, then uploaded the video saying she brought some life to a boring show or something. Things got bad enough that lolitas said they would boycott Tokyopop's English version of the GLB if she somehow managed to get in, because it showed that whoever edited the English version didn't have a clue about lolita.

Pretty much a lot of the things that lolitas are negative towards (shorter skirts, offbrand, lifestyle, ero-loli, etc) is due to all these, hence why lolita seeks to keep them out.

[Anonymous No.8229245]

>>8228273
>30 year old wearing lolita

[Anonymous No.8229259]

>>8228313
Have you never heard of circle lenses?

[Anonymous No.8230364]

>>8228677
Well, I said 60s but I meant 50s, sorry about that. :P
And sorry about taking this long to answer, I need to be on my laptop for that. Also, english is not my first language so I’m sorry if it’s a bit hard to read.

The whole Harajuku thing started after WWII, which ended in 1945. There were American settlements all over Japan and one of those settlements was called Washington Heights, and it was located in Shibuya. They used to sell american goods there and this attracted japanese youth and that’s where the western influence began. The area grew further in 1964 with the Summer Olympics and became a place for new artists and fashion designers.
The Harajuku movement was all about counterculture, it’s about going against their traditional values. The kawaii movement started in the 70s but I’ll try to stick to what I think influences lolita specifically.
Rune Naito was an artists active from 1950~1970 who was one of the pioneers on the kawaii culture we know today, together with Miyako Maki, who was a shoujo manga illustrator that created Licca-chan and later on ended her career after marriage. The works of both of them were heavily influenced by contemporary western fashion.

(CONT.)

[Anonymous No.8230367]

>>8230364
While there’s a goth portion of lolita, the whole looking like a porcelain doll thing, the fashion was influenced by the kawaii culture just as much. It becomes clear when we compare images. The name gothic lolita and the whole aristocrat/goth look came with Moi-même-Moitié, in 1999. The western goth subculture began in 80s.
I remember reading somewhere that Angelic Pretty even used old Macy’s catalogs as reference, but I’m having a hard time looking for my reference here. So it might not come from a reliable source. And there’s also the possibility I’m talking out of my ass here, but this is the summary of my conclusions.
I personally think it’s a bit silly just saying that “lolita is inspired by rococo” because it’s waaaay more complex than that.

>Then there are the girls who pulled out their kindergarten photos (I'm not kidding), pointed to the puff sleeves and flared skirts, and then used this as an argument that they've been into lolita since they were four, and _then they used this to pull rank by saying because they had been in the fashion for a lot longer, their opinions were automatically more correct than anybody elses. All this based on a photo of their children's dress.

This is way too funny.

[Anonymous No.8230394]

>>8224762
Very interesting and good points, I also enjoyed reading this. It seems like OP is just making some assumptions based on one dress and their limited experience but your essay puts things into context.

[Anonymous No.8230397]

>>8229245
>implying 20 year olds wearing it is not already ridiculous and laughable to outsiders
If you give a shit about being "too old" for lolita, you're doing it wrong.

[Anonymous No.8230399]

>>8228699
>And then there's this blogger (sorry, I don't want to mention her name or give her blog any traffic) who used the label like some sensationalist springboard to try and get herself into some kind of fame, book deals, tv deals and so on.
I forgot about La Sardina. Is she still active? She was like the Venus of the lates 2000's only so much worse.

[Anonymous No.8230405]

>>8225597
It's not going to be mid-tit on those of us whose boobs sit up high on our chest and aren't huge. I can tell by looking at her arm that the bust section lower seam would end lower than my boobs but I'm a B cup. I wouldn't wear this cut if I were bigger than a C cup though.

[Anonymous No.8230413]

>>8228384
I own that salopette and it's just so pretty! It works well with lolita. The fabric is light and it doesn't look too saggy as some salos do.

And as I said, >>8228273 doesn't have the best coord, but it was more about the idea and it was the only example I could think of the top of my head. And you are right, would look better with less poof and underskirt showing.

[Anonymous No.8230667]

>>8229245
Okay, I should give up lolita now. Obviously I must focus on producing crotch fruit and wear north face hoodies, leggings and uggs for now until forever. thank you anon, for setting me straight. I would've never known any different if it weren't for you.

You must be so wise for your young age.

[Anonymous No.8230701]

>>8230667
>north face hoodies, leggings and uggs
no you're 10 years too late for that
and judging by your post so is your emotional maturity

[Anonymous No.8230720]

>>8225709
just this one essay would be a great blog post. you would not even have to write anything else.

maybe lolita guide chan can feature it as an anonymous (or credited) "guest article"?

