Home

Advertisement

 
 
25 March 2008 @ 04:41 pm
TASTEFUL = BORING  
Prince Charming
Prince Charming
Ridicule is nothing to be scared of
Don't you ever, don't you ever
Stop being dandy, showing me you're handsome



In regards to being a creative, well-dressed man (a/k/a a Dandy), there's pretty much three types of people:
1. The Clueless
2. The Cowards
3. The Clowns

Almost all men fall into the catagory of the Clueless - they don't dress well, they don't wish to dress well, and they probably couldn't dress well even if they wished to dress well. This is as it should be - most people have no sensitivity to aesthetics, no appreciation for beauty and imagination. There will always be many spear carriers and only a few chiefs. I am indifferent to these people.

The Cowards are those men who DO know the value of dressing well, but are usually too timid to be a Dandy. They are afraid of being too flamboyant. They are afraid of color. They are afraid of patterns. They sometimes hide their cowardice behind grandiose claims that they wish to be 'tasteful'-- they state that a well-dressed man should not be anachronistic or draw too much attention. These cowards are old men, even if they are 20 years old. They are fond of qouting Beau Brummell, who said “If John Bull turns around to look after you, you are not well-dressed; but either too stiff, too tight or too fashionable.” They do not seem to be aware that, in the present day, wearing a suit IS flamboyant and anachronistic. If you wear suits, you are a peacock-- you are showing off, saying fuck you to the world of denim-clad drones. In the recent BBC documentary on the bespoke tailors of Savile Row, the story is told of an American entertainment lawyer who relocated from the East Coast to Los Angeles. The lawyer was asked (it wasn't a request, it was an order) to STOP WEARING SUITS - he was making the other people in the firm look bad. He was being a distraction and was creating a hostile work environment. THAT IS WHAT THE FUTURE WILL LOOK LIKE - The tyranny of the casual. By the way, you can download that excellent Savile Row documentary here. (You didn't hear it from me.)

Then, there are the Dandy Clowns. These are the men who dress well, and are brave enough to use a palette that is not limited to blue, grey, and black.

Photobucket
Above, we see two men - one is strutting around in velvet and orange. That clownish man is me. I am an atheist-- if I am going to grow a set of balls and walk out the door wearing orange, I must do it in this life. I won't have another chance.

The photo was taken at a Fashion Week event - so, the other man in the photo cannot be clueless-- he knows about clothes, he's just too cowardly to dress up. He looks tasteful, which is a polite way of saying that he looks BORING.

You can be a clown and not be a dandy. To be a DANDY, you must pay attention to fabric and to fit.

You can be a dandy and not be a clown. Grey, blue and black can be nice. Should we, however, limit ourselves to that? What fun is that? Some of us prefer to live vivid, blood-splattered lives. Also, why is it that the cowards, who claim to care about being tasteful, often seem to wear clothes that DO NOT FIT - their jackets are too big, they look slouchy. I guess it shouldn't surprise us - they are too cowardly to wear clothes that REALLY fit well. That would be too 'flamboyant'. Tom Wolfe tells an anecdote about his well-tailored suits:

“I think the thing that really annoyed people was the nipped-in waist. That seemed unpatriotic, a real affectation…I could have attracted more attention to myself–I could have worn a dashiki, for example–but I wanted to be in the game. The important thing was, I wanted them to say, ‘Who in the name of God does he think he is?’”

Photobucket

Being colorful, flamboyant, well turned out, is a gift to the world.

Who Is A Dandy? That is a controversial question, and always good for some cocktail chatter. Almost everyone agrees that the Duke of Windsor was a dandy. Was the Duke a tasteful (i.e. cowardly) dresser, or was he brave enough to clown it up. You decide:

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Personally, I'd rather hang out with a young, clownish Vivienne Stanshall, than with a coward. Neil Innes describes his first meeting with Stanshall: "He had on Billy Bunter check trousers, a Victorian frock coat, violet pince-nez glasses, and carried a euphonium. He also wore large pink rubber ears."

Vivienne's music group, the Bonzo Dog Band, had songs about shirts, songs about mustaches, and a song about trousers, which you can listen to here.

 
 
( Post a new comment )
jermynsavile[info]jermynsavile on March 26th, 2008 12:23 am (UTC)
What a liar Brummell was. His most famous quote was purely for effect, he didn't believe it and he didn't live by it. “If John Bull turns around to look after you, you are not well-dressed; but either too stiff, too tight or too fashionable.” The truth was that everyone turned and looked at him, and he knew it and did his utmost to ensure that it kept on happening. People keep trotting this one out because it justifies their own conservatism.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
bricology: Bernard Boutet de Monvel[info]bricology on March 26th, 2008 02:49 am (UTC)
"What a liar Brummell was. His most famous quote was purely for effect, he didn't believe it and he didn't live by it..."

