Voxsartoria's Weekly WAYWRN Subjective and Totally Unfair Digest

Originally Posted by RJman

Click to expand...

What do they argue about? I think I read a Gore Vidal short story like this.
We, well my brothers and father, used to argue about whether my mother should be required to remove the loose white stitches on the back of her Margeila gear. Good times.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

Are you saying changes before were made for rational reasons and now, due to postmodernism we became irrational (so now that we live in postmodernity we have "irrational" fashions). I posit we were never rational and never will be.

I'm not saying we were all one way or another--before or now. I'm saying that, as a whole, because of contemporary values, changes to norms are no longer necessarily healthy for individuals or society. I know my fellow political conservatives would agree with me here--particularly under current circumstances.

Originally Posted by Film Noir Buff

Click to expand...

This is a fascinating way to look at it and even suggests ideology over aesthetics, function, purpose etc.. But there are definitely periods of heightened creativity that people draw on more than others like Brummel's England, The sixties. I know that with military uniforms certain periods are considered classic in spite of their antiquity because the length of the conflict led to perfect cross sections of aesthetics and practicality. I think the 1920s are probably more creative than the 1930s but the 1930s was the time that set about codifying and standardizing the innovations of the previous decade's break from rigidity.

Sure, some time periods are more interesting to us. It remain to be seen if the concensus stays the same in 300 yrs (for the few people in the know).

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Click to expand...

Are you saying I let Manton put words in my mouth, or that I let you put words in my mouth? Clarity, RJ, clarity.
I bill for clarity. I snark pro bono. (whacked, feel free to quote this.)

I was writing in reference to Manton's implication that your foyer-ism had something to do with my alleged scorn for you. I wished to indicate that Manton is not my spokesperson.

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Click to expand...

I'm not saying we were all one way or another--before or now. I'm saying that, as a whole, because of contemporary values, changes to norms are no longer necessarily healthy for individuals or society. I know my fellow political conservatives would agree with me here--particularly under current circumstances.
What is healthy? How can you say changes to norms were healthy for individuals and society in the past? Could you have had the leeway to dress in a throwback fashion in the 1920s or would you have been deemed as insane as the guy in a Napoleon hat? What you are lamenting isn't the variation in the nature of the changes but the acceleration of hypermodernity. Too much info is making us loose control and some find it a cause of anguish while others think it is exhilarating.

Originally Posted by RJman

Click to expand...

What do they argue about? I think I read a Gore Vidal short story like this.

"Why does he have to dress different from everybody else?" That's really the extent of its depth, but the persistence goes on for miles and miles.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

In the sense that they didn't study AA or aspire to dress that way, aside from vague yearnings for the lifestyle that could have included seeing them in a fancy suit (the way would have been cut=irrelevant, the status it denotes=important).

No, I'm the poorest member of my immediate family. They just spend their money on cars, vacations, kids, and kitchen renovations.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

What is healthy?
How can you say changes to norms were healthy for individuals and society in the past?
Could you have had the leeway to dress in a throwback fashion in the 1920s or would have you been deemed as insane as the guy in a Napoleon hat?

"Napoleon wore a black hat, ate lots of chicken and conquered half Europe. Napoleon was caught by the British. Imprisoned on Elba, he died on the phone."

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Click to expand...

"Why does he have to dress different from everybody else?" That's really the extent of its depth, but the persistence goes on for miles and miles.



No, I'm the poorest member of my immediate family. They just spend their money on cars, vacations, kids, and kitchen renovations.

I was referring to my comments on how people at the time wouldn't have given a **** about AA and dressing that way.

Originally Posted by RJman

Click to expand...

"Napoleon wore a black hat, ate lots of chicken and conquered half Europe. Napoleon was caught by the British. Imprisoned on Elba, he died on the phone."

He also bathed in cologne.

Merde.

Originally Posted by triniboy27

Click to expand...

More importantly, I don't understand the fora's infatuation with a bunch of drawings from the 1930's.

Nice job f*cking up my little thread, Trini.

You're going on my **** list.

Originally Posted by George

Click to expand...

There also seems to be a greater expression of colour, patterns and textures in those old plates, more than you see in today's fashion media which is strange when you consider that we've never had more choices available to us and at lower cost. Fashion/style seems to have become somewhat homogenised with few men showing much creative individualism, which is a topic in itself.

With the AA/Esquire plates the key I feel is to be inspired and learn from them, then build from there. I wouldn't think it's a good idea to just run out and have a facsimile made.

Originally Posted by Despos

Click to expand...

