Have you seen this woman? — Brooklynian

Have you seen this woman?

edited 12:33AM in Park Slope
I grew up on President Street and have worked at several stores on the 7th avenue strip in my teen years. I remember seeing a woman, Caucasian, who wore a very strange outfit. It was a white linen top, and what I can only describe as a black dress/pants that looks very much like a burlap sack. She has stringy strawberry blonde hair drawn into a bun. She wears this white top and burlap sack black dress/pants EVERY SINGLE DAY. Week after week, month after month, year after year you will NEVER see this woman out of that outfit! I am not sure if it's her quirky statement on style and commercialism, or if she's just some uber rich PPW/8th avenue eccentric but I wonder if anyone has seen her or knows what the deal is.

Thanks!

Comments

  • I'd much rather know who this woman is in the green dress in the American Apparel ad.

    :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
  • You might be talking about the owner of the then Iron Horse Pub.
  • Subject: woman in white/black

    Idlewild wrote: You might be talking about the owner of the then Iron Horse Pub.
    where was that? That's not the place on 2nd street and 7th is it? Because if so I don't think she's part of that...
  • YES! I've often wondered about her myself. The outfit is almost certainly hand-sewn and does resemble a burlap sack in some ways. Yet it also always looks clean and new, oddly; she must have a closet full of identical getups (?).

    I've seen her many, many times in the Center Slope. She frequently walks a medium-sized dark mutt.

    Would love to know her story. The backstory I like to imagine: She sews her own clothes as a reaction to a world she sees as overly focused on image. She sews them as primitively as possible, and uses the most utilitarian fabric and drab colors, as part of her protest.
  • She is a "minimalist." A non-consumer, very commited to her beliefs. Shockingly enough, I actually saw her with a Starbucks cup in her hand last week :shock: Must've dug it out of the trash. And no, she is not doing this out of poverty. It is a living exercise.
  • BrooklynGigCenter wrote: I'd much rather know who this woman is in the green dress in the American Apparel ad.

    :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
    that's what i'm talkin 'bout.
  • BrooklynGigCenter wrote: I'd much rather know who this woman is in the green dress in the American Apparel ad.

    :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
    Someone you will never have sex with, probably.
  • Is it sad that our materialistic, image obsessed culture is shocked by one non-flamboyant individual who does not flaunt the latest fashion, flash an ipod, or drive a hot car?

    Maybe we're the ones -- assuming we all bought new clothes and fresh Starbucks cups within the last 12 months -- who should be examined under the microscope.
  • Ugh -- it's as if the comments on the green-dress lady were trying to prove burlap-wearing lady is right about everything.

    The first time I saw that ad, I was shocked that anyone would want to showcase a dress that looks like something from the Mandee's markdown rack circa 1982.

    And I'm totally not one of those women who rags on other women and whines "I don't know what men see in her"... but what's the big deal with this girl?

    Oh, nevermind. I'm old enough to know. Tight dress + stupid expression = possibility of easy sex. Which, to most guys, automatically equals HAWTNESS!!1!
  • She's at Stabucks in the early mornings on the weekends and usually sits at the table in the window by the entrance next to the bodega.
  • i think you're taking the comments regarding the american apparel ad a bit too seriously.
  • rtraindweller wrote: i think you're taking the comments regarding the american apparel ad a bit too seriously.
    No, not really. I'm just bemused because the first time I saw that ad, I thought it was horrible:

    1. The dress is 1982 Mandee's markdown rack, as mentioned above, all the way from the too-small, unflattering, one-size-fits-all spandex, to the puzzling turtleneck, to the color

    2. The model looks greasy and stoned

    3. The combination of the stoned expression of the model and the mugshot-style flash photography combine to make an ad that looks like it was pulled at random from some corn-belt suburbanite's MySpace page party snapshots

    ...Yet I keep reading guys commenting on the HAWTNESS of the model and the dress. I have to assume that it's because of factors 1-3 above, not in spite of them.

    It's true... sometimes men are as mysterious to women as women are to men.

    But I have to add: Kudos for the AA art director and creative team for understanding their target market and designing an ad that really works for that demographic. Who cares if I think it's ugly? I don't buy AA stuff anyway.
  • The Chipster wrote: She is a "minimalist." A non-consumer, very commited to her beliefs. Shockingly enough, I actually saw her with a Starbucks cup in her hand last week :shock: Must've dug it out of the trash. And no, she is not doing this out of poverty. It is a living exercise.
    Interesting, thanks. Are you an acquaintance? Have you engaged her in conversation? And just to clarify I'm not putting her down, I was just curious about her motives behind the wardrobe choice.
  • Brooke Lynn Knight wrote: [quote=rtraindweller]i think you're taking the comments regarding the american apparel ad a bit too seriously.
    No, not really. I'm just bemused because the first time I saw that ad, I thought it was horrible:

    1. The dress is 1982 Mandee's markdown rack, as mentioned above, all the way from the too-small, unflattering, one-size-fits-all spandex, to the puzzling turtleneck, to the color

    2. The model looks greasy and stoned

    3. The combination of the stoned expression of the model and the mugshot-style flash photography combine to make an ad that looks like it was pulled at random from some corn-belt suburbanite's MySpace page party snapshots

    ...Yet I keep reading guys commenting on the HAWTNESS of the model and the dress. I have to assume that it's because of factors 1-3 above, not in spite of them.

    It's true... sometimes men are as mysterious to women as women are to men.

    But I have to add: Kudos for the AA art director and creative team for understanding their target market and designing an ad that really works for that demographic. Who cares if I think it's ugly? I don't buy AA stuff anyway.
    Where is this ad you guys are talking about??
  • NativeSloper wrote:
    Where is this ad you guys are talking about??
    It's been appearing on the right side of Brooklynian pages for a while. Here it is, in all its testosterone-ripening HAWTNESS:

    image
  • Brooke Lynn Knight wrote:

    2. The model looks greasy and stoned

    3. The combination of the stoned expression of the model and the mugshot-style flash photography combine to make an ad that looks like it was pulled at random from some corn-belt suburbanite's MySpace page party snapshots
    Just to play devil's advocate, but your avitar is playing on some of these same "attractive" attributes.

    The mouth half-open, leaning forward like you (just assuming its you) could be crawling toward someone in bed, the hair a little messy and tossed across your face...

    All kinda the same to me minus the dress. :P :P

    PLEASE, though, I use all those things at various times in my self-portraits. I am just questioning your critical view in comparison to the picture you use on here to represent "you". Just pointing this out without any malice, as you do seem like a genuinely cool person :wink:
  • LOL, caahyoko! That had never occurred to me.

    Honestly, IMO my avatar is the furthest thing from "hot," let alone HAWT. It's a random picture I took a couple years ago while trying out my new Mac laptop -- it came with a camera and a program called "PhotoBooth" that allows you to take instant low-res pics of whatever's in front of the screen and apply weird filters to them, like the faux-Warhol thing you see in my avatar.

    I chose it because it gives a vague idea of what I look like, but not so much you'd recognize me on the street.

    But hey, if someone finds it hot, that's okay... I guess. Just remember I'm happily married with a kid. But then, who knows -- maybe the AA model is too! 8)
  • Brooke Lynn Knight wrote: LOL, caahyoko! That had never occurred to me.

    Honestly, IMO my avatar is the furthest thing from "hot," let alone HAWT. It's a random picture I took a couple years ago while trying out my new Mac laptop -- it came with a camera and a program called "PhotoBooth" that allows you to take instant low-res pics of whatever's in front of the screen and apply weird filters to them, like the faux-Warhol thing you see in my avatar.

    I chose it because it gives a vague idea of what I look like, but not so much you'd recognize me on the street.

    But hey, if someone finds it hot, that's okay... I guess. Just remember I'm happily married with a kid. But then, who knows -- maybe the AA model is too! 8)
    Yeah, I think photobooth has some magic powered juice in there that makes people look hotter than they are trying to look. :) Gotta love the photobooth.

    That would be the ultimate irony of all this hullabaloo if that girl is actually walking around the slope right now looking like any other young, disheveled mom.

    Maybe she's even wearing baggy homemade pants! :shock:
  • caaahyoko wrote: Yeah, I think photobooth has some magic powered juice in there that makes people look hotter than they are trying to look. :)
    You know, I think you're right. The question is: Can we isolate this effect and find a way to apply it to clothing store fitting rooms?
  • caaahyoko wrote: Yeah, I think photobooth has some magic powered juice in there that makes people look hotter than they are trying to look. :) Gotta love the photobooth.
    Mac users are just sexier :D
  • Brooke Lynn Knight wrote: [quote=NativeSloper]
    Where is this ad you guys are talking about??
    It's been appearing on the right side of Brooklynian pages for a while. Here it is, in all its testosterone-ripening HAWTNESS:

    image

    this ad is familiar, but in all honesty i never noticed the gal.
    hawt ???
    maybe cuz she's possibly bra - less,
    other wise, average

    but then i think actually get the original joke being made.

