Styleforum Mean-Spiritedness

[Lawman]

Mates:

I don't know if many of you frequent the styleforum site, but there was a recent thread there regarding the most recent Classic Style edition. Several of the gents over there referred disparagingly to the magazine's targeted audience of "costumers" which I took to as a less than charitable reference to the vintage-minded.

It struck me as symptomatic of a change in tone in that is taking shape in both the askandy and styleforum crowd. There is a new strain of elitism on those boards that is markedly exclusionary, at least in my perspective. Some of the threads have become so rarified, so confined to the exotic, that they have become caricatures. There is also an element of mean-spiritedness in some of the posts that I really find distatasteful.

A year ago I knew next to nothing about clothes, and these sites have added immeasurably to my knowledge of, and appreciation for, fine apparel. More and more, however, these sites seem to be a medium for aficionados to one-up each other on obscure points of sartorial esoterica.

Just my two cents.

Mark

 

[EricH]

Mark,

I think it is just the nature of the beast when it comes to issues of style and fashion. We, present company included, sometimes get a bit elitist about our hats as well, which is unfortunate. I just got my latest Classic Style magazine and learned much I did not know about suits from it. Unfortunately I need to ditch all my suits now and start over Perhaps the overlooked part of style we miss is the attitude and by that I mean donning a Gentleman's attitude (Apologies to the ladies I am not intentionally excluding them). A gentleman appreciates that there are differences in tastes and personal circumstances. When asked for comment a gentleman is respectful and mindful of his choice of words. An ass in a $3000 suit is still an ass. Of course with a well chosen fedora he might be treated like a donkey.

I appreciate that this forum works hard formally and informally to be a place where hat lovers new and old can share and learn. We should be mindful that it will remain so only if we remain diligent and respectful. Or as my grandma would admonish me, act like ladies and gentlemen.

My two bits.

Eric

 

[Lawman]

The whole vibe (pardon the expression) here is so welcoming. That's what I really love about this site. I have yet to feel stupid on here, though I am very much a neophyte when it coms to hats. I think that is a testament to the folks who frequent this site.

 

[Joel Tunnah]

As with any group of collectors/enthusiasts, the more rarified stuff elicits a more vocal response. And there are always a few "either it's ____, or it's crap" people in every online community. But all-in-all, the Lounge is one of the best I've ever participated in, in this regard.

One shouldn't feel afraid to post here about their non-elite hat. A lot of us are interested in those posts, including me!

Joel

 

[AlanC]

As a frequent poster at both SF and AAAC I will stick up for them (us?) a little bit. At SF particularly there is a younger, and often more 'fashion forward' crowd. Both of those combine to cause things to be a bit snippy, and quite frequently irreverent. That said, I know that there have been some very positive posts about Classic Style at SF. At AAAC, I think the overall reception to Classic Style has been very positive. Andy himself started a thread on it.

I have seen newcomers, and not so newcomers, treated with less than kid gloves at Fedora Lounge, as well. Sometimes it happens in Internet fora. I've been able to operate in all three without difficulty despite there being members at each one who at times grate a bit.

For the record, I purchased issue #2 of Classic Style yesterday, and am eager to dive in.

 

[MK]

.

I wouldn't worry too much about it. It happens here sometimes too. Message boards can have comments that come off harsh. When they truly are harsh... other members will usually call the author on it. Of course respected leaders are given more latitude.

That is the case in this instance. You are quoting a guy who is held in high regard at Style Forum, Ask Andy.....and by me. I respect Jan, not only because I have read his posts for the past year or so and find him a knowledgeable and decent guy....but because he is a respected writer/editor. I was reading Jan's articles almost twenty years ago...and I found him to have those attributes then too. Therefore I cut him a lot of slack and consider his words. He is not trying to insult anyone with that comment. He was just giving his opinion on the content of my magazine and saying what he likes and doesn't care for.

 

[AlanC]

Jan is a great guy, and also a hat wearer.

