or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Random fashion thoughts - Page 6958  

post #104356 of 109053
I was expecting more.
post #104357 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeemon View Post

mmm underwear

uhoh.gif
post #104358 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by jet View Post

i love athleisure, but you need to actually be in shape so as not to appear like a lazy fuck

Isn't it only women who do the whole "athleisure" thing, though? Or what is the men's version of athleisure?

post #104359 of 109053
Among men's internet fashion circles it's often conflated with a lot of other aesthetics (streetwear, techwear) but it's a lot of the time same thing. Nike's Tech Fleece offerings and the gyakusou line is one example. And then there's throwback sportswear stuff like Reigning Champ or Todd Snyder x Champion or mega nerd japanese repro sweatshirts like Buzz Rickson or the Real McCoys.

Then there's brands like Outlier or John Elliot or Isaora making high end athletic clothes you could wear from there and high-fashion "sporty" sneakers like Raf Runners or Quasas or Ricardo Tischi x NIke, Fragment x Nike or even mainstream but "cool" sneakers like Flyknits and Adidas Tubulars and the Asics Gel-lyte III.

Also totally underrated is Lululemons men stuff, which sells a bunch of clothes that have athletic/technical details and are actually pretty cool.

Sweat blazers are a different sorta thing though.
Edited by GraphicNovelty - 1/19/15 at 6:55am
post #104360 of 109053


Btw: Great game!
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicelynice View Post

I hope y'all were watching that football game
I just had PRK surgery and my eyes are about to fall out of their sockets but DAMNNNN

DAMN

fan2mJl.giffan2mJl.giffan2mJl.gif

1HafKaC.jpg
post #104361 of 109053

Thanks for the explanation. I guess some of the points you made don't deviate too far away from my own "personal" style. My legs are just too short for tech fleece pants :confused:

post #104362 of 109053
Missoni "scarf-shirt".... paging @RegisDB9

post #104363 of 109053
so here's a random fashion thought: I've been reading @dieworkwear's thoughts on minimalism, which reference Ms. @Rosenrot's writings on the subject (here and here). The question i keep coming back to is the same as the one Rosenrot explores in the second piece of hers that I linked, which is essentially this: What's the distinction between Minimalism and clothes that are just minimal? I'm tempted to refer to those minimal (not Minimalist) clothes as basics, since they're characterized by a kind of stripped-down utilitarianism that is focused more on easy function and less on aesthetic or conceptual qualities. An example would be Calvin Klein dresses in the ’90s (Rosenrot's example in her piece), but also a lot of pretty plain stuff today like Our Legacy.

If that's the case, then dieworkwear's characterization of Normcore as a kind of minimalism may be a bit off (sorry dieworkwear). Or is it? Would be curious to know what people think.

Either way thanks to dieworkwear and rosenrot for writing about this stuff.
post #104364 of 109053
Focus on fabric, construction, and fit while stripping as much detail as possible. Jil and Helmut perfected it imo. For menswear, at least.
post #104365 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by pickpackpockpuck View Post

The question i keep coming back to is the same as the one Rosenrot explores in the second piece of hers that I linked, which is essentially this: What's the distinction between Minimalism and clothes that are just minimal? I'm tempted to refer to those minimal (not Minimalist) clothes as basics, since they're characterized by a kind of stripped-down utilitarianism that is focused more on easy function and less on aesthetic or conceptual qualities. An example would be Calvin Klein dresses in the ’90s (Rosenrot's example in her piece), but also a lot of pretty plain stuff today like Our Legacy.

If that's the case, then dieworkwear's characterization of Normcore as a kind of minimalism may be a bit off (sorry dieworkwear). Or is it? Would be curious to know what people think.

Either way thanks to dieworkwear and rosenrot for writing about this stuff.

The normcore comment was more tongue in cheek.

Some of OL's line isn't actually that minimal, but of the stuff that is, I'd call that minimalism. Dimat and Gracia might call it Post Minimalism.

The first photo in that post is from an OL lookbook.
post #104366 of 109053
edit: this was in response to nahneun. if you read the posts it's a little more complicated than that. there are some basic qualities that Rosenrot lays out, and in that framework you can argue that Deconstructivist designers, notably Margiela, are Minimalist as well. Margiela's stuff often had lots of visual details, but conceptually it often reduced garments to their foundations—quite literally in the sense of letting all the underlying structures show. so then Minimalism isn't just about appearance; it's also about intent. there's another element too that's important to Minimalism, which is eschewing figuration—ignoring the shape of the body, in simple terms. the balenciaga egg coat would be an example since it imposes a shape rather than conforms to the figure of the body. that means fit isn't really relevant in the way you're suggesting. and with basics, fit is usually critical, like with the Calvin Klein dresses mentioned above.

now to dieworkwear: I figured it was kinda tongue in cheek, but it wasn't the first time I've seen normcore stuff referred to as Minimalist. i raised the point because that never really made sense to me. guess your piece was just a jumping off point for me to bring that up. i do see the term Minimalist getting thrown around a lot though when referring to stuff that i think of as basics, though, and it always kinda irks me.
post #104367 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by pickpackpockpuck View Post

if you read the posts it's a little more complicated than that. there are some basic qualities that Rosenrot lays out, and in that framework you can argue that Deconstructivist designers, notably Margiela, are Minimalist as well. Margiela's stuff often had lots of visual details, but conceptually it often reduced garments to their foundations—quite literally in the sense of letting all the underlying structures show. so then Minimalism isn't just about appearance; it's also about intent. there's another element too that's important to Minimalism, which is eschewing figuration—ignoring the shape of the body, in simple terms. the balenciaga egg coat would be an example since it imposes a shape rather than conforms to the figure of the body. that means fit isn't really relevant in the way you're suggesting. and with basics, fit is usually critical, like with the Calvin Klein dresses mentioned above.

Not sure I understand your question then. Do you mean what's the difference between Dimant's definition of Minimalism and clothes that are just minimal? I think Rosenrot outlined it in her post, which is why Dimant would prob call the Our Legacy stuff Post MInimalism.
post #104368 of 109053

Rosenrot pretty much summed it up in her last paragraph:

Quote:

Ultimately Minimalism, regardless of its iterations, “seeks to challenge perception of space and matter, ensure purity of design, and to reduce form to its cogent, accessible essence.”

 

 

basics like Our Legacy or whatever other plain jane scandinavian sportswear brand (COS, Tres Bien), have none of the underlying tenets of Minimalism (with capital M) -- well maybe the "accessible" part. to me they are just simple, plain albeit thoughtfully-designed clothes. re: the 90s wave of US minimalism, Helmut Lang was far better at going beyond pure basics than Calvin Klein, DKNY, et al.

 

Normcore is a completely different idea. it's about wearing stuff your Aunt in Wisconsin wears (Nike windbreaker, LL Bean flannel) but in Williamsburg or Austin.

post #104369 of 109053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker View Post

Normcore is a completely different idea. it's about wearing stuff your Aunt in Wisconsin wears (Nike windbreaker, LL Bean flannel) but in Williamsburg or Austin.

Well there was Rosenrot's comment that a lot of this stuff can start to blend into generic, nondescript pieces from high-street brands, which is what inspired my normcore joke. It was more of a bad way to end a post than a serious comment about normcore.
post #104370 of 109053
Where is Rosenrot? I was under the impression that she joined StyleForvm and was ready to start contributing.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts