or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › The Contentedness thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Contentedness thread - Page 4

post #46 of 527
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bam!ChairDance View Post

Burgundy + black is a winning combo.

You know I never thought to try this. I always wore burgundy shoes with gray, navy or olive tones. I can see it might be quite nice with black. I'll give it a shot.
post #47 of 527
Thread Starter 
that's the other thing about this thread:

Whenever I travel I notice quite a bit that, being limited in what I can take, I often have to make certain combinations that I never would have thought of. Often these work, surpisingly.

I wear raw denim with either zip boots or CPs, but they'd probably also work with longwings, sleeker shoes etc etc.

gray pants are work with navy shoes, but could and should be worn with pretty much anything.
post #48 of 527
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghdvfddzgzdzg View Post

The flexibility of the bomber is one of the reasons I wear it so frequently. I can do, and do all the time, the SF uniform--white T and everything--but it actually gets the most compliments when I wear it in business environments on top of a button-down with gray or navy wool pants. I've thrown a tie on with that look too for that George HW Bush steez: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
397
The other reason I wear it so frequently is its weatherproof nature.
from the toj gallery: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
263
263
And the VTG:
263
467
467
531
The VTG is less flexible as a staple; you kind of shape an outfit around it. It does do well in a variety of settings, and yes, I've worn it as a business casual item with a white shirt and gray slacks, but this thing does not fuck around. It demands a strong outfit underneath it. There's a lot it won't work with that the bomber will, like longwing bluchers, most cardigans, or ties. You do what it wants or your outfit will fail.

You must be one of the select few with a calf bomber - I think the guy who makes the bombers got pissed off with how difficult calf is to work with compared to lamb and only makes bombers in lamb now.

That brown calfskin is the same as my moto. Such a great leather. The bomber is much more versatile in styling, I think. If I was to recommend a leather to a noob, it would have to be the bomber. Can be worn with anything.
post #49 of 527
I have a NDG waxed 'short parka' that has been a 3 season jacket for me since 2008; hell, I wore it last week on a nasty, Irish June day. I also bought a lot of ts(s) in FW 10 and while I've gotten rid of a bunch of it, I still wear one blazer at least once a week. It's just on the right side of grungy steeze at this point. I find myself getting rid of more and more and buying less and less.
post #50 of 527

subscribed. 

post #51 of 527
i think this pic sums up what i wear the most sans shirt. i usually wear a ckc hidden placket shirt and im good to go.
siki im silk/linen jacket from s/s 2011 is pretty versatile and i can mix it into different looks.
silent polios pant. simple cotton poplin fabric with typical damir details like zipper pulls and asym cut at the back. love the high/long rise. its not so much of a drop crotch.
ann d boots from fw12. at first i thought about returning them because they were a bit plain for my tastes but as i wore them more and more they developed some character and mesh well into my wardrobe. i realized not every piece needed to be a statement piece lol. the boots are a perfect height for me to boot-tuck (a little shorter than last iteration of the vitellos with wedge sole)
i wear all these pieces throughout the year. well, siki im gets 3 seasons while the rest get 4
263

as for sneakers, first iteration of the mmm paints are my go to. coined OG painted gats by a few on SF biggrin.gif
post #52 of 527
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gettoasty View Post

satisfied is like settling and i rank it below being happy
i hold the same valuation for being satisfied and content though i see the former as a better place to be
seeing how they almost sold out in my size and the pair i received yesterday and wearing now fits so wonderfully, happy is a good descriptor.
happy that i picked these shoes up than some CP achilles in black nod[1].gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by snake View Post

Funny, I find satisfied > happy. But to each their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by APK View Post

When it comes to stuff like clothing, me too. For some reason, I associate being happy with a clothing purchase as that fleeting emotion that stems more from buying something than the item itself.

Some interesting thoughts from Recent Purcases.

I don't want to say "We should aim for satisfaction" because that ignores the fact that it's nice to buy new things. But is it nice to own and wear new things, too?

Or is satisfaction more to do with the "completeness" of the wardrobe? This itself is an endless goal, IME.
Quote:
The mindset of waiting for happiness is a never-ending cycle. You get a better job (yay!) and then immediately start thinking about what your next promotion will be. You get a nicer house and immediately start looking at how nice your neighbors’ houses are, or the faults in the house you have. You try to change your spouse or kids, and if that works (good luck), you’ll find other things about them that need to be changed. It keeps going, until you die.

