Re: And are people still calling them "shades"?

1

Alternatively, you could talk about Unf--k the Gulf (NSFW, language) if you prefer.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 7:39 PM
horizontal rule
2

Dude, they've been back in for ages. Even I knew that, and I hate most hipster eyeware choices.


Posted by: Parenthetical | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 7:42 PM
horizontal rule
3

Like I said in the post...


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 7:45 PM
horizontal rule
4

I've been telling my mom that NOW is the time to replace my father's honest-to-God 1960s Wayfarers with a new, unglued-together pair.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 7:47 PM
horizontal rule
5

The Oakleys website doesn't give me a lot of hope for their comeback. The zeitgeist is wrong for wanting to run around town looking like a dorkwad downhill skiier.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 7:48 PM
horizontal rule
6

I'm so tired of those knockoff wayfarers with the neon. No, it's vintage aviators or nothin' for me.

Because I'm like Tackleberry in Police Academy.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 7:56 PM
horizontal rule
7

5: I dunno, I have a very fashion-forward friend in LA who is super into that whole look.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 7:59 PM
horizontal rule
8

I don't even own a pair of sunglasses.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:03 PM
horizontal rule
9

5: You'd think so, but I saw some not six hours ago. Of course, these are liable to be the same people who decided to spend the last ten years wearing big fuck-off sunglasses that make you look like you're attempting a disguise. Why anyone would intentionally make themselves more like Posh Spice is beyond me.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:05 PM
horizontal rule
10

7.---True, the bicycle shorts on the recent runways do suggest that an Oakley renaissance may be around the next corner. The look I've been seeing more often around town tips a hat to vintage rather than cyberpunk, though.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:07 PM
horizontal rule
11

9: trying to get Beckham's checkbook?


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:07 PM
horizontal rule
12

9.last also applies to posh spice


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:07 PM
horizontal rule
13

Mad Men

If it can go for another few seasons, my current style will become the very height of fashion.

Not really. The show takes place in NYC. Damn.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:09 PM
horizontal rule
14

The only sunglasses I own are skiing oriented - i.e. curved around the sides to help keep the wind out of my eyes. They're also useful for biking. Given that prescription sunglasses cost a fortune, I'm not going to be buying any other pairs, no matter how dorkwaddish they make me look.


Posted by: teraz kurwa my | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:12 PM
horizontal rule
15

10: The look I've been seeing more often around town tips a hat to vintage rather than cyberpunk, though.

Does the cyberpunk look even include Oakleys? I thought cyberpunk glasses looked like those aviators currently popular with the steampunks? Did I miss a trend?

max
['Steampunk sunglasses like these.']


Posted by: max | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:14 PM
horizontal rule
16

Steam vs. cyber, max.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:26 PM
horizontal rule
17

Cyberpunk, steampunk... what's the next -punk?


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:28 PM
horizontal rule
18

Zombiepunk is already upon us.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:30 PM
horizontal rule
19

God only knows what the Etsy store for nanopunk would look like.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:30 PM
horizontal rule
20

Furries appear to be the antithesis of punk, so we're safe from that at least.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:31 PM
horizontal rule
21

17: Atompunk. Hybridizes nicely with the Mad Men obsession, I'd imagine.


Posted by: Cosma Shalizi | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:32 PM
horizontal rule
22

20: I'd guess you could drape a furry in leather, chains and pins, and give it a hairdo of defiance, without too much trouble.


Posted by: Cosma Shalizi | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:34 PM
horizontal rule
23

21: And has something to do with M/tch's proposed stringed instrument tuned a fifth lower than a violin, apparently.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:34 PM
horizontal rule
24

I've always wondered when "nanotech" enthusiasts are going to discover the prefixes "pico-" and "femto-". "Atto-", even!


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:35 PM
horizontal rule
25

Check out my yoctopunk iPad cover...


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:37 PM
horizontal rule
26

furry punk


Posted by: teraz kurwa my | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:39 PM
horizontal rule
27

22.--You could, but it would still be a furry.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:39 PM
horizontal rule
28

26 "This fluffy hat is new, 100% vegan and sweatshop free."

Oh good. I was afraid it was made of vegans.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:40 PM
horizontal rule
29

22 I'd guess you could drape a furry in leather, chains and pins, and give it a hairdo of defiance, without too much trouble.

You did a googleimage search on 'furry punk' too?


