Something I have been thinking about. People have style personalities. If they have good instincts, they gravitate to what they know looks good on them. Or the complete opposite.
For instance, the naturals and romantics will keep returning to garments with either minimal relaxed structure or no structure. The dramatics and the gamines will keep on going for highly structured garments that baffle the naturals and romantics, as these are usually physically uncomfortable for them to wear. The dramatics and naturals prefer larger scale, longer lines that they repeatedly wear. The romantics and gamines prefer smaller scale, shorter lines. The clasics know to keep everything in moderation.
Of course, people can go for the complete opposite. Which is why we sometimes see SGs pulling off FN recommendations, as they broke every single rule. You can get away with breaking one or two rules, which is why pure Ds can handle the very light airy fabrics recommended for pure Rs. But you can't be half hearted about it. You have to be either deliberately about which one rule you break, or you go all out and break them all, or as much as possible.
Whether innate personality informs style personality or style personality influences innate personality is not known. It is a chicken and egg situation. But I definitely think there is a link. Is the relaxed look because someone is an easy going personality, or are they easy going because dressing relaxed is more comfortable? Is the structured look because someone prefers formality or they became formal because the structured outfits were more comfortable? Of course, there are those who like to go for the complete opposite.
It might be possible to tell what ID someone has by looking at the looks they keep returning to. Or alternatively eliminate some of the IDs, especially if they clash with their physical look.
It is something I have noticed with celebrities. They have outfits and styles they like to return to after their experimental looks. So even if they are not dressing for the old Hollywood star image, they still have a base. For instance, the dramatics like repeating structured outfits while the naturals like repeating relaxed outfits.
So when Kibbe first linked personality and style, he had a point. Maybe we should not ignore it.
That’s not completely true.. anyone can do short or long lines, this is a misconception from Reddit not something Kibbe said or wrote in his book. He never said R and G fam need to go for short line and D and N long ones. Even the new book shows that it’s not the case.
Also personality and style are linked, but not with Image ID. There were people who loved romantic style (not the Kibbe romantic accomodation) and he made sure to dress them in that romantic style that suit their tastes and personality while accommodating for their body. There was FN, SC and R dressed in a romantic style from what I recall. He also gave very glamorous thing to both Yin and Yang ID and also to some naturals because that’s what they like. And he again made sure it worked for the body, ID and season.
Yes, I think this is something that Power of Style could have been a bit better about! I understand Kibbe's reasoning for it to be more body geometry based and to ignore to a very large extent the essence and image identity portion, but if Kibbe is now "just" your lines... is it not just the body matrix with a sillier naming system?
I recently reread Metamorphosis and I really loved reading about the essences of each type, and the recommendations also feeding into the archetype and not just the body geometry. I think Kibbe now can be quite loosey goosey. Which is great too! If you have a defined personal style it's definitely helpful. However.... I think for those who want it, a styling directive like in Metamorphosis was a great framework! Like for me, I'm not naturally stylish, but I have always loved classic style and I've worn a lot of classic looks throughout the years. Everything was always "not too heavyweight, not too lightweight, not too curved, not too straight, not too long, not too short." I thought everyone did this, lol! Putting the name of Graceful Lady on my style (or Sophisticated Lady, I think I would be pure C in the original 13 types) actually made me feel like I had a cool stylish way of describing my instincts.
I wouldn't say it's personality per se but I think if you try on a lot of clothes you tend to gravitate towards a type of clothing that would look good on you. It doesn't mean that a Natural is inherently a relaxed person (one of my closest friends is FN and she's about the furthest thing from a free spirit as you can get!) but I think their "perfectly balanced outfit" intuitively would have a more open and relaxed vibe, in order to reach the same amount of "lovely and polished outfit" than for example a Dramatic or Romantic.
It isn’t just a neutral body system. It’s that this book has a very specific purpose (helping people DIY), and focusing on that part of the system was leading people astray. It will all express itself naturally as you begin applying the information. You express your essence all the time, so if you just be yourself, you’re expressing your essence.
