What are you wearing today?

[Sion]

This is just, awesome. Chant, you are the best and i want your wardrobe. Inspiring! This is the best since heirlooms outfit.

[almroth]

love it chant! amazing.

[christianef]

now thats a drop crotch!

[Heirloom]

This is just, awesome. Chant, you are the best and i want your wardrobe. Inspiring! This is the best since heirlooms outfit.

Lol, i was gonna say I'd wear that in a heartbeat. I want similiar trousers, but in a not so black fabric.

[Heirloom]

Second one, the jacket looks ace, but the rickflap doesn't. In my view a straight edge to offset and frame the jacket would have been better.
First one is just too feminine. I'm afraid that I don't see the man before the outfit in that one.

not going to critisize your opinion. I'm just wondering if we really are ever noticing the person wearing the clothes first, or if we see the clothes first. As soon as an outfit is brilliant i notice that before the person, and if the outfit is good is dependending on whom it is put.

I don't think it's necessarily wrong to notice clothes before people. we in here are interested in clothes, so we'll probably notice it before the average joe, but I see clothing as a way to persuade, distract, grab attention and disarm people.

[SHYE_POSER]

It seems there is a continental split over the outfits...
Europe and Scandinavia say Yes...U.S say No to the top half...and the aussies....

[SHYE_POSER]

hahahaha! he did indeed.

[Chant]

Originally Posted by Johnny
Second one, the jacket looks ace, but the rickflap doesn't. In my view a straight edge to offset and frame the jacket would have been better.
First one is just too feminine. I'm afraid that I don't see the man before the outfit in that one.

not going to critisize your opinion. I'm just wondering if we really are ever noticing the person wearing the clothes first, or if we see the clothes first. As soon as an outfit is brilliant i notice that before the person, and if the outfit is good is dependending on whom it is put.

I don't think it's necessarily wrong to notice clothes before people. we in here are interested in clothes, so we'll probably notice it before the average joe, but I see clothing as a way to persuade, distract, grab attention and disarm people.

I think he meant "man" in another way...
But let's not start again this interesting discussion about gender confusion.

As I said these pictures are a kind of experimentation. Looking back at the pictures (real outfit is something different, since movement is what makes the outfit), I'd say that I agree with Zamb : drapey + drapey (or unformal), as in the first pictures, is too much and monotonous. I prefer more tension/complementarity between the different parts : unformal vs straight (or dressed). That's why the previous combination (the Paris trio picture), with the NCB regular blazer, was more balanced.

What I understood while looking back at the second shot is that an asymetrical jacket works like an unformal clothe, even though it is perfectly fitted, like the DD Junko jacket. It's interesting.


We should maybe open a new thread called "Style laboratory", or something like this. People could post there "avant-garde" combinations they're not absolutely sure of and we would have intresting debates. I'm only wondering if Kunk will participate, since it'll maybe be too overintellectual there.

[Chant]

this deserves a more-elegant way of phrasing the subject, but i think the whole line of argument brought up by certain people as one's aesthetic's value being established by how daring, provocative and attention-grabbing/ostentatious/flamboyant they are with what they wear is a little ridiculous in the context of this forum, which has (as i understood it) struggled to separate garment from attached baggage of all sorts (i'm not summoning fuuma here..).

I don't think this is Heirloom's point of view : he doesn't dress to catch people's attention, and it's definitely not what makes the value of his outfits - he calls up as everybody else fabrics, textures, colours, shapes, etc., and makes them work together. In this state of mind, being flamboyant is more a side effect than a deep motive or the main purpose.

[Faust]

/\ I agree, but you know that. But I am sure that's not Chant was doing here (and I know you didn't say it was).

Chant - if I may voice my opinion - it is a bit extreme. I think anything more or less unconventional or ostentatious (not in a bad sense of the word) should be done to either the top or the bottom part, so I think there is too much draping going on. Were you to put the sarouel (sp?) pants and something more form fitting on top, it would work better I think. For the same reason, I always advise people not to wear top/bottom leather or denim or corduroy. It screams a bit too loud, which in my view is a sign of inelegance.