Posted by: teraz kurwa my | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:44 PM
horizontal rule
30

Furry is murdery


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:44 PM
horizontal rule
31

Prescription sunglasses are the best reason to patronize the various online glasses sites (zenni, optical4less, etc) - they're cheap and you won't be depending on them as your only pair. I paid $18, including shipping, for prescription sunglasses with a moderately strong prescription, and they're fine - no optical issues I've noticed, and totally in the same ballpark as my normal ~$500 glasses.


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:45 PM
horizontal rule
32

21: Design guidance for atompunks. (From a pretty neat site, actually.)


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:47 PM
horizontal rule
33

Damn, I think I paid close to $300 once you included tax. Part of it was because I needed dark wraparound ones suitable to extreme glare at high speed, part was because they refused to do them without the very minor astigmatism I've got on my prescription. On the plus side they really are great for skiing and adequate for biking and hiking (they sweat up a bit which can be a pain), and that's the only stuff I really need them for.


Posted by: teraz kurwa my | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:51 PM
horizontal rule
34

Heh. Reminds me of a display case I saw in Los Alamos last month, of pop-culture ephemera from the atomic era. Like brightly colored kids' board games about nuclear war.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:52 PM
horizontal rule
35

29: Sadly, I just had to think about it.


Posted by: Cosma Shalizi | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:53 PM
horizontal rule
36

What's the deal with the new Google Image Search? Why are things numbered as different "pages" listed on one page?


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:54 PM
horizontal rule
37

Real design guidance for atompunks:

We were lying there, very tense, in the early dawn, and there were just a few streaks of gold in the east; you could see your neighbor very dimly. Those ten seconds were the longest ten seconds that I ever experienced. Suddenly, there was an enormous flash of light, the brightest light I have ever seen or that I think anyone has ever seen. It blasted; it pounced; it bored its way right through you. It was a vision which was seen with more than the eye. It was seen to last forever. You would wish it to stop; altogether it lasted about two seconds. Finally it was over, diminishing, and we looked toward the place where the bomb had been; there was an enormous ball of fire which grew and grew and it rolled as it grew; it went up into the air, in yellow flashes and into scarlet and green. It looked menacing. It seemed to come toward one.

Also:

From ten miles away, we saw the unbelievably brilliant flash. That was not the most impressive thing. We knew it was going to be blinding. We wore welder's glasses. The thing that got me was not the flash but the blinding heat of a bright day on your face in the cold desert morning. It was like opening a hot oven with the sun coming out like a sunrise.

So: welder's glasses.


Posted by: Cosma Shalizi | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:56 PM
horizontal rule
38

Neb attempted to lay down the law on "tweecore", but isn't he off in the wilds somewhere? If you want to establish "furrypunk", now's your chance.

Speaking of Neb and sunglasses, you can get "Nebb" sunglasses here.


Posted by: Mr. Blandings | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:58 PM
horizontal rule
39

I badly need new glasses, but I've been putting off making an appointment for an eye exam for like a year. Maybe I should get sunglasses as well. They'd come in handy every now and then, when driving.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 8:59 PM
horizontal rule
40

I am not an atomic playboy.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 9:10 PM
horizontal rule
41

It's glacier glasses or nothing for me.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 10:23 PM
horizontal rule
42

... "femto-".

Insufficiently appreciated.


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 10:34 PM
horizontal rule
43

41 I've got a pair or two of those but can't use them since my right eye decided to play catch up with my left a few years ago. Not so good for skiing and biking since you've got no peripheral vision, but absolutely the best thing for high altitude hiking, glacier or no glacier.


Posted by: teraz kurwa my | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 10:42 PM
horizontal rule
44

I am wearing rimless Oakleys right now.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
45

He's a flipster.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 10:47 PM
horizontal rule
46

I guess you're not in the US, or you're trying to pick women up as a blind person "you know what they say about our sense of touch, ladeez"


Posted by: teraz kurwa my | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 10:54 PM
horizontal rule
47

He's a flipster.

Then he should knock Lord Buckley his lobes.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 10:58 PM
horizontal rule
48

There's a Shane McGowan quote about the difference between hip and cool but it was pretty unintelligible even in the '80s.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 11:01 PM
horizontal rule
49

I guess you're not in the US, or you're trying to pick women up as a blind person "you know what they say about our sense of touch, ladeez"

This reminds me of a short story by Kilgore Trout.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 11:08 PM
horizontal rule
50

32: It's a great site. The feeling of impending doom doesn't translate well from the Fifties though, it's all sorts of quaint now. That's acceptable.


