Friday WAYWRN Challenge: MC Does SW&D - YOUR WINNER ANNOUNCED

[EZETHATSME]

^ I like your approach, Holdfast. It has a great deal of validity.

How specifially have you gone about increasing the proportion of your life where you don't really need to bother too much about whether others are envious, scornful or indeed perplexed?

I feel I am just begining to learn this process, and finding it's a mentality as much as anything. Curious to know more about how others have done so.

EZ

 

[EZETHATSME]

Originally Posted by SpooPoker

A professor, a psychologist, and a doctor walk into a bar.....

We need a contest for best conclusion of this joke.

EZ

 

[Holdfast]

Originally Posted by SpooPoker

A professor, a psychologist, and a doctor walk into a bar.....

Ouch.

Said the bar.

Originally Posted by EZETHATSME

How specifially have you gone about increasing the proportion of your life...

Firstly, I think the answer is going to be individual rather than generic. There isn't a one size fits all answer to this. Secondly, it takes time and a lot of hard work to get there, plus you need a talent that others lack (or rather, you need to identify what that talent is). And some of the specifics are either private or boring, so I won't get into that.

But in general, I think it requires you to create a situation where a) your income stream is sufficiently secure; b) your self-esteem is such that your inner character comes through strongly in a conversation to overwhelm most other factors including your clothes; c) you need less validation from external sources than internal ones.

Obviously these aren't necessarily independent of each other, but if you keep these end-points in mind, you can work through a multi-year plan of the key things that need to happen to achieve that degree of freedom. You can never really get there fully, of course, as I suggested upthread, and it's the nature of us all to continuously learn more about ourselves, which moves the goalposts somewhat. But you can get close enough to be happy with life!

 

[EZETHATSME]

Thanks, Holdfast. Very good things to consider.

EZ

 

[F. Corbera]

Originally Posted by Holdfast

More broadly though, I've tried to manage life in such a way as to sustainably increase the proportion of my life where I don't really need to bother too much about whether others are envious, scornful or indeed perplexed. You've probably done the same.

Analogue girl in a digital world.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.

Originally Posted by SpooPoker

A professor, a psychologist, and a doctor walk into a bar.....

...and three hours later:

 

[F. Corbera]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

It sounds like you're suggesting people should not try to dress like characters from stylish 1960s spy spoofs. That's terrible advice.

Terrible advice is my speciality.

 

[Holdfast]

Originally Posted by F. Corbera

Analogue girl in a digital world.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.

Is she my Christmas present? You really shouldn't have. But thank you. I will treat her as well as she deserves.

 

[LA Guy]

Originally Posted by F. Corbera

I understand your use of the word propriety, but may I offer an alternative since this is not AAAC? Dressing properly still has a bit of relevance in modern life, especially for important social events. Moreover, for many there is still meaningful utility to be had in dressing in ways that do not draw significant envy, scorn, or perplexity from the people around you. Understanding these things is simply one of the measures of manhood and I hope no one is silly enough to think that this forum or others like it can teach that.

So, what I meant was more of the following: in the general case of classic mens clothes, jacket and tie, the main benefit of history lies not in propriety but in offering the free advantage of a prior century of experimentation in what looks good. Sure, you can challenge that history if you are really, really able. Few are. Sure, you can draw inspiration from the more quixotic or flamboyant parts of that history. But beware.

I meant nothing more than that. It sounds trivial, but so, too, is this forum. Pleasantly so.

Given the drastic (by MC standards,) fluctuations in the proportions of men's suits over the past century, I'd conclude that what history has taught us is that men generally look good wearing a jacket with structured shoulders and lapels, matching pants, a shirt with a collar, and a tie. It's so broad as to be meaningless.

Combine that with varying social mores, and any "rules" that might help you dress in a way that "do(es) not draw significant envy, scorn, or perplexity from the people around you" are for all intents and purposes, useless.

Bringing this back to the difference between MC and SW&D, the root of a lot of the tension between some MC and SW&D posters seems to stem from neither group respecting the social currency of the other. "Coolness", which is valued by the posters in SW&D, is derided as childish and immature by MC posters, while signifiers of bourgeois success, which seem to be valued by a large contingent of MC posters, are mocked by some SW&D posters. The reactions of the MC posters are particularly acute, and numerous posts have insinuated that SW&D posters must either be financially dependent on others, have "creative jobs" (this seems to be a negative thing), or be otherwise unable to succeed in the milieu in which the MC poster works.

It's a minor, but not trivial part of the cultural conflicts of our times.

 

[niidawg3]

Originally Posted by LA Guy

Bringing this back to the difference between MC and SW&D, the root of a lot of the tension between some MC and SW&D posters seems to stem from neither group respecting the social currency of the other. "Coolness", which is valued by the posters in SW&D, is derided as childish and immature by MC posters, while signifiers of bourgeois success, which seem to be valued by a large contingent of MC posters, are mocked by some SW&D posters. The reactions of the MC posters are particularly acute, and numerous posts have insinuated that SW&D posters must either be financially dependent on others, have "creative jobs" (this seems to be a negative thing), or be otherwise unable to succeed in the milieu in which the MC poster works.

IMHO, there are a few inaccurate generlizations in your response. The main currency in MC and particularly in MC WAYWRN is still "looking/being" cool. Success is revelled, but I think looking/being cool is both an SW&D and MC thing. JP Hardy, Baron and UC are examples of people who ooze cool in all their shots. They could post an average fit and still receive high praise because of their gravitas.

