Two Things

Scatter #17

    Another week rolls by and its time again for me to fill your eyes with stuff.  You will ooh and ahh, you'll gasp and giggle.  You might even say, "What WAS he thinking?"
    First out of the gate this week, those crazy kids at Comme De Garcons, those perennial disturbers of the sartorial peace, gave this look a go in fall of 2013.  The collection was taking traditional menswear tailoring techniques and almost literally exploding it outward.  This effort has been so wildly manipulated that it has become something entirely other. We are faced with something at resembles more a sort of natural mineral growth than anything one might wear.  But I cannot do anything other than applaud both the technical skills on display, which are of the highest order, and the resolute desire to challenge as far as may be, our notions of shape, proportion, pattern and color.

    Jeweler Walt Cassidy did this super cool necklace.  What makes this so interesting to me, and what is so very obvious from the image here, is how manifestly the tone of the piece changes based on what the model is,  or is not wearing.  In the left hand image, the necklace has a pronounced S&M feel to it, since it looks almost like a kind of body harness.  The other image, supported by that voluminous cape/coat, it becomes something nearly religious in tone.  A perfect example of how an Attire word alters based on context with other apparel words.

    Dries Van Notten sent this down the runway as part of his Shall We Dance collection in Fall 2013.  What really gets me here is that completely unexpected balance of colors.  The rosy peach color with that brilliant lemon yellow is one that occurs in the natural world, but that we don't tend to realize in textiles.  What makes it work so well, for me, is the presence of the feathers, which soften what might otherwise seem jarring. Bravo, Dries!

    A piece of man coat porn.  Yeah I know, fur.  I may very well be a fake, though.  What's being produced is false fur is so good now its tough to tell.  Damn is that thing gorgeous.  Of course I would look like a Tribble in it.  But for the taller folk, oh yeah.

 
    A bit of serious sparkle, and my favorite stones, emeralds.  This is a badge of the Order of Santiago de Compostela, and it was made in the 1670s from red gold with pearls and dozens of square cut emeralds. The center, shell shape is of green enamel over chasings resembling the shell's texture. Dang, but awards used to be pretty.

    This is one of the most amazing hairstyles I've ever seen. Its all the more interesting because this wasn't done for some special hair fashions show. I love how the center section curves around to the left of his face, while the other section projects, fin-like from the back. I only wish I could see this from all angles.  It must have been amazing to have seen it.  Further proof, that we are sometimes living, breathing art.

    High fashion, as rendered through the lens of TV.  This image is a still from the "That Girl" television series of 1966-71.  Marlo Thomas is seen here with two extras aping the style and production of photoshoots of the time. What makes it interesting to me is that everything about it has been watered down to appeal to a TV audience.  The clothes, the hairstyles and the make up are none of them as extreme as would have likely been shown.  Its interesting to me to look at how much gets lost in that translation to TV.

    And as a finale, a piece by Jean Philippe Worth, son of Charles Frederick, from 1905. This detail image shows the perfect blending of textiles, decorations, and colors that could be brought to bear on clothes of the day.  The evening dress is a pale sea green panne' velvet that has been embroidered with sequins imitating the movement of water, and ruched velvet appliques of water plants.  the skirt is finished at the hemline with multiple rows of densely gather silk chiffon which itself ripples like water.  Breathtaking workmanship, combining to create true beauty.

Have a Delicious Weekend!

Secrets & Revelations

    I feel the need to weigh in on something.  Its been on my mind a good deal, since discussing Attire will always mean bringing our critical skills to bear on things seen on others.  See, the Attire language, being so complex, far reaching and intrinsic to our lives, has enormous power, both to help and to harm. that said, what gives me pause, is the need for all of us, (myself included), to be very careful about how we approach such judgements.  Its all too easy for us to flippantly state that something is ugly, inappropriate or tasteless.  All too easy.
    What is harder, but far more important is that we refrain from applying those comments to the person in those clothes. First of all, its our perceptions only that we are expressing, since we are not inside their heads to know their intent and meaning.  Second, and more importantly, we all share one thing.  Each of us has our pain, torment and secrets.  We all have our dark unsettled places.  We all have our hidden tender spots.

                                Images are from the Nissan "People Are Fragile" campaign.


    What I challenge myself to do is always to bring as positive a spin to my assessments as I can. And to be frank, if I can't say anything good whatever, then I don't speak about it. You won't see me opinionating about the People of Walmart or anything of that sort. If you do, then call me on it, cause its not what I'm here for.
    So, I'm suggesting you look deeply, and think fully about what you are seeing, when you look critically at others Attire statements.  What others choose to reveal or conceal with their raiment is a window into their secret selves, their fragile hearts, and as such we gain a great deal from kindness.

Matchy Matchy Matching!

    Its a very curious thing, our desire to look as much like one another as we can, now and again.  We invest a fair amount of energy into it, and will sometimes go to extremes to achieve it.  Of course there is the desire to copy famous folk, or characters from stories or films or television.  But in this case, I am addressing our sometime desire to look like each other.
    We have all seen, or perhaps been, those who are coupled, and dress alike from time to time.  In Hawaii, I saw more than one vacationing family dressed in matching aloha shirts from Hilo Hattie.  And we've all witnessed groups of like minded folk who by association seem to dress alike, all wearing versions of the same hair, and clothes.
     So first we have a sweet desire of those who are in close relationship to express visually the connection that they share to each other.  Sometimes, when it isn't carried to extremes, its really pretty adorable.  A young couple who wear similar tee shirts, or an older one that echos pattern in each other's clothes.  This can seem charming to us, giving us a colorful cue to the level of their commitment to each other.

 
    Other times, this same thing can exceed the sweet, and get to another level entirely, where we begin to infer negatives connected to the identical nature of the ensembles.  The correlation is that the more completely the clothes are copied, the less we feel comfortable in viewing them.  We begin to question their rationale, and the real quality of the very loudly stated relationship.

    Next there are those who by association that is not familial or sexual, choose to manifest their connection through dress.  This phenomenon is most often seen in teen aged people, who, as yet unsure of their position in the world, will cling together in very obvious ways, aping hairstyles, clothing and mannerisms to a high level.  Films like "Heathers" and "Clueless" lampoon this very condition.

    And then there is the imposed version of matching attire.  That family portrait with everyone in identical Xmas sweaters, or the vacation shot of the whole brood in the same swimwear or shirt, lives for all of us, either as a part of our own life or as a witnessed experience.  In this case the connection is entirely an artificial one. Since not everyone would of a certainty be on board with the idea.  Surely the small children would have no say in the matter. But it is a sartorial shout to the world, that this is a family unit that cannot be divided under any circumstances.  And again, seeing such a grouping, we do question the truth of that bellowed claim, as we often question someone who demands that we believe their oft repeated statements.

    Closing, Attire can be and is used to foster connections between us. It creates a visual bridge that others can see.  But when we build that bridge too heavily to seems to become a fortress instead of a bridge.  The clothing becomes a wall that shuts out interlopers, and closes off real communication. So unless we desire to keep others away, we need to be cautious about just how closely we copy the others in our circle.  Too much sameness says, "Stay Away".

This Is A Bridge

Garbled Communcations.

    The majority of us, I suppose, go about the process of dressing ourselves, to a degree, unconsciously.  And though it may be our intent to look put together, sometimes we choose Attire words that don't quite make sense with each other.  That leaves those who see us scratching their heads, trying to parse out the meaning behind the less than clear statements we are making.
    Since we cannot get inside someone else's head to find out their line of reasoning, (if there is one), we have to struggle along making inferences from what we do see.  Just a few days ago at my "real job" a young woman came into the store, and I was instantly struck by the dissonance of her chosen clothing.  She had on floral pants and a printed top.  Now, that description can't convey what I was seeing because I've seen florals and prints mixed to great effect.

