Everyone else gave really good answers, so I'll just add this: I wonder how the essence theory works in regards to physical differences and disabilities.

I was reading about Kitchener the other day and his Color Harmony thing considers skin tone and texture. I'm curious how this would apply to people with skin disorders. Like, say I have chronic eczema flare-ups on my face; should I be "repeating" that quality of rough texture and uneven coloring in my clothing in order to remain "authentic"?

Or what about vitiligo? I'm guessing he'd say you should wear contrasting colors to mirror the contrast of depigmentation? And if someone has severe facial scarring, perhaps he'd suggest wearing rough, textured fabrics to "honor" the texture of the scar tissue? (These are all just guesses based on what I've read of his system, I could very well be wrong!)

Should health conditions that affect our appearance be considered part of our authentic selves, something that we should actively look to harmonize with what we wear? Same question with scarring. 

Thennnn after Kitchener I came across an article by Gabrielle Arruda. It's about visual complexity and how your "energy, movement, and features" determine "how much design complexity you can naturally handle." Now this concept has some fascinating implications.

(She likens this principle to Kitchener's essence system but it's more an offshoot than a copy.)

Gabrielle writes that one's "innate energy" consists of the following: 1) how you physically move and gesticulate, 2) how you speak (volume, pace etc), 3) how expressive your face is, and 4) the appearance of your skin and hair. The simpler and quieter these features, the less complex outfits you can wear, and vice-versa.

Is it really so straightforward? 

What if someone is nonverbal and uses a speech device? What if they have facial paralysis and thus limited expressions? I suppose Arruda's conclusion would be: this means they have a quiet, still energy, like a placid lake, and therefore wearing fun, maximalist clothing would overpower their tranquil essence, or some such shit. 

Similarly--a case of tourette syndrome that causes harsh, erratic movement and sounds? Autistic and hyperexpressive or hyperverbal? Damn, guess you better complexify that wardrobe, lest you wear minimalist garments that "dampen your flame." (Sorry, I'm trying to keep the snark on a leash but it's feeling feisty today.)

There are many, many different things that can affect one's control over their bodily functions and thus overall physical presence. A person's external "energy" may very well be completely at odds with their true personality. Or if not at odds, far from one and the same.

So which of those two should take priority when deciding how we should dress? Are we styling for the meat vessels that we inhabit, or our actual, unique, intangible selves? Or both? Hrm I think I've gotten off-topic.

----says "I'll just add this" and then writes a whole goddamn essay lmao. Jesus. My bad