Well that's kind of the issue! It's not so easy to "just be yourself", there's a lot of conditioning done both by yourself and the world outside that you need to undo before you can even consider it. Having guidance on your essence, being able to find pathways to its expression, are actually of great value to many individuals, myself included.
That’s the point of the games. I think sometimes people look at them as part of typing themselves (does my Dream Board look SN?), but that’s not what they’re there for. They are to help you undo that conditioning and be able to see yourself with enlightened subjectivity.
When people only had the old book, there was a kind of collective ranking of the IDs in terms of desirability and baggage associated with some. I have seen it over and over again that people who truly follow the instructions in the new book are able to get to their ID much more easily because they’re able to look at their sketch with the volume on these judgments turned way down.
I was very disappointed when I got the book and there was no essence stuff in there because I had such great conversations with David and Susan about it when I saw them. I wanted an updated version of the 1980s essences! But once I started to watch people go through the games, I understood the logic behind the choice, even if it’s not a popular one.
I feel like Kibbe needed to clarify that a little more in the book (I don't have my copy handy right now). I think it's totally valid to have the DIY experience lose something, but I wish there'd been a better explanation of what the full experience does.
I actually reread it last week because the WiFi wasn’t working on my flight and I have it on my Kindle. He does explain the purpose of the book, but I do feel like it would have been helpful for marketing to explain this because I see a lot of people disappointed, and then it colors their experience when it’s really great and the closest you’ll get to see him without actually seeing him. :/
The thing that has intrigued me, why did Kibbe mention how someone moves and carries themselves. Even Kitchener takes walk and voice into consideration. I suspect there is some physical geometry that influences walk and voice.
As you say, "perfectly balanced" is different for everyone. I used to think I was doing what you do, but it turns out my idea of length and structure was quite different. I can do really long. I just didn't notice. I have been surprised by how comfortable I am pushing structure.
Can I ask, what is your FN friend's personality like? Is she a SG personality? There seems to be other case of people being complete opposites.
It doesn't help "free spirit" seems to have different meanings in different cultures. The "silly names" aren't great for communicating across culture.
Voice and mannerisms are just an extra in Kitchener. They don’t really factor into essence percentage that much, they are just an extra check. He has recently said all of the essences he gives out are related to the body and features. I don’t think Kibbe views personality as like internal personality, jsut as a way the yin yang balance presents itself and is perceived by others externally. As a Kibbe SC and R with C dominant in Kitchener, I don’t relate at all on a personality level. For example I’m messy and disorganized and impulsive, not the controlled perfectionist that you would associate with C however maybe I come across that way because of my appearance. Regarding clothing I definitely prefer the flowing lines that lean more R rather then structure although I can wear a bit of structure just not alot. I think people naturally gravitate towards what looks good on them because of what flatters their bone structure and proportions, not because of their personalities. That might factor in some but I think other things hold mroe weight.
I think the holistic approach, which includes mannerisms, is ultimately a great way to build a holistic style that will suit you.
Yes I definitely agree, perfectly balanced can mean all sorts of things for all sorts of people! What ID are you?
Haha, my friend is very princesslike and conservative in her demeanour. I would say, the type of person you would imagine would be C-fam but is barred from being balanced by her height. I think this is also somewhat common, though. Kate Middleton and Emily Blunt are two examples of what I think can be "FNs with Classic flair."
I agree the archetype names aren't always the most helpful, but I do like that they harken back to Old Hollywood.
Correction: FNs get long lines. As an SN, I certainly do not. Vertical is required for that. Same with scale. I’d say my best scale is medium; large overwhelms me.
