• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • We would like to welcome House of Huntington as an official Affiliate Vendor. Shop past season Drake's, Nigel Cabourn, Private White V.C. and other menswear luxury brands at exceptional prices below retail. Please visit the Houise of Huntington thread and welcome them to the forum.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Can Bohemians be Stylish?

babygreenspots

Distinguished Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
1,203
Reaction score
14
The forum aesthetic stresses neatness, reputable brands, high quality, and formality.

Can people who don't live conventional lives with large closets, frequent trips to the dry-cleaners, an ironing board, be stylish? I'm not saying that these characteristics are the only ones for bohemian, a term I suspect most find to be overly pretentious and slightly antiquated.
 

emmanuel

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
1,929
Reaction score
3
Yes. Different style but I respect some other choices.
 

holymadness

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
3,609
Reaction score
11
Bohemianism is more self-consciously cultivated than the SF-approved aesthetic could hope for in its wildest dreams. There is nothing dÃ
00a9.png
gagÃ
00a9.png
about dÃ
00a9.png
gagÃ
00a9.png
.
 

babygreenspots

Distinguished Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
1,203
Reaction score
14
Originally Posted by holymadness
Bohemianism is more self-consciously cultivated than the SF-approved aesthetic could hope for in its wildest dreams. There is nothing dÃ
00a9.png
gagÃ
00a9.png
about dÃ
00a9.png
gagÃ
00a9.png
.

This is the conventional opinion, and I think it has a lot of merit. However, I honestly it takes less effort to give off a relaxed, sloppily stylish air than a rigid one. Do the streetwear and men's clothing forum represent the old bourgeoisie versus bohemian conflict in the sartorial realm?
 

holymadness

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
3,609
Reaction score
11
Originally Posted by babygreenspots
This is the conventional opinion, and I think it has a lot of merit. However, I honestly it takes less effort to give off a relaxed, sloppily stylish air than a rigid one.
Possibly. It depends what 'plane' you want to have this conversation on. If effort is measured in strokes of an iron or trips to the tailor's for multiple fittings, then it's no contest. A smaller, easily-managed wardrobe made up of casual fabrics and less than strict fits is going to be less hassle to maintain, coordinate and deploy than your average MC closet on a strictly physical basis. On the other hand, MC is much easier to carry off psychologically. Rules are what separate MC from what we might call contemporary clothing. Once you learn them, you can operate within them with relative ease. No brown shoes with black pants. Pocket square should accent but not match a colour in either the shirt or tie. Double breasted is more formal than single. There's plenty of wiggle room, to be sure, but the very fact that it's circumscribed by laws makes it much easier to work with than any other style medium.
Do the streetwear and men's clothing forum represent the old bourgeoisie versus bohemian conflict in the sartorial realm?
The argument could be made, but I don't buy it. While MC is bound by rules, SW&D seems to me to be equally bound by fashion. Skinny jeans? Raw denim? Slim-fit cardigan? Narrow-striped t-shirt? Check off the list, and you're good to go. Give it a year or two, however, and you won't be able to recognize the looks in that forum. The strict attention paid to designer shows and the canonical brands (BoO, APC, NdG, Jil Sanders, Raf Simons, HL) is the epitome of the bourgeois consumer lifestyle. Part of the problem is that Bohemianism has always been interpreted as a counterculture, when really, it's a reified fiction. From one end, starving artists forced by circumstances to live in slovenly conditions idealized their own lifestyles as archetypes for the lives of all creative individuals. From the other, members of mainstream society have idealized the artist's life as an alternative to bourgeois norms of respectability and conformism, and his calling as a counterpart to modern commercial and professional identities. These inventions are all the more problematic when you realize that la bohème has been reinvented countless times, from Gautier's ironic modernist bohemian of the 1830s, to Murger's urban flâneur of the 1850s, to the androgynous figure of the hysteric and dramatic decadent in the 1870s and 80s. God knows how many permutations it's undergone since then, notably in the 1950s and 60s. It's never clear exactly what it is we're talking about, except for a vague notion of a Great Divide between mainstream and bohemian culture, one that I believe is largely false.
 

