(![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ellen_datlow Jan. 5th, 2009 05:04 pm)
ellen_datlow Jan. 5th, 2009 05:04 pm)Jezebel rails against a Newsweek trend piece by Sameer Reddy that blames "casual wear" vs elegance and sartorial fashion for helping to create the credit crunch -- I kid you not:
"Comfort has its place, of course, but if that becomes the guiding value in getting dressed—or anything else—then we've got a problem. This misplaced priority has arguably contributed to our current troubles with credit, education and productivity."
Here's the response from Jezebel
What do you all think about this?
"Comfort has its place, of course, but if that becomes the guiding value in getting dressed—or anything else—then we've got a problem. This misplaced priority has arguably contributed to our current troubles with credit, education and productivity."
Here's the response from Jezebel
What do you all think about this?
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
The point about the girdles is an interesting one, I thought (yeah if we were back in corsets and girdles we'd ALL look great but we'd not be able to breath). I wore a girdle in HS--I didn't need it but that's what girls did. I've never had a smooth leg line, even when I was a lot thinner.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
There's a wonderful book on footbinding that I highly recommend. I read it many years ago and still have it on my shelf:
Chinese Footbinding: The History of a Curious Erotic Custom by Howard S. Levy (http://tinyurl.com/9wrruj).
From:
no subject
Mind you, men's business suits can be mighty uncomfortable too, especially around the collar and tie region when it's oppressively hot. I read an article years ago suggesting that Australia should adopt an alternative mode of business attire -- something like the sarongs worn by pacific islanders -- in keeping with the hot climate. It'd never happen. Instead everybody just cranks up the aircon and keeps on dressing like they do in Europe.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
They CAN be comfortable...
From:
no subject
Not only that, but I happen to know that Mr. Reddy wrote the first draft of that piece entirely in Comic Sans.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I think not.
I agree with Jezebel's assessment that Reddy's expectations about how people dress are classist--along with structured toward a very narrowly defined viewpoint that embraces the dress of only a single culture.
If my employer were to adopt a more formal dress code, I'd be out of a lot of money. I imagine a number of other employees throughout the country would be in similar shape.
From:
no subject
Somehow it's always somebody else's fault.
Love, C.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I also rarely buy new clothing, instead buying used stuff (or new but pre-owned) from thrift shops or on Ebay. This is a fine way to practice recycling and reducing one's consumerist footprint. I also give things away on my local Freecycle list: most recently to a nine year old girl who needed warm clothes for winter.
I do think that one should buy quality items that will last; they may cost more but they're worth it. And they have that stuff in thrift shops, too. :) Places like Payless are kind of evil in my opinion. Poorly-made clothing and shoes were once the cornerstone of American manufacturing and retail. Try to find a pair of moderately-priced shoes for sale in this country that hasn't been made in China. Maybe this attitude is also classist on some level, but I grew up very lower middle class and learned that quality lasts.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
It's also interesting because in urban areas, I actually see a lot more women of weight wearing adorable clothing, like Marilyn Monroe-style halter dresses, because now the clothing is being made for their sizes. At the same time, I see more young slender people wearing pajama bottoms from Old Navy out on the streets.
I definitely dress for comfort, and personally I believe we all should. No one should wear something that hurts unless they really want to. That doesn't mean a lack of trendiness, however, and if the major brand manufacturers would make clothing people would actually enjoy *wearing,* we'd probably do so. I can't tell you how many times I've found a pair of boots I adored the looks of only to find they're bunion-squishing, heel-pinching, or simply too narrow in the calves. If I had the money to do all my clothing custom-made, I certainly would. Instead, I always look like I'm dressing slightly too young, because I must stick to Converse due to the fact that they're the only shoes that can properly support my rather wide and rather high orthotics.
From:
no subject
I love looking good, but I've come to value comfort more. And yes, I don't see why I can't have both. (well, money).
From:
no subject
Yeah . . . I . . .
That guy's viewpoint is just alien to me. But then, I don't understand people who are terribly passionate about fashion. Like it boggles my mind that we have cable shows devoted to this.
I don't like fanny packs because I think they look dorky. But that sentence right there is about as fired up as I get about fashion. It wouldn't occur to me to blame the financial crisis on people in denim shorts, T-shirts, and fanny packs. (Red Sox fans yes, though.)
Actually, that suggestion was so jaw-droppingly bizarre that it almost acts as a weird kind of camouflage/misdirection. We're so busy scratching our heads that it's hard to notice the more basic ignorance behind the statement: stereotypes aside, the economic crisis simply wasn't caused by irresponsible (read "black" or "poor") consumers at all, as much as Rush Limbaugh would like us to believe it was. The mortgage default rate is actually pretty small, and doesn't begin to account for the hemorrhaging. As Cat noted, the blame for this one belongs not to the slobs on the bottom, but to the well-dressed folks on the top.
What kind of fashion statement does Mr. Reddy think golden parachutes make?
From:
no subject
I accept that it would help subsidize the fashion industry if everyone spent the same proportion of their wealth on clothing, but unless you were to impose very heavy luxury taxes, I don't see that as an answer to our economic woes.
From:
no subject
Seems to me that folk are really not following his point. It's compressed of course.
What's being stated is that a culture of excessive comfort is at odds with being productive, working hard to get an education, and being fiscally responsible.
Is comfort the cause or just a manifestation? In my experience, I've dealt with any number in the younger generations who are not interested in being productive, doing a good job, putting forth any more effort than necessary, etc.
The financial crisis reveals a rotten core on both ends and really throughout: those living beyond their means and diving into ever greater depths of debt and those at the top unwilling to wait for financial reward over time.
Some will poohpooh the ethical accusation but it is an ethical across the board failing.
From:
no subject
"The suit remains the staple item for well-dressed men. But outside the boardroom or the ballroom, it's an unpopular choice. Rather than break out the cargo shorts and Hooters T shirts, men might opt for a well-tailored sport jacket and pair of dark-wash jeans by John Varvatos—an urban-cowboy look of which even President Bush would approve. Companies like Club Monaco, owned by Ralph Lauren, have further refined the category of elegant casual, with pima-cotton sweatshirts and thin-wale corduroys guaranteeing comfort without the taste trade-off of athletic shorts."
From:
no subject
I agree that he shortshrifted whatever could have been of value so much to the point that the discussion was cut down to his shortcomings...
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
That's true in as much as he does argue this, but I don't think he backs the argument up at any point. I agree that a sloppy appearance may sometimes indicate a generally careless attitude, but are people who're uncomfortably dressed, or working in an uncomfortable office, any more productive than the rest of us? Or are they merely more concerned with superficialities than with more important matters?
From:
no subject
Secondary reaction is that he suffers from that most basic of logical fallacies: hasty generalization.
I don't disagree with his basic point about how American tourists dress (my coworkers and I used to play the "guess the country of origin" game during tourist season in Rockefeller Center), but if forced to make hasty generalizations about people from other countries, I wouldn't be very kind to anyone.
He's not only made an error equating "casual" with "sloppy," he's mistakenly equated "put together" with "chic." I've seen a lot of people who very clearly had put a lot of thought into their non-chic outfits.
And to be honest, it's "non-chic" by conservative Western standards. Maybe Reddy should travel more and see if he can get honest opinions about his clothes from people who use currency other than dollars or pounds.
From:
no subject
* That would be those of us who are able to buy, of course.
From: (Anonymous)
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
High heels can be comfortable--but not those with spike heels. I've always found platform heels work well for me (I mean a high heel platform, not corkease, which I LOVED in the 70s).
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
:)