Culture, Aesthetics and Fashion Discussion | Page 2 | the Fashion Spot

Culture, Aesthetics and Fashion Discussion

right...anna k...
and notice how you are posting pics of artists and ballerinas and offbeat beauties...and note that there are about 5-10 posters who are all posting in those threads...but no one else...

the masses do not appreiciate something that they have to work at understanding...
if they have to go below the surface...then it's too much work and they can't be bothered...at least that's how it seems...

it's the same with the androgyny thread...people can't see the beauty...unless you take the girl and paint her face full of make up...more like the traditional beauty that the masses are used to...and then suddenly everyone says...wow...she's gorgeous...well...she was gorgeous without the make uop too...it's the same person...but people don't seem to have any imagination left...maybe they've been spoon-fed by the media for too long now and they have forgotten how to use their imagination...

even little kids have so much 'STUFF' to play with...that they really don't have to explore their imaginations...they can just buy whatever they want...they don't have to make up games and make things to amuse themselves...so of course they become brainless adults...just following the rest of the group without even thinking...and shopping at the mall like everyone else...
 
I think this thread is a wonderful discussion. Thanx for reviving it. I'm feeling like a "brainless adult" right now and can't really make a response that will be comprehensible, but will later.
 
I find this topic very interesting but I don't agree with everything being said.
about this forum, i have noticed that people are mostly in the star style or supporting section, too. but i post there because i am interested in beauty almost in a scientific way (i admit distraction also), i am interested in personalities...i like to single out people/artists who are special...be it even only through their looks.
What's wrong with posting on Supporting Cast and Star Style? People may use these forums as a lighthearted break from their day, who knows what they are interested as well as models, fashion photography and celebrity premieres. I imagine a lot of members do like to discuss and think about more serious topics, but perhaps do it through reading the newspaper, watching television documentiries or dramas, through any educational classes they take or just talking with people around them.
 
Don't shoot the messenger! :doh:

Culture takes time. And transmitting culture takes a lot of time. I believe that, in part, the lack of cultural education and appreciation stems from the lack of time parents spend with their children.

Once upon a time, when one parent (yes, usually the mother) did not work outside the home, there was time for children's concerts, reading art books at home, encouraging young talent, etc. With a ready source of parents as volunteers, it was easier for schools to have field trips to museums and to staff afterschool clubs around cultural topics. This applies to Girl Scouts, 4H, and similar organizations as well. Given that many families struggle just to find time to eat a meal together, the logistics of an outing to a nearby city to see a special exhibition can seem completely impossible.

Coming home to an empty house, most children are likely to take the path of least resistance -- the television or video games, neither of which are known for fostering intellectual curiosity or stimulating creativity.

When the busy parents arrive home, usually separately and at different times, the possibility that they might change their clothing for a night at the opera or the symphony or an art gallery opening seems pretty remote. In fact, just going out to the cinema is in great decline. The exhausted parents join their children in front of the telly. Consequently, the children do not even experience culture vicariously and they see that it is not a priority, competing for their parents' precious time.

Schools do not pick up the slack, more likely to take children to a "pumpkin patch" than to an art gallery or botanic garden.

Of course there are exceptions to this. Sadly, I think that the cultural drift is going swiftly in the wrong direction and shall exact a heavy penalty.

:innocent:
 
softgrey said:
even little kids have so much 'STUFF' to play with...that they really don't have to explore their imaginations...they can just buy whatever they want...they don't have to make up games and make things to amuse themselves...so of course they become brainless adults...just following the rest of the group without even thinking...and shopping at the mall like everyone else...

