Styleforum Mean-Spiritedness

[jimmy the lid]

Having read the styleforum thread, I don't find anything particularly mean-spirited about it. Seemed generally supportive of Classic Style to me. Even the reference to "costume" seemed more a statement of personal taste than derision.

Cheers,
JtL

 

[Feraud]

As i thought, the OED hits the nail on the head. To wit:

Costume sb [a.F.costume in Dict. de l'Academi?© 1740 pronounced costum?©, a. It. costume custom, use, wont, fashion, guise, habit, manner :-L. consuctudin-em Custom. Used, by Italian artists, of guise or habit in artistic representation, and in this sense adopted in French and Eng. early in the 18th c. Thence transferred to manner of dressing, wearing the hair, etc., and in later times to dress.]

bk

Absolutely correct.
Except of course when it is used in a disparaging way, which you noted earlier.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

yes. The problem is that whenever it's used in reference to anyone other than an actor, clown, giant fuzzy mickey mouse, etc. it is meant to be disparaging.

I say throw it right back at them. Beginning your reply with a quote from the OEd is bound to get them running. Chase after them so you can enlighten them further - I find that Dr. Johnson quotes are fit for purpose.

bk

 

[deanglen]

I should join that forum and promote campaign hats and five button sack coats and see if I get the tolerance there that I get here. Just read the CS thread there. Not condemnatory in every post. I just like the Lounge ethos, very Golden Rule, to me.

dean

 

[Feraud]

I do note that most of the comments were postive towards CS and its constituents.
The few "nays" came from a long standing member. Ironic.

I should join that forum and promote campaign hats and five button sack coats and see if I get the tolerance there that I get here. Just read the CS thread there. Not condemnatory in every post. I just like the Lounge ethos, very Golden Rule, to me.

dean

I wouldn't do that based on this -

Looking at them in their costumes (and that's what many, if not most of them, were wearing), I was left with the strong sense that they would be equally at home wearing their deerstalkers and tweeds for a banquet of the Sherlock Holmes Society the following weekend and their opera capes and evening attire for the Count Dracula Society the week after that! (These are very real organizations, in case anyone is wondering, BTW.)

I love the Dracula angle! lol
No biggie, a guy has got to protect his turf.

 

[deanglen]

I almost bought a deerstalker style hat last year!lol Wouldn't that have been too much! I don't think they're all like that, but a few always seem to stand out!

dean

 

[Feraud]

Btw, Mk was quite eloquent in clarifying the costume comment!

 

[Fletch]

Well, it's like this.

Costume is for performers, party-goers, phonies, and the emotionally maladjusted.

Fashion is for the au courant, the socially ambitious, and those who strive to stay in the public eye.

Style is for everybody who wants it.

 

[deanglen]

Btw, Mk was quite eloquent in clarifying the costume comment!

Yes. Great job he did.

dean

 

[deanglen]

Well, it's like this.

Costume is for performers, party-goers, phonies, and the emotionally maladjusted.

Fashion is for the au courant, the socially ambitious, and those who strive to stay in the public eye.

Style is for everybody who wants it.

:eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

dean

 

[Martinis at 8]

I really like AAAC! I have learned a lot there. And from what I can tell, most of AAAC is positive about FL. I learned about FL from AAAC. SF, however, gets a big negative from me. I've been banned there. Some single guy asked for advice about dating a single mother, so I gave him my opinion. No name calling or anything, but LA Guy didn't like the opinion so I was banned :eusa_clap

Costumes? You should see some of the costumes worn by the SF crowd. LMAO!

M8

 

[Joel Tunnah]

I think that "costume" is used only in the sense of people who try to look like they stepped out of a particular era. No mingling of styles or time periods.

I think everyone can agree that if I put on a tri-cornered hat, pewter-buttoned waistcoat, knee-britches, hose, and shoes with big brass buckles on them, I would be wearing a costume. I'm not sure I understand how merely changing the style to 1930 should exempt you from this label. [huh]

 

[Baron Kurtz]

But then surely trying to look like you stepped out of yesterday's fashion magazine should also make you susceptible to this label. ("you" meaning noone in particular)

We're all trying to effect a look. I personally don't look down on any look - i don't see why others feel the need. I've never seen a particular look that noone could make look great.

bk

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I do appreciate the Style Forum's willingness to review the magazine in detail: http://www.thefedoralounge.com/showpost.php?p=302753&postcount=67


.

 

[Flying Scotsman]

I read the thread, and first, let me say...I'm glad to be *here* and not *there*. I'm tired of rudeness, smart-alecky posts and know-nothings on forums.

