Judges' new rags

Well, I remember seeing a thread comparing the legal profession with the medical. It's all downhill from here.



http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/jud...444472812.html

The lady looks like she is wearing Yohji or Commes.

Awful--I don't know why people have this impulse to abandon tradition for no apparent reason other than to "keep up with modern times." Don't fix what's not broken.

Originally Posted by LabelKing

Click to expand...

Awful--I don't know why people have this impulse to abandon tradition for no apparent reason other than to "keep up with modern times." Don't fix what's not broken.

The traditions you praise were once themselves something new and modern.

Originally Posted by SoCal2NYC

Click to expand...

The traditions you praise were once themselves something new and modern.

We'll always have nay-sayers.

Originally Posted by LabelKing

Click to expand...

We'll always have nay-sayers.

And we'll always have traditionalists....however, most of them usually aren't 23 year olds from the Bay Area.

Originally Posted by SoCal2NYC

Click to expand...

And we'll always have traditionalists....however, most of them usually aren't 23 year olds from the Bay Area.

23 years old?

So many minnows on this board.

Originally Posted by LabelKing

Click to expand...

23 years old?

Originally Posted by SoCal2NYC

Click to expand...

The traditions you praise were once themselves something new and modern.
Not so true. What makes you think that judges 300 years ago wanted to look "new" and "modern" when they put on those enormous wigs? That wasn't a hip look by any stretch, even back in the day. Also, the guy in the photo is not selling the look with that frown.

This is what happens when you commit crimes aboard the Starship Enterprise.

Originally Posted by Dewey

Click to expand...

Not so true. What makes you think that judges 300 years ago wanted to look "new" and "modern" when they put on those enormous wigs? That wasn't a hip look by any stretch, even back in the day. Also, the guy in the photo is not selling the look with that frown.
I don't know the origins of those barristers' wigs, but 300 years ago, wigs were considered quite fashionable for men--the ubiquitous "powdered wig." If anything, the present wigs are quite small and modest in comparison to what 17th & 18th century men of rank wore. I've read that wigs were worn into the 19th century by staunchly conservative men along with breeches and other "old-fashioned" things. That new robe is just ugly--a kind of bastardized Chinese man's robe almost.

Hell, you want tradition, you can come to Canada or England... judges aren't the only ones who have to wear the robes.

^ When big white wigs were in fashion, the point was not to look "new" and "modern." The point was to look old and elderly, to look like the embodiment of tradition. We are talking about white-haired wigs, not black- or brown- or blond-haired wigs. I seriously doubt the first generation of judges wore those things because they thought they made them look youthful or attractive to young people. They wore them to better command young people, who were raised up to respect their elders and honor their mothers and fathers. I think the wearing of powdered wigs characterizes those generations of elite men who strove to look elderly and statesmanlike from their middle teens. There may have a period when people wore them in a ironic way, but I guess the big majority of those patriarchs from the 1600s and 1700s who wore the powdered white wig did so to better communicate the fact that they were the motherfucking patriarch.

Looks like all the wrong parts of old and new come together. It doesn't have the right air, the Lord Chief Justice looks like a notary or something. He looks old without the dignity that rightfully should be his.

I'm not a fan.

/Adrian