Last week, a heated debate took place over at ACL, which, among other assaults, questioned the motivations behind city slickers wearing outdoorsy gear like Barbour jackets. Are we, as some accused, merely affecting a rugged style? Posing as real men who earn a living outdoors, or on factory floors and construction sites? No doubt, work wear has been established as a serious trend in men’s fashion. And, while every such trend is to some degree frivolous and contrived, we’ve also embraced work-friendly gear for arguably legitimate reasons: It’s reasonably priced, durable, functional, aesthetically clean, and lends itself to “uniforms” -- something we encourage every guy to embrace, whether it’s a suit or a pair of jeans and a button-down. (Once you’ve found the right one for you, uniforms greatly simplify the shopping/dressing process, and save you tons of money over time.)Speaking of which, we love Greg's winter uniform here. An Upper East Sider, we caught the out-of-work chef making his way across town on Houston Street. He's noticed more guys with Barbour jackets of late, but said he takes particular pride in his -- it being a hand-me-down from his city slicker father and all.
That's a tailored Barbour if I ever saw one.
ReplyDeleteLooks like any other white dude to me. I like the jeans
ReplyDeleteOh, and my 2c about the work wear trend. No problem with work wear pieces, unless it's put together with some arcteryx or whatever is the latest Upper East Side outdoors brand to affectuate some kind of rugged, I'm JUST about to go hiking through the Andes and fell three redwoods but I actually live on 80th and Lex, look.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, my mountain jacket & workboots reduce my use of umbrella plus it is warm in the winter.
ReplyDeleteI think the whole uniform thing is genius. like the one this guy is wearing. and I love CB!!
ReplyDeletehe looks like he brews his own beer
ReplyDeleteThe problem with arguing the function while sidestepping the form is a really poor attempt at justifying your frame. I mean, don't act like your NOT concerned about posing (which is what it is). If it was all about not having to use an umbrella and be warm, let's be real, wear a plastic raincoat, some plastic shoes and throw on some long johns.
ReplyDeleteIf this functionality argument were really true, you wouldn't look like you could survive a trip through Nepal (which is ironic, because Nepalese people get along just fine without arcteryx). You live in Manhattan. I live in Manhattan. I know what the weather conditions are like, and they do NOT necessitate Himalayan team aesthetics. Poor people survive all sorts of harsher conditions all the time and they don't have to use the latest synthetic technologies from BS Mountain Engineering Int'l, Inc.
Once you get past being able to admit that as a rich yuppie/hipster/UES'er you proactively construct these looks, then we can actually advance these discussions. Let's get rid of the cool whip on the stool pie, shall we?
"Cool whip on the stool pie," huh? Nice. But like we said, HW, we do believe it's a balance between affected style and function. We've 'destroyed' plenty of inferior apparel and footwear getting around this city over the years.
ReplyDeleteFair enough, but think about this: for the same reason we laugh at hoodfab--think louis vuitton AF1's and gucci print prom dresses--why shouldn't we do the same for what rich yuppie/hipsters do? It's the same principle isn't it?
ReplyDeleteOnce people can be honest with themselves i.e. "I enjoy looking like a mountain climber while I eat brunch in Soho", we can start dissecting the why?
Until then, we're going to keep getting the cloudy rhetoric of "well it keeps me warm." Yeah, well so do a lot of other things. Let's put our superficiality and contrivance out there instead of keeping it thinly veiled. Because c'mon--who are we really fooling?
HW: since your generalizations say more about you than the people they are aimed it, to me it would seem more productive to think about why you are so personally irritated by other people's seemingly insignificant clothing choices. But that is a solo expedition you may or may not be interested in taking.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous1: that's another one of those quips that doesn't hold water. "Insignificant clothing choices"? If really so insignificant, why:
ReplyDelete- is there even this blog?
- do people spend so much time shopping and choosing their style?
My personal irritation, as you phrase it, is precisely because I know, and you know, and everyone else knows, that clothing choices are as much a social language as anything else. We're all portraying and conveying SOMETHING when we decide to put on our clothes--at least at these price points we are.
This is a multi-billion dollar industry we're talking about here. Surely the outflow of that isn't just "oh it's just clothes." And if it is--then doesn't that make these deliberately constructed looks all the more ridiculous?
Hw: Certainly you make a point, but at the cost of asking yourself, again, why this bothers you so much. You are bright enough to pick a battle no matter what is said, and the battle you pick will more likely than not address something that is indeed real, but a part of you knows that your still prevaricating.
ReplyDeleteThe questions remains why you are bothered, why it is that you demand acknowledgment that some people are posing. The intellectualizing is interesting, to a point, but overlooks what is driving it.
It's a peeve like anything else. It surely doesn't bother me as much as global warming or animal cruelty. And while it may seem like I'm fuming about it every instance I can, I assure you, it takes very little time in my day.
ReplyDeleteDude, what kind of jeans are those?
ReplyDelete