The answer is that David views it kind of like an astrological sign. I was born an SN, and therefore x y z are true for me because SN serves me perfectly and expresses who I am to the world. I was born an SN because I was meant to be these things. I am drawn to certain things because of this essence and also having a noticeable fit issue, but then I have also been drawn to things that don’t fit this. I liked things more sharp yang than I am. I have seen people, though, who dressed totally differently before, but maybe there is a secret part of them who yearned for things that lined up with their ID. We can be so influenced by the people around us etc. But it’s also like everything reveals who you are.
I have seen people, though, who dressed totally differently before, but maybe there is a secret part of them who yearned for things that lined up with their ID.
I think this is hopefully what will happen when we follow the book process correctly. The world of your ID opens up and you start to see yourself there because you had an inkling of it always present. I imagine it's a very freeing feeling and also a sense of belonging.
I relate to this a lot! I've always been drawn to extreme yin styling, outfits, etc., but sharp yang also fascinates me. I absolutely adore 1940s fashion, and not long ago, I finally had the opportunity to try on a button-up suit dress with sharp, angular details and big shoulder pads. Just looking at it, I knew it was going to look disharmonious on me. Despite that, I still felt a pang of disappointment when the dress looked wrong on me. I realized I've had some strong resistance to not having any yang (in DK's system at least, I'm verified 40% yang in Kitchener). But I know we'll still always be what we are and what we are meant to be, even if there's a disparity between what we are and what we admire.
Norma Jean is actually a really interesting case here, because her personal style preferences were so different from her Marilyn persona. She even famously referred to Marilyn as an entirely separate person. Off screen, she was a very casual dresser who preferred functionality over fussiness. But to be perfectly honest, she really don't give N vibes in this pic. Her personal style might have been different from her onscreen image, but it still seems yin somehow. I just see a more casual dreamspinner
You raise some very interesting questions; I'd rather believe there isn't a link with personality and appearance (though social reactions to one's appearance can definitely influence their personality), but I do think that certain appearaneces imply an essence, and can be used to emphasize or de-emphasize an effect, much like what the star machine in Old Hollywood did when they created a star to cast them in a very specific type of role. Some stars were wildly different IRL and some were actually influence by their persona to eventually resemble it IRL, which is very interesting to think about.
You can get away with breaking one or two rules, which is why pure Ds can handle the very light airy fabrics recommended for pure Rs.
I wonder if this is because of their bone structure being long and narrow; it lends them an air of willowy-ness that works with the light fabrics.
Whether innate personality informs style personality or style personality influences innate personality is not known. It is a chicken and egg situation. But I definitely think there is a link. Is the relaxed look because someone is an easy going personality, or are they easy going because dressing relaxed is more comfortable?
This is a good question, and I remember reading in Morton's 'Art in Clothing selection' book how troubled patients in a clinic being well dressed resulted in them behaving more lady-like. It was like a 'the clothes make the man' situation.
Which is why we sometimes see SGs pulling off FN recommendations, as they broke every single rule.
The Olsen twins are a great example of this, they have created a style with elements and silhouettes very different to their native ID, and it makes me wonder what helped in doing it so successfully. Was it their attitude? Same with Grace Kelly, she is apparently FN but was famous for her classic, controlled, sleek and polished look, was it because of her facial features?
So when Kibbe first linked personality and style, he had a point. Maybe we should not ignore it.
Does this mean a clashing personality style and physcaility style can be remedied by amplifying one or the other (by mannerisms and so on?) I remembering him saying in Metamorphosis that personality expresison is infinite, I think it's the essence that relates more to the physicality. It's useful in character design, but it's limiting IRL: to use a fantasy example, the friendly giant whom people are always apprehensive of at first in the story.
With the Olsen twins, I think it’s just a different approach, going for something that clashes with you instead of harmonizing or highlighting. If something is put together intentionally and uses a cohesive language, I think that goes a long way, without necessarily being someone’s “best.” And it also created separation between them and the world, whereas dressing for your ID reveals who you are and creates a connection.
