FlyingMonkey
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2011
- Messages
- 7,131
- Reaction score
- 11,036
I have to agree with Vox here, and not because I think MC is better than SW&D in any way.
The main root difference between MC and SW&D is this. MC is based in 'Classic Western Male Style' (CWMS) - a set of norms that has emerged during the course of the early-mid Twentieth Century about how men of particular social classes should look*. This means that it is actually quite easy to judge (if one knows what these basic norms are) whether someone is doing it right or not (and yes, this includes a certain degree of leeway for 'rule-breaking', although real Dandyism or Foppishness both sit uncomfortably in MC because they draw on aesthetics with an only partly-shared trajectory).
However SW&D is based in the diffusion of high fashion into more everyday settings (essentially the adaption and/or commercialization of runway styles). Because these are extremely diverse (even though there are identifiable commonalities over time and space) and draw on a much more varied and yes, superficial, set of influences ('other' cultures and historical periods, uniforms, fiction and film, as well as CWMS and where CWMS is merely one inspiration and taken without the normative baggage), so there are fewer clear rules - although SF SW&D does have its communal norms - and therefore the ways in which one can judge are different or perhaps not as clearly definable in advance.
Both of course depend on aesthetics, and people without taste or judgement, or who are learning to acquire these things - because they can be learned, they are not intrinsic, although some start with better instincts - are likely to fail in either domain. But equally it does not mean that someone who knows how to wear the latest Japanese street style to its best will necessarily be able to transfer their aesthetic knowledge to CWMS.
MC Casual can be confusing. There is a tendency to see it here as a kind of lazy version of CWMS. As Vox has pointed out, it isn't. It is the same principles in a casual context. And if you learn from SW&D, you'll get something that could work in all kinds of ways but it's unlikely to be MC Casual or improve MC Casual by CWMS standards (or course, it might be a massive improvement by SW&D standards!).
And in the end, this is why I don't generally do MC Casual. I like my tailored suits and my leather shoes and not because I feel any duty to wear these things, sometimes I just like to work with (although not be bound by) the discipline of CWMS rules. But a lot of the time, I prefer other rules, and - whether I do it badly or not - I prefer the SW&D approach. I don't like my casual style to have to play by CWMS rules. I don't like the CWMS aesthetic in a casual clothing context - and this is purely subjective.
*I specifically call it 'western' because there are many other very different kinds of formal style in the world. Being part of an Anglo-Japanese family, I have my formal kimonos etc. which I have worn both in an out of their 'proper' context. I suspect that out of the Japanese formal context, a kimono is much more likely to get love in SW&D than in MC...
The main root difference between MC and SW&D is this. MC is based in 'Classic Western Male Style' (CWMS) - a set of norms that has emerged during the course of the early-mid Twentieth Century about how men of particular social classes should look*. This means that it is actually quite easy to judge (if one knows what these basic norms are) whether someone is doing it right or not (and yes, this includes a certain degree of leeway for 'rule-breaking', although real Dandyism or Foppishness both sit uncomfortably in MC because they draw on aesthetics with an only partly-shared trajectory).
However SW&D is based in the diffusion of high fashion into more everyday settings (essentially the adaption and/or commercialization of runway styles). Because these are extremely diverse (even though there are identifiable commonalities over time and space) and draw on a much more varied and yes, superficial, set of influences ('other' cultures and historical periods, uniforms, fiction and film, as well as CWMS and where CWMS is merely one inspiration and taken without the normative baggage), so there are fewer clear rules - although SF SW&D does have its communal norms - and therefore the ways in which one can judge are different or perhaps not as clearly definable in advance.
Both of course depend on aesthetics, and people without taste or judgement, or who are learning to acquire these things - because they can be learned, they are not intrinsic, although some start with better instincts - are likely to fail in either domain. But equally it does not mean that someone who knows how to wear the latest Japanese street style to its best will necessarily be able to transfer their aesthetic knowledge to CWMS.
MC Casual can be confusing. There is a tendency to see it here as a kind of lazy version of CWMS. As Vox has pointed out, it isn't. It is the same principles in a casual context. And if you learn from SW&D, you'll get something that could work in all kinds of ways but it's unlikely to be MC Casual or improve MC Casual by CWMS standards (or course, it might be a massive improvement by SW&D standards!).
And in the end, this is why I don't generally do MC Casual. I like my tailored suits and my leather shoes and not because I feel any duty to wear these things, sometimes I just like to work with (although not be bound by) the discipline of CWMS rules. But a lot of the time, I prefer other rules, and - whether I do it badly or not - I prefer the SW&D approach. I don't like my casual style to have to play by CWMS rules. I don't like the CWMS aesthetic in a casual clothing context - and this is purely subjective.
*I specifically call it 'western' because there are many other very different kinds of formal style in the world. Being part of an Anglo-Japanese family, I have my formal kimonos etc. which I have worn both in an out of their 'proper' context. I suspect that out of the Japanese formal context, a kimono is much more likely to get love in SW&D than in MC...
Last edited:
