Well, this is an interesting twist. In a new Washington Post piece by Nia-Malika Henderson, here, the first lady "denied reports that she has changed her stylist, Ikram Goldman." This runs counter to recent stories from esteemed fashion journalists Robin Givhan and Cathy Horyn, here and here.
Givhan reported that "Goldman ... hasn't been riding herd over the first lady's wardrobe in some time," while Horyn wrote, "For what it’s worth, I hear that Ikram Goldman, the Chicago retailer, is no longer directly involved with Mrs. Obama’s wardrobe, since December."
Is it a matter of semantics, perhaps the word "stylist"? Or merely circulation of bad information? Hmm ... this is quite peculiar.
On the fashion front, she continues to draw attention and headlines for every outfit, no matter the circumstance - New York Magazine's Web site ran an item titled "Michelle Obama Observed a Moment of Silence in Narciso Rodriguez" when she donned a blue overcoat in the wake of the Tucson shootings. And her choice of a floor-length Alexander McQueen gown for the state dinner honoring China drew scrutiny from conservatives for its color (red), and some in the fashion industry balked that she went with a British design house. She denied reports that she has changed her stylist, Ikram Goldman.
"I like to patronize American designers, and the vast majority of the clothes that I wear are. But there are a lot of other designers that have cute stuff, too. So I don't think that I'm any different from any other woman other than the fact that people see what I wear and then they talk about it," she said.
"But my decisions aren't so complex. It's really just sort of: 'How cold is it? Do I have to stand outside?' and 'What am I going to use to cover my arms if I'm freezing so I'm not shivering while I have to give a speech?' It's really stuff like that."
"Michelle Obama's unfolding legacy" [The Washington Post]
"Michelle Obama on what she wears" [Politico]
"More Evidence That Michelle Obama Has Ditched Stylist Ikram Goldman" [NYMag]