Posted by: Biohazard | Link to this comment | 07-23-10 11:26 PM
horizontal rule
51

Not sure that mismatched socks is a good example of why you aren't trendy. In fact, I'm pretty sure that mismatched socks and claims of not being able to follow the trends makes you defacto trendy.


Posted by: GMcGrumps | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 1:14 AM
horizontal rule
52

My 12 year old is very into mismatched stuff atm. I often see her friends wearing odd socks, and she has a great pair of tights with different legs. And if you are a 12 year old girl, "shades" is hopelessly aged-parents-territory - they're called "sunnies".


Posted by: asilon | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 2:23 AM
horizontal rule
53

One of my acquaintances from high school has created a business catering to young girls' desire for mismatched socks. He was always going to be an entrepreneur, but nobody could have guessed that it would be socks.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:58 AM
horizontal rule
54

"your socks don't match"

"Yeah they do. I go by thickness."


Posted by: Steven Wright. | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 7:10 AM
horizontal rule
55

My wife has a pair of leather side-shield Vuarnets from 30+ years ago that I like; it looks like they've moved on to other looks these days.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 7:21 AM
horizontal rule
56

I found my Ray-Bans from the 80s. Now I can look cool again. Thanks Stanley.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 7:26 AM
horizontal rule
57

If I get contact lenses so I could wear my Ray-Bans.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 7:27 AM
horizontal rule
58

Funny this should be posted, as just yesterday I said "I should have brought my shades" in front of a bunch of twenty-somethings. They pointed and laughed and said "shades? shades??"


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 7:47 AM
horizontal rule
59

Did Ray-Bans really ever go out? I mean black or tortoise ones? Surely the white and red (etc.) ones went out and came back in several years ago. Hipster undergrads are all about the white Ray-Bans.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 7:58 AM
horizontal rule
60

55: that rules. I bet those'll be back in soon. Not for us, mind.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:05 AM
horizontal rule
61

You know who else made fun of the word "shades"? Gaydolph Hipster.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
62

There was a trickle of Ray-Bans last year and it seemed early this year they came in all at once. Or maybe I'm off by a year. In any case, I would love to know how this happened. It seems like someone has to be responsible.


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:11 AM
horizontal rule
63

Yahoo Answers for all of your fashion needs:

Resolved Question
Whats the best brand of sunglasses?
RAY BAN THEY LAST FOR YRS AND NEVER GO OUT OF FASHION MY MUM STILL HAS HERE PAIR THAT SHE BOUT IN 1995!!! STILL LOOKING GREAT THERE CLASSIC!


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:14 AM
horizontal rule
64

definitive swipple.

"Saying something like "man, it's pretty amazing how 65 people at this outdoor concert all decided to get their sunglasses at exactly the same time," should only be directed at a white person who is not wearing Wayfarers. This will make them feel better about not fitting in, but it will also make them self conscious about their plan to buy a pair."

Posted by: alameida | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:19 AM
horizontal rule
65

Hipster undergrads are all about the white Ray-Bans.

The reason I noticed they were surging, er, had surged, was my own purchase of some white ones, with American-flaggy interiors (interiors? you know, the part that's touching your face). They were $3 at a Wal-Mart in Kansas. I was amused by the subtly hidden American flag and figured they were factory rejects or something. No red-blooded American would hide the flag like that.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:19 AM
horizontal rule
66

and don't cast scorn on all the neon, folks. a) they make new neon ray-bans now b) what I have are vintage 80s knock-offs in neon. that's legit.


Posted by: alameida | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
67

Unfortunately, the neon Wayfarers were always stupid. Unless you also wear Jams. Do you wear Jams? That, that is legit.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:45 AM
horizontal rule
68

||

Kasey Chambers, Aussie country, is kinda a kid, but kinda fun because of that. At least she makes me smile.

Well it hurts down here on Earth lord
It hurts down here on Earth
It hurts down here cause we're running out of beer
But we're all gonna die someday

Janie got stoned cause she couldn't get boned
But we're all gonna die someday

Well they can all kiss my ass lord
They can all kiss my ass
If they want to kiss my ass well they better make it fast
'Cos we're all gonna die someday

|>


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 9:20 AM
horizontal rule
69

does the existence of atompunk mean David Lee Roth was prescient when he wrote the words to "Atomic Punk", back in '79 ?


