What is loli?

This is based on a comment in this post.

I am trying to describe loli.
Sweet, gothic, and punk lolita, but not "kodona," aristocrat, or any of the other styles you might see in a GLB. Just loli.
To a point where it's defined.
In about seven terms/phrases.
In a way that all or nearly all of us could agree on.
Talk about a Herculean task ~_^

What follows is what I've come up with so far.

Lolita fashion is :

Cute. Even the most gothic or deconstructed lolita maintains that cuteness.

Youthful. This could be tied into the cute factor, since cute is generally applied to more young/youthful people and things? This can especially be seen in the number of outfits that incorporate elements seen in school uniforms like schoolgirlish plaids, sailor collars, etc. Even the most mature lolita styles seem to retain the feel of youth. Youth, however, does NOT necessarily translate into very-young-girl-style. Compare Angelic Pretty to Mary Magdalene or BabySSB to Victorian Maiden.

Feminine. It's pretty self explanatory to me. But examples can be the emphasis on curved lines, soft fabrics, and typically feminine motifs such as hearts, flowers/floral prints, and butterflies. Punk lolita has the least of this element, but I think it's still there. I think the line between "just punk" and "punk loli" can be seen partially in whether or not strong feminine elements have been incorporated.

Detailed. This does NOT necessarily mean all loli is frilly or elaborate. There seem to always be little details in lolita clothing that make the outfit, be it pintucks, matching laces, embroidery, ruffles, shirring, richly textured fabric, unusual collar or skirt shapes... I could go on and on. But little or nothing is ever left plain. Some exceptions to the plainness are certain pieces from brands like Atelier Boz or Moi Meme Moitie, but one could argue that the details there are the very crisp, very clean lines of the garments, the very "rich" fabrics and trims.

Deliberate. In lolita done right* all the elements are carefully matched to each other, the outfit is planned; even the punky side of lolita looks like you deliberately and carefully matched pieces cobbled together from a war zone. ^^ Lots of lolitas have mix and match style wardrobes, *but* the empasis is on the "match" part of that. There is often careful attention to the lines of the outfit, the flow of colors and patterns, etc.

Not overtly sexual. There is a sensuality and flirtatiousness in this fashion, and occasionally innuendo, but I think most would agree that the traditional style/clothing itself is not overtly sexual. The only time I have seen overt sexuality described as part of lolita fashion is -here-, in the description of "erololi." This is the only time I've seen the term erololi. The community seems split between people who feel overt sexuality has no place in the fashion and don't seem to consider erololi part of their view of the lolita world, and people who feel that excluding all clothing that could be said to be sexualized constitutes elitism and excessive purism. The people WEARING the fashions may be utterly chaste and modest or extremely sexual, however.

Tentatively, I've also now got :

from another time. Sweet or goth loli to me always looks somewhat antiquated, even the casual styles (1950s, often, on the casual ones?), and punk loli looks post-apocalyptic to me. Lolita is completely apart of mainstream modern fashion, and often involves taking historically based clothing and putting a bit of a new spin on it. Most commonly given as an example is Victorian (1800s Euroamerican) fashion, but also seen are 50s styles (esp w/ certain brands), Georgian (1700s) clothing (Antique Beast makes the best examples), traditional Japanese clothing (wa-loli), etc. Any trends lolitas tend to follow are those within the fashion itself, not current mainstream ones.
I think this sense of antiquation is why materials like PVC and polyester, and very bright/neon colors in general are not considered traditional sweet or gothic lolita-- these are modern synthetics and modern color palettes. Very bright colors were simply not used in antiqutity. PVC can work for punked out styles, but often these styles are on the borderline of just (Japanese) punk and not lolita at all. PVC also is considered by some to not work so well because it's considered rather fetishy and inherently sexual. Some Western hybrids of lolita exist that do involve these (let's call them "cyber doll" and "lolita decora") but they are moving away from many of the other mentioned elements of lolita, almost to the point where they can be considered a breakaway fashion. Time will tell about that. I forsee the bright loud prints associated with decora (the colorful random fashion associated with classic FRUiTS streetwear) staying more "acceptable" due to brands like Metamorphose that sometimes use pretty funky prints already.

doll-like. I think that impression is created because a lot of those things that describe/define lolita also describe/define the traditional clothing of porcelain dolls. I think there is a progression in the doll-like quality through the different styles of lolita. Sweet lolita is like a straight up doll outfit. Gothic lolita is taking that straight up doll outfit and turning it, well, gothic. It's still doll like, but also "dark" and not like any doll made by a mainstream porcelain doll maker. I usually get "doll like and yet not" from gl. Punk lolita is taking that gothic doll and making the look worn, distressed, tattered, and edgy. Punk lolita will probably look like it was a doll at one point, but it's been through some realllly rough times. Not so innocent or "fragile," and sometimes not doll like at all when compared to sweet lolita.

* = re. "loli done right," I am not one to say that there is one right way, or even a dozen right ways, to "do loli" or much of anything else, but I think that most of us can safely agree that there are wrong ways. And I think that even the "loliest of the loli" and the "purists" and "elitists" know they've done it the wrong way at least once, especially when they were first starting out. So no shame in not getting it quite right your first or sixth time trying it... as evidenced by our Loli Bloopers archive in the memories. Shame on unconstructive criticism and rudeness, though.

Thoughts? Criticisms? Additions? Discuss.

Post a new comment
Error

Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal
We will log you in after post

We will log you in after post

We will log you in after post

We will log you in after post

We will log you in after post

Anonymously

switch

LiveJournal

Facebook

Twitter

OpenId

Google

MailRu

VKontakte

Anonymously

Insert Bold

Insert Italic

Insert Underline

Insert Strikethrough

Insert Link

Insert LJ User

Insert Photo

Insert Video

Your reply will be screened

Your IP address will be recorded
Help
69 comments

ex_pantheria458

November 17 2004, 21:53:37 UTC 7 years ago

Excellent... :)

loli_cat

November 17 2004, 21:58:34 UTC 7 years ago

This is looking to be something that Kats should put in the the FAQs area! Good job! ^_^

ashna

November 17 2004, 21:59:29 UTC 7 years ago

I like your definition. Specially on the sexual bit.

Though maybe change the feminine bit? I don't think All of the guys who dress in it like to look feminine.

ashna

November 17 2004, 22:19:32 UTC 7 years ago

oops. Didn't see the 'not describing the aristocratic etc bits'

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login or password? OpenID Google Mail.Ru VKontakte
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…

What is loli?

Error

FAOSeeinglife>

Re: FAOSeeinglife>

Re: FAOSeeinglife>

Re: FAOSeeinglife>

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

LJ Labs

Store