The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com Style Thursday, February 9, 2017 — 5 As far as style goes, January 2017 is the month of the man. The fashion industry raked in millions after shows in Paris, Milan, New York, Florence — you name it. The farthest reaching fashion media feeds gave menswear its due, Vogue publishing its usual glorious photo slides of each collection and hundreds of articles were published raving over or criticizing this season’s batch. Yet as relevant as it may be, I simply haven’t kept up with men’s fashion, really at all in comparison to the way I keep up with women’s fashion. The most I’d seen or paid attention to it was in unisex collections or styles because simply put, androgyny is in. But before scrolling through the slides of the most popular, recent runway collections whose designers I’d at least heard of, I made a number of assumptions about my expectations for modern menswear, namely in comparison to womenswear. It would be more practical, less flashy and, above all, boring (sexist, I know). But upon finally thinking about it and scrolling through the collections, I wondered why I hadn’t at least viewed men’s fashion week. From a personal standpoint, I buy plenty of men’s clothing at a thrift store and would agree the men’s section has infinitely better sweaters. Entertainment-wise, the spectacle of menswear runway shows rival the finesse, detail and extravagance exhibited in any women’s runway collection. The men’s fashion industry currently stands valued at $440 billion and incredibly famous and acclaimed designers like Raf Simmons and Marcus Wainwright made their debut in menswear. So here are a few thoughts of my favorite menswear collections of the season, interpreted by an almost completely blank slate. Nick Graham, apparently the maker of some of the greatest suits to walk the earth, debuted a Mars-themed collection for New York Fashion Week, hosted by, you guessed it, actually probably not: Bill Nye. The patterns and colors were bold and inventive but just understated enough to maintain the integrity of a dressy, professional suit. I completely agree with the hype. Raf Simmons: because of his work with Dior and Calvin Klein, this is biased in his favor. His recent immigration and succession of Calvin Klein has garnered plenty of attention. Regardless of whether or not his menswear collection expressed any of the recent uproar in regards to American immigration policy or sentiment about his new status as a U.S. citizen, the collection was unmistakably themed with pieces like an unforgettable “I heart New York” sweater and working class overcoats donned by especially thin models. His work was oversized, occasionally cinched with caution tape and plastic belts emboldened with trademark New York sayings. Much of it included exciting graphics and a remarkably unisex appeal. Hugo Boss, unfortunately, was what I expected to dislike about menswear. Everything was clean- cut but nothing remotely exciting. Maybe I’m simple-minded or misinformed for wanting some color, any color. My brief encounter with menswear forces me to conclude that I’ve been missing out. As womenswear and menswear continue to collide and mix, menswear just might reign supreme one of these days. JOHN VARVATOS New York Fashion Week 2017: Men’s in review Men’s Fashion Week in New York was an eventful time — with shows representing every designer from Fear of God to Vetements (seriously, check this one out). While there are many shows worth discussing, I want to focus on NYFW:M on a broader scale: Raf Simons Raf unveiled his Fall 2017 Men’s Collection in New York this past week. Having recently moved to New York for his new position at Calvin Klein, he seemed to draw from the feel of New York City, combining boxy and checkered topcoats with “I heart NY” sweaters. “I wanted to go back to how I experienced New York in the beginning and combine it with how I experience it now. So this fresh young direction to the city and everything it stands for—and what is happening now,” Simons said when asked about his inspiration for the show in Vogue. In reference to the current political climate, Vogue asked Simons if President Donald Trump’s election has influenced his work, and while he says it has not, his desire to represent the rich history of the city and all of its people is an inherent celebration of the immigrant narrative in this country. “Ask me do I think that you should stand up against what is happening in this country, then I say yes,” he also added. While Simons gave credit to the beauty of the city and its rich history, it wasn’t the NYC sweaters that stood out to me. The detail that made many of the looks was the cinching on the outerwear. It’s something that has become a staple of many Dries van Noten shirts, and it really allows some outerwear, that could otherwise be viewed as somewhat plain, to shine. Simons’ coverage in the news has not been exclusive to his eponymous line, though. Calvin Klein has also been making waves these past few weeks, giving the Belgian designer a jam-packed schedule. Coming