Mrs. Obama in Kors

Michelle ObamaThe White House/Handout The official portrait of Michelle Obama.

In the official portrait of Michelle Obama released by the White House on Friday, the first lady wears a sleeveless black shift dress by the designer Michael Kors.

Mrs. Obama’s selection is notable for several reasons: First, it cements for posterity the sleeveless dress as her signature style, which, as many readers have pointed out, is a fantastic and flattering look for her, as is evident by the dresses she wore on recent covers of Vogue and People, as well as by the Narciso Rodriguez dress she wore to her husband’s first address to Congress on Tuesday.

Second, this is the first time Mrs. Obama has worn a dress by Mr. Kors, one of the most visible American designers working today thanks to his breakout role as a judge on “Project Runway.”

And third, it shows that Mrs. Obama is now wearing designer labels beyond those carried by the Chicago retailer Ikram Goldman. As described in an article that appeared in The Times on Feb. 12, Ms. Goldman has played an important behind-the-scene role in developing the first lady’s style. It also raised concerns about a conflict of interest because Mrs. Obama was wearing mostly those labels carried at Ms. Goldman’s store, such as Jason Wu, Isabel Toledo and Thakoon.

The dress Mrs. Obama wears in the portrait is a black version of a red gown in bonded crepe jersey that was shown in Mr. Kors’s spring 2009 runway show. The runway version retails for $3,195, but a spokesman for Mr. Kors would not discuss the price of the black dress made for Mrs. Obama.

Still, Ms. Goldman played a role in selecting the dress. She had approached Mr. Kors and asked for some items for Mrs. Obama, the spokesman said. He added, “we had no knowledge of where and when the pieces would be worn.”

Comments are no longer being accepted.

I adore the Narciso Rodriguez dress she wore to President Obama’s first address to Congress. Gorgeous color. It’s so nice to see a smart, accomplished woman be feminine too. Very refreshing. I wish that Hillary Clinton would wear more dresses. She’s gorgeous, but she’s stuck in a pantsuit rut.

Maria
//www.carinanewyork.com

hell’s kitchen guy February 27, 2009 · 7:17 pm

Those pantsuits on Clinton make her look dowdy and — let’s face it — emphasize her least-attractive physical attribute, her table legs.

I disagree. Sleeveless dresses do nothing but call attention to her disproportionately long arms, and that is anything but flattering. Michelle, we know you’ve got “guns,” but please keep ’em holstered.

Yes Maria, it would be lovely if Hilary wore more dresses. Unfortunately, she has “cankles” so skirts are rather unflattering on her. I’m sure she is well aware of this and is the primary reason behind the decision to wear pants all the time in public.

Re: the “right to bare arms” controversy I’ve been seeing on other websites today, many women would sell their family members or various bodily organs to have such exquisitely toned upper arms. If you got it, flaunt it, I say.

another interesting item on the official photo

who’s that in the background? Thomas Jefferson?

she looks absolutely stunning. and those arms! many hours in the gym. love her.

Michelle is gorgeous, and I am so glad to see her style has improved since the campaign when I thought some of the dresses/suits she wore emphasized some of the more unflattering parts of her figure. I love the sleeveless look and the more drapey fabrics she is wearing now.

If I had those biceps I’d be wearing that dress too!! Michelle…you Go First Lady!!!

Classy, strong, and confident is a hard combination to pull off. A+!

The First Lady looks wonderful, but I am absolutely disconcerted by the blue drapery that, at a quick glance, appears to be emanating from her head.

Is this really her official white house portrait? It just goes to show how hard it is to take a really good photograph.

It’s a beautiful dress and she’s undoubtedly a beautiful woman, but why are there blue curtains growing out of her head? Her positioning in the room is all wrong. Couldn’t they have followed Vogue’s lead and contacted Annie Liebowitz? I imagine that Annie would have donated her services if asked. This photo is dreadful.

who’s that in the background? Thomas Jefferson?

— Larry Moss

I believe that’s James Madison.

Totally agree about the curtains, Stephen! She looks fantastic, but positioning is horrible.

Besides the blue drapery, the flower that seems to be sitting on her hand is disconcerting. Time for a do-over. It would be a fine photo with a bit more attention to fixing those items.

Hillary must be able to ditch those pantsuits. She isn’t running 24/7 in a campaign now, so she has no excuse for not exercising or not eating properly.

Actually, I’d like to see her official portrait include the girls. Better yet, how about a family official portrait.

About the portrait behind the First Lady….it does look like Thomas Jefferson which, if it is, could be a sly reference to th Jefferson-Hemmings relationship. Lest we forget, Hemmings probably ought to have been a First Lady, too, and the first African-American First Lady.

As a Virginian, I’m pretty sure that’s Thomas Jefferson in the portrait. As for Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits, my guess is she doesn’t want people paying too much attention to how she dresses or to take too much time worrying about it herself. She seems just to want to get the job done.

She looks fabulous….Best I ever saw her. I love Michael Kors..the dress ia a classic, and she looks classic in it.

Actually the portrait is very Jackie Kennedyesque….same style dress (slender, fitted though the Kors jersey flows better than the 60’s dresses)

And even more Jackie, check out the double strand of pearls worn around the neck , very much the way Jackie herself. wore her famous double strand of pearls.

Beautiful! I liked her dress at the address on Tuesday, too.

I keep hoping to read about who pays for Ms. Obama’s lovely designer clothing. She never seems to wear the same thing twice, and even with the President’s salary, I can’t imagine how she affords all that. It also seems unfair to expect her to pay for the great number of outfits she must wear.

The country is heading into a depression and Michelle Obama is wearing and ordereing $3,000.00 dresses. I guess the Obama’s believing that people that make $250,000.00 a year need help from the government would not miss a beat wearing expensive clothing.

And all of you people continuing to TRASH Hillary Clinton forever ad nauseum, EVEN when the article isn’t even ABOUT HILLARY, need to get real. We should be so lucky if Michelle looked like Eleanor Roosevelt or Hillary Clinton, or EVEN ACTED like EITHER one of them, pantsuit or WHATEVER!

The media needs to really quit making Michelle Obama out to be a fashion icon. She is not and this sudden tendency to go armless is a real mess. She needs a stylist to dress her and really tell her putting her arms out, which by the way are not that toned given the shaky way it moves when she waves, is not the way to go.
Michelle needs a style coach badly as evidenced by her recent dresses of choice. Far from a first lady it’s starting to look more like an episode of What Not To Wear.

This designer gown stuff is rather sperficial. A woman of Michele Obama”s intelligence and eduction could well devote herself to more substantive concerns.

She will harm her husband’s policies.

The first official portrait should be her. Those drapes must go. Her arms are just perfect. Many of us wish that we had such beautiful and well toned arms. She has a great sense of style and shows her confidence. I agree with the Sally Hemmings first lady!