JayJay

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
24,297
Reaction score
439
Originally Posted by DocHolliday
I like Bohemian, as long as it's not too self-conscious. It's a fine line. But too perfect, too slick, too conformist is creepy. A bit of eccentricity is a good thing, especially if it's arrived at honestly.
I like seeing it, too, when it appears to be without much thought. However, most of what I see is very contrived, and thus isn't as appealing.
 

james_timothy

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
2,491
Reaction score
94
Originally Posted by holymadness
Rules are what separate MC from what we might call contemporary clothing. Once you learn them, you can operate within them with relative ease.... Double breasted is more formal than single.
Less formal, or so the rule mavens have told me. But as for the rules part, I agree it makes it much easier. The budget one needs to operate inside that rule set is higher than for SW&D.
The argument could be made, but I don't buy it. While MC is bound by rules, SW&D seems to me to be equally bound by fashion. Skinny jeans? Raw denim? Slim-fit cardigan? Narrow-striped t-shirt? Check off the list, and you're good to go.
I disagree here- this a an argument that it is easy to construct passible outfit using SW&D rules, which is true. But the tightness of the rules in MC makes creativity easier- one is varying the shoulder, the pocket square, the tie. The looseness of the rules in SW&D makes screwing up much easier.
Give it a year or two, however, and you won't be able to recognize the looks in that forum.
Strangely enough, this is demonstrably not true. Go look up digital_denim's images from 2006-2007. He's right in the mainstream of 2009 SW&D, better than most. The evolution is slower than you estimate. Perhaps a 5 year time constant, instead of the 10 year constant of MC.
The strict attention paid to designer shows and the canonical brands (RLPL, RLBL, BB, A&S, Steed) is the epitome of the bourgeois consumer lifestyle.
Fixed. My point being that it is easy to brand any favored brand as part of the bourgeois consumer lifestyle.
Part of the problem is that Bohemianism has always been interpreted as a counterculture, when really, it's a reified fiction.
That is also part of the attraction. The issue is whether sloppy is always unacceptable or whether one can build up a style that uses counterculture and non-precise outfits that isn't a costume. Counter-culture could simply be a code for "non-business oriented"- an avoidance of pinstripe structured suits in favor of glen plaid drape jackets then would be a very refined bohemianism.
 

holymadness

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
3,609
Reaction score
11
Originally Posted by james_timothy
Less formal, or so the rule mavens have told me. But as for the rules part, I agree it makes it much easier. The budget one needs to operate inside that rule set is higher than for SW&D.
I was under the impression that the hierarchy was SB 3piece --> DB --> SB. Agreed about the budget.

I disagree here- this a an argument that it is easy to construct passible outfit using SW&D rules, which is true. But the tightness of the rules in MC makes creativity easier- one is varying the shoulder, the pocket square, the tie. The looseness of the rules in SW&D makes screwing up much easier.
Again, I don't substantially disagree -- I made much the same point earlier. What's at issue is exactly how loose the looseness of SW&D rules actually is. While they change faster, I don't think there is as much room for play at any given moment as you're implying. I'm no expert on SW&D, so I might be wrong.

Strangely enough, this is demonstrably not true. Go look up digital_denim's images from 2006-2007. He's right in the mainstream of 2009 SW&D, better than most. The evolution is slower than you estimate. Perhaps a 5 year time constant, instead of the 10 year constant of MC.
I concede that five years sounds more reasonable. However, passing familiarity with style handbooks like Flusser's Dressing the Man rather convincingly demonstrate that the principles of MC have a much longer shelf life than 10 years. Most rule purists look back to the 1930s for guidance. Others, even more hardcore, though less popular here, reach back into the 19th century (Sartort).
Fixed. My point being that it is easy to brand any favored brand as part of the bourgeois consumer lifestyle.
Agreed; my point being that SW&D and MC are not reflections of different cultures, but rather flipsides of the same cultural coin. Interestingly, however, as rules continue to go by the wayside and 'sloppiness' becomes ever more mainstream, I suspect we may see MC becoming genuinely countercultural, particularly if ever high-quality RTW begins to decline in favour of bespoke tailoring. Dead traditions are goldmines for those who self-consciously reject contemporary social mores. Another aspect that might put it even more outside the mainstream is its prohibitive cost, which is actually undemocratic.
That is also part of the attraction. The issue is whether sloppy is always unacceptable or whether one can build up a style that uses counterculture and non-precise outfits that isn't a costume. Counter-culture could simply be a code for "non-business oriented"- an avoidance of pinstripe structured suits in favor of glen plaid drape jackets then would be a very refined bohemianism.
There is nothing sloppy about either glen plaid or drape, they simply happen to be outside the cultural mainstream. Within the rules of MC, they are accepted givens. I suppose we should take some time to distinguish what it is, exactly, that we're talking about. Is sloppiness relative to social norms, or relative to the internal set of guidelines that govern clothing for the sartorially-inclined (of which most are unaware)?

