or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › How much of SF groupthink do you actually follow?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How much of SF groupthink do you actually follow? - Page 12

post #166 of 170

^^

But by wearing coat and tie traditional items of clothing, we're already giving up some independence. If you want complete creative freedom in clothing, CM is a dead end -- it's mannerism, where relatively small changes are communicating most of the meaning.

 

Style comes from choices people make, yes, but in any given form, an awareness of the form is important, so when you do something "different," it's with an awareness of why it's different. I also think it's possible to "reverse-engineer" the rules -- taking "this works" and figuring out substitutions for certain things.

 

That said, the world of tasteful CM is wider than "dressed by the Internet" might suggest. Look at all but the most outrageous stuff Vox posts on his blog -- it's relatively tasteful, but it's not all Marinella/spread collar/soft shoulder/brown half-brogue, either. I think a lot of "Styleforum gospel" is based on progressively safer versions of clothes that certain very well-dressed men with very well-developed personal style would wear.

 

Also, plenty of people are happy to play covers of songs, and there's no reason to frown on that.

 

EDIT: The clothes also have baggage -- semiotic meaning beyond just pure aesthetics, and a knowledge of the rules helps to manipulate that.

post #167 of 170

Not sure if this is following group think or not, but this is what I have learned from lurking and participating:

 

1.  Poor fit means a poor outfit, even if the individual pieces are great

2.  It is better to have a smaller more versatile and complementary wardrobe then a large non-coherent one.

3.  For a fit to work each piece needs to make sense from a formality standpoint.

4.  Stick to a consistent and complementary color palette.

5.  I wear tailored clothing much more comfortably in non-formal settings now

6.  Texture matters at least as much as color (so no worsted or smooth trousers with a flannel jacket for example).

 

Where I differ from group think:

 

1.  white shirts and blue odd trousers are not inherently evil items

post #168 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by YRR92 View Post
 

^^

But by wearing coat and tie traditional items of clothing, we're already giving up some independence. If you want complete creative freedom in clothing, CM is a dead end.

 

While i agree with your opinions, and personal style. which you have developed rather well..i must disagree with this highlighted part.

CM has no limits, like anything it can be pretty ordinary, but in some instances, it can become something extraordinary.  we have all seen examples, for me, a special mention to member Eazye, who has improved immensely, while making his own choices.

 

although the groupthink definition of CM is limited, the clothes themselves have unlimited possibilities.  

 

my wardrobe is 80% "CM" and i retain my independance to wear it in continually evolving ways-

. incorporating workwear wherever possible. -not always win (admittedly) ,but always unique, and more stylish than the average guy on the street.

 

the seperation between SW&D and CM, has created an unintentional isolation in what CM really is.   coralling a group in to a smaller circle has only served to increase the intensity of groupthink.   the merging of two worlds once more would open the doors to a larger number of "Approved" choices, and even miracles might happen, uprcrust might wear converse?- who knows. but either way, style is something that just can not be defined. and when it becomes a standard, it becomes "Normal".  and who wants to be "Normal"?

 

Groupthink only serves to  starve the members of choice. making them reluctant to try new things.

depleting the forums of legitimate "Style" . and we, (all of us) miss out on seeing the occaisional epic win. that is completely ground breaking.

 

please don't see this as an argument, - more of a exercise in brainstorming. where we can bounce thoughts and ideas off each other.

no offence is intended.

post #169 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by size 38R View Post

...the merging of two worlds once more would open the doors to a larger number of "Approved" choices, and even miracles might happen...

 



I think Tirailleur1 is an excellent example of how this philosophy drives the composition of some really interesting fits.

http://www.styleforum.net/u/159316/tirailleur1
post #170 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by size 38R View Post

 

the seperation between SW&D and CM, has created an unintentional isolation in what CM really is.   coralling a group in to a smaller circle has only served to increase the intensity of groupthink.   the merging of two worlds once more would open the doors to a larger number of "Approved" choices, and even miracles might happen, uprcrust might wear converse?- who knows. but either way, style is something that just can not be defined. and when it becomes a standard, it becomes "Normal".  and who wants to be "Normal"?

 

I totally agree with this. I think the average streetwear and denim poster (though they seem to have certain group-think-ish elements as well) has a grasp of some things that many CM posters take longer to get a handle on (silhouette and drama come to mind in a big way). On the other hand (maybe this is a misperception) it seems to me that a lot of SWD posters are interested in details of clothing, while more CM posters are interested in details of combinations -- not that either set is myopic, but I get the sense SWD is 60% clothing itself and like 40% fabric/pattern co-ordination, and then CM is the other way around.

 

That's, admittedly, based on me lurking on their WAYWRN more than anything else.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › How much of SF groupthink do you actually follow?