dressed down , the trend in the 21st century

[Flitcraft]

Pretty amazing that you can go to the White House in flip flops and get your portrait painted in bib overalls and its considered acceptable by most people.
Getting dressed for special occasions used to be a mark of respect- but I guess that has changed as well.

 

[DanielJones]

Modern Americans are slobs...

Period! I took my girlfriend to the Gilroy Outlets a few years back the day after Thanksgiving. Granted, yes it was very crouded. But what I had pointed out to her was something so obvious that she really never noticed it before. We were dressed down that day. Blue jeans, I in a Pendleton flannel, she in a nice fuzzy green sweater. But even though we (in my thinking anyway) were dressed down, we were by far the best dressed couple in the intire shopping center. I had pointed out that most people, young and old alike, were dressed like they just rolled out of the sack, threw on the nearest clean (or clean smelling) clothes, looked in the mirror and thought, "Mm Mm, I look good!" Then you realize why they're just rude little pukes. Because they have very little self pride. And the ones that tried to dress up looked more like a Hollywood hooker. American society has taken a spiraling nose dive in fashon. No wonder the Japanese call us fat & lazy. Because the majority of people look that way. Then we have a handful of us that want to dress better. Not expensively, just better.
Now, Chris & I do a lot of people watching when we're out and about, and since that day in Gilroy she has noticed the decline as well. Every so often we catch a glimpse of someone dressed nice, and it's usually somone our age or older. We see plenty of the Cal Poly students here in San Luis Obispo and they are the same as described above. Sweats, flip-flops, a logo t-shirt and a ball cap on backwards. The only song that comes to mind when I see that is 'Be A Clown'. And the thing about it is, they think they look good. The girls are no better. A mini skirt so short that if it was any shorter there would be two more cheeks to powder and some more hair to comb. Belly shirts so tight that it flaunts every bump curve and roll. The hip hugger jeans on the not so trim. They're so packed into those jeans that they're oozing out the top so even the slimmest of young women have the preception that they're overweight. The list goes on and on.
I had heard something a few months back about fashon taking an up-turn. That baggy jeans and sports logo t-shirts and dressing like a rapper are not in anymore. That Sean Combs is setting a trend for better dressed men. Well, I hope it happens some time soon.

Cheers!

Dan

 

[Joseph Casazza]

Surely a portrait of a child is a matter between the child and the parent. Mine 40 or 50 years ago certainly were. I appeared as my parents had me appear, as they wanted to remember me, dressed for the season or the occasion, or just the way they thought I looked cute. It has nothing to do with how I dress today - I am an adult and choose my own clothing. Sometimes I wore a bow tie, sometimes no tie at all, sometimes a suit, sometimes a wind breaker or sweater. They even put me in hats, but not always. It's one thing to complain about people who work with you (and even justified when the work for you!) dressing as slobs, or to complain about people in your church or club dressed inappropriately, but a kid in a portrait its parents have had made! You're out of order there, I think. Lighten up!

No, I didn't raise cows at 12, nor did I drive. Nor would I want 12 year olds doing the latter! Ever!

 

[nightandthecity]

I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ve seen many discussions like this on the lounge before, and they always seems to miss a crucial factor in the equation ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú modern ?¢‚Ǩ?ìsmart?¢‚Ǩ? clothes are the crappiest of all, and have been since the massive expansion of artificial fibres and cheap clothing imports in the 1960s. Here in the UK white collar workers are still often expected to dress ?¢‚Ǩ?ìsmart?¢‚Ǩ?, which in most cases means a badly cut, skimpily tailored, badly fitting, grey polyester suit. No wonder they leap at the chance to wear jeans and T-shirts which will by and large be solidly constructed from natural fibres, and hence both better looking and more comfortable. The fact is that modern formal clothes of vintage quality are prohibitively expensive for most people.

Someone mentioned school dress codes: well, here we still have them in many schools. It means kids are forced to wear the sort of badly tailored polyester junk I hate even touching. My eldest son was told off in front of his class for wearing a pair of nicely fitting and solidly made black cotton chinos with turn ups instead of the regulation black poly rubbish. We thought they met the school code, we were wrong, because school dress codes are meant to encourage bland uniformity not dressing well.

 

[Biltmore Bob]

Great avatar Night....

I get the strangest looks when out and about. Ocassionally I get a compliment. But mostly I get the ' Who the hell do you think you are?' stare.