    " do you know this woman ? "
    " No , do you know anything about this one ?? "

    and its funny :wink:
  • A minimalist, non-consumer who is at Starbucks every morning, got it.

    Yes, I've seen her around for years. If she's a minimalist maybe she should be living in a tent in the park or living in Amish country.
  • Subject: AA model

    Well, her face ain't all that but she has a nice body (big boobs . . . thin waist. . .nice legs) . . . I guess she gets points for red hair. I don't see why someone would make such a fuss about it though. The dress is lame, too . . .
  • OMG, this thread is hilarious! I always wondered about this woman. I moved out of Brooklyn a year ago and would love to unravel the mystery behind sack skirt lady.
  • Subject: Really, would you like someone to post about what you wear??

    Yavel wrote: OMG, this thread is hilarious! I always wondered about this woman. I moved out of Brooklyn a year ago and would love to unravel the mystery behind sack skirt lady.
    I might be asking for a firestorm of criticism but am I alone in feeling this whole thread is KREEPY?

    It's almost like virtually stalking a person who has their right to their own privacy. Yes we all have curious minds but isn't it ok just not to know why someone chooses what they choose. I actually work in fashion and have to spend an enormous amount of time observing what people wear and why so I have this particular pull in my thoughts alot - BUT... I also feel we have to be able to self edit our thoughts. The lady in question is a human being with her own right to live life as she pleases and not be subject of analysis, speculation etc. and all online where she may be unaware. I don't think the motivation behind knowing what her life is about has anything to do with really caring about her just being entitled to know some factoids about someone perceived as an "eccentric".

    I think boards are great for some issues but more and more they just become a big gossipy conversation that at times lowers otherwise good people. We are not entitled to the innerworkings of everyone's life just because we need our curiosity fulfilled. Come one people, really!

    Sorry have to call it like I see it.
  • The lady in question is a human being with her own right to live life as she pleases and not be subject of analysis, speculation etc.
    OK - so, now we can't talk about any people? Wow. How fun.

    So, um, does anyone like crackers?
  • gags2008 wrote: So, um, does anyone like crackers?
    must you use that racial epithet?

    (that was a joke people, put the gun down)
  • So what are the rules . . . we can't talk about someone else without their knowledge at all? What are we doing here that interfere's with this woman's "right to live"???

    I don't even know who the heck this person is, but if I see some unusual character walking down the sidewalk (which is fairly common, to the point that frankly I hardly remember five seconds later) I don't consider it a violation of their "right to live" to mention it to someone . . . nor would I feel it to be an encroachment of my "right to live" if someone somewhere happened to discuss me without my knowledge.

    Has society become THAT sensitive, serious, stale and sober that the appearance of an unusual or different person should not be mentioned that it might be a violation of the codes of human deceny or a violation of a persons civil rights? Is it so tasteless and officious to comment on a woman that wears a black burlap-bag dress everyday as some kind of avant garde personal statement?

    Should I try to control my thoughts so that I am never curious or so that I never wonder about a person's motivations for making an unconventional fashion choice? Or should I simply just not talk about it?

    Please clarify . . .

    Thanks
  • Yeah, gotta say I don't see any violation of privacy rights.

    The woman seems to have been spotted in public places (i.e. Starbucks, walking down the street, etc.) which by their very nature are not private. If someone peered into her home to gather these observations, then that would be a different story. If someone took her picture and then attempted to profit from her image in a non-editorial and commercial way, that too would be a different story.

    I think there have been a number of interesting and enlightening conversations on these boards about neighborhood characters (in particular, I'm thinking about the thread some time ago about the gent who spare-changes at 7th & Berkeley).

    Reading the thread, I don't see anything libelous or judgmental. A good rule of thumb on these boards (or even talking to a friend at a party) is to ask yourself if you would be willing to type or say the same things if the person was standing there with you.
  • A good rule of thumb on these boards (or even talking to a friend at a party) is to ask yourself if you would be willing to type or say the same things if the person was standing there with you.
    Haha . . . really? Are you speaking as moderator?