At the risk of sounding like a victorian, I am totally with you on this point. I am astounded at the way children are spoiled & overindulged nowadays. They have so much so young that how can anything be appreciated or treasured. to make a trivial example, how could a young adult treasure the beauty of an amazing prada coat if they have been used to wearing a myriad of designer childrenswear since they could say Christian Dior? Parents don't take their kids to the museum or art gallery for fear of them throwing a tantrum because its not a disney theme park. I think it makes for very bored & jaded young adults who have seen it all & done it all. Everything comes so easily that they neither have towork nor think very hard for anything in life. Its another disease of the affluent. In my HUMBLE opinion.
 
that was a great post tealady...good to see you my dear...hope you are well...
 
helena said:
At the risk of sounding like a victorian, I am totally with you on this point. I am astounded at the way children are spoiled & overindulged nowadays. They have so much so young that how can anything be appreciated or treasured. to make a trivial example, how could a young adult treasure the beauty of an amazing prada coat if they have been used to wearing a myriad of designer childrenswear since they could say Christian Dior? Parents don't take their kids to the museum or art gallery for fear of them throwing a tantrum because its not a disney theme park. I think it makes for very bored & jaded young adults who have seen it all & done it all. Everything comes so easily that they neither have towork nor think very hard for anything in life. Its another disease of the affluent. In my HUMBLE opinion.


I couldn't agree with you more Helena. I have friends that have 4 children who are spoiled ROTTEN. They don't have any responsibilities and aren't held accountable for their actions. It drives me absolutely crazy. These kids have 4 diffenent game systems and the oldest 2 have handhelds. It's always about newer newer newer and more more more. The parents are completely overworked and always running around trying to take care of the kids so they take the easy route like Tealady said and sit in front of the TV.

Unfortunately, I think this is the way it is in many American households. I don't think it has anything to do with affluence either. You see it in every income bracket. What I think is even more disturbing is that these days, children (and many adults) don't appreciate what they have because society is always selling them something else. I think that is where it starts and art and culture have now place in their lives.

I think that the public school systems are in such a poor state here that any sort of extra curricular activities are impossible, unless of course they are sports related. Creativity is hardly encouraged. If it is, it's in an elected course which many students take for an easy grade, not because they find it interesting.

still feeling kind of brainless, hope that i'm making some sort of sense...

Tealady, wonderful post! It's lovely to see you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yes I think what Tealady said is so true - parents buy STUFF for their kids to compensate for not engaging with them. Its guilt. but its so cyclical. work long hours to afford STUFF to buy kids to spoil them because of working long hours. Its not confined to the US. In the UK we work the longest hours in europe and its the same here. I don't know, I can see how it happens. It takes a big effort not to be like that and most people don't make that effort.

purechris - you're not brainless!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
and so this translates to a jeans culture...more mindlessness...
just throw on a pair of jeans...a total no-brainer...

because let's face it...getting 'dressed' takes some effort...it used to be that even in times of war people would make that effort...it was a matter of self-esteem and pride...but now people go to the extreme to make it look as though they haven't tried at all...how hypocritical and odd is that?!?!...

and they raise the prices on all the jeans and sweatsuits and people feel like they're wearing their 'good clothes' because they've spent a smalll fortune on it...but in reality...they are all wearing jeans and a sweatshirt/t-shirt...

look at dior homme...how much for a pair of jeans???...and don't tell me you couldn't get most of that stuff in a thrift store or at the flea market...part of the point of shopping at one of those places used to be that you would find something that was more unique and you wouldn't see yourself coming or going...but even that look has been co-opted by the big fashion houses...it's just like a very fancy and exclusive GAP...it's a small cult...whose members are all brainwashed...but think they aren't...but you'd have to be brainwashed to spend that kind of money for a pair of jeans...because there is NO WAY that that price is justified...it's a cult...

the CULT OF FASHIONALITY>>>!!! :ninja: :innocent:

:lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with you about jeans cult-ure. LOL wait for the backlash though Dior Homme = fancy Gap. controversial.
 
interesting analysis of our "jeans culture" Soft! I'm feeling oddly hypocritical now:ninja: for wearing the same jeans everyday...and oddly enough, this morning I was looking in the mirror thinking about that. (since the holidays I don't fit most of my pants these days and refuse to alter the waist)

Helena--thx :flower: I'm recovering from too much work, too much vodka and too little sleep.

waiting for the dior boys to come out any moment....where is Faust, this discussion needs his input.
 
i pm'd him...he said he was going to turn his brain on and then join in...i guess maybe his brain has a short or something...maybe he's re-wiring it?!?!... :innocent:

:lol:
 
maybe his brain is having the same kind of day mine is.