Posted by: cleek | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 9:40 AM
horizontal rule
70

I saw a woman decked top to toe in Units not long ago. In the Cleveland airport. She was not a Linda-Evans wing-banged hipster chick either. God, Units were terrifying.*


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 9:56 AM
horizontal rule
71

* I mean it, man.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 10:03 AM
horizontal rule
72

My extensive Google research has not made entirely clear to me what the fuck Units is.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 10:07 AM
horizontal rule
73

67 - Jams, shmams. I want to know who is gonna bring OPs back.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:17 AM
horizontal rule
74

Can we get to the Mad Men backlash already?


Posted by: Gonerill | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
75

Surely that should at least wait until Sunday?


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:48 AM
horizontal rule
76

Can we get to the Mad Men backlash already?

I was just wondering whether it would be morally, if not legally, defensible to cold-bloodedly murder the next columnist or blogger who thinks a nation of 350 million people is captivated by a television program that approximately one million people watch.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:50 AM
horizontal rule
77

Ah, but Flip, those other 349 people are indeed held captive by the program—through its agents, the columnists and bloggers who keep talking about it endlessly.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:58 AM
horizontal rule
78

349 million, of course.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:58 AM
horizontal rule
79

a nation of 350 million people

Is that the US, then?


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:03 PM
horizontal rule
80

Is that the US, then?

Is there another very large First World country where the new generation of putative intellectuals refuses to shut the fuck up about premium cable soap operas?


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:15 PM
horizontal rule
81

Can we get to the Mad Men backlash already?

As you please.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:15 PM
horizontal rule
82

So, the US in 2018?


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:17 PM
horizontal rule
83

76:I was going to point flipp to the proven social theory fact that one person in every hundred has 90% of the relationships and sets all trends but I don't even know enough to google it.

This of course creates a pyramid structure where two people in the country determine all fashion.

Those persons are Corey Feldman and Mary-Kate Olsen.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:18 PM
horizontal rule
84

Corey Feldman? Really?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:25 PM
horizontal rule
85

Stanley he appears in the very article you cite in the OP. Coincidence? I think not.


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:29 PM
horizontal rule
86

16: Steam vs. cyber, max.

Yes, I know. But steampunk goggles are not too far off those round John Lennon-style (called what?) sunglasses that the cyberpunks wore back in the day. I don't remember seeing any cyber or steampunks wearing Ray Bans or Oakleys.... not when they're punked out. But then maybe I'm an old industrial goth and missed something.

78: 349 million, of course.

That includes the 41 million that haven't bothered to show up yet, I suppose.

max
['Lookie! Here's a clock for that from the Census Bureau.']


Posted by: max | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:32 PM
horizontal rule
87

85: Oh. So he does. I read bob as saying that Corey Feldman determines fashion trends now, to which I thought, duh, obviously bob meant Justin Bieber.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:33 PM
horizontal rule
88

Yay, air conditioning! Though it doesn't seem to be capable of getting the temperature back down to comfortable when it keeps getting hotter outside and it's starting from 90-ish.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:43 PM
horizontal rule
89

That includes the 41 million that haven't bothered to show up yet, I suppose.

I was just following Flippanter's lead.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:44 PM
horizontal rule
90

This of course creates a pyramid structure where two people in the country determine all fashion.

Someday, when I am older and yet more curmudgeonly, I'm going to figure out a way to formalize magpie tendencies for people who otherwise tend to become creatures of habit. Every time I am lulled into thinking that the whole country is following the same trend or interest, I am relieved to discover that it's only my social circle and a few major media outlets. A very small adjustment in behavior puts me in contact with a whole realm of people going about their lives in an entirely different arena, complete with different values, fashions, leisure pursuits, etc. It really is immensely comforting.

In the meantime, in the absence of doing that, I'm going to keep trying to talk some smart person into writing up something that updates the concept of "fugitive literature" for the Internet generation. It amazes me how cognitively impossible it seems to be for people to imagine. Although it's kind of like how I feel about the deep sea, I guess.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:46 PM
horizontal rule
91

Yay, essear! I went downtown expecting to spend some nice cool time in Spanish group, but after 45 minutes we got fire-alarm evacuated out into the heat and I came home again. My new plan is to sit quietly on the couch and consider working.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:48 PM
horizontal rule
92

Does "fugitive literature" mean, as Google suggests, literature that's hard to find?


