What’s up with Kibbe, anyway?

Like I said in my last post, sometimes I’ve wondered if I’m Bright after all. But I forget how much personal style comes into play.

I’m not for sure of my Kibbe style type, but my natural inclinations are a mixture of casual, classic and romantic/girly, with a bit of funky thrown in. What category is ‘funky’ in? I suppose it depends on the definition of ‘funky’, but I don’t think Kibbe accounts for the occasional purple or pink hair streaks, or creatures in jewelry (as in, butterflies, starfish, etc.). I’ve always mixed some ‘edgy’-ness in with my style. (That is, ever since I developed my style. I was a bit of a wreck in high school.)

When I originally took the Kibbe quiz, I came up as a Dramatic Classic, but it didn’t feel right, and I think I might have been thinking of my features as they were pre-motherhood. (Large geometric shapes in jewelry is definitely NOT my thing.) I was relieved to lean more Soft Classic when I took my current features into account, as I really like to wear details like pretty trims and small frills.

Then again, I wouldn’t be very surprised if I turn out to be a freak occurrence of a tall gamine of some sort, if only because I feel comfortable in so many different styles, and the combination of opposites is, I believe, a gamine thing. Some people have said that I look ‘cute’ or have small features, but at 5’7″ my height doesn’t quite fit in. And one of the characteristics, large eyes, is not something I think of myself as having. Although, I have been told by many different people that I could double for Kirsten Dunst, who has been typed as a gamine.

Where is the ingenue in Kibbe? How would one inject youthful playfulness into a Soft Classic look? It really feels like an unfinished, outdated system when I think about it.

I wondered if I am going to be ‘discovering myself’ forever, but then, what’s wrong with that? We’re meant to change, grow, evolve (though not literally evolve). Wouldn’t life be boring if you wore the same things all the time? How else are we supposed to not get tired wearing only our season’s colors?

All this to say, that I am not one for neon colors, and most color-blocking, but that is just another person’s style. It doesn’t mean I’m not bright in comparison to the average Jane!

Permanent link to this article: http://www.brinnarose.com/?p=368


Skip to comment form

    • Lian on April 29, 2012 at 3:55 pm
    • Reply


    Fabulous blog! I’m a bright spring too and stumbled across your blog when doing a search for something bright spring related.

    Just wanted to say, before I even got quarter of the way down this post, I was thinking ‘She’s an ingenue of some type’ – which is what I am (was diagnosed as a Natural Ingenue by House of Colour, UK).

    I’m also 5’7, have big eyes, love little animal prints and pendants etc, ruffles and trims so you sound like my long lost twin 😉

    Good luck on your style and colour journey!


    1. Wow! Hi, thanks for commenting! It’s amazing to hear about other people on the other side of the world who are so similar to us. I’m glad you liked my blog, that someone makes sense of my ramblings!

    • Nicole on June 12, 2012 at 6:32 pm
    • Reply

    Hello lovie, I don’t think 5’7 is too tall for gamine. The “cutoff” listed in Kibbe’s book is a guideline, and I’m a bit over 5’6 and am a Gamine/Soft Gamine style. It’s the combination of opposites, not the big eyes (trust me, I don’t have the large saucer anime eyes either). From what you describe as being comfortable in and liking to wear, I daresay you could pull it off.

    1. Hi! Thanks for taking the time to write something. I am a little surprised that anyone reads my blog right now, as I’ve been on my early pregnancy hiatus. Your comment is a great reminder to me that I’m ready to start posting again!

      I’ve been all over the map with testing my Kibbegory in the last couple of months, and most have thought I am FN or SN, so once again, I am a combination of everything. Do you have any recommendations of Polyvores or similar that I could get an idea from for testing G/SG/FG styling? I’m scared of Kibbe’s 80’s examples. 😀

  1. I agree, Kibbe seems to be missing categories. Ingenue, Athletic, Ecclectic, etc. I also don’t fit in any of the categories. Equal Bs and Cs, maybe a couple of extra Bs. I will agree that Natural sounds like me (I’m definitely not Classic or Romantic), but something is definitely missing.