OT:but I won't pay the retail price for jeans. It's wholesale or sample for me...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
purechris said:
waiting for the dior boys to come out any moment....where is Faust, this discussion needs his input.

I think Faust owns some Dior Homme jeans :innocent:
 
I thought the story in Feb Vogue about high/low dressing was quite interesting--as if practicality in fashion is just a trend to be covered, followed and discarded. I think it's very important to realize that fashion is all about options. Over expensive jeans are not a sign of the times, they're a business decision made by a company for a customer who does (or does not) have the means to pay for them.

It's lucrative, at a certain level. Its crossover into menswear with Dior Homme is just an extention of the denim frenzy that took womenswear by storm.

Intellegence, being shrewd, being imaginative with down to earth finds will never go out of style--what would fashion do without those important influences, without men and women wearing exactly what they want, how they want? Mind you, jeans at any price point, are still jeans, still an item of clothing based on late 19th century coal miner workwear.
 
birdofparadise said:
I thought the story in Feb Vogue about high/low dressing was quite interesting--Over expensive jeans are not a sign of the times, they're a business decision made by a company for a customer who does (or does not) have the means to pay for them.

It's lucrative, at a certain level. Its crossover into menswear with Dior Homme is just an extention of the denim frenzy that took womenswear by storm.

Intellegence, being shrewd, being imaginative with down to earth finds will never go out of style--what would fashion do without those important influences, without men and women wearing exactly what they want, how they want? Mind you, jeans at any price point, are still jeans, still an item of clothing based on late 19th century coal miner workwear.
is the article any good?...
you're right about the menswear being an extension of the womens denim explosion...and it IS profitable...but WHY???...
why is there such a demand for denim in our culture right now???...

and i think my point is that ...while i agree that being imaginative with basics is always stylish...it doesn't seem to be the prevailing modus operandi in our culture...there is a small group who set the trends and the masses follow..even though there is a world of options...how many people bought uggs or juicy couture???...where's the creativity in that?...
 
The article seems to be trying to coax the wealthy into believing that its okay to wear a $10 dollar tee shirt....as long as you pair it with a $5,000 skirt. It is very much influenced by Mizrahi / Target mixed show more than a few months back.
 
softgrey said:
that's fine..but posts always go by the date...so that would mean we would have delete everything and start over...or copy and re-post them idividually after faust's big opening speech...

i've moved over some posts which need to go back to avh...moving individual posts is super tricky guys...look what happened to secret shopaholics...so please ...it's very important to stay on topic...and post in the correct thread...thanks!!
(helena... this means you!!!...:judge: :lol:...LOL)

:heart:

Jeebus, talk about pressure :shock: :lol: .

A lot of excellent points have been brought up on which it is useless to elaborate. Bad parenting, path of least resistance, jadedness, lack of time, etc. The topic of the Zeitgeist is complex. I've thought about all this so many times over that I don't exactly know where to begin. I guess I'll try to enumerate my points, and to note that each one is incomplete without the other when it comes to the US of A, because similar problems are found in different countries, yet the Zeitgeist there is different. I'm posting with very limited knowledge, of course, but I hope this will all make sense. I will highlight some points that I think are more important than others. Otherwise I'd have to write a book.

1. Foundation of the US. (Disclaimer: this post is not meant to look down on any group of people, I am just trying to state what I think happened historically)

In order to understand the US, I think one should look at the majority of people who came here from the earliest days up to before WWII. They were mostly peasants, factory workers, criminals fleeing prosecution, or criminals sent as a result of prosecution, African slaves torn away from their primitive tribes, puritan Christians who were being castigated for their way of life in the period of fast scientific and personal freedom advancement, and other groups of people of either poor or dubious background drawn by a promise of quick enrichment. These people were hardly people of culture. Even the rich aristocrats (very few and far between) who came here built their wealth on slavery - which would be unthinkable at that time in Europe. The governors, the generals were for the most part second rank - those who could not get in the immediate European governments. Most of people of the groups described above unfortunately and generally are ignorant, illiterate, cultureless, mannerless, moralless. That is the backbone of the US population today.

