Flamboyant Gamine vs Dramatic: what’s the difference?
You might have heard some people say “Flamboyant Gamines are just petite Dramatics” – hell, even I may have said it at some point.
While that statement is not an entirely inaccurate description, it doesn’t really help you differentiate between the two Image IDs and see the nuances.
This post is my attempt to clarify the differences and hopefully help you narrow down your type!
Let’s start with the basics.
Flamboyant Gamines are a mix of yin and yang. Their yin comes from their size and their yang comes from their shape and bone structure.
(This is a page from my Kibbe Verified Lookbook, but the information comes from David Kibbe’s book Metamorphosis)
Let’s look at a few examples.
This is Penelope Cruz (5’ 6”) who is so obviously a flamboyant gamine it’t not even funny.
She looks entirely sharp narrow, and elongated in her bone structure – her ankles, knees, and face all have a certain “narrow” feel to them.
But that is all “compressed” onto a visually tiny frame.
Would you ever have guessed she was 5’6”? I was frankly surprised to see she was so tall because she looks so petite!
This mix/match in her body is best honored with an equal mix/match in her style.
For example, look at Penelope Cruz in this very dramatic outfit.
The blazer and pants have an entirely elongated, vertical, and narrow look to them with the monochromatic colors and sharp tailoring.
Now flamboyant gamines need to accommodate for petite as well as vertical, whereas dramatics need to accommodate for just vertical.
As a little reminder in case you’re new to this,
Petite is when you are a) short, and b) small all over (in terms of bone structure)
Petite accommodation is when you need to maintain narrowness and precise fit to your clothing.
Vertical is when your silhouette from your shoulders to your knees have an “elongated”/”long” and “straight” look to them.
Vertical accommodation is maintaining long, straight, uninterrupted lines in your clothing.
If flamboyant gamines were “small dramatics”, then the logic would follow that all they really need to do to dress for their proportions is add petite accommodation to any outfit that fits a dramatic, right?
But that’s not exactly the case.
Even though this blazer is actually well fitted on Penelope Cruz and does maintain that petite accommodation, it’s almost like the vertical accommodation is a bit too much.
Now look at this outfit on Penelope Cruz.
It has much of the same elements as the last one – an elongated, vertical feel and monochromatic look with the jacket and pants.
But she looks much better, right?
In my opinion, by keeping her blazer open, we can see a clear end point where her white shirt ends and her black pants begin.
This creates a stop and start point for our eyes, which “cuts” or “creates a break” in that long vertical line.
Penelope Cruz, by virtue of being a flamboyant gamine, is elongated on a short frame – and that is exactly the template that this outfit follows – elongated, yet shortened throughout.
Here’s another example. Zooey Deschanel (5’ 5”) is a verified flamboyant gamine, just like Penelope Cruz.
If you look at her overall frame, it’s quite narrow and sharp. She doesn’t have double curve, she doesn’t have prominent width to her upper back/shoulder area, she doesn’t have width to her frame, and she has a pretty “straight” look to her body – all yang traits.
But there isn’t enough moderation for her to be a dramatic classic or soft classic either. Her torso looks visibly shorter than her legs/arms, and she has more elongation than not.
She also has a petite/short look to her, which is where her yin comes from.
This mix/match of yin and yang within her body means that a mix/match in her style looks the most cohesive on her frame.
This is Zooey Deschanel in an outfit that fits with dramatic style lines.
The blazer and leggings are in a monochromatic color palette which create a long, sleek, and straight vertical line for our eyes to follow, the blazer is angular and sharp for the most part (barring the rounded edges at the bottom), and even her shoes add some sharpness with the pointed toes.
It looks… a bit too sharp and long for her, right?
Now look at this outfit.
She looks so much more “at home” in this look, even though it maintains a lot of the same “sharp” elements like the last one.
The blazer is still angular (arguably even more than the last blazer), the pants are quite straight legged and made of a heavier weight material, and the shirt has collared edges which add to the angular look.
And yet, it looks better.
How?
In my opinion, the use of colors and cuts is what makes the difference.