    Maybe I require clarification, but I thought the whole point of these boards and being "internet anonymous" is that you could express yourself in ways that you wouldn't in "polite society". Well, not the WHOLE point, but certainly preserving a certain level of anonymity allows one to be honest (or dishonest) or express oneself with a degree of freedom one wouldn't necessary feel in a face-to-face situation.

    When I stepped in human poo in the subway, I didn't actually even tell my friends I was so embarrassed. But here? Who cares? Noone knows me . . . so I don't care.

    And . . ."KREEPY"??? - posting the word "creepy" in all caps starting with a K . . . what's that all about??? Are we supposed to feel even more like weirdos and perverts cause someone called us out by capitalizing it and starting it with a K?

    The whole idea that we should "edit our thoughts" . . . how patronizing. Sounds like an over-inflated sense of self-importance; because one works in the rag trade one is an expert on eccentric people's needs to not be talked about? Isn't the whole fashion industry based on pointless speculation about who's wearing what?

    Anyway, give us credit to know the difference between inappropriate personal attacks and harmless speculation about why some woman would wear a bag everyday . . .
  • gags2008 wrote: Maybe I require clarification, but I thought the whole point of these boards and being "internet anonymous" is that you could express yourself in ways that you wouldn't in "polite society". Well, not the WHOLE point, but certainly preserving a certain level of anonymity allows one to be honest (or dishonest) or express oneself with a degree of freedom one wouldn't necessary feel in a face-to-face situation.
    Um...yes and no.

    Yes, internet anonymity can give you some comfort in speaking about difficult or controversial topics. But there's a difference between "Anonymity lets me feel comfortable about discussing the crack house that is on the corner" and "anonymity lets me feel comfortable about gossiping about a neighbor, poking fun at her beind her back and maybe causing people to ostracize her." In one case, you're preserving your own safety while you tackle a dangerous situation -- but in the other, you're just disguising your tracks in the course of being a dick.
  • I do not see what is wrong with discussing a person's public eccentricities... the way he or she chooses to dress or behave while in public... without spreading false information.

    To me the line would be crossed were we either to claim we had inside knowledge about the person's history, psyche, etc., or equally wrong, were we to disseminate accurate information of a private nature.

    So long as everyone admits they're just speculating, and so long as they are not speculating about someone's sex life or otherwise inherently private business, what's the harm, and what makes it creepy (or worse, KREEPY)?
  • I'm surprised some people are assuming that she actually cares that some people think her clothes are "weird". If she made those choices for the reasons that have been enumerated above, I doubt she cares about the opinions of random people. I could be completely wrong, of course, but it seems kind of presumptuous to assume that someone would be concerned with every little thing other people say about them. How could you get though life if you were?
  • gags2008 wrote:
    Haha . . . really? Are you speaking as moderator?
    just a point of information
    when the moderators of this board are speaking as moderators, we say so and usually use a different color and preface the note with
    MOD NOTE:

    but this discussion is about what people think is appropriate in discussing their neighbors, not what is allowed on Brooklynian.

    I think West Meets East has a point.
    I'd hate to be the person who reads this board and thinks that's my Comme des Garçons sack cloth you are hating on
    :D
    I don't know this woman, but I doubt she cares what some people think about her sense of fashion.
  • "The whole idea that we should "edit our thoughts" . . . how patronizing. Sounds like an over-inflated sense of self-importance; because one works in the rag trade one is an expert on eccentric people's needs to not be talked about? Isn't the whole fashion industry based on pointless speculation about who's wearing what?

    Anyway, give us credit to know the difference between inappropriate personal attacks and harmless speculation about why some woman would wear a bag everyday . "


    Excellent, well said.
  • The lady you're talking about, her name is Joanie. She's kind of like a 'bag lady' who isn't homeless. She alternates between the black and white shirt, I guess depending on the season, and yes she wears the same black nylon-type dress everyday all year round. As you can probably gather from her appearance and behavior, she's a bit out there. She is friendly at first, but will eventually snap on you if you know her long enough (especially if you're male).
    I don't think you're missing out on any big exciting mystery by not knowing more about her and her routine.
  • "black nylon-type dress"

    DAMMIT! Now I AM curious! Not about the lady but the dress. How can you call it NYLON!?!?! Nylon and burlap don't look like each other in the least!