In my mind, counterculture makes some attempt to reject the former, however (un)successfully. Sloppiness, on the other hand, is a rejection of the latter, whether deliberately or through ignorance. The two aren't equivalent. Some examples:

One can wear a suit, but unbutton the top collar of the shirt and loosen the tie. This is sloppy, but not countercultural. It's very hip, in fact, thanks to Jim from The Office.

One can wear a tuxedo to lunch at a restaurant. This is both countercultural (in that it goes against the grain, not necessary in that it rejects bourgeois consumer culture) as well as sloppy (ignores the rules of MC).

Etc. etc.
 

pejsek

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2004
Messages
936
Reaction score
5
Originally Posted by texas_jack
Sure
bohemia.jpg


Good call. They also make a mean bread dumpling. Don't know why the guy on the left appears to have a water tumbler, though.
Of course Bohemians--and not just these guys--can be stylish. Wasn't Jean Cocteau an Arnys customer?
 

TheDroog

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
485
Reaction score
19
This is a very interesting question ... and yet I'm not sure the iGents here at SF are fit to answer it.

Bohemianism, as I understand it, is about artistic expression, independence, freedom from tradition, youth, and often poverty. Fashion that springs from such sources can look very good (Johnny Depp comes to mind), and indeed fashion designers often look to starving young artists for their inspiration.

But StyleForum isn't about any of this. The currency around here is rules, proper fit, high quality garments, prestigious brands, WAYWT. This is true for Streetwear & Denim too, which isn't bohemian at all.

What's my point? We're comparing apples and oranges here. It's as if the folks over at BohemianForum asked if someone in a suit could ever look good.
 

james_timothy

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
2,491
Reaction score
94
Originally Posted by TheDroog
But StyleForum isn't about any of this. The currency around here is rules, proper fit, high quality garments, prestigious brands, WAYWT.

Sure, but the primary aesthetic in MC is business oriented, easy to understand since most people's days are spent at work. There isn't a reason why one could not build a style around artistic expression, independence, and freedom from tradition while respecting fit, quality, and prestigious brands. The brands exist- Ann D. comes to mind.

We just don't, for the most part, and often deride those working in that direction as "hipsters". It'll be interesting to see what bmulford comes up with in his new company.

The time scale for MC evolution may be longer than 10 years, but it's probably no longer than 20. One has to deal with the skinny '60s, the extravagant '70s, the Armani drapey '90s. I think sloppy is a dead end for us, mostly because it translates to unthinking and uncaring and there is little we can say about that, other than note the general trend towards it.

I think the dominant form of the MC aesthetic -is- the establishment. Engineers use the phrase "the suits" for a reason. Still one can play inside of it- look at what Barims is doing or usually what Doc Holliday is up to. They have the air of bohemian around them, but not the hippy side of the connotation.
 

voxsartoria

Goon member
Timed Out
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
25,700
Reaction score
180
Originally Posted by holymadness
Part of the problem is that Bohemianism has always been interpreted as a counterculture, when really, it's a reified fiction. From one end, starving artists forced by circumstances to live in slovenly conditions idealized their own lifestyles as archetypes for the lives of all creative individuals. From the other, members of mainstream society have idealized the artist's life as an alternative to bourgeois norms of respectability and conformism, and his calling as a counterpart to modern commercial and professional identities. These inventions are all the more problematic when you realize that la bohème has been reinvented countless times, from Gautier's ironic modernist bohemian of the 1830s, to Murger's urban flâneur of the 1850s, to the androgynous figure of the hysteric and dramatic decadent in the 1870s and 80s. God knows how many permutations it's undergone since then, notably in the 1950s and 60s. It's never clear exactly what it is we're talking about, except for a vague notion of a Great Divide between mainstream and bohemian culture, one that I believe is largely false.

I enjoyed reading that quite a bit. It was like a little time machine back to college days.

Now, since I get confused easily, when you guys say "bohemian," we're talking about panhandlers, right? Or those people in the Haight who often crap on the sidewalk?


- B
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 55 35.5%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 60 38.7%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 17 11.0%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 27 17.4%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 28 18.1%

Forum statistics

Threads
505,201
Messages
10,579,250
Members
223,905
Latest member
sassandraarnett
Top