Keep in mind I'm not saying that we shouldn't buy new things, just that we can source happiness from what we already have.

Agree? Disagree? Comments?
post #53 of 527
If money doesn't make you happy, then you probably aren't spending it right (Google QuickView online)
http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/DUNN%20GILBERT%20&%20WILSON%20(2011).pdf
Elizabeth W. Dunn a,⁎, Daniel T. Gilbert b,1, Timothy D. Wilson
Quote:
One reason why small frequent pleasures beat infrequent large ones is that we are less likely to adapt to the former. The more easily people can understand and explain an event, the quicker they adapt to it (Wilson & Gilbert, 2008), and thus anything that makes a pleasurable event more difficult to understand and explain will delay adaptation. These variables include novelty (we've never experienced the event before), surprise (we didn't expect it to happen), uncertainty (we're not entirely sure what the event is), and variability (the event keeps changing). Each of these variables makes an event harder to understand and as a result we pay more attention to it and adapt more slowly. And, small pleasures are more likely to satisfy these conditions than are large ones. Having a beer after work with friends, for example, is never exactly the same as it was before; this week the bar had a new India Pale Ale from Oregon on tap, and Sam brought along his new friend Kate who told a funny story about dachshunds. If we buy an expensive dining room table, on the other hand, it's pretty much the same table today as it was last week. Because frequent small pleasures are different each time they occur, they forestall adaptation.

[...]

The happiness provided by frequent small pleasures helps make sense of the modest correlation between money and happiness. In a study of Belgian adults, individuals who had a strong capacity to savor the mundane joys of daily life were happier than those who did not (Quoidbach, Dunn, Petrides, & Mikolajczak, 2010). This capacity to savor, however, was reduced among wealthy individuals. Indeed, the positive impact of wealth on happiness was significantly undercut by the negative impact of wealth on savoring. Quoidbach et al. (2010) argue that wealth promises access to peak experiences, which in turn undermine the ability to savor small pleasures (see also Parducci, 1995). Indeed, when participants are exposed to photographs of money (thereby priming the construct of wealth) they spend significantly less time eating a piece of chocolate and exhibit less pleasure while doing it. In short, not only are the small pleasures of daily life an important source of happiness, but unfettered access to peak experiences may actually be counterproductive.

[and so on]
post #54 of 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post

Some interesting thoughts from Recent Purcases.
I don't want to say "We should aim for satisfaction" because that ignores the fact that it's nice to buy new things. But is it nice to own and wear new things, too?
Or is satisfaction more to do with the "completeness" of the wardrobe? This itself is an endless goal, IME.
Keep in mind I'm not saying that we shouldn't buy new things, just that we can source happiness from what we already have.
Agree? Disagree? Comments?

Gonna get a little zen for a minute, but because I think it fits here...I'd argue that contentedness comes from the seeking more than the getting. I've been thoroughly satisfied with my Somet 003s, and sit here enjoying them as we speak, even six months after buying them, but I think the real contentment came from learning about what made the 003s great and in connecting with people to find that out, etc.
post #55 of 527
263

visvim kiefer nez perce nome

say what you will about visvim, these are probably my most worn pair of shoes. subtle enough for the average person to not think twice about them, but goes beyond"another chuck-alike" status for me with some extra details and comfort to push them. kinda sad that they're starting to fall apart - although i was lucky enough to pick them up for a relative penance off B&S - but i definitely see myself wearing these to the ground.
post #56 of 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post

I don't want to say "We should aim for satisfaction" because that ignores the fact that it's nice to buy new things. But is it nice to own and wear new things, too?
Or is satisfaction more to do with the "completeness" of the wardrobe? This itself is an endless goal, IME.
Keep in mind I'm not saying that we shouldn't buy new things, just that we can source happiness from what we already have.
Agree? Disagree? Comments?
I think contentedness has little to do with clothing. Rather, feeling a need to continually purchase clothing (or whatever else) reflects discontent in some other aspect of one's life. I made many more clothing purchases when I was very unhappy with certain situations in my life. Now that I've resolved those problems, my desire to purchase has waned. I think I've bought maybe five articles of clothing this year? Although, I don't feel like I am in a state of flux as far as my taste is concerned, so that probably helps as well. And, well, maybe also the fact that I can no longer fit all of my clothes in my closet shog[1].gif
post #57 of 527
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zissou View Post

