Your Style Philosophy

[nqth]

Re: Your Style Philosophy



I wear whateverI like at the moment, if I haveorcould afford. I like graphic prints, blk, white, grey, blue, some coloured "spots". I sometimes make somehomemadealterations and I wear it unfinished:)), as it would have gone under further changes.

Sometimes I wear stuffs over and over again, if I like it.

In a way I am always torn between wearing more experimental (by mean of construction) and simplier, classic things.But I hate to fit one clothes with another. I like contrast, the rawnessand clothes that could make one feel uncomfortable looking at them:-).

EDIT: I must add that I like the clothes that don't have "style's reference". I mean, leather jkt that won't make you look like rock and roll wannabes, or biker jkt that don't make you look as if you owned a dozen of harleys. I don't belong to any of the subcultures andIwound't want to look like I did.

[Ann romance]

Re: Your Style Philosophy



glad to know that .

[laika]

Re: Your Style Philosophy



bump....

Because this thread is such a great read and we have lots of new posters who may want to add to it. [73]

[matthewhk]

Re: Your Style Philosophy



thanks for bumping this laika, always nice to revisit old threads and see how I (or we) thought about things back then compared to now.

my stance hasn't changed much from last year, although i would say i probably took fashion more seriously then than i do now. also about cmf's comment 'never try,' i think that's the right idea but maybe a bit of an extreme expression of that idea that isn't really attainable. If someone is going out looking pretty well dressed, there had to be at least some effort or thought into their dressing, whether it was from the shopping part of the process or the styling and put together itself. Perhaps a more approachable solution to that is instead of putting it as 'not trying,' it could be that if people took fashion and clothing less seriously, there would be less of a need to adhere to strict rules about how things should be worn...if someone is comfortable and confident and their personality shines through, they can make anything look good. I mentioned this on styleforum yesterday, i think sometimes people get a bit hung up onthe small stuffinstead of just letting loose with their style. In the end it's just clothing and shouldn't be a brain boggler.

[Faust]

Re: Your Style Philosophy

Laika, looks like the members of this forum who have joined in the last 8 months have nothing to say on this matter. Not sure whether to laugh or cry. [72]

[mortalveneer]

Re: Your Style Philosophy



[quote user="Faust"]Laika, looks like the members of this forum who have joined in the last 8 months have nothing to say on this matter. Not sure whether to laugh or cry. [72]
[/quote]

Don't count me out yet Faust...I saw this when it got bumped...prompted all kinds of reflection, which will eventually find their way into written form and onto this page. I make no promises about the quality of my burgeoning ramblings, but as soon as I finish my teaching responsibilities for the week, my newly conceived "style" document will be finished and posted...[76]

[Faust]

Re: Your Style Philosophy

I shall be waiting :-). Which reminds that I have to get my ass off SZ and get to my teaching responsibilities.

[BECOMING-INTENSE]

Re: Your Style Philosophy



A multiplication of lines in width, this taste for masses and this heavy broadening
of mass, underlining matter: either the frame disappears totally, or else it remains,
but despite the rough sketch, it does not suffice to contain the mass that spills over
and passes up above. The body in extension and prolonged, creased, and closely woven, skintight fabric will still be a watery fold that reveals the body far better than nudity:
the famous "wet folds" flows over Jean Goujon's bas-reliefs to affect the entire volume,
to create the envelope and the inner mold and the spiderweb of the whole body, including the face, as in Sinazzi's and Corradine's late masterpieces, Faith and Modesty. In every instance folds of clothing acquire an autonomy and a fullness that are not simply decorative effects. They convey the intensity of a spiritual force exerted on the body, either to turn it upside down or to stand or raise it up over and again, but in every event
to turn it inside out and to mold its inner surfaces. This is to make us "believe" in the body, to restore a direct self-awareness to the body. An interruption of signifiance and subjectification: The body itself becomes expressive.

[casem]

Re: Your Style Philosophy



Very poetic becoming-intense, lots of other great responses too. My philosophy has changed a bit, or at least I've thought of a better way to put it.