 

[manton]

Style Forum seems a lot more rough and tumble than it really is because it is so dominated by regulars who have known each other "virtually" for years. Some people have been on the site since '02. Much of what appears to be snark is in fact joking banter. But AlanC is right that the site is younger, "hipper", more interested in fashion, etc. Thus the average member's interest in Classic Style is going to be somewhat less than you might otherwise expect.

Actually, I have found flame wars on AA to be more frequent and more acrimonious. I agree that FL is by far the most decent and well behaved site of its kind. It's sort of amazing. I thought nastiness just came with the territory.

 

[Lawman]

Good thoughts, guys. If folks over here are willing to cut slack, I am willing to re-assess. Perhaps I did not fully appreciate the context.

 

[MK]

geeees......

While I'm composing a reply, three other guys beat me to the punch.....and prove one of points in doing so.

You have to be quick on trigger around here. ;-)

 

[Feraud]

Is this guy (and others) right in calling us "costumers" or knocking a magazine they have no intention of supporting?

Are we being asked to accept this?

 

[Lawman]

Overall, the commentary regarding the magazine was very positive. The "costumery" bent of CS was the only disparaging angle I could detect.

 

[TaxMan1]

Style Forum seems a lot more rough and tumble than it really is because it is so dominated by regulars who have known each other "virtually" for years. Some people have been on the site since '02. Much of what appears to be snark is in fact joking banter. But AlanC is right that the site is younger, "hipper", more interested in fashion, etc. Thus the average member's interest in Classic Style is going to be somewhat less than you might otherwise expect.

Actually, I have found flame wars on AA to be more frequent and more acrimonious. I agree that FL is by far the most decent and well behaved site of its kind. It's sort of amazing. I thought nastiness just came with the territory.

Ok, so as an old sh#t, I'm good here?!

 

[Baron Kurtz]

everyone is a "costumer". Everyone has some sense of personal aesthetics. Some feel arrogant and self-obsessed enough to denigrate the style of others. (not directed at anyone in particular, just a general observation.) So be it.

Like aqua from the dorsal surface of a mallard.

bk

 

[MK]

.

Is this guy (and others) right in calling us "costumers" or knocking a magazine they have no intention of supporting?

Are we being asked to accept this?

What's a matter with you? Are from New York or something?

Just kidding, my friend.

Jan does support the magazine. He just likes the classic, traditional content more than the vintage, golden era elements. He meant no harm.

 

[Warlock]

If the classic shoe fits

Anyone can throw on clothes. A person with style selects from a wardrobe for effect, do they not? If that means that I am wearing a "costume" by selecting classic or vintage apparel, so be it.

 

[Sunny]

I've always been a little miffed when people call my clothes "costumes." This is particularly true of my 1860s wardrobe. They are really clothes that I really live in and really work in. To call something a "costume," whether it's an 1860s dress or a 1940s suit, implies that it's just for show and for dramatic effect; that the wearer's primary purpose is to be stared at by the audience; that he's not sincerely wearing it because he wants to, it's appropriate, or it's practical. That is my difficulty with the term "costume."

 

[Baron Kurtz]

But it is a costume. It's all costume. What we (everyone) cover ourselves with is costume (yes, i'm deliberately ignoring any connotations associated with the word).

I'm not sure of the etymology, but isn't 'costume' just taken from the French where it means "suit"?

I was speaking to an ageing Irish professor friend of mine who said that for Christmas they got an apple, an orange, and a suit of clothes. Now, he didn't mean a suit, he meant a full set of covering garments.

I am, of course, being overly generous, and i realise the term was being used in a disparaging sense. But, as so many marginalised communities have learned before, the best way to deal with this is to take away the ammunition and turn it back on the fumer. (Etymological arguments are particularly useful here.)

bk

 

[Feraud]

I can appreciate the different style aesthetics between this forum and any other.

I just wish he (Jan) hadn't used the word costume so many times in one paragraph! :eusa_doh:

 

[Baron Kurtz]

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

Costume sb [a.F.costume in Dict. de l'Academié 1740 pronounced costumé, 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