The Style thread

[Ganbare!]

Come here to talk color, shapes, spaces or materials. Since there aren't that many of us here interested in architecture, design, illustration, fashion or other applied arts, I think it's better to conglomerate all disciplines linked to style or design.

I'm very fond of original and limited run graphic t-shirts displaying retro or pop culture imagery in an alternative way like this for instance: www.sixpack.fr/shop/man/303-r.html

In most cases, I abhor mass produced objects because they often lack style in favor of functionality when they have any.

WE LOVE ART.

[Ganbare!]

Weeeeeeeeee!

[betahat]

Honestly I would never pay 32.50 Euros for a t-shirt. I don't really like shopping although I do like (a)the feeling of getting a good deal (i.e. getting something I like on sale) and (b)feeling attractive. So I pretty much only shop for clothes with my wife and only buy things on sale. Pretty much all the new clothes I've bought in the last four years are either (a)$5 t-shirts from Chinatown or souvenir shops in foreign countries or (b)J-Crew preppy looking clothes I bought on sale. Except of course for my suit and tuxedo, both purchased at Tom's Place in Kensington Market, Toronto. I generally try to avoid t-shirts or clothes that say anything clever or artistic on them, for fear of appearing pretentious - but I do have a collection of geeky economic themed clothing, including the hat I'm wearing in my profile pic and a collection of t-shirts commemorating the economics and football rivalry between Cal and Stanford (these are limited run but give out a nerdy rather than a hipster vibe, unless there is some kind of extra hipster irony there, which there might be). I'm still working on my personal style - when I have the money, I might gravitate more towards preppy and less towards I don't care shlubness.


My wife is really into fashion, but except for a couple of Esprit and Banana Republic t-shirts, none of her clothes fall into the "graphic" t-shirt category. She goes for more classic fashion and is a sucker for embellishment like frills, embroidery, sequins, etc.

[Ganbare!]

I think you need to keep in mind that the tee is made of quality fabric and that only a handful people will ever own the same piece of clothes, it's a matter of exclusivity. I can't count how many times before I had the frustrating experience to meet someone sporting the exact same clothes. You just feel like another brick in the wall. What's more is that the design itself is just original.


Preppy fashion is a bit out of style but you still see a lot of people sticking with this look in large cities. I noticed that in North America people often pay too little attention to fashion and style, they just like to wear casual comfy clothes that doesn't suit them very well (straight legs jeans, hoodies, mountain boots?!).

Right now in Europe, what's hot depending on age bracket/personal brand is either a) bohemian, b) urban chic or c) retro street wear looks.

Banana Republic is fine much better than Old Navy or American Eagles for example but I wouldn't call it high fashion.

[betahat]

^I can't count how many times before I had the frustrating experience to meet someone sporting the exact same clothes.

Really? I think that has only happened to me once while wearing a striped purple shirt.

^I noticed that in North America people often pay too little attention to fashion and style

True, especially outside of New York. In NA we use the term metrosexual to derogatorily refer to men who seem a little too preoccupied with fashion and style. In general Americans have a tendency to regard certain aspects of European culture as impractical and uncomfortable. This includes the way people set up their homes, the use of smaller cars, and the tendency to wear tight clothing (pants especially but also t-shirts). It's no coincidence that hip-hop style (which maybe is the biggest contribution of NA to European fashion in the last decade, albeit one that you might not consider "high fashion") is all about baggy clothing, while Euro-style tends to be characterized as "tight." I'm not saying the Americans are right - I have a lot of admiration for the tradition of European art and fashion, which obviously has much more history than anything in North America, and I'm not a big fan of pants around the knees or the ubiquitous American baseball cap - but they come from a different tradition and history.


^Banana Republic is fine much better than Old Navy or American Eagles for example but I wouldn't call it high fashion.

Agreed, but my point was more that graphic t-shirts in general don't really qualify as high fashion, especially for women. Maybe if you combine them with a really tailored suit or jacket, but you don't usually see a lot of them on runways. My wife would consider the frequent wearing of t-shirts to be unfashionable, especially in a woman. Men can get away with a lot less - jeans and a t-shirt - but then fashion is mostly for women anyway, isn't it?