When I said my philosophy is a bit schizophrenic, I don't think that translates in to the way I actually dress, my outfits are never very eclectic. Rather, I imagine all the brands/designers I'm interested in as distinct characters that somehow reflect parts of my own personality (the cold Jil Sander intellect, the Ann D romantic, the Dior rocker, the Raf modernist). I guess I try to reconcile these character's different tendencies in day to day life as well as in how I dress and what I buy. For example, I may totally dig a total Ann look, but I know the structural Jil side of me would feel too sloppy in it, so I could never do the whole look. This may sound like I'm letting the designers dictate too much how I dress and approach fashion but 1) I'm only attracted to the designers that speak to my personality so what I wear still reflects me 2) I've never had a very creative mind for design so I don't mind letting a talented designer give me suggestions (after all, that's part of what we pay the big $$$ for).

I'm also the one who (maybe regrettably) brought up being attractive in clothes. I have a question about this that I hope no one takes offense to. I wrote about attraction, because what I wear is also influenced by what I would find attractive in others, maybe this is self-centered (I would be attracted like me etc. [83] ) but I wonder how straight people approach this? Is it difficult to reconcile making your image reflect an "attractive man" when you are not attracted to men? Or does it never cross you mind? Or do you dress as the male counterpart to what you would find in an attractive women (or man for Laika)? Sorry if this is off topic, but I've always been genuinely curious and since this is a thoughtful group I'm sure I'll get some good answers. I can't understand how people can be homophobic (not that anyone here is) and so seemingly grossed out by body parts they own and (for certain males) worship. [^o)]

[B.S]

Re: Your Style Philosophy

i dunno, i dont really have a philosophy, but i try to wear something secondhand and designer in every outfit, mix old with new, pricey with cheap. and at least one piece is alwaysblack.

[Faust]

Re: Your Style Philosophy

[quote user="BECOMING-INTENSE"]

A multiplication of lines in width, this taste for masses and this heavy broadening
of mass, underlining matter: either the frame disappears totally, or else it remains,
but despite the rough sketch, it does not suffice to contain the mass that spills over
and passes up above. The body in extension and prolonged, creased, and closely woven, skintight fabric will still be a watery fold that reveals the body far better than nudity:
the famous "wet folds" flows over Jean Goujon's bas-reliefs to affect the entire volume,
to create the envelope and the inner mold and the spiderweb of the whole body, including the face, as in Sinazzi's and Corradine's late masterpieces, Faith and Modesty. In every instance folds of clothing acquire an autonomy and a fullness that are not simply decorative effects. They convey the intensity of a spiritual force exerted on the body, either to turn it upside down or to stand or raise it up over and again, but in every event
to turn it inside out and to mold its inner surfaces. This is to make us "believe" in the body, to restore a direct self-awareness to the body. An interruption of signifiance and subjectification: The body itself becomes expressive.

[/quote]

Now, I really know it's multitudes, cause I don't understand anything you just said [86]

[zamb]

Re: Your Style Philosophy

[quote user="casem83"]


Very poetic becoming-intense, lots of other great responses too. My philosophy has changed a bit, or at least I've thought of a better way to put it.

When I said my philosophy is a bit schizophrenic, I don't think that translates in to the way I actually dress, my outfits are never very eclectic. Rather, I imagine all the brands/designers I'm interested in as distinct characters that somehow reflect parts of my own personality (the cold Jil Sander intellect, the Ann D romantic, the Dior rocker, the Raf modernist). I guess I try to reconcile these character's different tendencies in day to day life as well as in how I dress and what I buy. For example, I may totally dig a total Ann look, but I know the structural Jil side of me would feel too sloppy in it, so I could never do the whole look. This may sound like I'm letting the designers dictate too much how I dress and approach fashion but 1) I'm only attracted to the designers that speak to my personality so what I wear still reflects me 2) I've never had a very creative mind for design so I don't mind letting a talented designer give me suggestions (after all, that's part of what we pay the big $$$ for).

