I Googled Bi Swing Action...
It was almost as bad as when I googled 'Cream Pie'...
All I wanted was a jacket and some dessert.
The Internet has let me down.
I feel soiled.
Let me see what 'Facials' brings up...
Uck, NO !
I'll take the dog out instead. Time I got away from all this filth.
There must be somewhere good to go dogging locally... Google?
Worst one ever was when I had computer problems & clicked on 'RAM IT HOME'...
It's easier to conceal and draw a large frame handgun in a sack suit that a darted one.
The bi-swing helps when holding/swinging your shooter. Hence its name.
The only way to swing is to bi-swing.
While holding your shooter or someone else holding your shooter.
all this half-belted business is fine and good. Traditionally (or rather historically and culturally) the American style (trad or whatevah) had the element of the English about it. But you might do one or two things -- just odd pieces out, as it were. That worked. But not the whole get-up. That was a bit naff. Trying too hard.
I'm simply stunned -- having been away for a long time and with only brief journeys back -- how a little subculture that started on the net (or at least got re-codified on the net (for I won't disagree with ol' 'arry that there weren't pockets of it remaining) became so mainstream. I sort of think we had this sort of under-the-radar thing at least with regards to holding a magnifying glass to it -- ripping it apart and analyzing it to death -- and journos and others sort of superficially strained it (and then scuppered the whole thing) and presented it anew. What they missed was the irony and the qualifications and all the rest of it. Hard to do when you've got 400 words or less. Or people simply bypassed the journos since everyone knows that when you want to find out about something you google it.
It shows my limitations (in more than one way) that I'm surprised that people found a way to make money off the whole thing. That would've never occurred to me. Nor would it have occurred to me to blog. I much preferred the give and take of the community to sort of a pedestal.
I'm still a fan of the forum format, even with all of its limitations. I don't blog either, but I do like to pop up as a 'guest writer' on other people's blogs. That works best for me and I think there's more cache in it. I've done quite a few now, both Mod & Trad.
I think it's great that so many new business have been started on the back of all of this & names made - Mainly in the field of vintage clothing. Even I do that with my 'Smoking Cat' range supplying two award winning shops in London (JS & Hunky Dory).
Biggest coup for me so far has been the (Ivy) menswear consultancy stuff I now do which nobody else seems to, yet. Advising on new clothing projects, explaining the style to anybody interested in it and showing them vintage examples. Pure pleasure for me to talk about clothes & nice to see some money in return for it.
... But then again, nobody else has made themselves so utterly notorious as me !
http://www.modculture.co.uk/claudio-de- … st-mellor/
http://www.garmsville.com/2012/05/jimmy … y-and.html
All great fun.
Can't forget all the new books written & the FIT exhibit coming up in NYC, all the blogs spawned, the coverage for Ivy in various mags... We've done some nice playing with the zeitgeist. And to think it was all based on trolling ! ![]()
Jim.
You're a menswear consultant? Really? I don't recall you ever mentioning it!
actually that reminds me jim, i need to talk shop with you. Can you pm your new number to my other account. Thanks!
You're a menswear consultant? Really? I don't recall you ever mentioning it!
actually that reminds me jim, i need to talk shop with you. Can you pm your new number to my other account. Thanks!
In my professional capacity as a specialist Ivy League Style Menswear Consultant (Probably the only one in the world - All the rest are generalists) I shall do so. ![]()
... Although I have no new number. 666 still works just fine !
Best,
Jim.
I like the Fedora Lounge wall paper the best, really atmospheric, if cartoonish.
It goes something like this:
Fedora Lounge: the most archaic form of the tradition is the optimum.
Over 'ere: the most timeless, modernist version either vintage or new will do.
Perverts.
The trick to pulling off wearing 1920s and 30s style attire as regular wear, original or new, is to make sure sure it fits properly. You need to wear it with confidence otherwise you look like a parody.
Last edited by GIZhou007 (2012-07-20 17:21:44)
Costume to my eyes I'm afraid.
Last edited by Madras_Seersucker (2012-07-20 23:33:45)
I'm curious about this 'phenomenon', and what is underpinning it.
No rights and wrongs, of course.
Anyone dressing, on a day to day basis, in un-adulterated, top -to - toe 1930s and 1940s clothing has my admiration , for their 'bottle' and strong sense of individuality. Really.
My question is, is this a 'lifestyle' thing , or a 'life style' thing.
Looking at these pics, I wonder if the former might apply to the couple, in 1940s clothing, and the latter ,maybe , applies to the chap at the top. As I say, no rights or wrongs. I'm all for variety. Say what you want, but these 'looks' will always piqué interest...
The chap, in the middle, reminds me of a very young Alan Shearer. He looks a big Bogie fan. I just can't get that line out of my head: "Of all the gin joints, in all ......"
Last edited by jesmond (2012-07-21 09:03:20)
I think it's just like how you get these people that dress up for battle reenactments, or their favourite anime characters, you could argue it is no different than what we're doing, although we have to frame it in a different way as to avoid having to admit to ourselves we are just massive train spotting clothes geeks. I've got more respect for Fed than people on Style Forum.
The question is, who is wearing the REAL `costume`?
Is it the Fedora, 1930s afficionados, or just about every Tom, Dick and Harry wearing cheap, globalised, mass produced, faceless, anonymous, anodyne, casual wear ?
Last edited by jesmond (2012-07-21 01:44:16)
One For Bop wrote:
I think it's just like how you get these people that dress up for battle reenactments, or their favourite anime characters, you could argue it is no different than what we're doing, although we have to frame it in a different way as to avoid having to admit to ourselves we are just massive train spotting clothes geeks. I've got more respect for Fed than people on Style Forum.
They all seem to seek a very definite definition of themselves through their dress too. For me they joy of Ivy (that could be a book!) has always been about how it doesn't define me. Whatever I look like & whatever I am are wonderfully at odds with each other. Even in the US where Ivy is a very defining style of clothing to wear these days I still manage to gloriously ruin all expectations with my accent, conversation & behaviour. Same deal in London really if anybody thinks I'm a Mod - I soon wreck that misconception with my slovenly la-di-da ways...
Interesting stuff & all about context I'm sure.
Trads want an outfit that yells 'I am a Trad', hence all the exaggerations of baggy pants & bow ties. Ivy nuts tend to be more subtle as their clothing tends not to be their identity.
Maybe ?
Jim.
Talk Ivy wrote:
Maybe ?
Maybe and perhaps they never got over watching Bugsy Malone?
hey, nothing wrong with that...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ9KtuRHXRc
^I agree, a great wardrobe too. I saw it over the Christmas of 1980 for the first time, and boy was I impressed with the gangster look.
It's actually only that bit i like always thought it was a cracking tune, as musicals go it's not that bad, I typically cannot stand any form of musical theatre.
I can't stand any kind of Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, but there was a beautiful golden age of Hollywood musicals post-war that I really like. Maybe it was the equivalent of Bollywood, but you can't deny it's colourful strength and physical prowess. I had hopes that Moulin Rouge would be the beginning of a new Musical era.
I wish they would salvage Porgy and Bess, but apparently there is no chance. The masters are just in too bad a state ![]()
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mkgt263juzM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZsVMQSCXyk
Last edited by One For Bop (2012-07-21 11:59:21)