[Anonymous No.8230729]

>>8230701
In my city the uniform is leggings/skinny jeans with riding boots and a basic top/sweater from aritzia

[Anonymous No.8231173]

>>8230667

Don't respond to jelly bitter trolls.

[Anonymous No.8231464]

>>8228226
I'm no lolita expert, but why do so many loitas wear that style of eye makeup when their eyes are close together, it makes them look like a cyclops.

[Anonymous No.8231469]

>>8231464
I's supposed too make their eyes look bigger. Honestly every time I see it all I can think of is drag makeup.

[Anonymous No.8231496]

>>8231469
I always feel like they would look way better without the white highlight in the inner corner.

[Anonymous No.8231500]

>>8231464
It's supposed to brighten the inner corners of your eyes so you don't look grungy and tired, but it is very easy to overdo, as you've seen.

[Anonymous No.8231513]

>>8230367
The 50s (or pseudo 50s) influence is clear in alot of lolita dresses, from halternecks to big bows, the popularity of nautical themes, poodle motifs, huge poof, polka dots to halternecks. It's confusing for new people if they cant tell the difference between AP and Hell Bunny from time to time

[Anonymous No.8232140]

>>8230364
>>8230367

Interesting stuff, anon. I've always wondered where it came from, but could not find a decent, reliable source (well, I kinda gave up after a while, I don't speak Japanese and there were rather fewer English sources when I was actively looking).

If you don't mind my asking, do you happen to know where Pink House and otome fits in? One of the earliest Kera snaps seems to have been lolita done with an otome brand, although it might just have been that lolita was photographed very often. I've heard both that Pink House was the forerunner for lolita, or that both Pink House and lolita came into being seperately, borrowed off each other, and coexisted at the same time.

And yeah, egl somehow often attracts weirdos doing funny things that don't make sense. You could have a wander through getoffegl if you want more weird people stories.
>>8230399

No clue. I forgot about her too. She seems to have dropped lolita I guess? Although some searches still bring up her blog.

[Anonymous No.8232149]

>>8231513

I'm going to have to disagree, anon. Early lolita was kind of "weird-looking" and didn't really look like retro dresses. Some of the street snaps featured very flat petticoats, and VM once had a pattern in one of the GLBs for a very flat trapeze skirt. Maybe they got the idea of petticoats from the 50s, but the basic idea was about porcelain dolls, not 50s fashion itself.

The retro-looking lolita started popping up with Metamorphose's Old records, AP's Fantasic Dolly. The dresses that you posted are fairly recent as you can tell from the photography.

[Anonymous No.8232152]

>>8232140

Oh, a typo

lolita was *not* photographed very often.

[Anonymous No.8232168]

>>8230720

>a blog with only one post forever

That's... an interesting concept.

I do find that this topic does come up a lot, might be worthwhile to ask lolita guide-chan to include it, but I don't really know what section it goes into -- unless we want to add an extra volume titled "The Recent History of Lolita and why everything looks like Lolita"?

[Anonymous No.8232477]

>>8232168
Do it anon, publish that shit, one way or another.

[Anonymous No.8232496]

>>8232168
Best solution would be a single great guest blog post on a popular blog.

[Anonymous No.8232519]

>>8232149
holy shit that blouse? (is that a blouse? I can't tell jfc) the chest ? what? Her sleeves remind me of Josie from Dragon age inquisition

[Anonymous No.8232551]

>>8232149
It's just occure to me that the current trend is to have long sleeved bloses in a contrasting color rather than give the illusion of a long sleeved op

[Anonymous No.8232562]

>>8232149
Sorry, I wasn't talking about early lolita. I think it's pretty clear those are all very recent pictures. A more realistic early influence is from the peter pan collar dresses that got popular between 1905-1950, then saw an 80s revival and again in the present day. They wouldn't look put of place next to Jane Marple or IW

[Anonymous No.8232624]

>>8230720
Seconding this.

[Anonymous No.8232827]

>>8232140
Pink House, Milk, Angelic Pretty, BTSSB... All those brands surfaced in the 70s and 80s. While Innocent World, MMM opened business in late 90s, together with Emily Temple Cute. Back in the 70s otome fashion was about looking like a shoujo maiden, something out of a romantic novel. Like Anne of the Green Gables, which is from the Edwardian era. The anime, Akage no An, is from 79 and portraits a fashion style from late 1890, if I’m not wrong.