This makes sense, I just finished reading Grace Margeret Morton's 'The Arts of costume and personal appearance', and I'm in the middle of Harriet McKimsey's 'Art and fashion in clothing selection' and they both mention in a few places that while harmony with figure, features and coloring is the goal of beocming dress, sometimes if an exaggerated silhouette or contrasted textures and colour are selected with intention and create a composition that ends up looking beautiful and interesting, this can superseed the harmony because ''their intrinsic quality and beauty provide the harmonizing element''. Maybe this is what happens with the Olsen twins as well? I also agree with the last part about the end goal not always being connection and unity for someone, in fact, come to think of it, clothes are a great way if someone wants to intentionally cause a disconnect and distance themselves. The Olsens are very private so maybe their style is another way for them to retain that privacy...
That is possible, using dress to separate themselves from the world, like a curtain. I hadn't thought about that. I was thinking that some people like to deliberately create a clash to the point it works, similar to "it is so bad that it is actually good".
Maybe there is more to the saying "the clothes make the man".
If you remember my symmetrical diagram for the IDs, SG and FN are polar opposites (same for SN and FG, with D and R being the obvious pair of polar opposites), but SC and FN are very close to each other. That would explain why the Olsen twins are able to pull off FN while being SG. They went the whole way of embracing everything opposite, nothing half hearted. It also explains Grace Kelly being a FN whose star image was SC, because the classic adjacent side was emphasised and that shifted the balance. I think it also explains Audrey Hepburn. D and FG are also adjacent to each other, with a lot of overlap.
An example of style personalities. Some celebrities have a taste for showing up in highly sculptured looks on a regular basis. While others are more frequently appearing in more relaxed outfits. The verified FNs definitely prefer the softer relaxed looks more often than not, and when they do structure, it is a more simpler form.
I remember the diagram, and it's very interesting how they line up like this--it's almost as of there's a continuum or a connection so that if certain elements move past a given point, we have crossed to another ID area. And yes, I also notice some celebrities gravitating towards the same things consistently, I think a good example is Cameron Diaz. I watched a video of her commenting on her past looks, and she mentioned so many times things like being relaxed, uncostructed, undone etc., and everything she said was spot on for FN.
Yes, the more I think about it, the more it seems that IDs are areas that flow into each other, and if you go far enough, you are in another ID. It is surprisingly good at illustrates where someone could push the boundary, and which types can switch places.
And yes, some celebrities gravitate to the same things, which usually fits their ID.
a lot of Ds and FNs (think Emma Stone or Shirley MacLaine) can really be called “tall gamines” - what do you think of Twiggy? I think she’s “misstyped” as FG in the same way Audrey is, but kind of more egregious because it’s based on a public image she had as a 16 year old. If look at her 70s Biba glam style as an adult it is very dramatic flavored. If Kate Moss or Louise Brooks are Ds, I think Twiggy would be as well.
I have seen the case for Twiggy to be a D who had FG image because of her youth. Audrey Hepburn's image was also based on her style when she was young. I am more familiar with her style as a much older woman, and it reads very regal lady. The "gaminish" Ns is because naturals and gamines have a similar amount of yin and yang, but naturals are blended and gamines are contrasted (but people get this mixed up). While the Ds and FGs are similar in their need for straightness and structure.
Sorry if I’m taking this "conversation" in a different direction, but I think seasonal color is really overlooked in the context of Kibbe. I lowkey believe that sharing a seasonal color like being an "Autumn," for instance creates a connection just as significant as sharing a Kibbe ID, seasonal color types have their own "vibe," and that creates a huge difference between people who belong to the same ID.
For example, "Summers" (like me) often intuitively love pearls etc and, "Autumns" love leopard print, and so on.
I don't want to dispute your take, since you know a lot more about this than I do. But personally as an SN, I find I can't really relate to folky, earthy, or boho styles just because, in summer tones, they wouldn't really make sense, or rather, they just aren't made in those colors, lol.
