Perhaps this statement is less pertinent now than at any other time in history?

He was always chasing (Is he still alive?) a class around that he wasnt a part of. Similar to F Scott Fitzgerald. Quite a bit points to his being the Gatsby of that books eponymous title.

Taste and background is a two way street. I know quite a few narrow minded, low brows who are convinced that even the slightest non funereal flamboyance in clothes is a sign of being a weirdo fit for persecution. Interestingly, certain items escape their ire, such as a colorful lining. It's interesting to me that if I were given a choice to have any fabric/colors/patterns that i wanted but could use the makers I wanted vs, using my favorite makers but only allowed to wear plain navy/charcoal wool or plain white/sky-blue shirts that I would choose the second option. For me clothing is more about line and comfort and quality than about shock and admiration from observers. Happily I dont have to make this choice

Although I think you can go overboard with the idea that clothes are going to change you past a certain level, it is true that too much flamboyance can get you the wrong result. Sometimes it's impossible to dress in one outfit for all occasions in a single day. I often overdo it myself but I have both the experience and confidence to pull it off. However, I dont always wear exactly what I want and kowtow to the greater, generalized fashions that exist for men. It's true what doghouse nibbles at; the clothes themselves are changed by the way you yourself wear them.

Thus, although I think it is true that who you are and who you want the world to think you are is sewn into your clothes, I dont know that anyone but very calculating, class anxious people need to worry that they're making the wrong choices accidentally, the way it seems Wolfe is suggesting.

This is a two edged sword for me...on the one hand I have a loathing of inner city unemployed single mums, pretty criminals and the under-class. Yet I'd still like to see a society that did more for them in the way of opportunity. Even if I know that most don't have the foresight to get out of their rut.

I also have a loathing of the rich, people that are born into money or people and companies that have gained it unfairly like MPs or bankers/banks. More so the ones that talk about the hardships of the poor. I could quite happily kick Russell Brands head in.

I was born poor (by Western standards) and want to be super rich. I've been quite socially mobile but seem to have got stuck at the lower middle class level. I think thats my problem. Do my clothes reflect this? Quite possibly. Its most likely the reason I have about 10 pairs of shoes in the £3-500 price range, one pair of Lobb and one of Green and not 20 pairs of bespoke.



Infact, thinking about it that might be why I hate Russell so much, he carps on about the unfairness of the British class system yet he is super rich but dresses really bad and doesn't own bespoke anything.

Never really took to his work, as Mailer is quoted in The Guardian article there is definitely something absurd about a man who only wears white suits in a city like New York. Perhaps, this is an aide memoir to ensure he remains only semi-embedded with his subject matter.

Last edited by formby1 (2015-07-26 14:15:22)

"I don't think Britain is conformist, historically it certainly isn't".

...It was post war. It lagged a long way behind Europe and America in art, advertising and design. It wanted no influence from outside its shores and took none until the mid 50s. When it did, it led the world in popular culture through the next decade.

Last edited by Goodyear welt (2015-07-26 21:36:56)