1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Baddest Ass in Men's Fashion..Nick Wooster

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by 951socal, Apr 25, 2011.

  1. edmorel

    edmorel Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    25,670
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    NYC
    Poor Nick, he's probably a really nice guy, easy going, loving life if attention whorish but he's become an internet celebrity and hence gets the treatment. I don't mind the way he dresses, the guy is in "fashiony" side of mens classic clothing, not sure how people expect him to dress. he has to be a walking advertisement for what he does. Wearing a Savile Row suit everyday would probably look sillier on him. He is who is, I guess since he is not shy about having his pic plastered all over the place he is open to the criticism but not really sure how people expect him to dress. As for the fanboys, it's a lot worse on the real fashion side than anything Wooster gets from the various mens blogs. Guys like Crangi get their knobs slobbered like he invented analingus.
     
  2. gladhands

    gladhands Senior member

    Messages:
    2,267
    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    I like most of Wooster's looks, but not this one. Of course he looks affected, but who fucking cares. His style isn't appropriate for banking, but guess what: he's not a fucking banker.

    That said, I don't find him particularly badass or manly.
     
  3. 951socal

    951socal Senior member

    Messages:
    650
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    I like most of Wooster's looks, but not this one. Of course he looks affected, but who fucking cares. His style isn't appropriate for banking, but guess what: he's not a fucking banker. That said, I don't find him particularly badass or manly.
    i believe his tweed ensemble is an inaccurate representation of the man's fashion sense: http://williamyan.com/storage/SS_Nic...=1302487588291 [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  4. Don Carlos

    Don Carlos Senior member

    Messages:
    7,527
    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    You are but I wasn't really trying to insult your ilk but tell don carlos that trying to deride a bunch of people because they are wearing costume is stupid as everything is.
    It's a tu quoque argument, though. And one that doesn't apply to me in the first place, as I don't dress in nearly the same mode as most people on WAYWRN do. Even if I did, I could still be right in pointing out how costumish and affected Wooster's look in the photo is (even if mine were equally affected). There's an element of affect in all fashion, and you could certainly argue that fashion, removed of all extrinsic connotation or value, is nothing but the pursuit of artful affect. I don't deny that. I just think there's a line that Wooster's look crosses. You could say the same about the looks of many people on SF, and you'd get no argument from me. Finally, it's worth pointing out (as did the poster above) that Wooster is more than capable of putting together a non-costumish look that still seems personalized. In other words, the right kind of eccentric.
     
  5. globetrotter

    globetrotter Senior member

    Messages:
    20,605
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Location:
    greater chicago
    I think it'd look awesome with a different shirt, different, longer pants and a normal pair of shoes. But that's just me. Jacket is sweet.

    more of less - I think that the shoes look funny, longer pants, different shirt, no stripe on the pants. I don't think I could carry off the 4 tweed look, but I like it. I try to get my hair very similar to that, actually
     
  6. Working Stiff

    Working Stiff Senior member

    Messages:
    1,132
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto
    Wooster's problem is that he wears that stuff like it's his job. His excuse, of course, is that it is his job.
     
  7. MikeDT

    MikeDT Senior member

    Messages:
    4,276
    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Location:
    China, Mongolia and UK
    'Baddest ass'? Does this mean he has difficulty with sitting or something? ... and who is 'Nick Wooster' anyway? .. someone who likes tweeds at a guess. BTW his trousers appear to be too short.
     
  8. imhotep

    imhotep Senior member

    Messages:
    874
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
  9. Fuuma

    Fuuma Senior member

    Messages:
    25,818
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    It's a tu quoque argument, though. And one that doesn't apply to me in the first place, as I don't dress in nearly the same mode as most people on WAYWRN do. Even if I did, I could still be right in pointing out how costumish and affected Wooster's look in the photo is (even if mine were equally affected).

