This month’s event was a visual treat. The show was themed on the iconic television show Twin Peaks by David Lynch, and here they certainly took advantage of one of Lynch’s most celebrated (and wonderfully kitsch) works.

The space was cleverly utilised, turning the well-used Sub Club into an intoxicating and immersive atmosphere. The space was divided into three sections: the back space of the venue contained work by visual artists Claudia Nova and Rachael Sharpe, both students at GSA. The installation Dream Space offered a reaction to the setting with visceral paintings by Sharpe which depicted surrealist imagery partnered with a dark, Gothic aesthetic. The piece by Nova was a sculpture which directly referenced the Twin Peaks theme, depicting a hand emerging from a mountain constructed of colour and glitter. The work gave an interesting new dimension to the space, and was a clever addition to the event which enforced the idea of escapist decadence.

The event presented work from a vast selection of designers. As the lights went up and the show began, the first designer being Lilly Wiggler’s beautiful hand made corsets. This was followed by Sally Ann Provan, Jennie Loof, Jane Gowans, Catherine Aiken, Ten 30 and Anna Whyte. After a short intermission in which attendees could socialize with the designers, models walked for Chou Chou couture, dazed Dorothy, Hilary Lang, Oui designs, Betty Spoke, Mee Mee Couture and Mark Conlin. The styling was fantastic, the models’ hair and make-up (by Rainbow Rooms and LCR make-up) evoked a new-age sense of romance; exotic and yet unfailingly ethereal. The stand out collections included Jane Gowans’ 2010 ‘Matchstick’ which included beautifully made and innovative jewellery. I was also impressed by Ten 30′s heavily embroidered and well structured garments and Mark Conlin’s innovative use of material and pattern. The work was of an exceptional quality and the collections were both intruiging and innovative.

Having attended the previous ‘In the Company of Wolves’ in the spring, I had high expectations. However, I was surprised again by the extensive attention to detail, aesthetic consideration and overall success of the event.

If you’re one of those people who never escapes beyond the cosy west end bubble, this weekend is the time to venture to the far and distant land of East Lothian.

I’m talking specifically about the three harbour towns of Prestonpans, Cockenzie and Port Seton. If you know the area you’ll be aware that these towns have struggled hard against the tide of de-industrialisation and are gradually beginning to regenerate through community initiatives such at the Three Harbours Seafood Festival.

Organised by people of East Lothian, the festival is a great example of a community getting together to show the rest of us what they’ve got going. It’s been going for five years now and is perfect for foodies and art buffs.

The festival kicks off on Friday 28 May with an outdoor Ceilidh and birthday party led by the Islander Ceilidh Band. If you’re more interested in the food, why not visit the festival during the day on Saturday or Sunday. Entry to the festival is only £2 and the organisers promise cooking demonstrations, a great real ale tent and lots of fresh produce to buy. There’s free refrigeration all day so you don’t have to worry about your purchases getting ruined while you laze about in the sun by the sea.

Three Harbours Seafood Festival runs from Friday 28-Sunday 30 May at The Greenbelt, Edinburgh Road, Prestonpans. More information can be found at http://www.3harbours.co.uk.

Eight days in and I’m finding myself getting dressed slightly begrudgingly now.  I wish I’d chosen a dress that wasn’t quite so short … Still, I’ve yet to repeat an outfit, and I’ve now set myself the vague aim of wearing a different look every day.

One major flaw with any notion that wearing one dress repeatedly can be considered an exercise in sustainable fashion is that it requires dozens and dozens of extra items of clothing to build outfits with.  Even those who are seriously dedicated to this idea -  such as Sheena Matheiken over at the Uniform Project, who’s wearing an identical dress every day not for a month, but a year – have to depend upon a vast array of accessories, jumpers, jackets, tunics and so on in, in order to vary the look enough to make the concept remotely plausible or appealing to the people who they’re hoping to win over.

