This is a *bad* article. Yeah sure, it is well written. No grammer errors, easy to read, yadda yadda yadda. What makes it awful is the content, the implications, the ideas. If we can draw assumptions about the author, Robin Givhan, from the article; then we can conclude the author leads a trivial and shallow life.

I am annoyed that the kid's character is defined by his choice of colors and shoes. Further, Givhan trivializes the recent interest in MUG's. Worse, by mentioning Brad Pitt in "Troy", the article implies that cutting edge fashion (like MUG's) be only reserved for the "beautiful people". No wait... I went back and re-read... there is no implication; it is blatent! It is people like Givhan that really chap my ****.

Where Coviello's ensemble goes wrong, however, is with...
See, this sentence right here is reason enough to declare this article a waste of time. The use of the word "ensemble" and the fact that it is declared "wrong" (as if there is some high authority that is being offended), just really... [ian then mutters something angry and incoherent]. Of course this is the Washington Post, Fashion section at that; I shouldn't be surprised

-ian