Too Traditional?

[MacLowlife]

LOOKING 2012?

Here is what I think:

One of the many advantages of age is the kind of subtle perspective that gets internalized. Not that he has much age on him, but I think Jock demonstrates that internalized knowledge nicely. Some members under 35 or so may feel the beginnings of the long view, but as some wise person said about clothing fads- they come along just often enough to embarrass you in later life by reminding you of how ridiculous you looked in your youth. Put another way, if you aren't mildly embarrassed by the way you dressed when you were younger, maybe you haven't lived long enough.

I think a part of what AA was referring to about dressing like it is 2012 was those things we see all around us. In the US today, and I expect elsewhere, you will bump into people who have glasses or shoes or hairstyles or articles of clothing that intentionally refer to another time ( maybe an idealized notion of that time, but some other time). If you really pay attention, you may run into a guy whose 1960-70s facial hair actually recalls 1890s facial hair. Or maybe not.

The people who make and sell clothing, to a man, have found it in their own interest to subtly change their goods, so that every five or ten years, you can look and see that Things Have Changed. Collars wax and wane, taking ties, lapels, and shoulder width with them. When I was younger, people seemed to more uniformly observe those changes, but I think I was just not noticing how many people opt out. And now, in the Brave New Twenty First Century, eclecticism reigns. 2012 may be much harder to pin down than, say,
1985:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K38xNqZvBJI

[creagdhubh]

LOOKING 2012?

Here is what I think:

One of the many advantages of age is the kind of subtle perspective that gets internalized. Not that he has much age on him, but I think Jock demonstrates that internalized knowledge nicely. Some members under 35 or so may feel the beginnings of the long view, but as some wise person said about clothing fads- they come along just often enough to embarrass you in later life by reminding you of how ridiculous you looked in your youth. Put another way, if you aren't mildly embarrassed by the way you dressed when you were younger, maybe you haven't lived long enough.

I think a part of what AA was referring to about dressing like it is 2012 was those things we see all around us. In the US today, and I expect elsewhere, you will bump into people who have glasses or shoes or hairstyles or articles of clothing that intentionally refer to another time ( maybe an idealized notion of that time, but some other time). If you really pay attention, you may run into a guy whose 1960-70s facial hair actually recalls 1890s facial hair. Or maybe not.

The people who make and sell clothing, to a man, have found it in their own interest to subtly change their goods, so that every five or ten years, you can look and see that Things Have Changed. Collars wax and wane, taking ties, lapels, and shoulder width with them. When I was younger, people seemed to more uniformly observe those changes, but I think I was just not noticing how many people opt out. And now, in the Brave New Twenty First Century, eclecticism reigns. 2012 may be much harder to pin down than, say,
1985:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K38xNqZvBJI

Fantastic points and I do agree with you. I think that is what AA may have been getting at. Great video...in 1985 I was 4! Wow!

Cheers,