Also, I dont think its fair to call out MCers for their reactions (acute or otherwise). Both sides for the most part can't relate to the other's style and unfortunately this disagreement quickly degenerates into silly name calling and childish behavior (SW&D: you are all fat and boring, MC: you are all broke and live at home).

If there is any value in the recent cross pollination, it is to teach acceptance (not tolerance), and a realization that there is no value in bashing the other side of aisle, since the same bashing can apply to both sides (hope that made sense)

 

[LA Guy]

Originally Posted by niidawg3

IMHO, there are a few inaccurate generlizations in your response. The main currency in MC and particularly in MC WAYWRN is still "looking/being" cool. Success is revelled, but I think looking/being cool is both an SW&D and MC thing. JP Hardy, Baron and UC are examples of people who ooze cool in all their shots. They could post an average fit and still receive high praise because of their gravitas.

Also, I dont think its fair to call out MCers for their reactions (acute or otherwise). Both sides for the most part can't relate to the other's style and unfortunately this disagreement quickly degenerates into silly name calling and childish behavior (SW&D: you are all fat and boring, MC: you are all broke and live at home).

If there is any value in the recent cross pollination, it is to teach acceptance (not tolerance), and a realization that there is no value in bashing the other side of aisle, since the same bashing can apply to both sides (hope that made sense)

I agree with your last paragraph, but at the same time, I think that it's a pretty hard feat to achieve given the negative perceptions each has of the other, as you point out in the second paragraph. I didn't mean to call out MC posters unfairly, but given the context of the discussion (an MC does SW&D contest), it was inevitable that there would be a stronger and more defensive position taken by MC posters.

Maybe the use of the word "cool" is overly loaded, and I should find a better term. I think it comes down to differences in the values of one group vs. those of the other.

 

[F. Corbera]

Originally Posted by LA Guy

It's so broad as to be meaningless.

Combine that with varying social mores, and any "rules" that might help you dress in a way that "do(es) not draw significant envy, scorn, or perplexity from the people around you" are for all intents and purposes, useless.

When posts are this long, there is the real chance to swerve into

ing up the thread with point by point rebuttal.

If I step back and look at your last round of comments altogether, you seem to be arguing that there aren't aesthetic presumptions that make the MC forum any different than the SW&D forum. If you are not saying this, would you be willing to say what distinguishes the two?

Why are they different?

To make things sporting, I'll start. I am going to stick to my guns and say that what lies at the core of the best of the MC forum is a presumption that what we wear today is rooted in history. This history is not a shopping aisle from which you select your favorite brands of macroni and cheese, or pick your favorite apple. You don't wake up one day and say, tadaa! Top hat, white tie, and cane at the coffee shop! (Sorry, Tibor...we still love you.) This history is a continuation into the present, a living history.

I own and wear quite a lot of clothes from the makers who appeal to SW&D. But, they all tend to have something in common with the MC stuff that I wear: a consideration for good make and for, well, styles from my boyhood.

The type of things that end up on GILT leave me cold.

 

[lasbar]

Originally Posted by F. Corbera

Analogue girl in a digital world.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.



...and three hours later:

Pointy knees?

 

[LA Guy]

Originally Posted by F. Corbera

When posts are this long, there is the real chance to swerve into

ing up the thread with point by point rebuttal.

If I step back and look at your last round of comments altogether, you seem to be arguing that there aren't aesthetic presumptions that make the MC forum any different than the SW&D forum. If you are not saying this, would you be willing to say what distinguishes the two?

Why are they different?

To make things sporting, I'll start. I am going to stick to my guns and say that what lies at the core of the best of the MC forum is a presumption that what we wear today is rooted in history. This history is not a shopping aisle from which you select your favorite brands of macroni and cheese, or pick your favorite apple. You don't wake up one day and say, tadaa! Top hat, white tie, and cane at the coffee shop! (Sorry, Tibor...we still love you.) This history is a continuation into the present, a living history.

I own and wear quite a lot of clothes from the makers who appeal to SW&D. But, they all tend to have something in common with the MC stuff that I wear: a consideration for good make and for, well, styles from my boyhood.

The type of things that end up on GILT leave me cold.

I'd agree that SW&D allows a lot more latitude for reinvention. I'd say that the best posters on both forums, over the 8 years I've been here and the 5 years the 2 forums have been divided, do not try to justify their particular preferences over those of others except on an aesthetic level.

 

[SpooPoker]

Originally Posted by LA Guy

I'd agree that SW&D allows a lot more latitude for reinvention. I'd say that the best posters on both forums, over the 8 years I've been here and the 5 years the 2 forums have been divided, do not try to justify their particular preferences over those of others except on an aesthetic level.

If one has a strong enough affirmation in their particular preferences, they should not have to justify them, even on an aesthetic level.

 

[artoftime]

Originally Posted by SpooPoker

If one has a strong enough affirmation in their particular preferences, they should not have to justify them, even on an aesthetic level.


Live and let die?
Ignorance is bliss?
I don't know if one's convictions, especially on aesthetic levels, survive here if they are not SF approved on some level.
There is a definite critical mass that ensues here... particular preferences end up accessorized.
Some distinguished looks are achieved if one is open to critique and can take the snark.