    F**k - now I will have to stalk her . . . hahaha . . . . kidding!
  • Subject: Re: Really, would you like someone to post about what you we

    West Meets East wrote: [quote=Yavel]OMG, this thread is hilarious! I always wondered about this woman. I moved out of Brooklyn a year ago and would love to unravel the mystery behind sack skirt lady.
    I might be asking for a firestorm of criticism but am I alone in feeling this whole thread is KREEPY?

    You're just annoyed because we're stalking you too and you're sick of feeling our eyes on your back.
  • Obamanut wrote: The lady you're talking about, her name is Joanie.
    Can you give us her social security number too?
  • I have installed surveillance cameras on that block and am watching them on my laptop as we speak . . . .

    Just sit back and watch and . . . soooon enough . . . all my KREEPY burlap fantasies will come true . . .

    Heheheheh *drool* heheheheheheheh *heavy breathing* hehehehehehe
  • She makes her own clothes and doesn't have a computer. I've seen her around the neighborhood for about 17 years now. She is also one of the Park Slope 100 from Only the Blog Knows Brooklyn. A fact she was completely unaware of until I told her. She's never been anything but nice to me, then again I don't know her that well.
    THE SKIRT LADY because you sit in the window at Starbucks in your beautiful self-designed clothing and quietly create amazing necklaces out of dried fruit and berries from Prospect Park.
    http://onlytheblogknowsbrooklyn.typepad.com/only_the_blog_knows_brook/park_slope_100/index.html
  • . . . sits in Starbucks making dried fruit and berry necklaces?????

    :shock: AAAAAAAAAGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

    Uh, I think we have more to fear from skirt lady than vice versa . . .

    KREEPY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • gags2008 wrote: . . . sits in Starbucks making dried fruit and berry necklaces?????

    :shock: AAAAAAAAAGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

    Uh, I think we have more to fear from skirt lady than vice versa . . .

    KREEPY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    I don't know about that, I think you need to watch out more for the "normal" looking people than us freaks.
  • True dat!

    I kid the burlap / nylon skirt lady. Hey - if I had any clue who she was I'm sure we be best buds . . . just thought making necklaces from berries in the park was too funny. Hope kids don't think it's edible and that. Could be tragic.

    I mean, wow . . . but then again I have some strange hobbies too . . .
  • Oh, she's definitely an odd duck but I tend to like the strange ones. :)
  • caseopele wrote: Oh, she's definitely an odd duck but I tend to like the strange ones. :)
    Normal people are freaks. 8)
  • Subject: Re: Have you seen this woman?

    NativeSloper wrote: I grew up on President Street and have worked at several stores on the 7th avenue strip in my teen years. I remember seeing a woman, Caucasian, who wore a very strange outfit. It was a white linen top, and what I can only describe as a black dress/pants that looks very much like a burlap sack. She has stringy strawberry blonde hair drawn into a bun. She wears this white top and burlap sack black dress/pants EVERY SINGLE DAY. Week after week, month after month, year after year you will NEVER see this woman out of that outfit! I am not sure if it's her quirky statement on style and commercialism, or if she's just some uber rich PPW/8th avenue eccentric but I wonder if anyone has seen her or knows what the deal is.

    Thanks!
    I know a few people who have talked to her over the years. Supposedly she was some kind of fashion designer way back when. Yeah, strange that she only sports one fashion. An eccentric Sloper indeed... I wish there were more interesting folks like her still around. Things are getting a bit bland 'round here.
  • No kidding, I am sitting here thinking of some quirky way to dress or be in PS so that everyone will know exactly who I am though never know who I am. It seems it would be some strange form of "performance art" that I could take over as a lifestyle and would allow me togive up my dreary existence.
  • Aaaaahhhh yeahhhh...

  • Yeah! HAMMER TIME!!! :D
  • caseopele wrote: She is also one of the Park Slope 100 from Only the Blog Knows Brooklyn.
    Ok, now I feel dirty. :?
  • But does anyone know about the properties that she or her daughters, or she maybe one of the daughters, owns. Its on 2nd. street and 7th ave. its a gorgeous building but i hear that it has been out of use for over 30 years. why did that not do anything with it. from what i hear the bar lost its license and the school went up and now the building is vacant. by now it has to be worth millions. and i think the city owns it due to unpaid taxes. what do we know about the building is what i am getting at.
This discussion has been closed.