Even in my work clothes, which is lately is more denim, I look differently than the average Ambercrombie and Fitchite.

Speaking of Ambercrombie....I had the rare opportunity, or should I say misfortune, of visiting the local Mall the other day. What a beacon of fashion, I must say. A&F had in their window what appeared to be worn out jeans for sale.

 

[nightandthecity]

ISpeaking of Ambercrombie....I had the rare opportunity, or should I say misfortune, of visiting the local Mall the other day. What a beacon of fashion, I must say. A&F had in their window what appeared to be worn out jeans for sale.

yes, the fashion for "pre-distressed" jeans is truly bizarre. This is the second time I've lived through it, we had it in the 80s for a while as well. I presume it reflects some longing by the desk-bound to look as if they actually do something physical now and again. But if so, why not go buy a genuine used pair from a charity shop (thrift shop) or garage sale for a fraction of the price?

Worse thing is that the ageing always looks completely fake. No, worse thing is that it is becoming all that's available...it could even end up like the 70s when it became near impossible to find unflared jeans. Imagine, you go out to buy some new work pants and all you can find are jeans exactly like the pair you've just torn up for rags...

 

[matei]

Regarding "distressed" jeans... ah, well - if people are dumb enough to buy them. It is shocking how sheep-like the general public is (sheeple instead of people). If I were uber-famous, I would intentionally start the most ridiculous craze I could think of, just to have a laugh at the dopes who blindly follow the latest fads. As a matter of fact, perhaps that is what is happening now? Surely it must've been the case in the '80s with some of those naff styles.

I generally make the effort to dress well. When I was young and not-so-bright I passed through a phase where I couldn't be arsed to make the effort. Baggy tracksuit bottoms (sweatpants - ugh), unshaven... I think back and cringe. Then I went into the service...

It made all the difference in the world. It made me mature, accept responsibility and respect myself and others. As soon as I came out of the service I was a new man, one who paid attention to how he presented himself.

I don't think todays doughy, sweatsuit-swaddled masses have enough pride in themselves, everything is made easy for them and there are no more real challenges. No self respect, no respect for others. They need a good 8 weeks in basic training methinks!

 

[Biltmore Bob]

Matei...

The average youth today would not make it in the armed services. It takes an exceptional young person who has already been taught values to make it in the service. While you had a sort of rebellious period, you more than likely came from proper upbringing. Or maybe you saw the light in spite of your circumstances.

The average youth today has an attitude of entitlement. It is rare indeed to find a young person who is willing to work hard for advancement.

 

[Lauren]

I, for one, see nothing wrong with modern clothes. You just have to have basic ettiquette to know what to wear at what time. The quality on many is poor, but so was the quality of the many lines of clothing in the "golden era". The difference is that we see the good ones that survived. As far as the painting, I don't see anything terribly wrong with it. For my personal preference I would rather myself or my family be painted in something more classic. Not modern clothing that will be out of fashion in a few years. If you're going to make the investment of a portrait make it something that will last more than a few seasons until twenty years later is becomes "retro" and cool again.

 

[Sefton]

I don't believe it is out of order to offer critical opinions on the subject of how people dress in public. Nor is it wrong to critisize the trend of casual portraiture for children. It would be out of order for said opinions to be offered in a manner that directs them towards a specific person or to do so with profanity. Neither appears to be happening here. Sure, it's your own business how you dress your children...no one is trying to take away these rights.

Yes, modern clothing is mostly made of inferior materials, poorly constructed, badly designed etc., but this isn't a very strong justification to have a "hang it all" attitude and look like a slob in public. You show respect not just for yourself but for others when you make the attempt to look well groomed.

I'll step off my soapbox now...

 

[Lauren]

I definately agree with you On all regards.

 

[Sefton]

I just wanted to add that I am in no way suggesting that people shouldn't post a contrary opinion on this matter. It would be rather boring if we all just patted each other on the back all day long: "Good show old chap" and "Here,here!"

I'll freely admit to having many a sartorial skeleton in my closet...the photographic evidence has been destroyed and the witnesses have been "persuaded" to remain quiet.....
Best regards, Sefton

 

[shamus]

I'm just checking but is the tone of this thread...

Dressing in traditional european "fine clothing" a sign of morals and values?

While not following this line of dress is someone who lacks morals and values?

 

[16_sparrows]

Even more disturbing is this quote:
""There's some embarrassment in modern society of having too much money, and if you present yourself as having money this way, you open yourself up to a certain kind of criticism," she said."