Matheiken’s blog calls for people to donate accessories to her, or make something and send it in, or collaborate with her to put together an ensemble, and most of the extras she mixes and matches with her dress are second hand, from small producers on sites such as Etsy, or made for her by her conveniently crafty friends.  While it means that she can uphold her sustainable style principles even while wearing, over the course of one year, more clothes and accessories than most of us get through in five, it’s hardly a model that is practicable for the majority of people.  We don’t all have access to NYC flea markets, or have friends who happen to be fashion designers.  Even in Glasgow, where we’re blessed with wonderful and reasonably priced vintage stores, if everyone adopted Matheiken’s stance, there’d soon be nothing decent left in them. The stock of reasonable-quality second-hand clothing is by definition limited.

Still, that’s not to deny the fact that setting limits is one of the best ways to encourage yourself to be creative, and if I can get 31 different outfits out of one dress without purchasing any new accessories this month in order to make that happen, I’ll at least have shown myself that when I feel like I’ve got nothing new to wear, shopping isn’t the only solution.

Today’s extras:

Grey tunic (worn under dress), Acne

Black ruffle cardigan, Reiss (as before)

Leather jacket, M&S [I've owned this for a decade, which is both terrifying, and, I suppose, a good thing]

Black lace tights, New Look [I can't wear tights more than three times without ripping them, so there's no point wasting money on pricy ones]

Opaque pink ballet tights (worn under lace ones], from dance supply stores

Boots, Gap

Know someone taking on the One Dress, One Month challenge? Support their cause by donating online to Macmillan Cancer Support here!

Four days into March and so far, I’m finding that I’m really enjoying waking up every morning and knowing, pretty much, what I’m going to wear.  It’s like being back at school , except this time my uniform is rather less hideous than the itchy bottle green and white striped monstrosities that made up my school uniform.

Today’s extras:

Houndstooth jacket, vintage Christian Dior

Grey jersey scarf, American Apparel

Cardigan and belt, H&H

Ankle boots, Kurt Geiger

Know someone taking on the One Dress, One Month challenge? Support their cause by donating online to Macmillan Cancer Support here!

So, it’s the first day of March, the first day of One Dress, One Month, and the first outing of The Dress.

It took a good two weeks and far too much time in changing rooms to find something I could bear the idea of wearing for 31 days straight. Ironically, considering my hope that this month would be something of an anti-fast-fashion statement, I ended up getting my dress in a shop that must surely count as one of the biggest purveyors of throwaway fashion – New Look.  Oh, and going out and buying something new?  Not really in the spirit of things either, but practical considerations – mostly involving not starting to reek by about day 5 – meant that choosing a dress I already owned just wasn’t going to work.

I realised early on during my dress-hunt that I was going to have to buy two identical dresses.  This may well be considered  cheating – but, honestly, there’s no way I’d be able to launder one single dress every night in time for the following morning.  This meant, then, that I couldn’t pick anything too expensive – I had to be able to afford two of them, and, what’s more, most of the dresses I looked at from the usual higher-end high street suspects, such as Whistles or Reiss, were dry-clean only and therefore totally out of the question. (It may surprise you to hear that the vast GU Guardian budget does not stretch to staff dry-cleaning costs.)

When it came to colour, though, black was always going to be the only option.  (I wonder if there’s anyone participating this month who hasn’t gone for black?)

In the end I picked this black jersey skater dress; hopefully it’ll prove a versatile choice…

Today’s extras:
Cameo brooch, Starry Starry Night, worn as choker with black velvet ribbon from Mandor’s Fabric Store.
White woolly tights, M&S
Black thigh-high boots, vintage
Black ruffle-fronted cardigan, Reiss
Know someone taking on the One Dress, One Month challenge? Support their cause by donating online to Macmillan Cancer Support here!

So many clothes but nothing to wear? Claire Strickett looks at the paradox of fast fashion

With New Year’s resolutions now for most people little more than distant memories, you’ve probably heard enough about diets to last you at least another year. Sorry, then, to draw one more to your attention.

This diet, however, has nothing to do with food, but rather, with shopping. The Great American Apparel Diet (no relation to the clothing chain of a similar name!), was embarked upon by a group of women last September, when they vowed that there’d be “no shopping for one year”, as their website, thegreatamericanappareldiet.com, proclaims.

