dear garance.

in response to this post by my favourite fashion blogger, garance dore: http://www.garancedore.fr/en/2010/06/08/not-much-sex-even-less-city/

garance! you are a beautiful writer. really. you captivate an audience with your first few words, and i consistently sit on the edge of my seat for more like a kid who popped a piece of sugar-coated candy dressed in the most appealing of childhood colors for the very first time.

and although i have yet to see sex & the city nor disagree with most of your sentiments in this post, i do disagree with one thing - aging isn't glamorous. when i wasn't tall enough to head to our local amusement park, i watched my mom take my older sister to the estee lauder counter at marshall fields for the first time. her blush. her mascara. her glamour. aging to the tender age of 13 meant entering glamourdom. then came her jewelry collection, her dresses, .... her shoes! i waited for the day when i would age to starting line of the glamour run, and i think that's where we differ. you have to age to start your run of glamour, but i don't believe there is ever a mandatory finish line. throwing in your heels is like quitting the marathon on mile 20.

real glamour becomes more glamourous with age. although i envied my sister for entering the wondrous world of glamour before me, my mom held the title of glamour idol. with every year, she grew more into her glamour. her stride became more custom to her own path.

aging is glamorous, if you let it be. true appeal is a woman who shines in her own look, which time can only mature. today, three days after her fifty-seventh birthday, her comfortability in her heels and the jewels that she's acquired perfectly to her style show me that glamour only grows with age.