off of showing his first designs since taking over as Calvin Klein’s Chief Creative Officer, where they announced that customers could schedule appointments for made to measure clothing, the fashion house recently took to Instagram to let the world know that they have changed their logo. This is all in anticipation for the Fall/Winter 2017 ready-to- wear collection which is set to show on February 10th in New York. The Runway Gets Political There has never been a more fitting time for fashion shows to be in New York than this past week. While President Donald Trump’s proposed immigration ban was sending shockwaves through the country, there were dozens of fashion houses with foreign designers, foreign employees and foreign models showing their collections for, among other people, Americans. To me, it perfectly encapsulates the point that many people have tried to drive home over the last week: Our country is strengthened by all of the people from all over the world who come here to have an impact. While most of these designers will soon return to their respective countries, they did not waste any time to voice their opinions (both on the runway and off). Detroit-raised designer John Varvatos told the New York Times, “Half the people in my company are from someplace else” in response to Trump’s executive order, echoing the fears of many people in this country, especially as we await the court decision on the ban. Of the most on-the-nose demonstrations on the runway, Nick Graham welcomed Buzz Aldrin and Bill Nye to his Mars-themed show, where Nye addressed those who deny climate change. Meanwhile, Robert Jamesmade statements on the immigration ban, with models sporting signs with messages like “Made in a Sanctuary City” or “Bridges not Walls.” Both can be seen here. Fashion, like other forms of art, can be a powerful way to send a message. There are thousands of people who go to the shows, write about them online and end up purchasing the items when they hit stockists. For many people in the United States and around the world, this is a tumultuous time, and it’s reassuring to see designers using their platforms to express their discontent, even at the potential cost of customers. An outsider on menswear Style writer Sarah Agnone explores Men’s Fashion Week piece by piece taking a look at designers, costs and clothes SARAH AGNONE Daily Arts Writer STYLE REVIEW NYFW designers consider political implications of fashion DAILY FOOD COLUMN There are no quick & easy shortcuts in the kitchen Don’t be mislead by those Tasty videos — fast and good are mutually exclusive according to the Daily’s food columnist When it comes to cooking, fast and good are generally mutually exclusive. By fast, I’m not talking about the impossible rate at which Iron Chef contestants chop carrots (At the speed of light. Don’t fact check that). I’m talking about clickbait articles like “10 Cooking Shortcuts Everyone Needs to Know” or “30 Dinners in Under 30 minutes.” Fast and easy are often used interchangeably, but lists of tips and tricks that boast speed are the ones to look out for. Yes, maybe some recipes are more easily and quickly prepared than others, but by nature, not by method. If you’re taking more than several minutes to fry an egg, you’re probably doing something wrong. As food and cooking have becoming increasingly present online and on social media, the discussion surrounding them has changed. We’re a technologically driven society obsessed with what’s fast and easy. We don’t have time to dedicate to cooking — we’d rather have our Apple Watch make our dinner for us or watch someone make dinner in a Tasty video instead. “Drunk Uncle” digression aside, I’m here to tell you (in my very professional opinion) that in cooking, as with life, there are no shortcuts. That’s right, call your mom to tell her she was right. Alert the press. Or just tweet about it. There are no shortcuts. Stop microwaving your eggs and putting frozen chicken straight into the pan (it has to thaw first, c’mon). While some shortcuts are kitchen experiments executed at the hands of desperate, time- crunched cooks, others are much more nefarious. Into the latter category fall clickbait disguised as time-saving hacks. Less experienced cooks fall victim to these hacks, shaping their culinary experience with two-bit tricks designed to garner views rather than inform readers. Growing up, I frequently visited my grandmother for the sole purpose of learning how to make her signature rugelach. They were fluffy, oozing with a rich chocolate filling and sprinkled with a sugar, butter and flour mixture that turned golden brown in the oven. They bore little resemblance to the dense, dry cookies of the same name sold in many grocery stores and even traditional bakeries. They were an entity of their own, stealthily categorized in the same group of recipes defining the traditional Ashkenzi pastry. The process of making these rugelach-sweet bun hybrid was nothing short of involved (mostly on my grandma’s part as I was only seven or eight at the time of my interest in making these treats). To save