    There's an element of affect in all fashion, and you could certainly argue that fashion, removed of all extrinsic connotation or value, is nothing but the pursuit of artful affect. I don't deny that. I just think there's a line that Wooster's look crosses. You could say the same about the looks of many people on SF, and you'd get no argument from me.

    Finally, it's worth pointing out (as did the poster above) that Wooster is more than capable of putting together a non-costumish look that still seems personalized. In other words, the right kind of eccentric.


    I think the poasted look is his best (out of those I've seen, its not like a seek out his pics-hell I don't even read the sartorialist)...

    All I was saying is that there isn't something more inherently costumy in dressing like an urban lumberjack than a suit wearing guy in 2011, both are irrelevant modes of dressing unless done in the tamest way possible.
     
  10. Lel

    Lel Senior member

    Messages:
    3,386
    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Poor Nick, he's probably a really nice guy, easy going, loving life if attention whorish but he's become an internet celebrity and hence gets the treatment. I don't mind the way he dresses, the guy is in "fashiony" side of mens classic clothing, not sure how people expect him to dress. he has to be a walking advertisement for what he does. Wearing a Savile Row suit everyday would probably look sillier on him. He is who is, I guess since he is not shy about having his pic plastered all over the place he is open to the criticism but not really sure how people expect him to dress.

    This.

    I don't really get why the natural inclination of SF-ers is to attack and insult anyone outside of SF when it comes to clothing(Dan T, anyone on the Sartorialist). I don't particularly like his outfit that was posted in the OP but I've also seen him pull off some nice minimalist looks which is my preference when it comes to suiting.

    But yeah, he works in a high end department store and wears... the brands they carry.
     
  11. Fuuma

    Fuuma Senior member

    Messages:
    25,818
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    This. I don't really get why the natural inclination of SF-ers is to attack and insult anyone outside of SF when it comes to clothing(Dan T, anyone on the Sartorialist). I don't particularly like his outfit that was posted in the OP but I've also seen him pull off some nice minimalist looks which is my preference when it comes to suiting. But yeah, he works in a high end department store and wears... the brands they carry.
    Dan T dresses ridiculously bad, I don't take time to sling shit at him and its not like I care but he does and the result is still abysmal. Once again, that's going with what I saw on this site and another (french) fashion website.
     
  12. Don Carlos

    Don Carlos Senior member

    Messages:
    7,527
    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    I think the poasted look is his best (out of those I've seen, its not like a seek out his pics-hell I don't even read the sartorialist)...

    All I was saying is that there isn't something more inherently costumy in dressing like an urban lumberjack than a suit wearing guy in 2011, both are irrelevant modes of dressing unless done in the tamest way possible.


    I'd argue that the urban lumberjack look is slightly more affected than the suit-and-pocketsquare "precious" look affected by the typical iGent on SF. By degrees, though. They're not the same degree of try-hard. They're both try-hard to a significant extent, and I'll grant you that. Nevertheless, I still don't see how this diminishes my original assessment of Wooster's look. It's too affected, regardless of the affect we see here on a daily basis.

    If Wooster's urban lumberjack outfit had maybe one or two fewer sprezz elements to it, I'd buy it. Hell, I'd buy the boots if not for the pants. Or the pants if not for the boots. Or both if not for the moustache. I feel like you get two eccentricities in an outfit before it turns into pure costume, and he breaks that limit here. That limit is totally arbitrary, and I'm making it up on the spot, but it's a back-of-the-envelope estimate.
     
  13. Fuuma

    Fuuma Senior member

    Messages:
    25,818
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    I'd argue that the urban lumberjack look is slightly more affected than the suit-and-pocketsquare "precious" look affected by the typical iGent on SF. By degrees, though. They're not the same degree of try-hard. They're both try-hard to a significant extent, and I'll grant you that. Nevertheless, I still don't see how this diminishes my original assessment of Wooster's look. It's too affected, regardless of the affect we see here on a daily basis. If Wooster's urban lumberjack outfit had maybe one or two fewer sprezz elements to it, I'd buy it. Hell, I'd buy the boots if not for the pants. Or the pants if not for the boots. Or both if not for the moustache. I feel like you get two eccentricities in an outfit before it turns into pure costume, and he breaks that limit here. That limit is totally arbitrary, and I'm making it up on the spot, but it's a back-of-the-envelope estimate.
    But pretty much everything else can be defined away from (a yet) undefined normalcy and into costume. I don't see how that is a useful judgment. Hell the guy is wearing clothing adapted to his lifestyle which could be said to be exactly congruent with an operational definition of the always shifting center of normalcy.
     
