or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Unfunded Liabilities: a/k/a The Cloth Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Unfunded Liabilities: a/k/a The Cloth Thread - Page 1105

post #16561 of 19918
nm
post #16562 of 19918
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post


I don't really want to argue with people on this side of the board. Sorry for engaging it in the first place.


Less argumentative for some; and more informative. Your response illuminated an appeal that I couldn't understand and provoked a wonderful critique from @sprout2. So thank you.

post #16563 of 19918
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post


I don't really want to argue with people on this side of the board. Sorry for engaging it in the first place.


Don't be sorry. I wish I had logged in to this thread earlier to read your thoughts, which are generally very well-informed and on point.

 

As for sprout2's rant, well, it's pretty fantastic stuff. A coruscating critique of everything that's wrong about fashion these days. But how the hell does it spring from a single image of a garment on some online store?

 

I actually thought that patchwork overcoat was kind of cool.

 

Not at the price of course. I think it's the price that got sprout's goat, not the thingy itself.

 

But hey, why not put some ridiculous tag on the thing and see if it sells? I mean, taking a fool for his/her money is a kind of performance art in itself, innit?

post #16564 of 19918

Here's another way of looking at it. At some price point, that patchwork overcoat makes sense. If you were cold, and you had a dollar in your pocket, and it was on sale for a dollar, you'd probably buy it, and be glad.

 

I think it's therefore safe to assume that the Sproutster's beef with it had less to do with the garment itself, than with the way it was presented. The price, the air of exclusivity (hey, there's only one left! - until some doofus buys it, and then we'll make another one, but of course it will also be a pièce unique and for that one, buoyed by our own chutzpah, we will jack the price up even a bit more), the arty-farty rant about legacy fabric and history and texture...

 

In reality, all of that context and self-knowing post-structuralist posturing actually adds value, in some people's eyes. Just not in Sprout's.

 

Ultimately, it's about the money.

 

But...back to the overcoat. Like I said before, it's really not so bad. Kind of cool. Interesting textures. Decent silhouette. I'd like to see it worn by a real person - maybe it flows well, maybe the asymmetry of it is fetching. Maybe the lining is also cool (it was mentioned in the website blurb). There could be some actual value here.

 

But...for eight large, you'd be wanting to get a lot of wear out of it. And there lies a problem. A statement piece like this can probably only be worn a handful of times before the impact and the novelty wear off, and then it just becomes another overcoat, and maybe you don't really want to have people staring at you on the subway and wondering whether you've got a gold Rolex they could lift.

 

Ultimately it's considerations like these which would steer me away from buying this, even if it looked great on me, even if it were guaranteed to magnify my streed cred, even if its purchase were to validate and transform the career of a struggling young fashion prodigy... and of course, assuming I had the cash, which like most people, I don't.

post #16565 of 19918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coxsackie View Post

maybe you don't really want to have people staring at you on the subway and wondering whether you've got a gold Rolex they could lift....

Let's agree to disagree but if I saw someone wearing that, absent external context, I'd assume they couldn't afford a proper coat.

Perhaps that's what many are finding offensive - for the asking price you could have a coat handmade especially for you by someone whose tailoring skills are world-class, and you could have a fair choice of fabrics including either a unique vintage deadstock cloth or something very luxurious.

That coat is made of disassembled thrift-store garments, and even the workmanship inputting the pieces back together looks sub-par.
post #16566 of 19918
This is a conversation that never goes anywhere on the MC side. Just like some discussions on fit, quality and construction often go nowhere on the SWD side. Every year, I see people peeking their head on the other side and slowly shifting their initial reactionary approach to start to understand and even appreciate the other side's perspective. It always makes me happy when that happens - but it can only happen organically.
post #16567 of 19918

I really really like some of the stuff from rare weavers actually having looked at some of the stuff on instagram. I still think it's ridiculously overpriced for what it is, and I still think some of the way it's framed is very pretentious, that's all.

post #16568 of 19918
Disappointed they didn't name the line (Very) RVRE weaves.
post #16569 of 19918

Which is more self-indulgent: making/selling/buying an $8,000 coat from scraps of old fabric, the associated impulses, and commercial pitch, or an 8,000-word rant about the garment and its sellers and buyers that engages in broad generalization and gross reductionism of real people to strawmen caricatures?

post #16570 of 19918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Six View Post

Which is more self-indulgent: making/selling/buying an $8,000 coat from scraps of old fabric, the associated impulses, and commercial pitch, or an 8,000-word rant about the garment and its sellers and buyers that engages in broad generalization and gross reductionism of real people to strawmen caricatures?

The former, hands down.
post #16571 of 19918

For one that isn't 8000 words, and for the second, spending time talking/writing about stuff that interest you is not the same as making up bullshit to sell things to other people. Of course, you're suggesting that what he's saying IS bullshit as well, in which case I would be interested in hearing why.

post #16572 of 19918

Who cares? Its the internet, weird shit is everywhere.


Edited by venividivicibj - 1/28/16 at 10:03am
post #16573 of 19918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testudo_Aubreii View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Six View Post

Which is more self-indulgent: making/selling/buying an $8,000 coat from scraps of old fabric, the associated impulses, and commercial pitch, or an 8,000-word rant about the garment and its sellers and buyers that engages in broad generalization and gross reductionism of real people to strawmen caricatures?

The former, hands down.

 

I'm not sure the world wouldn't be a better place if more people thought the answer was the latter.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isolation View Post
 

For one that isn't 8000 words, and for the second, spending time talking/writing about stuff that interest you is not the same as making up bullshit to sell things to other people. Of course, you're suggesting that what he's saying IS bullshit as well, in which case I would be interested in hearing why.

 

Oh, did I overstate something for rhetorical effect that likely misrepresented the thing itself? It's a good thing that hasn't occurred in the course of this discussion.

 

sprout2 seems like an interesting and funny guy with a lot of smart things to say about men's clothing. I'm just not a fan of the genre of writing--particularly popular on the internet--of shitting on people who are mostly doing no harm by caricaturing them in ways that are specifically crafted to find a particular kind of audience. The post makes some interesting points, but they're wrapped up in a style of writing that seems to me more for the audience than to support the points themselves.

post #16574 of 19918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Six View Post
 The post makes some interesting points, but they're wrapped up in a style of writing that seems to me more for the audience than to support the points themselves.

 

A symptom of the zeitgeist, to be sure.  And we haven't even had the first primary yet. 

 

I'm no acolyte of capitalism, but one of its primary features is that it disassociates price from value.  In this case, I think that's a good thing--my disdain or critique does not infringe on your ability to find meaning and pleasure in the thing, or to own it. 

post #16575 of 19918
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post

This is a conversation that never goes anywhere on the MC side. Just like some discussions on fit, quality and construction often go nowhere on the SWD side. Every year, I see people peeking their head on the other side and slowly shifting their initial reactionary approach to start to understand and even appreciate the other side's perspective. It always makes me happy when that happens - but it can only happen organically.

 

If anybody from MC is looking for a place to start on the other side, Cotton Dockers has done a watered-down version of that Rare Weaves piece in what is a solid and MC-appropriate fit:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

http://www.styleforum.net/t/394687/the-what-are-you-wearing-today-waywt-discussion-thread-part-ii/20040_20#post_8173234

 

That is a Rebuild by Needles shirt, which is constructed of strips from a bunch of vintage white shirts. Although, Rebuild by Needles can often look like this:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Unfunded Liabilities: a/k/a The Cloth Thread