Since striking out solo from One Direction, Niall Horan’s personal music and style has developed greatly – something he proved Sunday night at the 2017 American Music Awards. Aside from winning the new artist of the year honor, Horan stepped up his fashion game in multiple stylish looks. To give a better understanding of how the singer-songwriter’s sense of style has progressed over the years and the direction it’s going in the future, Billboard got the inside scoop speaking with the star’s stylist, Ellie Stidolph.
“I think Niall’s style has evolved naturally as he got older,” she said. “He likes classics with a twist and is interested in how well things are made. It’s been fun working on bespoke pieces with some of our favorite British brands like Percival, Folk and Oliver Spencer. Music and fashion go hand in hand and Niall’s style reflects the authentic, personal nature of his music.”
From the casual white T-shirts and sneakers he used to wear with his former bandmates, it’s clear his style has become more sophisticated. “Since 2015, it’s become our tradition to do a suit for the red carpet,” Stidolph revealed of Horan’s AMAs outfits. “I think it’s a great opportunity to showcase how great Niall looks in slick tailoring. He actually often says he would wear a suit everyday if he could.”
However, as we saw in the black henley he wore for his performance of “Slow Hands” during the show, Horan is also after comfort when it comes to his attire, especially on the road. “He’s pretty low-key for tour,” continued Stidolph. “We had fun shopping for vintage T-shirts together in L.A. and I’m forever scouring eBay for them. I’ve bought a lot of Eagles tees at 2 a.m. and then forgot about them until they’re delivered. A great T-shirt, pair of jeans, along with R M Williams boots and Niall’s a happy man onstage.”
No matter how much his wardrobe changes as time goes by, there’s one thing the singer will never get tired of: accessories. Though Horan typically just wears hats when he performs, Stidolph confirmed his eye for accessories is only growing. “Niall enjoys building on his look,” she mentioned. “My approach for accessories, in general, is to let him build. I bring unique options to shoots all the time. You see, I love collecting articles of clothing on my travels and Niall is the same.”
8K NOTES! 8k notes on this repost of my art I swear the more time that passes the more I hate that I ever drew this piece of art I really don’t know how many times I have to say this but PLEASE do NOT re-distribute, re-post, trace, or otherwise use my work in any way without my consent
It astounds me how often we fail at being able to comprehend two complex concepts at the same time.
I’ve been seeing this post going around in two forms, about how Rogue One (which I have yet to see, so please NO SPOILERS) has an extreme lack of women (including background characters). That’s a really good, important point to discuss. And then there’s a post bashing that same article, pointing to the fact that the film highlights many non-white men and dismissing the article as white feminism.
Both of these may be correct.
The ability of a film to have great representation for men of different races, creeds, abilities and backgrounds does not for a moment contradict the inability of the film to have adequate representation for women of any race, creed, ability or background.
This is why I hate the “trash fire” all-or-nothing mentality. It cannot cope with the notion that something can be good and bad at the same time, in different corners and contexts. For example: something can be great for racial representation and terrible for LGBTQ+ representation. The former does not automatically make the thing great; the latter does not automatically make the thing terrible. (Key word: automatically.)
Not only that, things can have different meanings to different people based on their different experiences. For someone mixed race Asian-white, a main character like Chloe Bennet’s on Agents of SHIELD may be hugely important. For someone black, the show’s troubling history of killing off most of its black characters may be deeply problematic. Neither is wrong.
Personal experiences shape our interpretations of things. Experiences are not universal. The world is not comprised of absolutes. The stunning lack of women in film (at every layer) intersects, of course, with the stunning lack of non-white people in film (at every layer), but neither is more or less important than the other. (Especially since the doubly stunning lack of non-white women in film is something we should talk about more.) It is not “white feminism” to point out that a film with ten character posters had only one devoted to a (white) woman (even if she is the lead), just because the remaining men are non-white. Nor is it misogynistic to appreciate the film’s focus on (male) non-white heroes.
I’ve been thinking about this a lot in the last hour and a half.
Taylor got SO MUCH shit in 2012-early 2014 that I feel like we were in constant internet fights defending her against assholes who went after her just because it was the “cool” thing to do. Then, in the 1989 era, Taylor became so universally loved, both musically and personally, and it was SO beautiful to watch.
But then, as it seems to happen, so many started to shit on her. The media turned on her- again. People she trusted- people she let back in even after they had badly hurt her in the past- turned on her (in some cases, for a second time.) People she took on tour with her and welcomed on HER stage took sides with people who backstabbed her. I feel like in 2016 and even 2017, we watched slam after slam after slam against her, and it broke my heart.
If that hurt us, can you even fathom how that made HER feel? And yet here she is, rising like a damn phoenix and for that I am so damn proud of her.