Getting a portrait painted of your kid kind of let's the cat out of the bag about your wealth. It also doesn't really help having them "dress down" in Ugg boots and a designer shirt, posing on a leather seat from Pottery Barn.

 

[Lauren]

No, I don't believe that at all. But on the same token, and I am speaking from a women's perspective on women's clothing, when you hang more out there it is suggestive of the type of attention you are wanting to draw to yourself. For example, a women dressed conservatively whether vintage or modern need not dress like a nun but can dress attractively and doesn't need to epose more skin in order to do so. On the other hand, the women dressed- whether vintage or modern- in something too tight or two low, can show her priorities. The exception is in eveningwear- where it seems it's getting to be the less you have on the more formal the occassion! Which was true througout the 19th and 20th centuries. And it must be said that the attitude of the wearer highly affects the general appearance. A woman who is refined but wears something of an elongated neckline will not seem as "scandelous" as a woman drinking and flirting with all the men in the room.

And for examples of modern american clothing which I personally feel expresses elegance and style for women, here are two sites:
Anthropologie
BCBG (let me warn you beforehand that it plays obnoxous music)

And while I know these are pricey, the same stylelines can often be found for less money at a regular women's clothing store. Or you can do what I do and shop the factory sales, clearances, and wherehouse sales

 

[Joseph Casazza]

The average youth today would not make it in the armed services. It takes an exceptional young person who has already been taught values to make it in the service. While you had a sort of rebellious period, you more than likely came from proper upbringing. Or maybe you saw the light in spite of your circumstances.

The average youth today has an attitude of entitlement. It is rare indeed to find a young person who is willing to work hard for advancement.

And precisely how many average youths do you know to make such a sweeping generalization? Seems to me quite a few average youths enter the armed services and do well enough. Over 2000 mostly (I would guess, in the absence of evidence that the armed services have especially high academic or other standards for enlistment) average youths are dead in our latest escapade.

 

[Joseph Casazza]

I don't believe it is out of order to offer critical opinions on the subject of how people dress in public. Nor is it wrong to critisize the trend of casual portraiture for children. It would be out of order for said opinions to be offered in a manner that directs them towards a specific person or to do so with profanity. Neither appears to be happening here. Sure, it's your own business how you dress your children...no one is trying to take away these rights.

Yes, modern clothing is mostly made of inferior materials, poorly constructed, badly designed etc., but this isn't a very strong justification to have a "hang it all" attitude and look like a slob in public. You show respect not just for yourself but for others when you make the attempt to look well groomed.

I'll step off my soapbox now...

Hmm, I thought we were talking about portraits of children in casual attire or surroundings, not portraits of children dressed as slobs. And unless those portraits are being displayed in a gallery or on a billboard or in some other public way, I think they are private, not public, and so not really anybody's business to critique outside of those closest to the family. If an acquaintance shows you a picture of his or her child that you disapprove of because the child is in blue jeans, I think the gentlemanly thing to do is make some noncommital soothing sound and move on.

 

[Joseph Casazza]

I'm just checking but is the tone of this thread...

Dressing in traditional european "fine clothing" a sign of morals and values?

While not following this line of dress is someone who lacks morals and values?

Yes, I think we are in danger of making far too great a connection between casual dress and morals or values. As I said, lighten up!

 

[jamespowers]

Yes, I think we are in danger of making far too great a connection between casual dress and morals or values. As I said, lighten up!

No one made that connection. Let's not start bringing out the red herrings here. It was simply a commentary on the trend in portraiture today. No need to lighten up.
The other part of the discussion is more to do with sloppily dressed people in public places now and how it has pervaded the public arena. At that particular point it is public and open to scrutiny. I should mention a term here that some have forgotten--SHAME. If I had children running around dressed like Spears and Aguilara then I would be ashamed. No matter what the denials of people may be, how you look determines how you are treated. If you look like a bum you will be treated as such. I would be ashamed to be seen as slovenly and unkempt. Perhaps some people have a lower threshold of shame or they need an adequate definition.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Joseph Casazza]

No one made that connection. Let's not start bringing out the red herrings here. It was simply a commentary on the trend in portraiture today. No need to lighten up.

Red herring? Pardon me? Behold:

Ah, the good old days when children were not necessarily viewed as childen but little adults to be taught morals, values and ethics. I suppose Pandora's box of permissiveness has been opened and we can only hope parents will have more backbone.

Regards to all,

J

QED