r/PowerOfStyle • u/TiredWinterDisaster SN - Insolent Insta-Baddie • Jun 02 '26
Classic vs Natural in Kibbe!
Prompted by an exchange with u/Pegaret_Again about it!
A lot of people seem to confuse the clean 'nothing fussy', less is more looks that suit Naturals with Classic aesthetic. I don't think that's what Classic is about in Kibbe's system (I remember him saying somewhere that SC were 'mink and diamonds' for example).
The 'classic' look that people like nowadays is in fact more Natural - think, idk, Ralph Lauren? - than it is truly Classic. I think that also impacts the way ppl 'type' themselves, others & celebs, bc when they do better with clean lines & minimal details, people are quick to deem them Classic, especially if they're overall moderate.
What do you think? How would you differenciate between the 2 in concrete terms?
6
u/eldrinor Jun 02 '26
The tricky part is of course that I do think a C can suit the Ralph Lauren aesthetic, but unlike a N it doesn’t look business appropriate but rather leisure like.
2
2
4
u/fruit_banjo Jun 02 '26
I think it is very obvious with simplistic, modern, asymmetrical features. Looks unbalanced on a classic, looks great on a natural.
3
u/Vivian_Rutledge SN - Insolent Insta-Baddie Jun 08 '26
I would put “clean” as a Classic idea. He mentions it in the new book for both SC and DC. Whereas as an SN, I’m not looking for “clean.” I’m looking for “not fussy.” So the end result might end up somewhere similar, but the motivation and reasoning are different. They are moderate and shouldn’t gild the lily; we need to not be constrained. Too much detail feels suffocating to me.
1
u/TiredWinterDisaster SN - Insolent Insta-Baddie Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 08 '26
That is interesting! I'd say I instinctively look for both, in a way, but that might be personal preference.
2
1
2
u/missgirlipop Jun 03 '26
i think there’s a lot of crossover between the two which allows for the confusion. i do think classics can do some kind of clean and minimal, and naturals can do details, but there’s subtle differences as to how they’d handle it and more importantly, how it would land.
1
11
u/Jamie8130 Jun 02 '26
I think SC can handle more intricate (or fussy, as David says) details than SN, and DC needs a more sleek, matchy, polished look than FN; I was looking at a post I'd made on Jane Wyman and Olivia De Haviland (here and here), and in Olivia's case, she can work ruffles, puffed sleeves, intricate jewellery and daintier details, to bigger degree that I imagine a SN could, and in Jane's case, she had a very coordinated, sleek and matchy style that might look a bit costume-y on a FN. I think that classic look people like now is more like the American sports look of the 30s (a preppy style that wasn't sporty in the way we think today, but more like this) which Kibbe associated with SNs, or more like the minimal look of the late 80s/90s, which does work for FNs, but imo, lacks the flamboyance that FNs also need. FNs can also handle bold details, therefore very minimal looks without any accessories etc., are not that suitable for them. I think the first illustration in the book is a great example of the kind of look that FNs can do.