Last edited by g- (2010-05-14 08:10:20)

Sad but true, Monsieur. It pains me especially to see gentle, funny Wodehouse adopted by and bent to the stunted psyches of the internet "rakes."

I thought a little more about the post that I derided above, and I think that I did not use sufficient scorn and harshness. For those who do not wish to weather the storms of Lord Fondlewell's cutesy prose I will summarize: at a (fantasy) office part a troupe of young women approach the narrator, Count Pantstent von Erectionly, and using various wiles and ruses flash their underwear at him. One might tartly summarize the entire "adventure" with the sentence "I almost saw a great number of vaginas."

Duke Spoogedrawers recounts this story in a needlessly indirect, "aw shucks" fashion to show that he certainly did not seek out these partially concealed vaginas, but rather had them thrust upon him (doubtless because of his great personal charm); he even admits the possibility that the young women might have been tormenting him, though that raises the question of why he would include the story on his self-indulgent website. The fact that it bears such obvious marks of puerile fantasy makes it all the more embarrassing. It's clear that the entire incident is fictional, but the best that Sir Chodeington can come up with is some underwear-based teasing? Sad. Again, it's like Arby's roast-beef sandwich at Le Cirque. If you're composing the whole thing you might as well actually seal the deal with one of the tartlets. So perverse, and so infantile.

EDIT: But Tony, who is it?

Last edited by Gilgamesh2003 (2010-05-14 20:12:29)

^ And I can't tell you how incresingly proud I am of all this.
A triumph of viral marketing, manipulation and surely quite historic (in it's own way) trolling.

The forum IS the troll!

Genius!

It's like the russian dolls lifted to reveal a smaller inner figure and so on. To paraphrase Churchill ' a farce distracted by a joke bought at markdown wrapped in a Ralph Loren discount outlet bag.'

Last edited by shamrockmonkey (2010-05-15 03:13:22)

Shamrock's Reagan/Buckley conspiracy theory has a certain Pynchonian beauty to it. It probably says something about the clothing "fora" that the inhabitants all moon over Wodehouse and Waugh (as Mr. de Robespierre pointed out), yet the general atmosphere more closely resembles the nightmares of Pynchon and Burroughs.

Not much on Ask Andy this morning:

http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/forum/showthread.php?105000-Pucker-Crisis-on-shirts
Inanity, like most things, follows a bell curve, which I will represent here with a simple line diagram

Not inane (interesting) ----> delightfully inane (optimal for this thread) ----> catastrophically inane (boring or nonsensical)

The above post falls into the "catastrophically inane" category.

http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/forum/showthread.php?46631-North-by-NorthWest
Guess how many forumites have memorized Cary Grant's neck size!

http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/forum/showthread.php?48726-A-Trad-What-are-you-Wearing&p=1100467#post1100467
The Rambler compares putting KitonBrioni on ignore to the eradication of the European Jews during the Holocaust. A few posts up Phudson briefly stops gnawing on a human femur in order to scold the forum for being disrespectful of "KB," who is after all an "Honors Member." And a few posts up from that Tripples had another quality Kitonbrioni related zinger. It's a regular Zombie Jamboree over there in tradland!

In the jobs thread Kitonbrioni claimed to be a professor on sabbatical. I find this difficult to believe for a number of reasons.

Last edited by Gilgamesh2003 (2010-05-15 09:48:28)

This thread is full of misinformation and stupid opinions (most garbage is from #20 on). Many of these people should be niether seen or heard.
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/forum/showthread.php?105004-Should-I-buy-more-expensive-shoes&p=1100461#post1100461

New mod Checkboard speaks rot too in #25:
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/forum/showthread.php?105004-Should-I-buy-more-expensive-shoes&p=1100604#post1100604

Last edited by The_Shooman (2010-05-15 21:10:12)

That thread is to shoes what Rod McKuen is to poetry and Tom Robbins to modern literature. I'd thrash checkerboard with an old copy of Steve Martins CRUEL SHOES, except he would protest the paperback isn't as pleasurable as the hardback 1st edition's solid thump.

Hmmmmm - The 'shapeless' element in Trad comes from the OPH's satire on the fit of a Sack. Looking back earlier Sacks were to be found in all sorts of different cuts and degrees of fit. It's another one of those problem areas for Trad - The real tradition conflicts with their 'rules'.