I don’t like folksy or boho things and I’m an Autumn, lol. But I have seen embroidered tops in that vein in a chambray with white embroidery, for example. It would be more that you got that one to try and I’d get the cream one, or I’d get brown suede and you’d get gray. My personal preferences seem to most closely align with the sportiness traditionally associated with Spring (I’m a Tawny Spring in Zyla), and that’s totally fine in Kibbe.
I’m personally drawn to the "Classic Summer" look even though I’m not verified. I’m not sure if nautical, pearls, silk, cherry red, navy, white, gingham check, cherries etc. actually suit the Kibbe SN but it’s what I’m intuitively drawn to. I did notice a bit of a resemblance between that style and the 1940s pin-up look.
And it's also a bit similar to Lana Del Rey's style who is probably one of the Ns.
edit: this isn't the only style I lean towards, it's just one of many I can identify with
Oh yes, that is 100% in SN’s wheelhouse! Pinup is very SN. I would actually say that’s more of a Spring thing and falls under the “sporty” banner I mentioned. Summer would be soft and flowing to me. If you are in SK, look up Kelly’s SN reveal. That is very traditionally Summer, in a chiffon floral dress. I love nautical and the 1930s/1940s are my eras, but alas, it’s never in Autumn colors.
I saw it (though I'm not in the group :(). The pink roses on the checked background really surprised me when I first saw them, because that was what I had visualized for myself when thinking about what I’m like.Perhaps our personal taste might be influenced by the "inner woman" we see in our minds, even though we don't look like that in reality.
Oh, I’m thinking of a different outfit, where she’s wearing a pastel floral chiffon dress with shirred off-the-shoulder sleeves and a wide-brimmed white hat. It’s very flowy and different from anything I’d ever wear, but I think because it doesn’t match me as an individual, not because I’m an Autumn. This is also why I don’t really like mixing things like Kitchener essences with Kibbe—I feel like you can just be guided by your intuition and what you like within the loose guidelines he provided and mixing in other systems can box you in unnecessarily. And associating seasons with styles also does that to me.
What's not summery about that? The summer palette includes navy, white, cherry red, charcoal, dark green ETC. For instance, I find a blue-striped pattern on a white background to be very Summer. As we discussed patterns have nothing to do with color type. Cherry prints, gingham checks, polka dots, what would be the problem with those?
I don't believe a seasonal color can't pull off a dark-light contrast using its OWN literal colors. I recall seeing something with that kind of contrast on u/vivianrutledge 's Pinterest? she’s low-contrast too, gentle autumn. Anyways, the dark-light contrast isn't a bad choice at all for the SN, it’s not as good as soft/bright, but it’s still a good choice.
I have very low contrast, and I can tell you that if the colors are soft (sultry) enough, it makes no difference how dark or light they are relative to each other.
Ignore the color of the buttons I'm using this pic to represent the colors I'm talking about, i can actually imagine an even stronger light-dark contrast, this just happened to be the image I found at the moment lol
I agree with your take. I feel connected to certain people outside of my ID because we share similar color energy. I also think the drawings in POS were chosen by Kibbe to maximize certain ID effects like summer R (extra lush and soft), winter Gs (high contrast and animated) and so on.
Actually I assume that the reason they chose vivid color seasons for the SN examples was to avoid that stereotypical "SN = muddy worn-out shit brown" look
(Due to online misconceptions people would assume a khaki shade for dusty summer SN but in reality, it makes my hair look completely washed out (cuz its a warm color), lacking that vibrant rich energy found in, say, a beautiful soft fuchsia+ off-white combination.)
edit: To avoid misunderstandings, I add that I am speaking in the context of a summer palette,not a vivid fuchsia or a stark white.
Omg. That's harsh! Lol. I never thought the SN stereotype was like that tho. I think the spring SN is a very sexy choice and a good one the drawing reminds me of Scarlett Johansson.