To me the message in those old pics are dressing for the occasion. Every pic is in a different local, portraying multiple situations from business to casual to formal events to the horse track to the beach and the clothing reflects the feeling/formality/casualness of the occasion. The accessories, the colors, patterns all reflect a mood congruent to the setting. It is conveying a mode/attitude of dressing that is pretty much lost today. Most men have generic year round wardrobes that denote "one suit for all reasons and all seasons". SF posters excluded. Go to a meeting or a party and see how similar everyone looks. You'll know what I'm saying.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

I said that the idealization of the high society dress of a certain period is a huge influence on many members of this forum and often held as an unsurpassed golden standard by people who think there's an optimal way of dressing (hahahahaha!).

Originally Posted by Film Noir Buff

Click to expand...

If you could develop this a bit more for discussion purposes. I don't necessarily say there isn't another reason, i just can't see a stronger one than wanting to identify more closely with the past.

Oh dear. This thread was supposed to be all Italo Calvino and you guys mess it up with deep thought. Now, I have to say something to bring the average down.

Again.

Let's start with the General with an anticipatory shot across the bow:



Thank you, General.

The great AA illustrations, particularly the Esky ones, are referenced often because they represent a coherent, accessible, and compelling visual summary of aspirational dressing at the zenith of modern tailored dress. What competes?

One of the reasons that I started LIFE threads the week that its archive was released on Google was to suggest some visual sources of high quality other than AA (if you mention the Sartorialist, I will send goons to tase you, then dump you in the river.) Despite their charms and power, however, these photographic images lack the singularity of the Esky drawings.

Despos tells it like it is when he notes that the AA illustrations portray a wide variety of dress for a wide variety of occasions, something now lost. I will amplify his point by suggesting that the AA illustrations also capture a time when men aspired to a life led as a concatenation of social occasions. This American aspiration was definitely one of American class.

Today, however, the class that was the object of aspiration in America is dissapated, diminished, and irrelevant.

A vignette of disintegration: this winter, I had the pleasure of attending an old event (somewhat secret) that had been held annually, but had not been held for five years because of the difficulty in assembling enough people. All the men were in full dress, and most of us arrived in top hats.

But you know what? I was the youngest guy there by twenty years, and I am not a young man.

Just because descendents live does not mean that class survives. And without that class, the underlying form of life to which the AA illustrations reach loses quite a lot of punch.

Originally Posted by Manton

Click to expand...

I have met my share of upper class people in my time, and I have never come across one as insecure about his standing in the haute monde as our Carl. The geniune article is more like Vox, though perhaps a bit more outwardly humble (even if that is a pose).

Well, all the sins and glories of the flesh and mind are visited on all classes. The only thing that really makes the privileged class distinct is the encultured assumption of superiority which, if life does its job, gets broken by reality. And reality has broken it completely as far as I can see...and those who pretend otherwise should put the crack pipe down.

The AA illustrations are wonderful resource, and as George and Manton say, they can always be approached as inspiration.

In fact, for those of you who remember, Ralph Lauren launched Purple Label in the nineties with items almost exactly taken from AA...not from the real past, but from the illustrations.

I bet he was damning the public for lacking the proportionally tiny heads that help to make the illustrations so otherwordly handsome.


- B

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

What is healthy?
How can you say changes to norms were healthy for individuals and society in the past?
Could you have had the leeway to dress in a throwback fashion in the 1920s or would you have been deemed as insane as the guy in a Napoleon hat?

Subjective health. People complain about things, come up with stupid solutions because of socially accepted values they've adopted, and then complain more about the worsened problem or the new problem that was created.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

What you are lamenting isn't the variation in the nature of the changes but the acceleration of hypermodernity.

I disagree. But even if the nature of the changes hasn't changed, and they are just very fast, the problem I describe still exists: hasty and costly forfeiture of existing norms.

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

In fact, for those of you who remember, Ralph Lauren launched Purple Label in the nineties with items almost exactly taken from AA...not from the real past, but from the illustrations.

I bet he was damning the public for lacking the proportionally tiny heads that help to make the illustrations so otherwordly handsome.
Ironic, given how disproportionately large his own head is.

Originally Posted by RJman

Click to expand...

Ironic, given how disproportionately large his own head is.

Ralph Lipshitzfan?


- B

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

I might not be able to keep this going, but we'll see.

And once a month, I might post Looks Gone Wrongⓒ, for which I will always be the number 1 candidate.

Let's start:

- B

Correct

Originally Posted by George

Click to expand...

Correct

I'm glad that at least one person is on my side.


- B