I wonder at what point the world of fashion became a runaway runway joke for ordinary people. Cuffs/no cuffs, hemlines up/hemlines down, collars open/button-down collars/no collars, hoodies not hats, pantyhose and Spanx, short boots/high boots, pumps/ballet slippers, belly button blouse/long shirt blouse, low waist/empire waist.

No bra/push-up bra? Padded bra? Okay, that one has some historical significance because before the padded bra, Kleenex was a part of the full-bosom look.

Designers are desperately running out of ideas on how to cosmetically alter clothes so that stylishly naive people keep buying new outfits with every change of season.

Have you read a fashion article lately, featuring a particular designer or a new line of clothes? They use phrases like “imaging and intriguing,” “unique and soulful,” “vulnerable and aspiring,” “candor and subtext.”  Clothes! “Emotionally intellectual?” Overcoats that are “upscale and elegant?” A shirt that is “redolent yet intrusive?”

One line of new fashion was described as “funked-up” and I thought yeah, they nearly got it right that time.

As far as I can tell, the latest fashions come in two categories: smoke and funhouse mirrors. Sorry but when I look at a sports coat that is “hand-painted” and “fashioned from Pashtun blankets of Northern Pakistan then shot with Lurex,” I don’t see a jacket. I see a racket.

Remember bell-bottoms and Nehru jackets? If there was justice in crimes of fashion, those designers would be getting out of jail right about now.

And what about the prices? “A wool cashmere Italian swing coat in menswear check fabric is $225; an asymmetrical cashmere jacket with inventive black pleating is $225 and a grey kimono coat inspired by Brunello Cucinelli is $245.” Wouldn’t that kimono coat be a hundred bucks less if “Tony the Tailor” had inspired it?

I’m looking at a photo spread in the Toronto Star’s fashion section with three suits that were uniquely designed, custom-fitted, image consulted, linearly flattered and channelled by George Clooney, and I swear I’ve seen these clothes on the rack at Moores. In another shot, the slim male model is wearing a black trench coat by Haight & Ashbury but I’m betting the label reads “Army & Navy.”

And the quote from the designer that explains this “sombre and yet subtle” line of fashionable menswear: “I have an alluring dark quality that’s mysterious.” Yeah, so does Russell Williams, but I’m not anxious to be seen wearing the clothes that guy’s been modelling.

The fashion models that show these clothes look like either the cast from *The Night of The Living Dead* or a bad ad for veganism. When they wire mannequins to walk on a runway, fashion models will be out of work.

Sorry, but I don’t buy clothes that are “classically appliquéd,” whatever that means. Nor do I shop for garments because I am “this moody intellect with so much going on underneath.” That fact is, one big reason I buy clothes is to cover up what’s going on underneath, if you know what I mean.

I think we could all use a stern reminder of the historical significance of clothes that dates back 100,000 years to the earliest days on earth of Homo sapiens. Forgive my arrogance here, but I was after all a history major and, if memory serves me, the first cave woman was swaddled in the stretched skins of a woolly mammoth when Fred got angry at Barney because he was always peeking at Wilma while she did jumping jacks down by the river.

Also, clothes became very useful during the Ice Age. Hard hats were all the rage during the Stone Age and tie-dyed, psychedelic ugly-as-sin clothes became very popular during the Age of Aquarius. We think. Nobody from the ‘60s can remember that era, and all written records used the language of peace signs and happy faces.

I think I see where the fashion industry is headed. Designers have created every unnecessary change from top to bottom and the only place they have to go now is inside out. A bustier used to be an undergarment and now it’s used as an outer top. Just a word of warning for men: Superman may look great wearing his gotchies on the outside, but that’s probably not a good look for you.

So yeah, I dress for comfort, according to the temperature, and with a mild sense of occasion. I aim to be presentable. I also wear shorts until it snows and whites until Christmas, but that’s the last gasp of rebellion I have left. I know I could be arrested for wearing my Harris Tweed jacket in public, but that’s just the kind of maverick I am. Plus, it’s warm and goes well with my jeans.

No, unless you are intentionally dressing to get laughs like, say, Lady Gaga or Chuckles The Clown or Don Cherry, keep it simple: clean and comfortable in colours that would not clash with a crossing guard’s vest.

Here's to the fashion industry, where every night is Halloween.

OCTOBER 2011 SENIOR LIVING MAGAZINE VANCOUVER & LOWER MAINLAND