The project has gained momentum, and now has upwards of forty participants from around the world. These shopping dieters have promised to make the most of what’s already in their wardrobe, altering clothes, finding new ways to wear them, but never adding to their collection. Their reasons for embarking on the project are many and varied, including the need to curb a credit card addiction, curiosity about the depth of their emotional dependency on shopping, making a point about consumerism, an attempt to reduce their carbon footprint, or simply learning to be content with what they’ve already got.

As someone who ranks the time when a friend said they couldn’t remember me ever wearing the same outfit twice among their proudest moments, I’m not sure that I’m quite ready to renounce shopping for a year. But the SRC’s upcoming One Dress, One Month fundraising campaign, running throughout March as part of the appropriately named RAG (raising and giving) Week, was too much of a challenge to pass up.

It’s a simple enough concept: wear the same dresss every day throughout March, get sponsored, and, if you make it, donate the money raised to Macmillan Cancer Research. How hard can it be? Well, I’ll admit that the thought of wearing an identical dress every day for an entire month — surely every fashionista’s worst nightmare — sends a shiver down my spine, even if it is for a good cause. But, above and beyond the charitable aims of the campaign, I’m hoping that it’ll prove an opportunity to re-evaluate the way the fashion industry has got me, and many others, hooked on its ethos of constant change, whereby only the new can ever be good.

It feels like a timely move. The American apparel dieters aren’t the only ones taking a more critical look at the way the clothing industry functions, its wastefulness, and its unsustainability. Their project is part of a growing backlash against “fast fashion”. In the past, concerns about the textile industry have been directed mainly towards the production side of things, with, for example, the scandals that erupted over the sweatshop conditions that were found to lay behind the garments on the rails of so many respected high street stores. These problems have by no means been resolved, but perhaps they will never be until we turn our attention to our changing shopping habits and the drive for ever-cheaper clothes that, in turn, perpetuates poor working conditions for those who produce them.

Fashion is a deliberately fickle and fast-paced industry, and the increasing move towards low-priced but high-volume shopping, sometimes called “the Primark effect”, has capitalised on that. When clothing seems to cost so little, it’s easy to buy almost without thinking. We’ve surely all picked up something which catches our eye and that’s so cheap that we can barely be bothered to consider whether it goes with anything else we own, where we might wear it, or whether it even really fits us properly, before we head to the till.

This kind of thoughtless shopping must surely be at least partly responsible for the staggering statistic that half of all the clothes, shoes and accessories purchased last year by women in the UK have never been worn, resulting in the waste of an estimated £11.1 billion, according to figures released by the climate change charity Global Cool. Closer to home, the survey showed that the average Glaswegian women (unfortunately, men weren’t questioned) spent £1,074 on clothing and accessories in 2008, a whopping £472 of which went on clothes that remained unworn.

Fast fashion, while selling itself as a bargain, looks like a false economy in the face of such figures. While the price tag may be small, the true cost isn’t marked on the label, but is felt elsewhere — in its impact on the environment, for example. The energy and materials used to produce, transport and sell these unworn garments go to waste, and the clothes themselves will usually end up in landfill. Even the old systems of recycling and circulating unwanted clothing, such as second-hand and charity shops, can’t deal with our new shopping habits. These clothes are often of such poor quality, and sold so cheaply in the first place, that selling them on as second-hand clothing simply isn’t worthwhile: charity shops struggle to price the second-hand garments any lower than the price charged “as new” and still make enough money to cover their overheads, while quality is so poor that after a few wears, much “fast fashion” is fit only for the bin.

That affordable clothing is available for people on tight budgets — i.e., most students — is obviously something to be welcomed. That said, we’d be doing ourselves, and our planet, a huge favour if we learned to focus a little more on quality over quantity. While Vogue might blithely recommend prudently investing in a few “statement pieces” that turn out to include a £1500 mackintosh, even those of us on tighter budgets can, paradoxically, save in the long run by spending more initially. Buy a new pair of £25 shoes each month, for example, and the chances are that, in three years’ time, they’ll all have been consigned to the great wardrobe in the sky — some, if Global Cool’s survey is correct, still unworn. Meanwhile, you’re back where you started and have to hit the shops again. Spend the same total on just one or two carefully chosen pairs each year, and you’re much more likely to take care of them, polish them, waterproof them, get them re-heeled, and treasure them for years to come.