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:54 PM
horizontal rule
93

Speaking of, uh, trends: holy shit, there are pretzel M&Ms now?!?!?!


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 12:56 PM
horizontal rule
94

92: Sort of, but not like an out-of-print book. It means things that are also hard to know exist. So, a print-only (no electronic version) guidebook that some obscure state government agency developed, or an annual census conducted by an amateur birdwatcher, or a neighborhood plan described at a zoning meeting, or a commencement speech printed only in a community newspaper, or a hospital's patient handout.

It's also connected to the idea that when there is no central clearinghouse and the people don't have tools to identify and collect fugitive materials on their own, there is likely to be more low-quality, reinventing-the-wheel stuff produced. Remember when Brock was up in arms about the fact that the pre-surgical-procedure instructions he got were an old Xerox copy with poorly explained information that was somewhat self-contradictory?


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 1:14 PM
horizontal rule
95

93: I saw those in a 7-11 recently. I'm probably going to break down and buy a bag.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 1:25 PM
horizontal rule
96

95: A cow-orker just gave me some. They're kinda like mildly salty malted milk balls. In other words, they are delicious.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 1:27 PM
horizontal rule
97

Wow, look at the thread in 94. ogged! Cala! soup biscuit! bitchphd! What happened to this place?


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 1:34 PM
horizontal rule
98

The pretzel m&m's are okay. I like the coconut ones.


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 2:17 PM
horizontal rule
99

It would be awesome to have a big bowl full of different kinds, since I actually like 'em all. Mmm. Decadent.


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 2:17 PM
horizontal rule
100

COCONUT m&ms?!


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 2:19 PM
horizontal rule
101

indeed


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 2:20 PM
horizontal rule
102

I'm holding out for BLL-flavored M&M's. You gotta dream, right?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 2:30 PM
horizontal rule
103

Butt Lick Lemon?


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 2:38 PM
horizontal rule
104

I don't have Wayfarers, it turns out. I have the aviator style things from the Top Gun era. So, I'm guessing those won't be back until 2016 or so.

On the other hand, I won $75 at the blackjack table this morning.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 2:48 PM
horizontal rule
105

They were $3 at a Wal-Mart in Kansas.

Oh Stanley, say it ain't so.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:05 PM
horizontal rule
106

What happened to this place?

If the blog seems poor to you, do not blame it; blame yourself that you are not poet enough to call forth its riches


Posted by: OPINIONATED RILKE | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:17 PM
horizontal rule
107

Those who left changed their lives.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:21 PM
horizontal rule
108

It wasn't poetry that helped me win $75. It was the dealer busting seven out of ten hands.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:25 PM
horizontal rule
109

I don't have Wayfarers, it turns out. I have the aviator style things from the Top Gun era. So, I'm guessing those won't be back until 2016 or so.

They've already made a comeback in the Bay Area...


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:27 PM
horizontal rule
110

Oh Stanley, say it ain't so.

Yeah, sorry to disappoint. They actually won't let you leave the state until you've bought something at Wal-Mart. You have to show a receipt at Wichita Mid-Continent Airport.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:31 PM
horizontal rule
111

I have fake aviators, which I believe to be fashionable-ish (I only wear them in the car). One certainly sees them around a lot.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:32 PM
horizontal rule
112

Also, that's some impressively early morning gambling. Are you in Vegas?


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:35 PM
horizontal rule
113

112: I have not left Pittsburgh. The casino, which just started table games this month, is right next to the Science Museum and I didn't think it takes two parents to watch one kid.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:41 PM
horizontal rule
114

113: So you let your wife have a nice quiet visit to the museum, while you taught your son to gamble? That was very thoughtful, Moby.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:45 PM
horizontal rule
115

That does seem fantastically decadent, gambling on a Saturday morning *AND* getting out of boring parenting stuff! We have a couple of casinos here in town but (I just looked) they don't open until 2pm. I will have a lot of time to myself next week though ...


Posted by: asilon | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:53 PM
horizontal rule
116

When I was younger I had a secret wish to be a croupier - it seems so glamorous! (Ignore the fact that I am not at all glamorous in that croupier way in actual life. I'm sure I could pretend, and even enjoy it for a short time.)


Posted by: asilon | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:54 PM
horizontal rule
117

The movie Croupier is intermittently glamorous.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 3:56 PM
horizontal rule
118

"Your socks don't match," my standard response is, "Sure, they do; they're both socks"

LOL! Classic :-)


Posted by: acuvue oasys | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 4:04 PM
horizontal rule
119

"acuvue oasys" is a bad pseud. Try "Wry Cooter".


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 4:08 PM
horizontal rule
120

When I was younger I had a secret wish to be a croupier...

I didn't pay attention to the croupiers, but the dealer looked like that henchman who had the metal teeth in the James Bond movie. That is, the dealer had ordinary teeth, but his face was similar to that guy's face.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 4:31 PM
horizontal rule
121

117: You're right, but I found it overall pretty unsatisfying.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 4:58 PM
horizontal rule
122

*AND* getting out of boring parenting stuff!

But . . . but . . . it's a SCIENCE museum! I can only conclude that either Moby Hick is, despite all appearances, a cretin, or Pittsburgh's science museum must suck.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:00 PM
horizontal rule
123

Not to pile on 118, but "LOL" AND and emoticon?

NO FRUITBASKET FOR YOU!


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:01 PM
horizontal rule
124

Ah! I finally looked at the picture(s) linked in the OP of the Ray-Ban Wayfarers: I have a pair, or at least a pair of look-alikes, and used to wear them quite a bit. They look almost exactly like the first picture on the linked page.

I thought they looked sort of cool at the time (years ago), but you know what's wrong with them? The nose-pinchy part that's supposed to actually keep them up in front of your eyes instead of sliding down your nose is ... inadequate. Particularly if you're at all sweaty.

In other words, they slide down your nose frequently and you're constantly having to push them back up, which is just so, so nerdy a thing to keep doing.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:04 PM
horizontal rule
125

||

68: bob you might like the band I'm sitting in with on accordion tonight:

All the boys drink vinegar
and all the men eat rocks
All the women are tough as nails
and all the chickens are cocks
cause this is Bad Town
everybody in this town is bad

|>


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:17 PM
horizontal rule
126

124: The problem is that you're sweating. You should perspire instead.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:17 PM
horizontal rule
127

125: It's bizarro world Lake Wobegone!


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:19 PM
horizontal rule
128

126: I thought sure the problem was that my nose is so aquiline, dear.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:23 PM
horizontal rule
129

126: Perspire s/b glow.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 5:25 PM
horizontal rule
130

122: The museum is very nice, but I've been there half a hundred times.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 6:16 PM
horizontal rule
131

half a hundred times

I was told there'd be no math.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 6:17 PM
horizontal rule
132

I was told there'd be no math.

But it's Not-Tuesday.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 6:53 PM
horizontal rule
133

LOL and emoticons are deprecated.

HA! is acceptable.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 7:45 PM
horizontal rule
134

I didn't see Mitch's 123 before I posted. I felt so strongly that I needed to go down to the end of the comments and respond right away.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 7:48 PM
horizontal rule
135

129: glow s/b mist.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 8:10 PM
horizontal rule
136

these guys have very cheap glasses:

http://www.zennioptical.com/home.php

I got these prescription sunglasses for 13 dollars:

http://www.zennioptical.com/product.php?productid=1618&cat=&page=1


Posted by: Lemmy caution | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 9:44 PM
horizontal rule
137

In my opinion, Stanley, you should have had a space on either side of the ellipsis in the post.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 9:58 PM
horizontal rule
138

This looks like an unlikely new trend:

http://thefastertimes.com/tv/2010/07/20/nba-jerseys-of-pitchfork/


Posted by: Lemmy caution | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 10:06 PM
horizontal rule
139

I actually just started wearing acuvue oasys contacts last year. As far as I can tell, the vision and comfort are the same,* but they're more difficult to put on and take out and they cost a lot more, and the solutions you're supposed to use with them also cost more. I think this comment should be appended to every comment where "acuvue oasys" comments.

*Supposedly they're healthier than the other ones I wear.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 10:59 PM
horizontal rule
140

I can't wear those Oasys ones. I've been wearing Acuvue 2 lenses since they started making them, and they've been trying to talk me into Oasys, but I refuse. They feel just awful to me. Maybe they've gotten better.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:07 PM
horizontal rule
141

Most effective comment spam ever?