The pants, blazer, and shirt are all fitted very well, so that is already a given.
However, notice how:
Her shirt is a different color than her jeans.
Her blazer is in a cropped style.
Because her shirt is both tucked in and a different color than her jeans, our eyes have a “break” in the vertical line. It creates an element of “shortened lines” which match her own body.
Because her blazer is in a cropped style, it adds to those “shortened lines” being created.
Whereas a Dramatic might look more cohesive with a continuous line and look less ideal with breaking the vertical into pieces, Zooey Deschanel looks harmonized and powerful when she incorporates the exact opposite into her looks.
Now Dramatics are entirely yang.
Dramatics are vertical dominant so elongation would be noticeable somewhere in the body.
One of the biggest differences between a flamboyant gamine and a dramatic is that a dramatic will visibly look elongated on a much more prominent frame.
As in, they will look elongated but not look petite.
(This is a page from my Kibbe Verified Lookbook, but the information comes from David Kibbe’s book Metamorphosis)
Let’s look at an example of a Dramatic.
Keeping in line with the pant suit theme, this is Cate Blanchett, a verified Dramatic (5’ 9”).
At her height, she’s already limited to Dramatic, Soft Dramatic, or Flamboyant Natural.
Cate is both literally long, and looks like she is made of long, vertical features.
She is sharp throughout – both in her face and body.
In fact, it would be hard for me to point out a single yin (short, rounded, lush, soft) trait in her features, which removes the possibility of being a Soft Dramatic.
She also doesn’t have any noticeable width to her upper back/shoulder area which removes any possibility of needing width accommodation, and in turn, removes the possibility of being a Flamboyant Natural.
Therefore, she is a Dramatic.
Ignoring the colors (which I think are a bit too harsh for her softly contrasted skin tone/hair color), the actual cuts and materials used are very suitable for a Dramatic body type.
However, the slight contrast in the colors of the black shirt and black washed jeans creates just enough of a break in the vertical line to create that “stop point” and “start point” where her shirt meets her jeans.
That break in the vertical line which would look fantastic on a Flamboyant Gamine is not her best look (in my opinion, of course 😉).
On the other hand, look at Cate Blanchett when she maintains a long vertical line through the use of a monochromatic color palette.
The suit is tailored and well fitted, yes, but more importantly, the monochromatic look does not create that break in the vertical.
Just like the last pantsuit, this one also uses color to maintain a long vertical line.
This unbroken vertical in her clothing also matches her own unbroken vertical line in her body, making her look powerful and vibrant, not drowned out.
Also, on a more unrelated note, notice how different Cate’s torso and Penelope’s torso look in terms of visual length.
Is it as obvious to you as it is to me?
Even though both women are wearing a cropped blazer style, it looks perfect on Penelope whereas I have an urge to reach into the screen and pull Cate’s jacket down and make it longer 😂.
Right?
I think it’s because Cate’s torso itself is visibly much longer than Penelope’s. The crop blazer is almost “fighting” her body’s proportions rather than meshing with them.
The monochromatic gray palette did a good job in using colors to maintain a long vertical line, but I still think it would look even better if the blazer was a tad bit longer to match Cate’s proportions.
In short, simply adding petite accommodation to Dramatic style lines doesn’t work for Flamboyant Gamines because that doesn’t always result in the very necessary “mix/match” yin/yang style.
And therefore, classifying Flamboyant Gamines as “petite” dramatics is an insufficient conclusion (even if it can be helpful as a very basic way to understand).
This blog series of comparing Image IDs is to help anyone who is in between two types and wants help narrowing it down!
If you want to see more visual examples of Kibbe verified celebrities to help you figure out the similarities/differences between the Image IDs, I made a comprehensive lookbook of every verified celebrity organized by type as well as descriptions of each ID.
If you're interested, click this link for more information!
Finally, if you have any blog ideas, ID comparison requests, or feedback for this post, comment them down below!
Constructive criticism helps me learn and grow, so I welcome it all 🥰
As always, Happy Styling!!