Whether I’ll still treasure a dress that I’ve worn for 31 days straight come the end of March is debatable, but I’ll be blogging the One Dress, One Month experience at glasgowguardian.co.uk, hoping to show (myself, as much as anyone) just how much mileage can be got out of one outfit with a little creativity — and a lot of accessories. We all know that no relationship stands a chance without respect — so for those of us who love fashion, isn’t it time we learned to respect the clothes we buy, rather than treating them as disposable?

Who says students have to live on pot noodles and beans on toast? Not us! Each issue our Lifestyle editor shares a recipe that will keep your finances and your body in good shape.

Muffins are one of the best things you can bake in a typically ill-equipped student kitchen. Unlike many cake or biscuit recipes, they don’t require you to cream together the butter and sugar — a technique that requires an electric mixer, or else a lot of elbow grease and perseverance. Good muffins, however, positively depend on a minimum of effort. And, as these are comparatively low in sugar, made using wholemeal flour, and contain plenty of fruit, they’re much better for you than most shop-bought kinds. This recipe is also a great way to use up any neglected bananas that have over-ripened at the bottom of the fruit bowl. The polenta, meanwhile, adds a subtle crunch and a golden colour. Muffins don’t keep particularly well (up to 2 days in an airtight container), but they freeze brilliantly. Defrost overnight for breakfast on the go.

Ingredients (makes 12)
125g wholemeal flour
100g plain flour
50g quick-cook polenta
1 tsp bicarbonate of soda
¼ tsp salt
100 ml neutral-flavoured vegetable oil
40g light brown sugar
35g caster sugar
2 eggs
2 bananas, as ripe as you can find, mashed
75g natural yoghurt
1 tsp vanilla extract
120g frozen or fresh blueberries (or, if you can’t find any at a reasonable price, you can substitute the same weight of raisins or other dried fruit)

And how to do it…

Line a muffin tray with 12 paper muffin cases. Pre-heat the oven to 200 C.
Sift together the flours, polenta, salt and bicarbonate of soda.

In a jug, whisk the oil, sugars, eggs, mashed bananas, yoghurt and vanilla extract until thoroughly combined.

Tip the frozen berries into the sifted flour mixture and toss to coat, then pour in the wet ingredients. Mix very gently until the wet and dry ingredients are just combined, but don’t stir too vigorously. It doesn’t matter if the mixture is lumpy — as long as you can’t see any dry patches of flour, it’s done.

Divide evenly between the muffin cases and bake for 20 minutes or until risen and golden.

If you can cast your caffeine-addled minds back to last year, you may recall Movember, when  the boys — sorry, men — of Glasgow were encouraged to grow a moustache during November to raise funds for the Prostate Cancer Charity and to promote awareness of the disease. Verily, our cup of testosterone runneth over, because this manifestation of masculinity was apparently not enough for the Glasgow boys. It was this tidal wave of testosterone that precipitated the creation of “Manuary”, a Facebook group whose main objectives (if we may so call them) are “fighting, meat, beer and chivalry”. This good-humoured pastiche of masculine stereotypes started life as a joke between creator Mark Stewart and some friends in December, but has now expanded to include over 30,000 members.

The backlash group, “Femruary”, has attracted only 146 members so far, perhaps because girls are none so keen to identify themselves with the unprepossessing by-line image of an overweight woman in a swimsuit. Creator Annie Beauchamp assures me that the origin of this picture was a Google image search for feminism, which is in itself troubling. The tongue-in-cheek gender stereotypes suggested by Femruary include giggling, drinking cocktails, shopping and, of course, pillow-fights in your underwear (as if boys don’t do that).

Why are people suddenly flocking towards gender stereotypes as society at large strives to become ever more gender-neutral? Beauchamp suggests, “Gender stereotypes make it easy to categorise people, and that’s where their attraction lies — simplicity. Obviously, not all stereotypes hold true for everybody, but they are always founded on a commonly perceived truth.” These Facebook groups are a deliberately ironic pastiche of gender stereotypes — we are now supposed to be sufficiently distanced from a time when these stereotypes really did hold sway to be able to find them laughable and trite.