Exactly. Thank you. That one line has done more to justify the Chensvolds of the world than perhaps any other. And it's entirely possible that the quote is apocryphal; I don't recall reading it in Male and Female Costume.

And even if one discounts the fact that he introduced such as the wearing of trousers to society (itself rather conspicuous in a society where breeches were the norm), the fact that he refused to lift his hat would've been no less conspicuous.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
Sir Frederick Chook: Vanity?[info]fredchook on March 26th, 2008 05:03 am (UTC)
Byron's obvious counter to Brummell's maxim is so handy, I put it in a poem and made a tea shirt of it. I'm prepared to argue for a proper place for Ts in dressin' up fine, too - case in point, Matisse.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
Sir Frederick Chook: Whizzo![info]fredchook on March 26th, 2008 06:37 am (UTC)
PS- Smashing knee-breeches!
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
bricology: M. Hulot[info]bricology on March 26th, 2008 06:38 am (UTC)
This is all excellent. You say it better than I, but I find myself often trying to explain that being a dandy nowadays is a revolutionary act. The Chensvolds and Nick Willards in their charcoal Brooks Brothers suits with the non-functional sleeve buttons and lapels exactly 2-5/8" wide are so self-deluded that they don't recognize that they've become retrograde fashion drones. Brummel would've despised them. The Duke of Windsor would've shunned them. But no doubt Ralph Lifshitz, with his sham preppy lifestyle package, loves them.

It's always amusing to see the timid chatterers on Dandyism.net sputter and fume about people like Whimsy, Tom Wolfe and others whom they accuse of being "flashy" or "costumey". The fact is that we're all wearing costumes; some of us just prefer to not wear the same costumes as the masses.

Glad to see you back on LJ.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
Gregory[info]dandy_gregory on March 26th, 2008 02:17 pm (UTC)
Well I agree with you 100% that a dandy will stand out [especially in our day and age]; but clown? Not sure I agree with that idea.
As you stated, not all clowns are dandies and frankly, a true dandy will never be a clown. Why? Because clown's outfits are designed to make people laugh. They are composed of loud garish colors, and are designed to grab the eye.
A dandy on the other hand can [and should] use color, the key element is that he should KNOW HOW to use color so as to be elegant. Elegance is the key. If you look at the Duke of Windsor, his plaids matched.
My take on Brummel's "revolution":http://www.thedandy.org/the%22beau%22today

and on dandies in general:http://www.thedandy.org/howtodistinguishadandy

As for the question of which color is best...I think that's a decision each dandy has to make for himself. I personally do not like loud colors, gray and black are my best friends. Does that make me less of a dandy? Only if I am less elegant for it. The key thing is that your clothes compliment you:http://www.thedandy.org/lesinvisibles

And for the record...I like the your outfit in the photo above. I think that is one of the better uses of plaid I've seen in a long time, very well matched.
That's the key for a dandy, to create an elegant portrait using himself as the canvas: and a really good dandy can get a little baroque and it will only enhance the composition.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
lord_whimsy[info]lord_whimsy on March 31st, 2008 06:31 pm (UTC)


Dandies are clowns--but let's not just take that statement at face value. I suspect what our man D is saying here is meant to be taken in a more metaphorical than literal sense. The thing that clowns and dandies have in common are that they are outsiders, society's "what-iffers". Unlike the bohos, they diverge from the pack by going up or out. In this sense, being super-refined is also being clownish, hence dandyish. Being 'correct' or merely well-dressed is not.

Mere deference to convention is not taste. In my experience, "taste"can often be a cover for a plodding mindset. True taste knows that there must be a some kind of challenge to convention in the mix--a flirtation with vulgarity--for something to be truly tasteful. How else might someone discern the evidence of one's mind at work?



Look at our man Massimilano above: looks tame enough, but then look at his selection of shoes! Genius--he carefully and artfully picked his moment to confound our expectations. Without those shoes, the ensemble would look too stiff, serious and uninspired. A masterful stroke, as it suggests that everything on him is absolutely intentional, and not mere deference to convention. Taste--real taste--knows when not to be too tasteful.

Taste too cheaply bought is a pantomime of true taste, and is a far worse sartorial transgression than the shrill blurt of any fop.

Like I've said before: refined vulgarity, not vulgar refinement.

I suspect many traditionalists who profess to be keepers of the dandy flame (could there be a more vulgar sentiment?) are dandyists, not dandies: waterboys who feel they know the game better than the players on the field.

Edited at 2008-03-31 06:59 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
Neil Scott[info]neil_scott on April 2nd, 2008 02:17 pm (UTC)
Isn't the Duke of Windsor just a golfer who likes golf so much that it infects his everyday wardrobe (note the spikes on the top row of shoes)?
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
 

Advertisement