    Have you not noticed how much of the 80s is back already? One of the descriptors for Naturals…Avoid tapered pants. I always hated tapered pants as a kid!!! The hems were difficult for me to get my feet past and always bothered/hurt my ankles.

    • Sophie on July 17, 2012 at 11:30 am
    • Reply

    Hi there. I am a tall gamine too at 5’7. My body is more yang, while my face and hands/feet are more yin. So many people take the height of the Kibbe types too literally, it’s only one part of the whole picture. Of course I think the height variations have its limits and I doubt a girl at 5’9 could be gamine.

    I don’t think Kirsten Dunst is gamine, on the seasonalcolor forum kibbe board they concluded she was Soft Natural. But she has a very cute face which might be why she seems to like and wear the gamine style. She really looked like a doll as child!

    1. Hi there! My apologies for not responding sooner to your comment, I wasn’t sure what to say at the time, as I am still on my Kibbe journey.
      But, looking back on it now, I’ve realized that it’s very interesting that they say Kirsten Dunst is SN, because I think that may be what I am, or at least a good part of it. (It’s rather hard to tell when you’re pregnant of course.) I do like the classic glamour of SC but I can’t wear it on a casual everyday basis. My current assumption is that I’m a combination of SN & FN. I would be surprised if I am accurately applying that to my wardrobe choices, though!

    • Corinne on May 30, 2013 at 11:14 am
    • Reply

    I just stumbled across this and your blog (lovely!) and my very first impression of you was ‘some kind of Natural’. Your facial features are classic Natural… wide, prominent cheekbones. Maybe you’ve already figured this out, but I thought I’d mention my impression for what it’s worth. x

    1. Thanks! I’m glad you found it. I have settled into Soft Natural for now, thank you for your opinion. Quite a few have thought I am closer to Soft Dramatic, but I have too much youthfulness in me to pull off that kind of drama. I even tried Flamboyant Gamine for a bit, but I couldn’t take the lack of girly details! 🙂
      So for now I am doing Soft Natural in a dramatic way, which can be seen on my Pinterest board for clothes. 😀

      I just stumbled across this and your blog (lovely!) and my very first impression of you was ‘some kind of Natural’. Your facial features are classic Natural… wide, prominent cheekbones. Maybe you’ve already figured this out, but I thought I’d mention my impression for what it’s worth. x

    • Eliza on August 10, 2013 at 5:52 pm
    • Reply

    I agree with this statement wholeheartedly:

    ” It really feels like an unfinished, outdated system when I think about it.”

    AGREED! And I have no home in that system at all. 😉

    1. I THINK I may have found myself in Kibbe, somewhat. I was way off when I took the quiz, every time. But working backwards, I know I’m either SD or D. I’m happy with my Zyla result, though. 🙂

    • KT on March 12, 2014 at 9:12 pm
    • Reply

    I take all things Kibbe with a grain of salt. The questionnaire is terribly vague and doesn’t even make sense at times. Terms like “irregular” are used. Whatever that means is beyond me. It’s also full of gaps. For example, what if your waist is defined but is somewhere between waspish and “slightly” defined? What if your nose is straight, not sharp, broad or upturned? A lot of the questions didn’t provide enough of a range for answers.

    1. I’m absolutely in agreement with you that the test is impossible to decipher. The system works great…if you’re the creator. Otherwise, it’s a guessing game!

    • Olga on February 25, 2015 at 1:32 pm
    • Reply

    Hi! Do you know Dwyn Larson’s typology? Is broader than Kibby’s, there few types are really just missing… Kirsten Dunst is defenatelly not a gamine as a clear gamine ;). Also in Larson’s system. I am on a imagemaker’s course at the moment and Learning about that, as well as Kibby etc. Could be fun to try to type you;)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.