With that in mind, I think what it comes down to is what is constructive criticism, and what is being snide and condescending.

"Amateurish" is rude.
"I think it would be better if..." is constructive.

At work, I refuse to accept general comments that do not include a means of improving the product (document, whatever), no matter who they come from. "Not good enough" or "could be better" doesn't help anyone. I insist that comments include specific suggestions for improvement.

And that was what was missing from some of those posts...no suggestions for improvement, just sarcastic comments.

I won't be going back there anytime soon.

Thank heavens we have excellent bartenders here!

 

[Lawman]

These are some great posts.

I realize that we are all masquerading as something else every time we put on a suit of clothes, but, just out of curiosity, using the colloquial acceptance of the term "costume" (think Halloween), do you guys feel like you are wearing a costume when you put on a fedora and a vintage suit? I don't see any way that someone can use that term to describe someone's aesthetic sense without intending to disparage or diminish that person's sense of style. The term costume has a certain dopey or childish connotation to it that other terms (e.g., vintage-minded) do not.

 

[Flying Scotsman]

I don't have any vintage clothing (yet), but am cultivating a certain "look", I guess that is mildly evocative of the era. That said, I think "costume" connotes the wrong thing.

I prefer "attire". "Vintage attire" works just fine.

And I get this a lot when wearing my kilt..."I love your costume!" I'm therefore fairly adroit at mildly and politely correcting people by telling them "Actually, it's not a costume...it's Highland attire". Only the obstinate or profoundly dense will not get that, at which point I can add "Costumes are what you wear on Halloween. This is the opera (or wherever it is)".

 

[Fletch]

do you guys feel like you are wearing a costume when you put on a fedora and a vintage suit?

Absolutely not. I used to be made to feel that way by others' comments, but I no longer feel I have to give them that power.

I don't see any way that someone can use that term to describe someone's aesthetic sense without intending to disparage or diminish that person's sense of style. The term costume has a certain dopey or childish connotation to it that other terms (e.g., vintage-minded) do not.

Absolutely. And clothes-typicals harbor that idea quite often, as is evidenced by all the "gangster," "movie," and "detective" comments thrown at fedoristas. Most don't mean to be really unkind, but they can't help acknowledging what they see as an affectation or pose.

 

[Lawman]

Fletch, I like that.

 

[Chanfan]

Interesting discussion. Strikes home to me, as I certainly do wear "costumes" at times. The general term to describe my wife's hobby is "costumer". She sews fantasy and historical garments.

I do SCA (medieval dress up and camp out) as a hobby. They are pretty particular about calling their outfits "garb", as "costume" is considered insulting. Folks in that group run the gamut from almost no attempt at reproduction (t-tunic and jeans) to very slavishly detailed garb. It's all reproductions, of course - can't really wear vintage medieval.

I've done stuff with a group called "Somewhere in Time", that picks an era, and you dress up for that era (and have a potluck, or go to the races, or whatever). I tend to think of it as costume - it's mostly homemade or purchased repo, or an attempt to get the feel of the era, and typically is just for the purpose of the event, not a lifestyle choice. Again, they are less strict in their standards than, say, a re-enactment group.

And speaking of reenacters, I would guess most of them do not use the term "costume".

My wife does participate (and wins) events specifically called "costume contests" (at SF/F cons). She makes amazing outfits. She herself doesn't like Halloween, as she doesn't like having her outfits grouped in with cheezy off the rack costumes. When she makes a 1880's gown. it has a corset, bustle pad and bustle, and various researched layers. Still, she will sometime use modern conveniences in her recreations (hook and eye tape, etc.).

So I understand a little about the way the term costume is tossed about.

Now, as for my own hat wearing (and as yet unfulfilled suit desires), I'd certainly like to look as if I stepped out of the 30's or 40's - because it looks darned good, in part. I don't think of my hat as a costume, but I do know it's a bit of an anachronism. I would agree that the tricorn hat, etc, would seem pretty clear cut as a costume, despite the fact that it was once the norm, and now it's just waaaaay vintage. I know I love Napoleonic military uniforms - I'd love to have a Hussar's outfit with the leopard pelisse, and a nice busby. I don't think I'd fit in, however - it's so far out one couldn't really function in society. With the golden era suits, they are still the same basic outfits worn today, for the most part, and many elements of them are certainly still available currently.

And of course there's stuff on the current runways that's way more outlandish and "costume" than a golden era suit. But it's all about what's in, and what folks will accept as being clothes vs. costume. And if you care what other folks think.

Anyway, I guess for me, if you are wearing it as clothes - even if they are designed to impress, look outlandish, or be vintage - it's a style choice.