1a. Cultural heritage (a lack of thereof)

I believe that in order to produce culture, one has to teach culture. That is obvious. I think it is also important to have a cultural heritage on which one can built, even against which one can rebel and thus push for something new. The USA (given point 1) did not have such a base. The US did not have the dantes, the pushkins, the goethes, the bachs, etc. to be proud of, to admire, to emulate, to improve upon, to build upon, to draw inspiration from, to rebel against, to disdain, to hate. They just had nothing. Only at the end of 19th, beginning of 20th century the cultural heritage is beginning to be built. Jazz in music, Witman, Poe, Faulkner, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Salinger in literature, etc...

2. Parenting (I won't elaborate, because you guys nailed it.)

As we know, parents influence the children immensely. Look at point #1, and see what the parents would teach their children. Especially look at the puritan Christians, and proliferation and strength of religion in the US, which can only be compared to Europe of 300 years ago is obvious.

3. Industrial revolution, Karl Marx, effect of the Soviet Russia.

When industrial revolution came and all of a sudden it has become easier to feed oneself, most people shifted from farming to factories. Urbanization (and hence proximity of the working class) grew at incredible rates. Then came Karl Marx with his ideas of Communism. These were the first signs of the common man beginning to free himself from the upper class. Demonstrations, sabotages, unwillingness to slave away in the factories, and common understanding of a better life has become a force that the upper class could no longer deal with. Consessions had to be made to the workers, or Europe and the US would fall to Communism, just like Russia did (think about the strength of the socialist parties in Germany, the UK, France, and Spain between WWI and WWII). 8-hour work day was introduced. All of a sudden, for the first time in history of the manking, a common man, the masses, the majority received leisure time, which was a luxury of the upper class before that.

3. Leisure time

But what do the masses do with their leisure time without proper education and proper exposure to culture? There has become a void between the leisure time and the usage of it. Instead of filling that time with education, the upper class jumped on that void as a means of another money-making outlet. Think about when mass-sports and cineam proliferates? Exact same time period, late 19th, beginning of the 20th century. Dumb, easy entertainment, instead of culture. And the public bites, of course, because the public is still ignorant and cultureless, only now it has time and disposable income.

4. W.W.I, W.W.II, and change of the governing mentality in Europe

Both wars devastated Europe and showed that the age of reason does not have the upper hand before the instinctive feelings of hatred, agression, and the resulting war. What this taught Europe is that the role of the government is not only foreign policy and expansion (at which it utterly failed, give two great wars and failure of colonisation), but maintenance of the welfare of its population. Here, Europe goes the socialist route in government (not economics) - free education system (including higher education) is set up, free healthcare system is set up, pension system is set up. The U.S., having come out on top (thanks to the cunning politics of Churchill and FDR/Truman and some stolen information from the Germans about a certian bomb :innocent: ), decides to go the more inhuman route. No free healthcare system, a bad public education system (including higher education), inadequate welfare system. Point #6 may explain why this happened.


6. Money worship

It's hard to say what really propelled the US to go a different route from Europe, but I think it was something in that "land of opportunity" mentality, in which if you don't succeed in making money, the fault is entirely yours. I think Kurt Vonnegut sums it up best in Slaughterhouse 5, "America is the wealthiest nation on Earth, but its people are mainly poor, and por Americans are urged to hate themselves. To quote the American humorist Kin Hummbard, 'It ain't no disgrace to be poor, but it might as well be.' It is in fact a crime for an American to be poor, even though America is a nation of poor. Every other nation has folk traditions of men who were poor but extremely wise and virtuous, and therefore more estimable than anyone with power and gold. No such tales are told by the American poor. They mock themselves and glorify thier betters. The meanest eating or drinking establishment, owned by a man who is himself poor, is very likely to have a sign on its wall asking this cruel question: 'If you're so smart, why ain't you rich?'" The worship of money over intellect is obvious in the US. In this country, to most people it only matters how much you make, not what you do. Hence the adoration of sports stars, pop singers, etc...

