Originally Posted by archetypal_yuppie
Congrats on the site. In fairness, fool was in response to philistine, but I guess you have the ultimate say.
So even you think the outfit is overkill, but my worldview is too narrow for thinking it looks bad. Something there doesn't square. I guess "overkill" is more moderate than "ridiculous/idiot," but is that difference enough to separate fashion pro from philistine?
I recognize there are people who like that "boho/hobo" look (that's what you called it, I don't know any better), but I reserve the right to think it looks nuts and I think you're going too far by suggesting that those who think it looks nuts are philistines.
I'd bet a majority of the CM crowd would agree, and I don't think you'd label them philistines. I'm not suggesting that they would, but if manton/foo/voxsartoria said it looked ridiculous, would you call them that?
Some men like to dress in women's lingerie, is that ridiculous, or is my world-view too narrow? Who get's to draw the line? I think the "boho/hobo" look is more deluded than I am philistine.
To expand this beyond the clothing arena, it's very PC to appreciate and celebrate everyone's differences, but if it goes totally unchecked, shit flies off the handle. I'm one of the courageous few who dares to take the heat from the wild ones for saying "enough of this nonsense." If my opinions are not welcome, then which of us is closed-minded?
I've disagreed with Manton, Foo, and Vox on many occasions. Manton, who is probably the most knowledgeable of the three, and I, are actually pretty good friends, and we have decided that we just come at fashion/style from very different vantage points. Manton refuses to opine on styles about which he has no knowledge, which I think is a prudent thing. He confines his analysis and opinions to styles that fall into the purview of classic menswear. I know the man well enough to guess that he would say that he doesn't understand that attraction in this type of clothing, but that he has nothing really to say about it other than that he doesn't understand, nor is he particularly interested in learning about this type of style. His position is reactionary only when it comes to the small deviations within classical menswear itself.
I welcome all opinions. Like I've said before, I have had some very in depth conversations about all sorts of things with Manton. We frequently disagree. I welcome that type of discussion and disagreement. I do not appreciate ignorance in any form.
This "hobo" look does not come out of nowhere. It has it's roots in the junction between Japanese and western influences. I think that the brand that best illustrates this is Kapital, and the brands use of "boro" fabrics. "Boro" was originally not at all a celebrated thing. It was patchwork, made necessary from poverty. However, like a lot of things originally produced for purely utilitarian reasons, we've come to see the beauty in the commonplace. That's how we also get boiled wools, Casentino, crepe soles, brogueing, and so on. Oh, and just so that we are somewhat on topic - it's the same thing that lead to merino and cashmere fishermen's sweaters. It's reasonably well documented that this type of sweater has only been produced in the Aran Isles for about a century and a bit, and was actually the result of a government initiative to jumpstart the stagnant economy of what are traditionally poor communities. And the "hobo" fit? Yamamoto's explanation for his earliest Y-3 pieces is perhaps the best. He deliberately made the silhouettes drapey and oversized, to evoke the oversized silhouettes of Japanese wearing clothing made for much larger Europeans and Americans. Now, if you knew all of that, and decided that within that context, this is still rubbish, and could articulate why? Then I'd respect your opinion.