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:11 PM
horizontal rule
142

I'm going to have to get new contacts before I go back to Canada, and my US prescription is the only one I have, so I will probably end up re-ordering the oasys. But when I finally see an optometrist up there, after a long wait because of the socialized medicine, I'm going to push them on whether the oasys is really better because I'd kind of like to go back to wearing the Acuvue 2.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 07-24-10 11:16 PM
horizontal rule
143

111: The Aviators or the Serengeti auto-darkening equivalents were great for my motorcycle + contact lens combination. No slipping down the nose, big enough to keep wind and grit out of the eyes, and not polarized so oil and water slicks on the road were visible.


Posted by: Biohazard | Link to this comment | 07-25-10 11:55 AM
horizontal rule
144

In my opinion, Stanley, you should have had a space on either side of the ellipsis in the post.

I think, deep down, I'm dissatisfied by the hellip command thingy and would prefer simply to put periods with a space on either side of each one. I vaguely recall that this was what the Chicago Manual of Style may have prescribed. So, like . . . this.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-25-10 2:47 PM
horizontal rule
145

it's vintage aviators or nothin' for me

Would that I could pull off aviators. I've got the wrong face shape, or something.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 9:26 AM
horizontal rule
146

I've always thought of aviators as 'twats' shades'; but ended up buying a pair recently [only thing in the shop that fitted my head, honest]. And now I have to deal with the cognitive dissonance raised by the fact that they actually sort of look OK.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 9:28 AM
horizontal rule
147

I've always thought of aviators as 'twats' shades'

To wit.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
148

But on the other hand, a twat I can get behind.

Or, uh...

Oh well. Swing low, sweet fruit.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 9:31 AM
horizontal rule
149

Why anyone would intentionally make themselves more like Posh Spice Jackie O. is beyond me eminently fathomable.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 9:33 AM
horizontal rule
150

From the link in 15:
WANT.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 10:43 AM
horizontal rule
151

150: Really? Hm. Gusty bus, I guess.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 10:47 AM
horizontal rule
152

151: A steam-driven gusty bus, by the looks of the spectacles in question.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 10:54 AM
horizontal rule
153

Not to wear in public -- I imagine few people could carry them off -- but the combination of the brass (?) and the turquoise/teal lenses is so pretty to look at and they're all nice and heavy-duty. The double-lens-flip-out-to-the-side thing: objectively cool.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 10:59 AM
horizontal rule
154

Besides, I need more pretty, non-functional items to sit on shelves.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 11:00 AM
horizontal rule
155

The double-lens-flip-out-to-the-side thing: objectively cool.

Agreed. Swingy moving parts = cool. Is there some sort of functionality to double lenses that I'm not getting off the top of my head? Maybe it's like the swimmers who practice with a drag suit or something.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 11:03 AM
horizontal rule
156

155: They're like spare tires in case one of the main lenses breaks.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 11:14 AM
horizontal rule
157

Or maybe to provide side protection, kind of like those visor things in cars.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 11:15 AM
horizontal rule
158

WANT.

WOW! Those are awesome, Kraab! Quick! Buy them, because I can't!

max
['Go Kraab.']


Posted by: max | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 11:51 AM
horizontal rule
159

115: I think it's so you can choose between single or double lens darkness.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 11:58 AM
horizontal rule
160

159 to 155, that is.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
161

158: Alas, I really can't justify spending a hundred bucks on them, especially when we've just moved into a new house and have a gazillion other things to buy. (Query: how in god's name does Big Linen get away with charging $200 for a duvet cover?!)


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 12:02 PM
horizontal rule
162

(Query: how in god's name does Big Linen get away with charging $200 for a duvet cover?!)

Ooh! I know! Answer: by selling them to people who know what a duvet is, own one (or more), and understand why a duvet would need a cover.

How'd I do?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 12:05 PM
horizontal rule
163

162: You're hired.


Posted by: Vladimir Linen | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 12:11 PM
horizontal rule
164

Don't you sass me, young man. You know you forked over some bucks for a futon cover.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 12:13 PM
horizontal rule
165

155-157: Apparently they were originally a bifocal alternative:

Patents were granted to Addison Smith in 1783 and to J.R. Richardson in London in 1797 for what could be called an alternative to bifocals. Each was comprised of an extra pair of lenses hinged to the main spectacles, the Addison Smith variety came down from above while the Richardson variety rotated in from the sides behind the distance correction, in order to correct for near work.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 12:19 PM
horizontal rule
166

I couple of months agoI lost my pair of Ray Bans that I had had since 1982. I think they were in the pocket of a jacket that went to the dry cleaner. I had bought them at the PX at Parris Island. I did not find five dollars.


