And the bride wore pants
By Christa Terry
The wondrous variety of different sorts of people in this world means that there are many, many different sorts of brides. In my daily life, I am a jeans and t-shirts kind of gal. In my dreams, I am a fairy princess whose feet don’t hurt when she walks in high heals and who can wear a corset without sweating. Other women, having rejected the whole fairy princess thing, care not a lick for pretty shoes or big poofy dresses. Yet one imagines that these women still want to look smokin’ on their wedding days.
Which brings me to the topic of this post: Pants. And pantsuits, in particular.
The Beard pointed me toward a recent Yahoo News story about how more and more brides are rejecting traditional wedding gowns in favor of modern pantsuits. While I am not sure I believe this article – as a search for bridal, white, or wedding pantsuits yielded few notable results – it is interesting to consider the possibilities.
Telegraphing a vibe that’s either sophisticated or sexy, casual or chic, trouser suits have turned up on the bridal runways of Richard Tyler, Saison Blanche and Pronovias. And non-bridal designers are offering suits that could translate into altar attire, such as the icy silk pantsuit unveiled two weeks ago at Rochas’ Paris fashion show.
Modern Bride featured a pair of wedding pantsuits a few years ago: a tuxedo coat and corduroy trouser from Vera Wang and an ivory lace pantsuit with camisole top by Monique Lhuillier.
“I like to shake things up and stir things up,” says Lhuillier, whose suit has been a “good seller” since she introduced a version of it four years ago.
The image above is of a $3,296 Ralph Lauren creation featuring an ivory antique duchesse silk satin jacket and cream double-silk georgette pants. Sure, it looks great on the tall, slinky model, but I could see it looking horribly boxy on a regular sized bride. But different strokes for different folks, right? I just wish I could find more examples of bridal pantsuits online.
Related note: I did what I could to make it easy...
March 16th, 2006 at 3:00 pm
‘More and more’ in this context could mean a few hundred a year as opposed to a few dozen.
Most of the women I’ve known who have seriously considered pants for their wedding days have a) considered it for budgetary and fuss reasons, and b) ended up not going that route. I haven’t met a woman yet who would spend over $3000 on a pantsuit to get married in. Then again, in my social circles $1000 for a wedding gown is beyond most of our means and many of our preferences.
And yes, this looks fabulous on the model, but mere mortals would look short, dumpy, and awkward in that suit. I think more of your readers could probably pull off yesterday’s super-sleek strapless mermaid gown than this pantsuit.
The way I see it, this can only work for a socialite who wants none of the pomp but all of the bills of a typical wedding.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:33 pm
My stepmom wore a suit–albeit with a skirt instead of pants–for her wedding to my dad. I think something with a jacket (i.e. more suit, less dress) isn’t uncommon for brides who have already been to the altar once.
March 17th, 2006 at 1:27 am
I love the pantsuit pictured here—it’s very Katharine Hepburn. But I agree that you’d have to have the build and the flair of Katharine Hepburn to carry it off without looking like a corporate executive who was headed for the company cocktail party and ended up in the wrong hotel ballroom…
March 17th, 2006 at 11:45 am
I also think the giant pants might bother me. Especially if it was windy!
March 17th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
Actually, I think if you replaced the jacket with a different sort of top (and I’m thinking of several options here, from a structured shell to a relaxed sweater) it would look FABULOUS. The boxiness has mainly to do with how flattering the jacket is on various figure types… it would work well on some people, but not others. The pants though are goregous and I suspect would flatter a wide variety of women.
March 17th, 2006 at 3:24 pm
If it was windy, those pants would stick to one’s thighs and buttocks. I do not have the thighs and buttocks for clingy things; therefore, the giant pants worry me, too.
March 18th, 2006 at 12:43 am
But the floppy pantsuit is just one example. How many suits exist?
Also, why does it have to be a “bridal” suit, but why can’t it be a beautifully cut and fitted suit of extremely fine wool, in white or cream? Armani does this a lot, like with Jodie Foster at the Oscars. And you could buy a suit in one of Armani’s lower lines that fit like a dream for the price of the average wedding dress.
Picture Bianca Jagger’s YSL suit with the big floppy hat when she married Mick Jagger–single button jacket that comes in sharply at the waist over slim white pants. No nonsense on the jacket but a fabulous cut. And a big floppy hat. Fantastic. Still chic, 35 years later (god I’m old).
(You can’t see much but look at this: http://i.timeinc.net/instyle/images/2004/Weddings/classic_jagger.jpg)
March 18th, 2006 at 1:29 am
Call me crazy, but I think that something like this Elie Saab suit (perhaps minus a bit of the flesh) would be gorgeous.
March 21st, 2006 at 12:56 pm
I actually have a fabulous fitted white crepe jacket with satin banding which would work really well with flowing crepe or satin pants for a weddings, together with a really, really (REALLY) wide assortment of hats.
It’s just … ehhhhh. For me, I mean – I am so utterly unmotivated to be married in trousers, which seem to me neither formal, nor festive, nor flattering.
(Of course, I’m unmotivated to wear trousers generally, on the grounds that I find them neither formal, nor festive, nor flattering.)
March 21st, 2006 at 2:39 pm
Eeeeeh! I love hats!
March 22nd, 2006 at 1:06 pm
Hats make up a huge part of my way of life. I almost never go outside the house without wearing one.
March 22nd, 2006 at 4:13 pm
Hee! Do the words “Bartholomew Cubbins” mean anything?
I have three commercial hatracks, the kind you find in department stores, and they aren’t nearly sufficient to hold all my hats. And they are hats; not a baseball cap amongst ‘em.
N.B. If there’s an April Cornell nearby, check for hats, as the stores are going out of business!
October 25th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
[...] that’s not enough for you, here area couple bridal pants-related blog posts: And the bride wore pants and This bridal wear goes on one leg at a [...]
November 27th, 2007 at 11:27 am
I just had a large argument with a friend her husband and my fiance. I guess from how it ended none of them will be there…..hahahah
I am not a dress wearer.
I want to wear pants.
I know that there great pant suits to get married in.
This is my second and his 4th.
I just can’t find enough pictures to go by.
November 27th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
Yikes, Jackie…stinks that it had to come to fisticuffs! A search for pants nets me a lot of sites selling “mature” suits. Boxy things, they are. Not cool. I feel like the only time I find really nice bridal pants is when I stumble onto them by accident. So I wish you all the luck in the world finding something you like–though I still love the suit linked above. Yum. The question is, are you married to the idea of wearing white/cream/etc.? If not, the pant suit world is your oyster, baby.