whnay.'s good taste thread

[roquesoon]

Does anyone else find the constructions "actively better" "actively good/bad" strange? As opposed to passively better?

OK, pedantic rant over...

Lovely suit, Fred.

 

[Wallcloud]



Yep, the old chair will return soon but I am trying these out to see if I like them.

Good, I really like that Vioski.

 

[Fred49]

Me too. It is one of the most comfortable chairs I have ever owned ...imo.

 

[Fred49]

these are great too.

 

[Cantabrigian]



I think he would say "actively bad"

You did get him to come around to generally accepted by people who usually don't have terrible taste.

That might be your greatest victory.

 

[Victor Elfo]

no. sometimes, a fit is good, and should be noted as such, and offering a critique that simply says, you should use brown trou not gray, or the like, is merely personal preference and sometimes it is flat out wrong.

here in this thread, such critiques i feel are more valid. you want to nitpick something to death, this is a great place to do it. and sometimes good comes out of it. but, in waywrn, i usually find them to be annoying. telling some you dont like their PS when it looks fine as is, doesnt help them, it just is asking them to dress to someone elses liking.

ymmmz, but so is my opinion.

Agreed, a minor issue should be noted as that, a minor issue. However, I disagree on the difference between the two threads, as I try to offer an honest critique on both of them and so should you. There should be no greater lee-way to bad taste on one thread over another, the only difference between those two is the specific aesthetic that your going to use on your critique. On the waywrn you should critique taking the subject's aesthetic into perspective, here we critique accounting for the "whnay's aesthetic". Perhaps, your view on the waywrn is exactly why the older members started to move way from it. But, hey, just my R$ 0,02.

 

[Caustic Man]

Are we seriously trying to define the thread again?

 

[ethanm]

Are we seriously trying to define the thread again?

I believe you started it by bucking all advice that was given to you.

 

[in stitches]



I honestly don't see tweed as at all dressy, but I value the perspective.

fair enough. to each their own. no biggie. thanks for the kind reply.

Agreed, a minor issue should be noted as that, a minor issue. However, I disagree on the difference between the two threads, as I try to offer an honest critique on both of them and so should you. There should be no greater lee-way to bad taste on one thread over another, the only difference between those two is the specific aesthetic that your going to use on your critique. On the waywrn you should critique taking the subject's aesthetic into perspective, here we critique accounting for the "whnay's aesthetic". Perhaps, your view on the waywrn is exactly why the older members started to move way from it. But, hey, just my R$ 0,02.

im ok with most of this, but assuming that regulars left WAYWRN because of "my" outlook, i think is a stretch. but hey, who knows. and i never advocated for non honest critiquing. either way, i think we have gone through this before. agree to disagree?

 

[Caustic Man]



I believe you started it by bucking all advice that was given to you.

Absurd.

 

[Cantabrigian]

Look at the average fit poasted in this thread. It's considerably higher than WAYWRN. Granted that's a really really really low bar nowadays but I think it goes to show the value of self-selection and criticism.

 

[Victor Elfo]

im ok with most of this, but assuming that regulars left WAYWRN because of "my" outlook, i think is a stretch. but hey, who knows. and i never advocated for non honest critiquing. either way, i think we have gone through this before. agree to disagree?

I'm sorry, reading it again I would phrase it differently. I did not mean to say that you are the cause, but that the low bar that you also relegate to the waywrn could be the cause. So the general opinion that the waywrn is a lower class thread would be the cause, not by the level of the fits, but by the level of the critiques offered.
I think that we actually agree this time.

 

[unbelragazzo]

3 pc suit and not a SC but thought this might be relevant to the earlier discussion of brown jacket outfits:

 

[in stitches]



I'm sorry, reading it again I would phrase it differently. I did not mean to say that you are the cause, but that the low bar that you also relegate to the waywrn could be the cause. So the general opinion that the waywrn is a lower class thread would be the cause, not by the level of the fits, but by the level of the critiques offered.
I think that we actually agree this time.  ​

maybe we do.

imo, there is still a lot to learn in waywrn for anyone willing to take it on the chin, and even for long time posters there is what to learn if you are willing to wade through and and ignore certain things.

and i also think that regardless of how good or bad waywrn is, this thread serves a separate and important purpose.

--

looks nice, unbel. i dont personally love the tie, but i dont hate it either, and the fit as a whole looks nice to me.

 

[sprout2]

Absurd.

I agree with the theory, if not the praxis (pairing bland earth tones with more bland earth tones is an amateur's mistake), of a lot of what you say, and you explain it in terms far more lucid than most tend to do when questioned on those grounds. On the other hand, and I mention this in case you weren't aware: there is a strange, recurring formula ITT, whereby someone with different (by the standards of the in-group, "lesser") taste emerges, contradicts the established wisdom, is challenged, defends those choices in increasingly vociferous terms; over time, though it feels like suddenly, there is a parting of the clouds and the individual warms to the established wisdom, begins to learn from it, if not imitate it, and then finally there is a transformation where the individual is seen by the group to have improved his style across the board. There is always kicking and screaming at the beginning. In some ways it seems to mirror the classical stages of denial -> acceptance -> etc. In general there are two archetypes: the person refuses the criticism, slams the door on the way out, and never returns to the thread again; or, conversely, slowly acquiesces and enters the fold. You seem to be vying for a Category C, challenging the sacred cows of the in-group. Frankly, I have no stakes in this contest either way, so that is welcome by me. However, do not confuse stubbornness with tenacity.

Like in art school, we should be happy to have people tear apart our best work (does this even happen anymore, or do they just hold hands and make indie music?).

In Stitches is one member whose early style I would describe as plainly hideous but who, through the proddings of the Combine, learned the virtues of restraint. (His logorrhea remains unabated.) This is not to say that austerity and restraint are advanced, complicated aesthetics: most people who come out of this thread can achieve it through little more than a cluster of simple rules and very conservative shopping heuristics (basically striking out entire categories of clothing and pattern as too difficult). What makes austerity rarefied is that you have to make your peace with it, and battling those internal style demons (you know, the ones that encourage you to wear corduroy pants embroidered with tiny crocodiles, because deep down, they know it's cool) is where the real skirmish takes place.