2018-03-16 — nytimes.com
With her blond hair and lipstick, her uniform set her apart from the hoodie pack as well as the suits, and made that Jobsian connection, giving her an aura of cool in the way that he was cool (and Apple is cool) but that most digi-geeks are not, when viewed by the non-digi world.
But such an individual uniform has a risk if you don't live up to the promise. In the end, it's the substance behind the style that makes the difference; what you wear becomes its expression. So already, what was once the symbol of her dedication has become the symbol of the backlash, as the revisionism has begun, with various columnists berating themselves for not "looking behind the black turtleneck."
Even on social media, it has not gone unnoticed.
In the same way that Gordon Gekko's suspenders and Michael Milken's toupee became symbols of their greed, Ms. Holmes's black turtleneck is starting to seem less a brilliant frame than a false front; a carefully calculated costume that fooled everyone into assuming she was more brilliant than she was; a symbol of hubris rather than success.
Those who live by the turtleneck, die by the turtleneck. It's enough to make the otherwise derided pantsuit look like the ... well, smart choice.
Comments: Be the first to add a comment