I think contentedness has little to do with clothing. Rather, feeling a need to continually purchase clothing (or whatever else) reflects discontent in some other aspect of one's life. I made many more clothing purchases when I was very unhappy with certain situations in my life. Now that I've resolved those problems, my desire to purchase has waned. I think I've bought maybe five articles of clothing this year? Although, I don't feel like I am in a state of flux as far as my taste is concerned, so that probably helps as well. And, well, maybe also the fact that I can no longer fit all of my clothes in my closet shog[1].gif

that's another good thing to know.

I think it probably does reflect a state of discontent, but good to also temper that with the last couple of sentences. Many of us would hope that the copping is not in vain!
post #58 of 527
Thread Starter 
This article from a very readable MC blog articulates the main reason I started this thread.
IMO you can't truly like a recently bought item until you've worn it in.
Quote:
Clothes should be worn. They should be used. They become more personal, more distinctive and more beautiful - for me - when they have been worn lovingly for years.

One of the reasons I have always identified with Anderson & Sheppard is that old saying that the suits should never look new when they are walked out the door. Prince Charles, pictured during the recent Diamond Jubilee celebrations for his mother, is a perfect embodiment of that philosophy. Not only does he wear Mr Hitchcock's double breasteds, but he always prefers to darn, patch or otherwise repair his clothes rather than buy new ones. There is a box of old cloth under Mr Hitchcock's cutting board with just that purpose in mind.

One of the key reasons I believe well-worn clothes look better on everybody is that the wearer is inevitably more comfortable in them. You never look stylish when you are conscious of what you’re wearing.

This leads to several conclusions. First, invest in clothes that are good enough to last a long time. Cheap clothes come and go. You rarely develop the same connection with them as with something that has worn with you over several periods of your life.

Second, don’t acquire too much. I know it’s a wonderful position to be in, but I know I have too many shoes. Even with a rigorous policy of giving away or selling old pairs, I have too many shoes. It is noticeable that the newer pairs take a lot longer to acquire character, because they are not worn as much or polished as often. They will probably never catch up. When you get more money, buy better shoes, not more shoes.

Third, look after clothes well and pay to have them repaired. Few stains can’t come out of a shirt if dealt with quickly. They can be taken in and out (to an extent) as you lose and gain weight. Treasure the frayed collar or cuff as signs of your connection to that cloth - don’t wear that shirt to a job interview, but be aware of how good it looks with your old denim and worn-in brogues at the weekend. This is age-worn, old-money style.

At some point you will have enough clothes. That’s ok. Like gradually filling up your house with good-quality furniture, your consumption will inevitably slow. Spend the money on something else. Your kids perhaps. The consumerist urge will fade, and give way to a far richer, more rewarding period in your life filled with easy, simple elegance.


Beyond the fact that clothes need to be worn in, is the fact that a wardrobe full of new items just looks bad.
Edited by hendrix - 7/2/12 at 10:52pm
post #59 of 527
Thread Starter 
When not to buy

i'll start with the obvious:

1. When you can't afford the item.

2. When you just want to buy something.

3. When you are substituting it for something you like better.

4. When you are following other people's opinions and haven't really thought about how it fits your own personal style.

5. When you have to justify buying it because of a sale.

6. When you have to justify buying it because of its "quality"

7. When you have to justify buying it because it may sell out.

8. When you just read a feature or article on the item or brand. This will blind you. selectism etc.

9. When you want to post about it on the internet.

10. When you are buying it because it's a "staple in the man's wardrobe". Seriously, I have no need for a "classic blue blazer, charcoal suit, 10 white shirts, Mac coat" etc etc. Figure out what your own staples are.


please add to this list.
post #60 of 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post

3. When you are substituting it for something you like better.

great list hendrix, although i'm not as convinced about this one. are you saying it's not good to "upgrade"? i for one think that, at least for those who don't have their style quite dialed in, they should dabble using less expensive varieties as "gateway items" than starting out with the good stuff.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › The Contentedness thread