The mafoofan and Thom Browne philosophies are not too unlike.

dopey · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by iammatt

I feel like I have learned a lot from this thread. I just have no idea what I have learned.

You are still drunk, and Fuuma hears the inner dialogue of pants.

Fuuma · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

You are still drunk, and Fuuma hears the inner dialogue of pants.

They call me the pants whisperer in certain circles. Sadly I can't enter the state of Michigan anymore due to a dark incident of public dialogue with a pair of pants who's owner wasn't cooperative.

TheFoo · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Modern art hardly improves, it just reflects on art. Some sort of glorified intellectual circle jerk if you will. Of course not everyone wants to send the message they're a professional lawyer at all times and much of today's clothing choices are influenced, one way or another, by the mythification of the individual rebel in western and specifically American culture. If it wasn't for those countercultural jerkoffs we'll probably still have a wardrobe consisting of 5 grey suits and 10 white shirts with two pairs of shoes, nothing drives standardized industrial production of well categorized looks like the need of the market for an always renewed individuation.

But 'art' is a different matter. It does not need to do anything other than say whatever it says. Modern art was arguably a sort of improvement if you agree that forms, colors, and proportions were the elemental and sufficient building blocks of all art that preceded it. Of course, you may not agree with that premise, but that doesn't reduce the value of the art since all it has to do is say something to the viewer, even if it merely raises a question.

I agree, people do not need to all dress the way we did 50 years ago. But that does not mean that people who dress that way do so to mimic the past or because they lack individuality.

eg1 · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

You are still drunk, and Fuuma hears the inner dialogue of pants.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

They call me the pants whisperer in certain circles. Sadly I can't enter the state of Michigan anymore due to a dark incident of public dialogue with a pair of pants who's owner wasn't cooperative.

Your English readers are no doubt amused ...

For myself, I see hobgoblins.

Fuuma · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by mafoofan

But 'art' is a different matter. It does not need to do anything other than say whatever it says. Modern art was arguably a sort of improvement if you agree that forms, colors, and proportions were the elemental and sufficient building blocks of all art that preceded it. Of course, you may not agree with that premise, but that doesn't reduce the value of the art since all it has to do is say something to the viewer, even if it merely raises a question. I agree, people do not need to all dress the way we did 50 years ago. But that does not mean that people who dress that way do so to mimic the past or because they lack individuality.
So the function of art is to say something to the viewer then? I didn't say they did so to mimic the past or because they lack individuality so I dunno why you're saying that.

Fuuma · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by eg1

Your English readers are no doubt amused ...

For myself, I see hobgoblins.

Huh?

dopey · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Huh?

Pants = Panties, is the point, I think.

Fuuma · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

Pants = Panties, is the point, I think.

Oh, English readers as in British readers, right! I read english I think anglo-saxons!

vitaminc · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Some sort of glorified intellectual circle jerk if you will.

Damn, you said circle jerk before me.

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

First in with spalla camicia before the lock.

- B

was going to say circle jerk before the lock, but since fuuma stole my words, first in with bespoke tragedy before the lock.

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I agree, people do not need to all dress the way we did 50 years ago. But that does not mean that people who dress that way do so to mimic the past or because they lack individuality.

There might not be a causal relationship between the dress code of the past and the style choices of today, but people 50 years or 100 years ago DO lacked individuality as they conforms largely to a set of dress codes.

zjpj83 · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I see; clever. But I'm going a step further and arguing that Thom Browne's 'essay' is a bad one. He hasn't made the case for his changes to existing norms, or even demonstrated that the existing norms need changing at all.
Or even demonstrated that he has changed existing norms. The only Thom Browne I've seen "in the wild" was on an accountant in a meeting who was of average height. The suit looked somewhat shorter than average and had somewhat thinner than average lapels. Other than that, it was a normal suit. Thom Browne is hardly destroying convention, his ridiculous runway shows notwithstanding.

zjpj83 · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

Yay!!! Essays you can wear.

I still don't think I understand the essay's thesis or, rather, understand how the essay's thesis is being proved by the body text.

The point of it all seems to be to make a statement to The Man about how against the current you swim and how unlike the elite conformists you are. The way to make this statement is by forking over thousands of dollars to wear a garment that mimics the elite conformists' apparel with slight twists that, themselves, require strict conformity to some other set of standards. Such conformity, and such spending of thousands of dollars on clothes, is the way to challenge everyone else's regimented conformity and highbrow hierarchies of class and superiority.

dopey · Feb 10, 2009

Originally Posted by zjpj83

I still don't think I understand the essay's thesis or, rather, understand how the essay's thesis is being proved by the body text.

The point of it all seems to be to make a statement to The Man about how against the current you swim and how unlike the elite conformists you are. The way to make this statement is by forking over thousands of dollars to wear a garment that mimics the elite conformists' apparel with slight twists that, themselves, require strict conformity to some other set of standards. Such conformity, and such spending of thousands of dollars on clothes, is the way to challenge everyone else's regimented conformity and highbrow hierarchies of class and superiority.

I didn't read your post other than to see that you didn't use "dialogue" or "tension". You need to use those words if you are going to talk about this stuff. "Opposition" is good, too. So is using nouns as verbs.

bluemagic · Feb 10, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

I didn't read your post other than to see that you didn't use "dialogue" or "tension". You need to use those words if you are going to talk about this stuff. "Opposition" is good to. So is using nouns as verbs.

Why the anti-intellectualism?

dopey · Feb 10, 2009

Originally Posted by bluemagic

Why the anti-intellectualism?
I love intellectuals. Some of my best friends are intellectuals. Really. I just don't like babble and intellecto-gibberish used to obscure shallow thinking. It is even worse when the idiotic language of second-ratism gets used to pretend a conversation about nothing is about something. And no matter how hard Fuuma tries, I will not be convinced that there is anything of substance worth talking about when it comes to Thom Brown other than whether or not the clothes look nice or make the wearer look silly. And it seems that the harder people try to pretend otherwise, the more they have to resort to babble and gibberish. When you finally got around to explaining Thom Browne, you did it clearly - He likes short jackets because he thought that is what his style icons wore even though he eventually realized that it wasn't, and he likes cutting pants too short because everyone else wears pants that are too long and he wanted to do the opposite. You won't see me make fun of that. But when people dress it up as a comment about fascism or some sort of dialogue with pants of the past, it gets silly. Ooops - it is gomestar that explained Browne with lucidity. But I'll give you credit anyway.

bluemagic · Feb 10, 2009

I wish I could free your mind. I understand that your position is actually the majority one these days. Few believe in theory anymore. But I think that while there may be some nonsense in theory, there are a lot of things about the world that it does explain, even if the vocabulary is a few steps removed from commonplace reality. I have to go to bed now, but I'll try to explain things better tomorrow.

The mafoofan and Thom Browne philosophies are not too unlike.

Stylish Dinosaur

Franchouillard Modasse

THE FOO

Distinguished Member

Franchouillard Modasse

Franchouillard Modasse

Stylish Dinosaur

Franchouillard Modasse

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Classic Menswear Featured products

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

Always - Sustainability is a top priority in all my clothing purchases.

Often - I frequently consider sustainability, but it isn't the main factor in my decisions.

Rarely - I seldom consider sustainability when purchasing clothes.

Never - Sustainability is not a factor I consider in my clothing choices.

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: