I was hipped to this great article from the NYT concerning men my age (20's and 30's) dressing much nicer than they used to, and more to the point, dressing much nicer than their fathers did. They cite this as being a sort of rejection of the casual Friday lifestyle, a way of rebelling against their fathers. As a tie-wearing guy who takes a great deal of pride in stepping out well-groomed, well-dressed, and always in damn shiny shoes, this article made me prick up my ears and pass it along.
Why go to all the trouble of shaving every day, moisturizing every night, keeping my shirts neat and wrinkle-free, and owning more ties than socks? The number one reason is that girls like it. I look good in a suit - everyone does - a well tailored suit is customized to your build and accentuates your best features. It tells the world that when you got out of bed, you decided to to go through a little extra effort just so you wouldn't disgust all around you by showing up in a ripped T-shirt and sweatpants, both stained with liberal smears of nacho cheese.
When you go out looking good, you are telling the world that you have arrived, or at least are ready to get underway. A suit lends you confidence because a suit is the uniform of authority. Many men's sartorial traditions have their roots in military dress, and not the modern work-a-day, remote-control robot-murder army: the cavalry army, the officer's army, the gentleman's army. These traditions carried over to the professional world, and so suit = boss, suit = power, suit = in control.
The article from the NYT is spot on in pointing out that it was this mode of dress that our fathers, the boomers, rejected. They force-fed themselves this sort of anti-establishment faux egalitarianism, convinced themselves that style was effeminate, and started shlubbing to work in khakis and dockers. I don't know what the big deal was - wanting to look more workmanlike? Wanting to look like you weren't part of "the system?" I don't know - knowing would mean that I want to hear a whole load of excuses that grown men have made for dressing like children.
Men of my generation were taught that that was how you were supposed to dress, and in that way we were initiated into the Cult of Blah. But as the guarantees and givens of society started slipping away from us (house, car, job, education), we started to see that membership had lost its privileges, and so our own mod revolution has begun.
Those of us who embrace style, fledgling as many of us are (myself included - financial circumstance dictates that I only go well dressed 4 days a week), do not want to dress like our fathers because we want to be more. Indeed, those like myself from working class families don't want to dress like our grandfathers either.
No, we are dressing like our grandfather's bosses. Certain whiskey ads would have you believe our fathers were swinging hip cats - they were not. These are the people who brought you Woodstock, Wal-Mart, and the SUV. They were the people who roundly rejected the trappings of Western aristocracy and sought to knock it down.
Well now they have it - they've made a good, if quixotic, run and wound up in the suburbs, upside-down on their homes with a titanic collection of disposable plastic crap.
So those of us who want nothing to do with that sort of lifestyle have picked up the uniform of the old elite, the aristocracy, the upper class, and this makes for a complex fashion statement.
As we take up these clothes, so too do we say that we are embracing a way of life, one which honors authority and discipline (our fathers, who so roundly rejected authority, are hard pressed to in turn earn what they themselves would not give over) - we are in fact ready to take our turn holding the reins of empire. We are ready to push the whole cultural anomaly of the last 60 years out of the way.
But even as we say that we are ready to pick up the old mantel of command, we are well served to remember that the gentrified social order fell out of fashion in large part due to its own fatal flaws - racist, misogynistic, and exclusive, "the system" worked so well for so few that its cruelty and avarice became inexcusable and many would-be gentlemen refused to play along.
So to my fellow aspirants in the order of silk-and-wool, let's not be silly about our suits. In re-embracing these fashions, so too do we lend lip service to the lifestyle that spawned them: martinis and cigars, big business, leisure and gentle pursuits, yes, but also oppression, cruelty, and unwavering devotion to old flags and false morals. Let us move forward into a more just and equitable gentle persons club. Let us be more tolerant, more enlightened, and more generous than our great and genteel forebears while still looking just as good.
Grandma S. celebrated her 80th birthday last month, and as a gift, my aunts went through all of Grandpa S.'s old 8-mm movies, digitally captured the footage, and worked some nice post-production to condense it all down to a 1-hour DVD. What struck me the most were the way the ladies and gents (my grandparents, great-grandparents, and their contemporaries) were dressed. The only time Gramps had jeans on was while under the Bonneville's hood. For most every other task (hand-harvesting grapes, installing new siding), the jacket was off, the sleeves were rolled up, and the tie was tucked in. It's left an impression on me, and I'm on the cusp of subscribing to your newsletter (visiting the local tailor, trying out some hats, switching over to a straight blade).
ReplyDeleteI'd be interested to see the fairer sex's general response to a reversion in men's fashion. Something tells me a lot of them would be happy to stay in their pants (once thought "vulgar").
I don't have any problem with women wearing pants - I think slacks on a woman can be a very good look, and even though I wear a jacket, I will always honor a good pair of jeans for casual fun on men AND women alike. What I do have a problem with is women in pajama pants, Ugg boots, and a ratty old hoody going about their day in frump because "nobody's going to see them". There's an old bon mot that's made it's way via email forwards to me more than once that ladies can't expect men to act like the heroes of a harlequin romance if they don't look like Victoria's Secret models, and vice versa. While the tone of that email was one of general deprecation (eg, the two extremes were expected to be ignored in both cases), the logic isn't unsound.
ReplyDeleteI know my own great grandfather in his later years usually wowre slacks and an oxford shirt, but by the time I met him he was approaching his dotage. I do know that my family has for the most part been working class with wide disparity, so I don't think we looked quite as posh as I would have liked for bragging rights; thus, I don't dress like my grandfather, but my grandfather's boss.
I've got a couple good links and recommendations for you on all things sartorial - I'm no expert, but I'm certainly learning from the best, and I'll pass them along.
loved reading this Vyeto! I'm excited to see what you'll wear to Nicole's 80's Prom New Years party. assuming you're going?
ReplyDeleteI am going, but I don't think I'll stun anyone with new looks - sadly, Xmas did a nasty tap-dance on my bank accounts and so the one Xmas present I was hoping to get myself has to wait :(
ReplyDeleteVery Useful information , this is both good reading for, have quite a few good key point. It is my pleasure to read your article! Thank you for sharing !
ReplyDelete