However, as journalist India Knight suggested recently in the Sunday Times, women today are still clamouring to emulate the ideal 1950s household — on top of having children and full-time jobs: “We’ve had the whole Nigella-Cath Kidston thing, where what started off as a camp, tongue-in-cheek joke — the ‘domestic goddess’ — mutated into a strange sort of reality which ended up with women feeling they weren’t worth their salt if they couldn’t rustle up a batch of cupcakes in their 1950s-retro kitchen, complete with pastel accessories and baby-blue Smeg fridge.”

Knight focuses on the extra responsibilities heaped on women, but men too are feeling the strain. As we push towards the ideal of a gender-equal society, everyone is expected to be “a good all-rounder”, with both men and women expected to be just as adept at baking and childcare as they are at DIY and managing a business. These are certainly positive aspirations, but one can see how the monumental pressures they incur (who has the time? the energy?) could drive people back towards traditional gender stereotypes whereby the roles of men and women were clearly defined and everyone knew exactly what they were supposed to do, and how they were supposed to relate to each other.

For Beauchamp, it’s not as clear-cut as that: “I don’t think people actually want to return to gender stereotypes as such. A lot of girls I know are proud of the fact that they don’t conform to traditional feminine stereotypes. I can see, however, why people would want to celebrate particular aspects of their gender — it forms a sister/brotherhood, and creates a sense of camaraderie. It can help to bring people together.”

This is perhaps the most attractive aspect of gender tribalism  — it unites people under a common denominator, allowing them to celebrate what they consider themselves to have in common. Homosocial bonding between men has become much more relaxed of late, with the preponderance of “bromances” spouting forth from Hollywood and the mock-unhealthy relationships between JD and Turk in Scrubs, or Mark and Jeremy in Peep Show.

Where confusion exists now, though, is in how we should relate to each when we’re supposed to have moved beyond fixed gender identities, yet so many of our relationships — especially the romantic ones — are still predicated upon older, more traditional concepts and structures. There remains a fissure between  chivalry and feminism — no-one has rewritten the rule-book to correlate the two, meaning that we’re just as confused as ever when it comes to relating to the opposite sex. Many boys are confused about what exactly girls expect of them on dates these days — will it offend her feminist sensibilities if you offer to pay? Will you look cheap if you offer to go halves? What about same-sex couples? Surely the solution is obvious, though — if everyone could just have better manners, it would solve many a potential dating conundrum. Luckily for all of us, Debrett’s, “the modern authority on all matters of etiquette”, has stepped up to the mark, creating modern etiquette guidelines on subjects from text-messaging to chivalry and beyond.

Generally perceived as archaic and elitist, Debrett’s daily business is ancestry, peerage and the social calendar of the aristocracy. When it comes to dictating manners, however, their website proves to be rather insightful and surprisingly modern. Their line on chivalry is that it should be “manners with a sexy edge”, and that it is entirely possible to manifest good manners towards your lady friend without patronising her. According to their wisdom, “Chivalrous gestures should not feel creepy — there is a fine line between flattering attentiveness and smothering sleaziness.” A lot of their suggestions could easily be described as common sense, and whilst their approach is a little prescriptive at times, this is by no means a bad thing — for example, when it comes to “making a pass”, their suggestion is that one should “never attempt it if you have overindulged”, and I think the majority of us could agree that sounder advice was never given.

Men are advised that boasting about their sexual prowess is not likely to gain them any admiration: “You may want to impress her with your man-about-town credentials, confident that she will be seduced by your savoir-faire and worldly finesse. But be warned: if you get it even slightly wrong, you will look like a sad roué — lecherous, needy, debauched — and she will be making a rapid exit.” This may be something that the boys who wrote about their sexual conquests on Manuary’s wall should bear in mind — all I can say is woe betide you if the ladies in question find out.

Their final, refreshingly gender-neutral word on paying for dinner is that going halves is a sure way to kill the romance of the occasion: “There is one abiding rule — the person who requests the pleasure, pays for the pleasure. So, as a simple point of etiquette, you should pick up the tab for a lunch, dinner of raft of cocktails — if you have invited the other person. The other non-paying party should, however, assume one or more of the minor expenses of the date — after-dinner drinks, a taxi home…”  There is definitely scope for a relaxation of this rule for students, and personally I don’t know many girls who are likely to mind splitting the cost of a meal. The other issue here is that you may find that you’re always the one doing the inviting. Well, perhaps that’s a good indicator that it’s time to find worthier recipients for your invitations.