[palaver]

Sept 20, 2009 15:48:58 GMT -5 betahat said:

It's no coincidence that hip-hop style (which maybe is the biggest contribution of NA to European fashion in the last decade, albeit one that you might not consider "high fashion") is all about baggy clothing, while Euro-style tends to be characterized as "tight."

Baggy clothing tends to make fat people look skinnier. Hence America's fashion inclinations. Baggy clothes do not work for me. That's why I hate shopping for clothes in the States. Even a pair of khakis with a 28" waist balloon outwards like a clown costume. The fat template is everywhere.

[Ganbare!]

Sept 20, 2009 15:48:58 GMT -5 betahat said:

^I can't count how many times before I had the frustrating experience to meet someone sporting the exact same clothes.

Really? I think that has only happened to me once while wearing a striped purple shirt.

^I noticed that in North America people often pay too little attention to fashion and style

True, especially outside of New York. In NA we use the term metrosexual to derogatorily refer to men who seem a little too preoccupied with fashion and style. In general Americans have a tendency to regard certain aspects of European culture as impractical and uncomfortable. This includes the way people set up their homes, the use of smaller cars, and the tendency to wear tight clothing (pants especially but also t-shirts). It's no coincidence that hip-hop style (which maybe is the biggest contribution of NA to European fashion in the last decade, albeit one that you might not consider "high fashion") is all about baggy clothing, while Euro-style tends to be characterized as "tight." I'm not saying the Americans are right - I have a lot of admiration for the tradition of European art and fashion, which obviously has much more history than anything in North America, and I'm not a big fan of pants around the knees or the ubiquitous American baseball cap - but they come from a different tradition and history.


^Banana Republic is fine much better than Old Navy or American Eagles for example but I wouldn't call it high fashion.

Agreed, but my point was more that graphic t-shirts in general don't really qualify as high fashion, especially for women. Maybe if you combine them with a really tailored suit or jacket, but you don't usually see a lot of them on runways. My wife would consider the frequent wearing of t-shirts to be unfashionable, especially in a woman. Men can get away with a lot less - jeans and a t-shirt - but then fashion is mostly for women anyway, isn't it?

Before dropping from law school I was one of those preppy serious-looking individual but I came to the point that I'm not comfortable with being a 'suit' (both mentally and appearance-wise). I haven't shifted to being a crazy artist yet but I realized that I don't want to spend the rest of my life working on my own little private interests nor on a small scale.


For me it is important to some extent to be aware of fashion or grooming whether be male (it's a growing trend) or female.

Although I take the time to watch runways of 'maisons' I fancy most and keep myself a little up to date with the industry , I'm not that much into 'haute couture' fashion, probably because I can't really afford it for and deem myself too young to switch to a more elegant look.

[betahat]

^Baggy clothing tends to make fat people look skinnier. Hence America's fashion inclinations.

True. It's also easier to deal with hand-me-downs (you just need a belt), and let's face it, the poorest people are usually the fattest, at least in America. Of course, you see a lot of very skinny people in ridiculously baggy clothing too.

^I haven't shifted to being a crazy artist yet but I realized that I don't want to spend the rest of my life working on my own little private interests nor on a small scale.

Well, some people believe that the clothes make the man. On the other hand, most of the really important people who make a difference in the world do wear suits, frequently, because no one will take you seriously if you're wearing some funky retro t-shirt (except as an entertainer or artist). I have academic friends who view wearing a suit as conformism and selling-out their left-wing ideals, but our Italian professor who always wears suits and suspenders is actually the biggest fashion iconoclast in our department (well, him and the prof who only wears tie-die t-shrits and shorts).

[Ganbare!]

Just hoping dress code in international organizations is casual *dreams* or at least doesn't require wearing a suit at all just more formal shirts...

Academics do have more freedom in that sense, so many of my female profs just dress like they are stay-home moms or something lol

[palaver]

Sept 20, 2009 18:14:16 GMT -5 betahat said:

True. It's also easier to deal with hand-me-downs (you just need a belt), and let's face it, the poorest people are usually the fattest, at least in America.

Not anymore. Thanks to the McRevolution. The people now share equally in the redistribution of calories across the economic spectrum.