I'm also the one who (maybe regrettably) brought up being attractive in clothes. I have a question about this that I hope no one takes offense to. I wrote about attraction, because what I wear is also influenced by what I would find attractive in others, maybe this is self-centered (I would be attracted like me etc. [83] ) but I wonder how straight people approach this? Is it difficult to reconcile making your image reflect an "attractive man" when you are not attracted to men? Or does it never cross you mind? Or do you dress as the male counterpart to what you would find in an attractive women (or man for Laika)? Sorry if this is off topic, but I've always been genuinely curious and since this is a thoughtful group I'm sure I'll get some good answers. I can't understand how people can be homophobic (not that anyone here is) and so seemingly grossed out by body parts they own and (for certain males) worship. [^o)]

[/quote]

You ask a number of questions here, for which there is/(are) no single answer. i am sure if you ask ten people it would be quit likely that you would get several different (if not ten different answers from them)

I am a straight man, for me i wear or choose clothing that i assume/presume best enhance/project the things about me that i want others to see, male and female, it has very little to do with sexuality/attraction. also there are certain flaws/ shortcomings that i have and i try to work around them.

eg. I am a black man, very dark skin tone, as a result i always wear mostly light colored shirts when wearing a suit, as i think it frames my face better. and looks more radiant.

I am engaged to a woman that is very conservative in her dress, i am attracted to the mystique, the fact that she is always covered and the pleasure of knowing that there are aspects of her both physically and personally that only myself and her will ever know and those things are not revealed to the world.

regarding "making yourself an attractive man" (your words) the reality is that there are different types or levels of attraction, and for me, i think i percieve, or assume what a woman would be attracted to (at least the ones i would be interested in) and this goes beyond the realm of appearance, into mannerisms, conduct, education/knowledgeetc. and i try to acquire/develop these aspects of my person as a means of increasing my value and desirability to others. On the subjectof gay/ straight/ homophobic etc, i think the sad reality is we often make the mistake of failing to see people as people first.,I am a straight man, who for the most part am not homophobic (a fear of homosexuality) that being said, it does not mean that i automatically endorse the practice of homosexuality. I am a devout Christian and as a result homosexuality does not fit into the context of what i deem as appropriate behavior based on biblical teaching, but does it mean that i hate homosexuals, far from it, i love them (and many other kinds of people) even more, because the very same Bible that renounces homosexuality(but not homosexuals as Jesus died for allpeoples)tells me that i have an endless responsibility to Love my neighbor (without categorization) as myself.

[Servo2000]

Re: Your Style Philosophy



I personally don't know that I have a "style philosophy" so much simply because of my limited funds. I know there are designers I like and there's a very general aesthetic I adhere to, but my ultimate style is essentially defined by the pieces I'm able to get a hold of at reasonable prices. I am at the mercy of second-hand retail and thrift. I imagine that if I were able to develop an aesthetic without concern for pricing that more thought would go into my own personal style, but as it is it's largely secondary to my interest in fashion as design and art.

I'll think more and see if I can expand somewhat but that's about all there is to it: find clothes that mesh well with what I already own, fit well, and are reasonably priced and made.

[zamb]

Re: Your Style Philosophy

this is how i would want to dress everyday, in another life

[mass]

Re: Your Style Philosophy

[quote user="Servo2000"]

I personally don't know that I have a "style philosophy" so much simply because of my limited funds. I know there are designers I like and there's a very general aesthetic I adhere to, but my ultimate style is essentially defined by the pieces I'm able to get a hold of at reasonable prices. I am at the mercy of second-hand retail and thrift. I imagine that if I were able to develop an aesthetic without concern for pricing that more thought would go into my own personal style, but as it is it's largely secondary to my interest in fashion as design and art.

I'll think more and see if I can expand somewhat but that's about all there is to it: find clothes that mesh well with what I already own, fit well, and are reasonably priced and made.

[/quote]

have to say this is true for me too. oddly enough i think we have a very, very similar aesthetic as far as being consumers. my appreciation for garment design is completely detached from my 'philosophy' in the way i dress. but to put it simply, as a consumer, i guess (and this goes along with being lazy) that i would like all my pieces to be interchangable. unfortunately that isn't the case with a lot of things i own but i'd prefer if i could match any pair of shoes with any pair of pants with any shirt and any jacket.