Let's Talk About Bookcore

[Cause Moe]

This is pure bullcore.

It reminds me of Alan Sokal's dialectical deconstruction of postmodernism.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

Well, the people I expect to disappoint me just continue to do so.

If you want to fight with the entire idea that trends can be identified (on or offline), you are really better off on a different forum entirely (grumpyoldmen.com, uncomfortablewiththemodernworld.net, or itwasntlikethisintheolddayswhenpeopleknewtheirplace.org).

This phenomenon undoubtedly exists. You may call it whatever you like, but it's clearly noticeable as one of a family of trends that have a dual online and offline existance.

 

[otterhound]

View attachment 1738377

I want that coat!

 

[Nyarlathotep]

This is pure bullcore.

Yes, totally astroturfed stuff.

 

[Fuuma]

Yes, totally astroturfed stuff.

WTF does that even mean? That some LVMH exec put forward a core-generating task force to sell more of their future fashion gardening division products?

 

[Nyarlathotep]

^It means that the idea of trying to present nerdy "poem girls" who have been around since centuries as some kind of unified new subculture is completely artificial. Reminds me of the moronic labels that UK music mags like NME used to come up with, New Acoustic Movement or Intelligent Dance Music anyone?

 

[dieworkwear]

This is pure bullcore.

Genuinely want to know why you, @smittycl, JFWR (not @-ing him because I don't want to summon him), and others participate in threads you hate.

 

[Clouseau]

Genuinely want to know why you, @smittycl, JFWR (not @-ing him because I don't want to summon him), and others participate in threads you hate.

I don’t hate this thread. I even find it quite interesting. The thing is I can’t resist a joke - ok not always good.
I find funny the reactions it provoked so far.
Now TBH and you know it, there is nothing new about that bookcore thing. The pictures of people of Paris you posted, well they could have been taken twenty years ago.
I find the last Doubledouble post spot on btw.

 

[London]

It is from the 80s-90s not recent, no? I used to listen to booty house in the 90s. I remember seeing a banking ad at Charles de Gaulle airport where they put forward a footwork dj like a couple yrs ago so maybe not so underground now lol.

You don't even know when it was created. It's not from the 80's. 9.5 out of 10 people haven't heard of it. There will always be subcultures created from minority communities and people on the margins. By the time you find out about it, it will have morphed into a different form and those people will have moved on or created a palpable version for your consumption. To say there are no subcultures anymore is just not factual. I'll take you into Black culture alone and show you a ton. There are subcultures around dress, music, food, sex, hair, dance, etc.

 

[smittycl]

Out shopping in Georgetown with wifey and about to get ahead of snowstorm. Slouchy rules on winter weekends.

Genuinely want to know why you, @smittycl, JFWR (not @-ing him because I don't want to summon him), and others participate in threads you hate.

I don't hate it. I do find it a little amusing as it's a very broad category and all the pics here could be used elsewhere in different categories. Just seems like too much of a reach. I'm unable to refrain from calling out things I find a bit absurd.

I just re-read my (few) comments are think I was being fairly irreverent but not overly negative.

Not like I was talking about Drake's or anything, jeez...

 

[dieworkwear]

I don't hate it. I do find it a little amusing as it's a very broad category and all the pics here could be used elsewhere in different categories. Just seems like too much of a reach. I'm unable to refrain from calling out things I find a bit absurd.

I just re-read my (few) comments are think I was being fairly irreverent but not overly negative.

Not like I was talking about Drake's or anything, jeez...

This seems to be your MO though. You love going into threads and feeling smug about yourself. Yet, you enjoy your personal threads and posts because of the civility of others. I don't care for your posts about your shopping trips to the most boring stores possible, but I don't say anything because those posts are simply not for me.

There are a lot of people like this on the forum. They enjoy the Allen Edmonds threads, The Look Goes On thread, and others, despite many members thinking this stuff looks terrible. But no one bothers them because no one else cares. Yet these same members love harumphing others. Like, if you don't care for it ... move on? Go somewhere else?

 

[Clouseau]

well you seem very intolerant.
This is a post about you someone wrote in another thread, this one was spot on too.

All in all, I've found the forum most useful for recommendations of specific brands/designs I was looking for, but not very useful for any actual discussion, as everybody seems to be completely set up in his own camp and unwilling to move from it.
And *some* people (yes, you, DWW, most of all) keep advocating for discussion, but then tend to want to dominate any and all discussions of every possible such thread, so that in the end only his personal sensibility gets representation.

 

[smittycl]

This seems to be your MO though. You love going into threads and feeling smug about yourself. Yet, you enjoy your personal threads and posts because of the civility of others. I don't care for your posts about your shopping trips to the most boring stores possible, but I don't say anything because those posts are simply not for me.

There are a lot of people like this on the forum. They enjoy the Allen Edmonds threads, The Look Goes On thread, and others, despite many members thinking this stuff looks terrible. But no one bothers them because no one else cares. Yet these same members love harumphing others. Like, if you don't care for it ... move on? Go somewhere else?

I'm sure I grate on some folks, bore others, get in the odd decent comment. I don't consider myself malicious, though.

Yes, I can be quite smug I guess (I used "I" four times in this post after all). Maybe you're taking yourself a bit too seriously, though?

 

[dieworkwear]

I'm sure I grate on some folks, bore others, get in the odd decent comment. I don't consider myself malicious, though.

Yes, I can be quite smug I guess (I used "I" four times in this post after all). Maybe you're taking yourself a bit too seriously, though?

Alright, well I look forward to hearing about your next shopping trip. Will be a new -core (mediocore)

 

[breakaway01]

Well. I certainly think there can be healthy discussion about whether bookcore is a "thing" in and of itself. After all, the OP set this up as a discussion thread, so I don't really see why we can't discuss this very fundamental question about what bookcore is. I do appreciate a lot of the looks shown and discussed.

A few of my own thoughts. Probably most styles of dressing that we talk about are at least somewhat intentional on the part of the wearer so that they can have some visible indication of affiliation or identity. As some have pointed out here, most "bookcore" people don't intentionally dress the way they do to establish an affiliation in the same way. To me, "bookcore" says more about the observer than it does about the person in the bookstore. When I go to the bookstore (and I've lived in NYC so I am quite familiar with the Strand, for example), I see a very broad cross section of dressing. Yes, maybe the proportion of people who dress as DWW portrays in his article is higher than what you'd see on the street, but definitely still a minority. Why only mention some of these looks and discard the ones that are less 'interesting'? As a scientist I'd call that cherry-picking your data. [Yes I know this is not hard science, but even in anthropology or sociology I think the concept of cherry-picking who you think falls into your own definition of "bookcore" would apply].