I don't know if everyone's revised themselves.

I think we've broadened the discussion though.

"The Curriculum" IS pretty much what I wear, and believe is the core of the trad, or Ivy League look...both in real life and as it was discussed in our early discussions on Harris's thread.


We've now expanded the discussion.  In the past on AAAT I tried to shoot down expansions in the direction of "how does my 2 button darted, shoulder padded, Brooks jacket fit into this canon" because I thought it was pretty obvious that it didn't fit at all since we'd been over that about 80 times. (ie threads to which LongWing, etc and I contributed such as "Trad Hawks Unite")  I saw it as necessary to keep it clear that the look itself was different than just a standard, traditional, don't make waves corporate look--that it could be young, youthful, vibrant, classy, interesting, and even rebellious, as I thought that was becoming lost, especially when Russell introduced fogeyism into the picture.  In hindsight, I now realize that Russell and I were doing the same thing: I was isolating the style by trying to state what it was not.  He was isolating it by showing that the people who were not clear on the style would believe any little treat that was thrown them: heraldic connections, fogey, most trad cell phone...in short that they weren't in love with the style, they were in love with one social interpretation of what they thought it could represent if they wore it.  I was playing forehand, Russ was backhanding. (That could be the foundation for an interesting comedy of manners on the Brits and Americans, in fact I think Galsworthy touches on it a couple of times when he says "we irritate your epidermis and you irritate our nerve centers" of Americans to Brits and the reverse, respectively)

I think my own expansions and understanding in the area have been largely in personal taste:  by spending time looking through the old pictures ...from my own family and others here (most often by Tony V), and even just probing my own dad on what he liked way back when, I've realized that though there is the purist look that Harris and I clearly love a lot, one can mix and match and still look good.   That and reading FNB's essay on the Tree of Style, has enhanced my understanding of where the whole look fits, and how to cross into other places with it.

In short, I'm still a huge fan of the curriculum, but because I believe after 2 years of constant discussion I've learned much of what  I didn't already know about elements of that purist look, (and gotten past the initial thrill of finding others who want to discuss it) I'm becoming more fascinated with how it fit with other looks of the era, and what can be done to it to individualize it for me.

That is why I think Andyland should toss the trad forum.  It sets it off too much by itself to be sitting out there.  It allows for insularity, and people get too used to the bowties and GTH.  It needs to be incorporated within everything else, as it is here, so people can continue to learn, and questions can be answered by people who don't necessarily see the look as their first choice, like Grayson or FNB.   It allows for the cliche of personal growth to see people who don't always love what you love to look you over.

Last edited by Coolidge (2007-11-02 08:12:45)

Coolidge has just wrote the final word on Andyland.

He offers criticism, and then solutions!
How un-modern!

TV