National Income-Obesity Statistics

Here are the income-obesity statistics for 1971-1974:

* Less than $25,000: 22.5% obese
* $25,000-$40,000: 16.1% obese
* $40,000-$60,000: 14.5% obese
* More than $60,000: 9.7% obese

Here are the results for 2001-2002:

* Less than $25,000: 32.5% obese
* $25,000-$40,000: 31.3% obese
* $40,000-$60,000: 30.3% obese
* More than $60,000: 26.8% obese

[D.A]

I prefer plain or simple graphic tees, I do make a few of my own just to be somewhat different:



The intention here was to make a plain Daft Punk tee, but I f*cked up the screen print (it was 7am just after my Oma passed away. I was trying to make it for a festival the next day) so I had to paint over the top of it. I ended up screen printing the back of it with Daft Punk and the right way round...

However the topic of choice is nothing too creative or original, I always tend to make music oriented and tv show tees. I just can't be bothered putting too much thought into the creativity or originiatlity of the idea

[betahat]

OK Palaver, let's try and get this t-shirt made then, in honor of the wealthy, fat, capitalist:



There does seem to be a correlation at the state and neighborhood level between obesity rates and income, but in general you're right that the obesity inequality has not mirrored income inequality in recent times. Black and latino women still have the highest rates though, at 50% and 40% respectively, and these are not exactly rich groups. But I guess they get swamped by fat rich white women in your averages.

[palaver]

Sept 21, 2009 9:45:54 GMT -5 betahat said:

There does seem to be a correlation at the state and neighborhood level between obesity rates and income, but in general you're right that the obesity inequality has not mirrored income inequality in recent times. Black and latino women still have the highest rates though, at 50% and 40% respectively, and these are not exactly rich groups. But I guess they get swamped by fat rich white women in your averages.

So you're saying the fat-income distribution is different among minorities. If they were skewing the numbers to produce the near equal distribution, you would have to assume that white Americans have an inverted distribution and become leaner as you go down the income ladder. I don't know if that is true.

Compare the maps. There are some mono racial states with high obesity rates.

[betahat]

^So you're saying the fat-income distribution is different among minorities.
Not exactly. Prepare to be taken further off topic...

You picked up on the race thing, but I specifically said women. The income-obesity negative correlation appears to be much stronger with women, and is virtually non-existent with men, in the United States.
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=993263

I have no idea what your statistics look like by race and gender. I also don't know what measure of income they use (individual or household?). So I wouldn't want to comment too much on your statistics, other than to point out that (a)if black and latina women are significantly more obese (45%)than the figure you report for the lowest income groups (32%) and (b)they fall predominantly in the lowest income group then either (c)they are such a small percentage that they get washed out (but perhaps explain the small negative correlation between your group income and obesity rates) OR (d)your explanation, that they are a non-trivial percentage of the low income category, and that therefore poor whites must have lower obesity rates than rich whites to balance things out.
I am more inclined to believe conclusion (c), at least if you buy the premise of (a) and (b), and I'm agnostic about (d) pending further evidence - there could be an inverse correlation or it could be basically flat. Black and latina women are only about 13% of the US population, and even if they are over-represented in the low income group (say 25%-33%) they would only add 5-7% to the obesity rate (I'm taking 45% obesity for them, versus 26% for "rich" white women making over 60,000, and taking 25-33% of the ~20% difference in obesity rates). And the difference between your poorest and richest groups is about 6%. I'm not sure I'd consider 60,000 to be rich exactly (especially if it is household income - median hh income is about 50K in the US), but I don't know if there is any data about the income-obesity relationship in the upper tails of the income distribution. Maybe you could locate a more detailed data source?


In any case, I agree with your broad interpretation of the statistics - the fact that incomes in America have increased since the early 1970s (though median family income might not be that much higher in real terms) concurrent with a large increases in obesity suggest that income is not really related to our current obesity epidemic. Relative prices and fast food availability (the latter which is correlated with neighborhood income) might have more to do with it, along with whatever is going on with the physical activity side.

The maps are interesting but there are probably too many things going on there. Kentucky and West Virginia look like the biggest outliers - mono-racial states with high obesity rates. Interestingly they are ranked 47th and 49th in terms of median household income.
Look at this map:

www.visualizingeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/census_2006income.gif

Now looking at this map and the obesity one, you're making me want to argue for the income-obesity correlation again. Dammit!

[Ganbare!]

@ DA: Your DIY serigraphy is very inspired, great job customizing your apparel to look stylish !