Clothes
The first fashion article I ever personally related to:
With the recent decline in our security, industry and standing, that nostalgia for a prelapsarian America (and the durable domestic goods that defined it) seems to have settled over the stylish set here at home. "Ironically, it's largely because of overseas interest that Americans can now wear real American stuff," says Michael Williams, a fashion publicist who covers Americana on his blog, A Continuous Lean. "They're recognizing that heritage and quality are precious in our disposable Wal-Mart world." It's as if globalization has come full circle, creating both an appetite for cultural anchoring and a fashion to feed it.
-Authentic Americana, Newsweek, Jan. 31 2009
This seems to be quite a bit different from the "Ted Kaczynski chic" of four or five years ago and the ironic trucker hat and Carhartt jacket fad in Williamsburg. At least, it seems to espouse some kind of sincere admiration and nostalgia for the "strong silent," Cormac McCarthy-ish masculine archetypes, which haven't been in the eye of haute couture since Jackson Pollock. (I would say McCarthy himself, as an artist, is one of these heroic American males --- though in a far more quiet and introspective way than Pollock). After Pollock's self-destruction, the "dandies" took over as taste-makers, ultimately begetting metrosexuals 40 years later. The difference between this newest fashion statement -- born of economic anxiety -- and the hipster "white trash" fashion trend is earnestness.
By choosing clothes that exist for a reason, young urbanites are defying the metrosexual mores of recent years and trying to participate in a testosterone-rich tradition instead. It's still fashion, of course. But it's fashion that fulfills a masculine ideal rather than a feminine one: function over frill. Superficial or not, that shift has come as a relief for men who already spend more time working with their MacBooks than their hands—a sign that they aspire to be as strong and silent as their rougher-hewn predecessors.
That may be superficial, but it's more confidence-inspiring than this. Granted, I won't pay those prices just to 'look like' something that I already am: I don't want just to look like I do skilled manual labor (a simulation), I want to do skilled manual labor. But at least the underlying logic is similar to my own set of criteria -- I select clothing with use in mind. The return to function dictating form is reassuring to me, but I'm also fascinated that this emphasis on functionality seems to be regarded as both distinctly masculine and distinctly American.
Edit 2/11/09: That is, fascinated in a semi-annoyed kind of way. I appreciate and endorse elevating function above form, and the higher valuation of build quality and durability -- but the association of those values with "American masculinity" perplexes me. The Teen Vogue link illustrates the infuriating counterpart -- the association of absurd frivolity with femininity.
With the recent decline in our security, industry and standing, that nostalgia for a prelapsarian America (and the durable domestic goods that defined it) seems to have settled over the stylish set here at home. "Ironically, it's largely because of overseas interest that Americans can now wear real American stuff," says Michael Williams, a fashion publicist who covers Americana on his blog, A Continuous Lean. "They're recognizing that heritage and quality are precious in our disposable Wal-Mart world." It's as if globalization has come full circle, creating both an appetite for cultural anchoring and a fashion to feed it.
-Authentic Americana, Newsweek, Jan. 31 2009
This seems to be quite a bit different from the "Ted Kaczynski chic" of four or five years ago and the ironic trucker hat and Carhartt jacket fad in Williamsburg. At least, it seems to espouse some kind of sincere admiration and nostalgia for the "strong silent," Cormac McCarthy-ish masculine archetypes, which haven't been in the eye of haute couture since Jackson Pollock. (I would say McCarthy himself, as an artist, is one of these heroic American males --- though in a far more quiet and introspective way than Pollock). After Pollock's self-destruction, the "dandies" took over as taste-makers, ultimately begetting metrosexuals 40 years later. The difference between this newest fashion statement -- born of economic anxiety -- and the hipster "white trash" fashion trend is earnestness.
By choosing clothes that exist for a reason, young urbanites are defying the metrosexual mores of recent years and trying to participate in a testosterone-rich tradition instead. It's still fashion, of course. But it's fashion that fulfills a masculine ideal rather than a feminine one: function over frill. Superficial or not, that shift has come as a relief for men who already spend more time working with their MacBooks than their hands—a sign that they aspire to be as strong and silent as their rougher-hewn predecessors.
That may be superficial, but it's more confidence-inspiring than this. Granted, I won't pay those prices just to 'look like' something that I already am: I don't want just to look like I do skilled manual labor (a simulation), I want to do skilled manual labor. But at least the underlying logic is similar to my own set of criteria -- I select clothing with use in mind. The return to function dictating form is reassuring to me, but I'm also fascinated that this emphasis on functionality seems to be regarded as both distinctly masculine and distinctly American.
Edit 2/11/09: That is, fascinated in a semi-annoyed kind of way. I appreciate and endorse elevating function above form, and the higher valuation of build quality and durability -- but the association of those values with "American masculinity" perplexes me. The Teen Vogue link illustrates the infuriating counterpart -- the association of absurd frivolity with femininity.
posted by M. Weed at
3:39 PM
4 Comments:
Function is the reason I like sweatpants and sweatshirts. They're so comfy and warm :)
However, I don't like how the article associates "function" with masculinity and "frill" with femininity. Gender stereotyping!
I remember wearing one of my more battle-worn overalls (I probably told you this but don't stop me) at Tyler and a very earnest young lady says, "I love those overalls they make you look like you are a house-painter". Of course my bewildered expression was the result of not knowing whether she was earnest or not. Later I realized that she couldn't conceive of wearing work clothes in order to facilitate *working!*
Of course being outnumbered 10 to 1 with the ladies means this has nothing to do with gender. The statistical probability of me speaking to males is very low at Tyler. [this is not accurate but I don't care, it feels like 10 to 1)
YESSSS! So glad you wrote about this!
Post a Comment
<< Home