me the anticipation of waiting for the dough to rise — I was, predictably, quite impatient during the whole ordeal — my grandma would make the dough the night before. To this day, I still don’t know how she made it. It was just this magical, massive ball of risen yeast and flour that was revealed in its enormous bowl under a checkered towel every time I arrived for our day of baking. I was in awe of the bowl’s contents. Somehow, by some process of adding ingredients and shaping them, my grandma created the foundation for what we would spend hours assembling and baking. It was hard for my young mind to grasp the actual work that went into making something like that, and looking back now, I regret taking it for granted. To assemble the rugelach, we’d carefully roll out the dough and cut it into triangles, slather each piece generously with chocolate spread (something mysterious that came out of a plastic tub with Hebrew lettering) and roll them up before dabbing them with melted butter and sprinkling the crumb topping over them. Waiting for the rugelach to rise again then bake was agonizing. I would watch the oven and try to will it to turn the dough golden brown faster. It was a trying several minutes even waiting for them to cool out on the counter once the fragrant, steaming pastries were removed from the oven. This process took countless hours of preparation, but it was worth it. Not just for the final result, but for the time spent making them (however impatiently passed). The memory of making rugelach is one that I hold on to dearly. No shortcut could replace or even resemble that. In an era of increasing instant gratification and dissociation from reality, it’s easy to forget that cooking, however time-straining, is a grounding and nourishing process. Using shortcuts only detracts from its benefits. Rather than following those “lazy cooks” guides for “quick and easy meals,” try making your meal with a different adjective. And please, please stop using the microwave to cook raw food. SHIR AVINADAV Can we dig a six-foot-deep ditch for ill-fitting, light- wash, high-wasted jeans? Specifically, those that resemble something your grandpa would wear to senior breakfast with a matching pair of white orthopedic New Balances. While mindlessly perusing the internet, I came across an image of Malia Obama on her first day of her new internship with the Weinstein Company in New York City. The image was upsetting. First, because it served as an unwanted reminder that I still do not have an internship for this summer (yes, mom, I am working on it). But primarily because she was wearing a pair of jeans so heinous your mother wouldn’t even touch them. I’ve seen these jeans walking around every day, but this particular pair heartily shoved me over the edge. Their unabashed ugliness served as a gamma- ray machine, transforming me from a mild-mannered style writer into a green monster seething with distaste for the style. If you have a pair of mom jeans, I implore you to burn them. The appeal of mom jeans lies in their rebellion. To my knowledge, no one has ever purchased mom jeans under the impression that they are good looking. What makes them cool is their ugliness, and the undaunted attitude that accompanies wearing them. I think this notion of “cool” is a fallacy. You have to have a semblance of originality to be a non- conformist. Mom jeans, once bold and unique, have firmly dug their gnarly toes into the mainstream mud. Their moment has passed. No one is applauding your sartorial bravery and distinction; unfortunately, because the trend has become so widely adopted, you’re left looking unoriginal. I should clarify, my main issue is not that they are fundamentally unflattering. I subscribe wholeheartedly to man-repelling, wearing aggressive and eccentric styles even if — especially if — they are deemed ugly by the opposite sexW. At the core of man-repelling (a term coined by Leandra Medine) is the notion of dressing exclusively for yourself based singularly on your personal style. My dispute with the pants is that I perceive them as a superficial imitation of this stance. When I see a girl wearing baggy trousers, I do not view it as an empowered statement, a declaration of independence from a beauty- oriented style of dressing. When I see a girl wearing them, I view it as an appropriation of a trend in an obvious attempt to look alternative. There’s nothing less cool than trying desperately hard to look cool. However, I may be in the minority on this. The article in which I initially saw the image lauded Malia. Comparing her outfit to something that Rihanna would wear (primarily for her choice of coat and shoes, but still). And this was Vogue, no less. All fashion is subjective if you wear mom jeans and love ‘em, you’re in your rights to tell me to ‘eff off. TESS TOBIN Daily Arts Writer Put away those mom jeans and defy the ugly fashion trend Bad Jeans, Good Genes STYLE NOTEBOOK NARESH IYENGAR Daily Arts Writer STYLE REVIEW When I see a girl wearing them, I view it as an appropriation of a trend in an obvious attempt to look alternative