[Faust]

I don't think this is Heirloom's point of view : he doesn't dress to catch people's attention, and it's definitely not what makes the value of his outfits - he calls up as everybody else fabrics, textures, colours, shapes, etc., and makes them work together. In this state of mind, being flamboyant is more a side effect than a deep motive or the main purpose.

I believe he has stated as much during our last discourse.

[Chant]

Were you to put the sarouel (sp?) pants and something more form fitting on top, it would work better I think.

Isn't it what I said in my message? At least, this is what I wanted to say (The Return of the Blacksuit Syndrom II).

[Trebre]

I don't think this is Heirloom's point of view : he doesn't dress to catch people's attention, and it's definitely not what makes the value of his outfits - he calls up as everybody else fabrics, textures, colours, shapes, etc., and makes them work together. In this state of mind, being flamboyant is more a side effect than a deep motive or the main purpose.

Maybe it's a rude thing to do, to comment in a thread that one hasn't contributed to whatsoever.
It's an interesting and very inspiring thread to follow non the less.
And i'm sorry if i offend anyone by being here.

The thing is, with the pieces i choose to wear, the "reason" differs from day to day.
Sometimes, when i'm in a bad way i just want my whole being to scream fuck off, don't go near me.
And sometimes i want the same pieces, to say, Hey, I'm alright!
I'm your very best (welldressed) friend.
Sometimes a very subtle change in the combination of clothing can seriously alter the way you and the people around you meet a new day.
To me it's the moment of choice that is the interesting part, not how it's perceived (and often people around me just go: Oh... He's in black/gray again... well.. whatever).
Even if i sometimes go for a reaction i find that when i think i'm going to get it, i don't and vice versa.

[Johnny]

not going to critisize your opinion. I'm just wondering if we really are ever noticing the person wearing the clothes first, or if we see the clothes first. As soon as an outfit is brilliant i notice that before the person, and if the outfit is good is dependending on whom it is put.

I don't think it's necessarily wrong to notice clothes before people. we in here are interested in clothes, so we'll probably notice it before the average joe, but I see clothing as a way to persuade, distract, grab attention and disarm people.

Actually I wholly agree with this heirloom. There's nothing at all wrong with saying - "that outfit looks nice", rather than necessarily thinking "my, that man looks fantastic, what can it be?" Chant was right about my cheeky comment, not meant offensively at all :)

[Sombre]

i don't aim to draw attention to or away from myself when putting on one thing or another, but given the choice i'd rather make someone observe me possibly wearing something interesting than something really interesting worn by an anonymous meat-mannequin. these things revolve around and ahere to the wearer in so many ways that an observation made of a garment before the person wearing it seems like a failure.

but on whose part..

This is a side effect/symptom of being interested in fashion I think. To take an interest in any aspect of the field and apply it to real life is alienating oneself from the general public so much that to an extent that public, on first glance, becomes a massive swarm of bad, cheap clothing. Any deviation from this terrible swarm meets the eye with such surprise and awe that the deviation is usually what becomes noticed before its creator.

For example, we've pretty much all heard or read the phrase "Look at a man's shoes before anything else." Is this fair? Absolutely not, but a large number of people interested in fashion size people up this way everyday, effectively likening people to "meat-mannequins" as you (unflatteringly) put it. Another example:

this is so true.

there's a guy in vancouver who's definitely "part of the club".

he works at shopper's drug mart, and owns rick sneaks and a killer julius leather. i used to see him come into komakino.

i saw him waiting at the bus stop in kits the other week and just pointed at his shoes and yelled YES! and then his jacket and yelled EYEEES!

then I kept walking.

This isn't necessarily wrong, as it establishes a connection between two people who share an interest.

The "side effect of fashion," of sizing up an individual's adornments before the actual individual, isn't really unique to fashion. Snap judgements are made based on what people drive, read, or eat. It's not rather the fault of any one person; it's just first impression. You're correct to have reservations with what you've said, but then you have to take issue with general human behaviour as a whole, and I find that makes people a bit bitter.