Bare arms are still for cocktails, and for movie premieres

If you're going to appear on a news program as a public official, you really shouldn't have bare arms. I've said this before. But what happens when you have more than one appearance to make in an evening?

Michelle Rhee recently sat down with ABC News to discuss her service as DC Schools Chancellor, and whether she just cost Adrian Fenty the nomination in the DC Democratic Mayoral primary (she says yes). After a montage of file footage showing Rhee in her signature structured black clothing, she suddenly appears on the screen in a burgundy dress with a cowl neck and no sleeves:

Seeing Ms. Rhee sitting down for a formal interview in this outfit was jarring in the first shot, until the story continues to mention (and show footage of) her appearance on the red carpet for the premiere of a documentary about DC public schools in which she stars. On the red carpet, she's wearing the dress - it's obviously the same night, although the shot is quick and it's never explicitly stated.

ABC could have just as easily chosen not to mention the red carpet appearance, or mention it but not show it. And then we would all be scratching our heads trying to figure out why on earth she was dressed this way. Even with this explanation, I can't recommend this look. Her shoulders practically glow under the studio lights. This dress, as a dress, is pretty conservative and not all that dressy. It would have looked great with one of the many black blazers we know she owns thrown over the top of it. And then we might not even have noticed that she just walked in from a movie premiere.

It's ironic, too, that a woman known for wearing black eschewed that traditional evening wear shade and opted for color instead. But the burgundy works for her. She could even include the dress-plus-jacket look in her regular work wardrobe.

Michelle Rhee's signature look

You probably saw news coverage on DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee's recent labor contract proposal and how it might be paid for. But what you probably didn't see was a recent photo of her. I'm not sure why this is, but there are a lot of old file photos of her out there - you can see the length of her hair go up and down across newspapers, but you don't see a whole lot that's recent. So I went looking for something. Here's a speech she gave at the California Charter Schools Conference last month:

And you know what I noticed? She looks almost exactly the same as on her Time cover in November 2008:

Black suit

Dark lipstick

No jewelry

And very close variations on this look show up on all those file photos in between. It's a signature look, to be sure, but a rather severe one. She has a tough job and a polarizing persona that has nothing to do with how she looks. But if she's ever in the mood to take a more compromising stance, she's going to need to soften it up a bit. Even a switch over to a medium gray (a color that looks good on almost everyone) would be a start. The lipstick should really change in any case - a more sheer formulation in a classic red would do the trick, like Make Up For Ever in True Red 415.