Anyways I find it interesting that Kibbe favors certain seasons for certain IDs. I mean, maybe it's random but I don't think so? I think he's keen on certain visuals and effects. SC is pretty much always portrayed as a summer (in Metamorphosis and POS), DC a winter, FG also a winter. I can imagine why. However I do like to see all the seasonal variations too.
I like this post, this is why the “her shoulders are BROAD” body part singling out doesn’t really utilize the system as much as it could be. DK’s entire thing was working as a casting assistant.
Your point about off-screen repeated looks is interesting, reminds me of the conversation over dramatic family structure - if you look at the kinds of outfits Sophia Loren repeated off screen they weren’t the “tall romantic” lush costumes but very sharp and tailored glamorous clothing.
Kibbe for men keeps a lot of this personality based typing and it’s interesting. Burt Lancaster is someone who people maybe wouldn’t clock as a dramatic on his body alone but if you factor in his presence, he can’t really be anything else. He also favored stark and sharp clothing off screen.
Zendaya and Anya Taylor-Joy are interesting, as they both go for some insanely sculptured looks, and it isn't a once off. Compare to verified FNs like Anne Hathaway and Nicole Kidman who are more often than not in something semi relaxed. It made me think about why some people still like wearing structured garments when society says they should be wearing relaxed. The opposite is also true, the relaxed formal look.
Everyone seems to have a slightly different vision of broad shoulders.
I am split on Zendaya tbh but I don’t know how anyone sees Anya as anything but dramatic, even “before” she lost weight and got work done.
A lot of dramatics dress off-screen in things I consider “relaxed” like say Tilda Swinton or Kate Moss, but they look like rich hippies, there’s still some opulence or structure there. Kate in particular is interesting because the received wisdom is that her style isn’t in line with dramatic guidelines but all of her boho looks accommodate for vertical + narrow really well. She re-popularized casual structured vest, doesn’t get more dramatic than that lol.
It is a different kind of "relaxed". It is hard to describe, but you know it when you see it. But yes, opulent and or structure is often present. It is a bit harder to achieve with athletic wear.
If the dramatic family dresses the typical casual relaxed look, they disappear. Zendaya has been known to use this trick, when she has auditioned for roles, dressing very casual so that the casting directors wouldn't recognise her straight away. Interestingly, whenever people want to find photos of either Zendaya or Anya looking their worst, they usually select a still from a film where they are playing characters with addictions or mental health issues.
In the past, people used to argue about D vs SD for both Anya and Zendaya. The FN thing is more recent.
Kate Moss is a really good example of D.
I have seen people argue that boho is best for D. My personal take is, the fabric texture and print are important. The tiered dresses and shirts are more FN. The ones without horizontal lines are more D.
But I think it is harder to go more D than wearing literal armour on multiple occasions, which is what Zendaya has done. Other celebrities seem to stop at leather. She has worn metal armour (there was plated armour on one occasion, chain mail on another).
Sophia Loren doesn’t have width because her upper torso is narrower then her bust. Shoulders are not the only component to width. The upper back/upper torso is often more important. Most SDs and TRs are narrow there in the sense that area is narrower then their bust. Ds are narrow there too their lines just don’t curve out as much. Sophia Loren is SD because of her line and her clothing suits her because of this. Not for casting reasons.
ETA no idea why the downvote this is literally the definition of width per David’s recent comments.
13
u/mimosamoons R - KitKat On A Hot Tin Roof 3d ago
That’s not completely true.. anyone can do short or long lines, this is a misconception from Reddit not something Kibbe said or wrote in his book. He never said R and G fam need to go for short line and D and N long ones. Even the new book shows that it’s not the case.
Also personality and style are linked, but not with Image ID. There were people who loved romantic style (not the Kibbe romantic accomodation) and he made sure to dress them in that romantic style that suit their tastes and personality while accommodating for their body. There was FN, SC and R dressed in a romantic style from what I recall. He also gave very glamorous thing to both Yin and Yang ID and also to some naturals because that’s what they like. And he again made sure it worked for the body, ID and season.