7. Hippies, beatniks, punks and WTF happened?

The period of enlightment in the US culture is a period of revolt against the material culture of the after WWII prosperous and consumerist America, imperial aspirations of the US, and the Vietnam war. It roughly started in 1947 with Kerouac's and Co wanderings and evolved into a philosophy of non-consumerism, bohemian way of life, and preoccupation with something "higher" than the everyday consumerist rut (spiritualism, art, etc.). Kerouac, Ginzberg, Joan Baez, Janis Joplin, Hunter S. Thompson, the Doors, etc. led the cultural revolution and young people followed. The wrongfulness of the way of life and the foreign US policy (Vietnam, McCarthyism) was just too apparent. It was the high point of revolution, but it should've transcended culture into politics, where (unfortunately) the real power is concentrated. This never happened. What happened instead is that the government, and the capitalists learned quickly how to fight the rebellion. The biggest lesson the Doors taught the world was not that a human being has a right to personal freedom and peace, but that a rebellion is fashionable and charismatic, and can be turned into a money making machine. Why do you think Jim Morisson killed himself? Why do you think Sid Vicious killed himself? Why do you think Kurt Cobain killed himself? Why do you think Rage Against the Machine fell apart so quickly? I believe all these people had integrity in their heart which they could not reconcile with the fact that the message of their art was misrepresented, misused, and turned against them (in the effect of creating an image instead of truth, and enriching a small group of people, including thesmelves, at the expense of the ignorant masses). People without principles (money worshippers) came out on top, once again.

8. Where we are today

Where we are today, is the product of everything I've stated before (of course). There is not much to say. More and more people are getting money and free time, but bad education and valueless attitude. Teenagers have their parents' credit cards. There is nothing to do, except go to the mall and spend, spend, spend. Money worship, and its ostentatious display reigns. It's not cool to be smart, it's cool to have a car. Rebellion is quickly turned into money-making by the entertainment industry. Conglomerates swallow the little fish. People are kept dumb by inadequate education systems. Dumb people are easily influenced and will always take a path of least resistance. So we have TV, Hollywood, Vogue, pop music, which to any person with a brain cell is just painful to see. I don't know what will fix it. I'm banking on education and higher moral values, which will destroy consumer culture and money worship. It is all up to the people on how to spend their income. Noone twists your hand, but they can surely put immense pressure on you with advertising, peer pressure, etc. It takes a strong character to break away from this. But, I'm optimistic enough to think that this will change. Hollywood films are getting dumber and dumber, TV is getting worse and worse, so is music. I think there is a threshold to everything. Hopefully there is a threshold to ugliness and stupidity. I've shifted my belief in society to belief in the individual. Society is ruled by people without principles. Alber Camus said it best about politics, but I think it pertains to all aspects of life, predators will always be on top, "Politics and the fate of mankind are formed by men without ideals and without greatness. Those who have greatness within them do not go in for politics." As a result of this shift my life has become so much more relaxed and interesting. I don't watch TV, I rarely read papers, I don't read popular magazines, I've taken myself out of the pop culture that has nothing to offer, and instead I'm pursuing the culture that has tons to offer. I now choose what I do, where I go, what I read and listen too, without society's effect. And I'm not concerned with missing something new and interesting, because there are enough interesting things to fill many lifetimes.

So, if you refuse to accept this Louis Vuitton culture, don't fight it, take yourself out of it. Faust has spoken, and I hope it makes sense :p . I don't pretend to be a sage, but this is what I think.

P.S. Once again, I would advise for everyone to read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintanence that adresses a very important point pertinent to this discussion, on which may be I'll comment later on. As it is, this post took half out of my workday, for which I would like to thank Softgrey, who pointed me to this thread. :flower:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
215,198
Messages
15,290,693
Members
89,112
Latest member
homich
Back
Top