I was inspired by froggiebecky's thread about what's in a name, as well as a couple of comments on my outfit posts that I don't look like my moniker, 00Noir. I also remember comments from the past that I did not look very UWP. So I guess the question is whether a moniker is supposed to "sum up" the look that you project - or is it more of a jumping-off point to inspire outfits and purchases? Or to put it another way: does your moniker stand for the way you want others to see you, or does it stand for the way you see yourself?
For me - for 00Noir - I keep coming back to this picture of Daniel Craig. Even though it's from The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and not a Bond film, it sort of encapsulates the intersection between the slick, dressy agent and the gritty, downtrodden detective that I envision for 00Noir. She has been in a scrape or explosion or kidnapping or marathon foot pursuit through a dusty construction site or pathetic cinematic downpour, and she's looking a little rough. Not that I want to look like I was running through the desert when I walk into work - or even look like a secret agent per se! - but I do want to bring some distressing into the classic mix.
For others, the image and story evoked by "00Noir" is probably different. Some may think immediately of immaculate suits and sparkling femme fatales - and that's okay. For me, the moniker is more some kind of ephemeral aura - something that informs but does not dictate. It's 100% okay if people look at me and don't think, "brooding detective super-spy."
How about you? Are you bothered when you don't look like your moniker?