I’m attaching an image (1) to compare what otome was like in early 80s vs 1890 fashion. While otome was like that, lolita came a bit further back. Early lolita looks a lot like 1880s dolls or maybe from even earlier than that. Also adding some pics (2) from Momoko, from Kamikaze Girls. I know it’s from 2005, but I’ll get to it.

Lolita was gothic, it wasn’t “cute”. Even though girls were emulating dolls this was something that emerged in the club scene, it wasn’t like that.

As I said before, kawaii culture started getting around in the 70s and moe culture term was coined in the 90s.

The turning point was the 00s. You can see on Kamikaze Girls styles from before and after that, even though the dresses keep the Edwardian vibe they started getting shorter and poofier. There is when it began looking like what we now have defined as lolita. While lolita went straight for kawaii and got a childish appearance, I dare to say, the otome brands turned to a more toned down and moe version of it all. Adding pics (3) too, Angelic Set from 2005 and Victorian Maiden .

So, what I wanna say it that even though those styles started out together they were never quite the same thing. Also they were never so distant from each other. You can see that with fairy kei and decora, for example.

[Anonymous No.8234233]

>>8232519

It's just a sleeve with elastic around random parts of it. Like the white dress here, second row from bottom.

It's a very bad look for fatty-chans. So glad it's out of vogue now.

[Anonymous No.8234291]

>>8230399
She was still active by at least a year or two ago, as my mother tried to link me some newer article she'd written that she saw on fb.

[Anonymous No.8238072]

>>8234291
Yep, she is still active, I just checked. Her 'shop my closet' thing on the sidebar leads to Light in the Box.
Kek.
For someone who has had this many advantages, so much exposure and all those resources to be this unsuccessful in the subcultures she claims to be in is almost an embarrassment.

But it seems she still does alt modeling photo shoots and creeps around with her odd posse and does travel guide and hosting things so still trying to get famous.
She's one I did half expect to turn up in porn or something.
She's pretty terrifying without makeup.

[Anonymous No.8238213]

>>8232496
>>8230720

So I tried sending guidebook-person an ask this morning, but tumblr won't allow me to send links in the message, so I can't link her back to this thread. Any other ways of contacting her?

[Anonymous No.8238237]

>>8238213
Just use 'cgl thread 8224435'
If she pastes it into search, this thread pops right up.

[Anonymous No.8238545]

>>8238237

D'oh. Thanks anon. Don't mind my dumb.

[Anonymous No.8239735]

>>8238213
replied to you on the blog!
short version: i screencapped >>8224762 and >>8228693 and linked them on the blog for those that might be interested. i mean, shit, i don't think i could word these write-ups any better.

[Anonymous No.8239746]

>>8239735
Might be better to copy and paste it with a link to the archive than screencap it, which is a little too 4chan.

[Anonymous No.8239761]

>>8239746
i'd rather have the screencaps; it takes the best pieces of the thread and puts them in an easy-to-consume format for newcomers to potentially look at. i don't know why they would be "a little too 4chan". slapping a link to an entire thread seems more 4chan to me.

[Anonymous No.8239846]

>>8239761
Because the pictures are obviously from 4chan anyway and also the wide-ass monitor you screencapped on makes it hard as fuck to read. I'd rather see it in pretty text fitting your theme

[Anonymous No.8239863]

>>8239846
considering that the blog has always been a 4chan-based effort (it's literally said in the side bar), i fail to see your point. i don't know why the images are hard to read because of my resolution either? plus i don't want to just have a block of text taking up the front page of the blog. this just seems easier and non-intrusive.

[Anonymous No.8239909]

>>8239863
Because you gave to scroll sideways while reading each line on smallest monitors or tablets, or deal with having it at a small size. People use readability extensions for a reason, and finding super wide lines of text hard to read is one of them.

As for the comment about 4chan I wasn't suggesting disguising it, just that it's ridiculous to say normal text with a discreet link is more 4chan when you're literally posting screencast.

[Anonymous No.8239918]

>>8230667

Better hurry, after 30 your reproductive prospects diminish RAPIDLY

[Anonymous No.8239922]

>>8231496

I agree, it's not like lolitas are doing any kind of performance or anything where people need to be able to make out your features from a distance away.

[Anonymous No.8240891]

>>8239735

Wow, thanks, guide anon. The images are readable on my computer, and I think they're definitely better than nothing at all.

If you're open to it, maybe I can do a proper write-up as a google document later on? I don't have the time for it right now, it may take a few months.

[Anonymous No.8240915]

>>8239918
It's more like in your 40's
it begins to diminish in your 30's, but it's not "rapidly"

[Anonymous No.8241021]

>>8229245
misako aoki is 32 tho