Equality is a two-way street, and we ought to be able to expect the same treatment from people of every gender, whether it’s paying for a meal, cancelling an engagement or replying to a text message. Good manners cost nothing, and yet we are coming to be surprised when we are treated with the respect we deserve. If we aim to replace stereotypical conceptions of how we ought to relate to each other — conceptions based upon outdated views of gender — with the simple aim of treating everyone with equal respect, then gender relations needn’t be so fraught with tension. We just need to treat each other a little more kindly and put a bit more thought into our conduct. In the meantime, enjoy what’s left of Femruary, look forward to “Gaypril” and “July-curious” — and brush up on your manners!

Glasgow, famous for its shopping, fashion and experimental style, has had one thing missing til now – something that every other self-respecting city from Tokyo to Tel Aviv, from Berlin to Barcelona has. Can you guess what?

A street style blog.

Les Garçons de Glasgow, founded by two friends that share a fondness for the well dressed, has emerged in the last three months to fill a void in Glasgow’s blogosphere. Les Garcons, inspired by The Sartorialist and LookBook, is focused solely on Glasgow’s style in order to reflect the sartorial spirit of the city.

The ingredients are simple, too – a camera, a good eye and an Internet connection. Thrown into the mix are Glaswegians, divided between those with a passion for timeless style and those with an eye for constantly changing fashion trends.

Les Garçons intend to expand their love for Glaswegian style with the ‘A Glaswegian in…’ section that has featured Glaswegians based in New York, Montreal, Berlin and Paris. As well as this, the blog will be running style profiles of some of the brightest stars of Glasgow’s artistic community over the coming months, showcasing the talent the city has to offer.

Les Garçons have recently been invited to photograph the Subcity Halloween Party, Death Disco at the Arches and the institution that is Art School’s Record Playerz on a Thursday night.

For Les Garçons, style is something that is classic, will still look good in ten years time and more often that not is black and vintage. The blog aims to document the looks that hit Glasgow’s sodden streets and reflect the city’s flair for fashion.

You can see more of Les Garçons de Glasgow online here.

Who says students have to live on pot noodles and beans on toast? Not us! Each week our Lifestyle Editor shares a recipe that will keep your finances and your body in good shape.

Ingredients (makes 2 portions)
Vegetable oil
4 good-quality sausages
1 onion, diced
2 cloves garlic, crushed
1 tbsp tomato purée
¼ tsp fennel seeds
125g green Puy-style lentils
350ml stock (vegetable or chicken), prepared and set aside in a jug
A sprig of thyme or rosemary, or a bay leaf, or a sprinkle of dried mixed herbs at a push
8 button mushrooms, wiped clean and sliced in half
Small handful of flat-leaf parsley leaves, roughly chopped

And how to do it…

Heat 1tbsp oil in a large saucepan over medium heat. Brown the sausages on all sides. Set aside.

Pour in enough of the stock (or, better, the dregs of a bottle of red if you have any at hand) to cover the bottom of the pan and bring to the boil, scraping off all the sticky bits on the bottom with a wooden spoon. Pour this mixture back into the rest of the stock and reserve.

Wipe the saucepan with a kitchen towel, then heat 1 tbsp oil over a medium heat. Sweat the onion until softened. Add the crushed garlic and cook 2 minutes more, then add the fennel seeds and fry for another 30 seconds. Add the tomato puree and continue to cook, stirring constantly, until it darkens slightly in colour.

Return the sausages to the pan with the lentils, stock and whatever herbs you’ve got. If the stock doesn’t cover everything, add more water, then bring to the boil. Reduce the heat to a simmer and cook, uncovered, for 45 minutes until the sausages are cooked through, the lentils tender, and the sauce reduced and thickened. Stir occasionally and add water if the stew is getting too dry.

About 5 minutes before everything looks ready, stir in the parsley and mushrooms. Taste and season if necessary before serving with a green salad and some crusty bread to mop up the sauce.