  14. Teger

    Teger Senior member

    Messages:
    21,933
    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    what he wears is as much a costume as most things posted on this site. he looks good, and, even more importantly (especially considering his job), interesting
     
  15. Suicmez

    Suicmez Senior member

    Messages:
    419
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2009
    Location:
    London, ON
    He definitely looks better than Dan T. I never knew that guy started the Style Blogger!
    So god awful. Just spent 5 mins sifting through it... dude is the worst part of trendy NYC urban fashion (I mean, tassle loafers with camo pants?)

    Then that Urban Aesthetics clown just copies every one of his outfits and the shitquake continues.
     
  16. Don Carlos

    Don Carlos Senior member

    Messages:
    7,527
    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    But pretty much everything else can be defined away from (a yet) undefined normalcy and into costume. I don't see how that is a useful judgment. Hell the guy is wearing clothing adapted to his lifestyle which could be said to be exactly congruent with an operational definition of the always shifting center of normalcy.
    I'll grant you that normalcy is relativistic, but I think it's less fluid in the short term than you're making it out to be. He's in a different line of work from the societal norm, so you could argue he operates in a very different dimension/definition of normal. Fine. But my point isn't to define what's normal and compare him with respect to that baseline. Such an exercise is silly and impractical. Rather, my point is that certain items in his look are costumish with respect to one another. The whole is less than the sum of its parts.
     
  17. robin

    robin Senior member

    Messages:
    12,416
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    As you already know I'm not into those retro/americana looks because they, consciously or not, come from awfully restrictive heteronormative discourses regarding the nature of masculinity and give wearers a false sense of regaining something they were pressured into thinking was lost by enjoying more adventurous modes of dressing and living, I am, as a straight dude, of course concerned with not going in that direction as it is as much a prison as a security blanket.
    I mean, if we're talking fashion, that's one thing, but I think the irritation (at least mine, I can say) is "holistic" in nature.
    It's a tu quoque argument, though. And one that doesn't apply to me in the first place, as I don't dress in nearly the same mode as most people on WAYWRN do...There's an element of affect in all fashion, and you could certainly argue that fashion, removed of all extrinsic connotation or value, is nothing but the pursuit of artful affect.
    But pretty much everything else can be defined away from (a yet) undefined normalcy and into costume. I don't see how that is a useful judgment. Hell the guy is wearing clothing adapted to his lifestyle which could be said to be exactly congruent with an operational definition of the always shifting center of normalcy.
    I'll grant you that normalcy is relativistic, but I think it's less fluid in the short term than you're making it out to be. He's in a different line of work from the societal norm, so you could argue he operates in a very different dimension/definition of normal. Fine. But my point isn't to define what's normal and compare him with respect to that baseline. Such an exercise is silly and impractical. Rather, my point is that certain items in his look are costumish with respect to one another. The whole is less than the sum of its parts.
    [​IMG]
     
    1 person likes this.
  18. gladhands

    gladhands Senior member

    Messages:
    2,267
    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
  19. Tck13

    Tck13 Senior member

    Messages:
    5,750
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Location:
    Philly
    Shirt too long, pants too short, jacket too tight.

    And that's just the tip of the iceberg...
     
  20. MarcInDentonTx

    MarcInDentonTx Senior member

    Messages:
    328
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    So, this little person with no iron and a tweed fetish (not that THAT is a bad thing) is the reason NM Last Call stores are so full. Got it. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by