  In this particular case the two garments belonged in different sentences, not in the same one.  The reason they didn't communicate in harmony is because they shared no elements in common.  The floral pants had a good deal of color in them.  The top was a black and white.  The scale of the pattern on the pants was large, on the top, it was a smaller scale.  And there was not enough difference between them to create an appealing juxtaposition, so they couldn't speak that way either.  Its not even that either garment was of itself unattractive.  Both pieces were fine in their own ways, just not together.
    So what am I getting at here?  Is this simply the product of my own judgements and opinions on the matter of taste?  Or is there another layer to this that goes deeper?  I would have to admit that a part of this is about my own reactions and tastes. How could it not be?  There is though, I believe, another aspect to this that is deeper seated, and tougher to recognize.  We are, as humans, hard wired about certain visual cues.  For example we, regardless of culture or education, respond positively to particular balances of color, proportion and shape.  These are combinations that get repeated in every part of the human community, because on some unspoken level we know that they work for us.  We perceive them automatically as beautiful and harmonious.

    With that said, our responses to the apparel of other people is a dual one. We see sub-textually, the harmonies we expect and hope to see, and then we filter all that through the sieve of our societal perceptions to come to a conclusion.

  What creates the discomfort we feel is when the hoped for harmonies are absent, or there are unexpected jarring aspects to the visual statement.  This doesn't mean that sometimes wildly outlandish get ups are not also ravishingly beautiful, they can be.

  And it also does not mean that simple, seemingly normal and average attire cannot be an utterly confusing kind of visual glossolalia.
    So, the next time you see someone whose appearance puzzles or dismays you for some reason, stop and give it some further thought beyond, "Wow, that sure doesn't look good".  Apart from a desire to be fair-minded, based on not knowing another's full intent, its a chance to see more deeply, and possibly learn more about ourselves in the process .

Comfort Zones

    Recently a friend told me something about being at his family reunion.  Everyone was wearing kicks, sandals or flip flops, except him.  He had on black work boots.  It made him think about how his comfort wasn't at all about physical ease.  And so, this post is devoted to that thought.
    For every one of us out there who chooses clothing with an eye to their comfort level, or rather how effortlessly they can be worn, there are others for whom considerations outside of that take precedence.

    I know for myself that I prefer my trousers trim cut (when I wear them), and my shirts with as little bulk in the middle as may be.  Sure, trimly cut pants can hamper range, or ease of motion, as well I know, but I'm willing to accept that minor inconvenience to gain the look I want; and so, I am more comfortable, probably because I feel more attractive in such pants.  Being a short guy, short waisted, with a barrel chest, I can go sausage-like easily, so shirts that don't add to the middle of me are a good thing, even when I have to deal with a certain amount of confinement of my range of motion to get there.  Not that I want things compressing me, or skin tight, but I am fully accepting of the limitations the look I'm going for requires of me.
    And that's just me.  But this concept is one most, if not all of us are quite familiar with.  We all to one degree or another make sacrifices to our actual physical comfort, in order to get to where we want to in terms of appearance.  And when we do that long enough, and regularly enough, it makes us feel  comfortable to be so dressed.  Some women can't abide not wearing heels, even when they are painful.  Some men really must wear their jeans skin tight, or they don't feel right about themselves.

    So, feelings of comfort can derive, not just from our physical sense of ease, but from how closely our clothing expresses what we wish to convey about ourselves.  We have a thought, or set of them, we wish to put out to the world, and our internal easiness is predicated on the full relation of those thoughts.  We are most comfortable, when we are in our image of ourselves totally.

     That doesn't mean our image of ourselves and our reality cannot diverge from each other; they often do.  And in the end it really isn't about the presentation of an image that is acceptable to others on some superficial, societally generated level; its about our telling our personal tale with honesty.  If you believe you're a hottie and want to wear revealing clothes others might deem wrong for you, then by all means go for it.  If you think honestly of yourself as an arty intellectual, then make sure your apparel tells people that, without regard to what they may think about your statements.   Your comfort will drive a good deal of the success of your chosen attire.

    So whatever our perceived body flaws, or imagined personality shortcomings, we share this one thing in common, we all want to be comfortable within ourselves, and comparisoning ourselves in ways that tell our story honestly, is a great way to get there.

Get Comfy!