Posted by: Tasseled Loafered Leech | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 12:19 PM
horizontal rule
167

that I had had since 1982

A year of many great beginnings, it must be said.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 12:24 PM
horizontal rule
168

I heard Stanley had like 30 goddamn beginnings.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 12:39 PM
horizontal rule
169

we've just moved into a new house

Hey, congratulations! Surviving a move deserves major kudos, whether or not it involved an actual home purchase.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 5:22 PM
horizontal rule
170

I heard Stanley had like 30 goddamn beginnings.

It's been done.


Posted by: The Pooka MacPhellimey | Link to this comment | 07-26-10 5:32 PM
horizontal rule
171

Data point!

One of the hipster-ish youths who works in my new office just came in wearing what appear to be genuine Ray-Ban Wayfarers, in some kind of a tortoiseshell kind of a colorway.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-27-10 8:36 AM
horizontal rule
172

I don't see tortoiseshell color.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-27-10 8:40 AM
horizontal rule
173

"Colorway"? Is that an industry term like "Mouthfeel"?


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 07-27-10 8:46 AM
horizontal rule
174

173: kinda.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-27-10 8:53 AM
horizontal rule
175

Sadly, Ray-Ban is now just Yet Another Brand owned by Luxottica, and even the current Wayfarer models are cheaply made knock-offs of the awesome old ones. FWIW, though, the really old-school ones were made of a particular acetate prone to disintegration, so a true vintage Wayfarer is probably a fleeting possession at best.

Also FWIW, Oakley is also owned by Luxottica, as are nearly all the mall sunglasses stores that push all these trends. It is safe to assume that once Ray-Ban "nostalgia" wears off Luxottica will be ready to push some other label (like Oakley).

Yes, I have spent entirely too much money on sunglasses over the years.


Posted by: fedward | Link to this comment | 07-27-10 2:57 PM
horizontal rule
176

fedward!


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-27-10 2:59 PM
horizontal rule
177

Steampunk Ghostbusters ad.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-27-10 9:38 PM
horizontal rule
178

I need to get sunglasses. I was nearly blinded driving around sunset today.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 07-27-10 9:44 PM
horizontal rule
179

Okay, this is the procedure for trendy glasses:

Look at all the fashion blogs. Find the most outre and borderline ugly frames that are still posted on a fashion blog.

Google around the internet to confirm that old people, the poor, early rappers, or people living at least fifty years ago wore this style and that no one in your generation does. For preference, there should be a discourse among middle-aged people about how this style is ugly, boring and old-fashioned.

Now find your frames! Tell everyone that you're just too dorky to pick fashionable ones, or that you used to wear glasses just like these in junior high because your family was too poor to afford trendy ones. (It is accepted to lie about this, because it is fashionable to claim to have been dorky and persecuted.)

Oh, and it's important that you be classically good-looking if you pick ugly glasses. Ugly glasses are only fashionable if they throw your perfect features into high relief. And you should be young--if you're old, people might think that you're wearing unfashionable glasses because you're unfashionable. If you happen to be old, you should get a very severe haircut, which may compensate. Also, if you are a woman in mannish glasses, you need to be clearly heterosexual--little features, long hair, kittenish manner with the men. Otherwise people will think you're a dyke who is wearing ugly glasses because she does not care about men.

The most important part is maintaining a narrative of your own naivete--you're just a nerdy, dorky outcast who doesn't have the fashion smarts to plan their look. If you can maintain this narrative while running a hipster fashion magazine, all the better.

Once two people in your social circle have similar glasses, you need to find a new pair. Try moving forward a decade--if your last glasses were seventies, try eighties. Or try moving genres, but pay attention to which genres are trendy--early rap, yes; mid-period punk no. It's also funny to wear the corporate-conformist glasses of twenty years ago, particularly if you're white and wealthy.


Posted by: Frowner | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 2:48 PM
horizontal rule
180

Oh, and it's important that you be classically good-looking if you pick ugly glasses. Ugly glasses are only fashionable if they throw your perfect features into high relief.

So, what you're saying is I'm going to need some really good-looking glasses.

I have noticed finding the really oversized glasses from the 80's adorable on women. I don't think they'd work on me, though.


Posted by: persistently visible | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 5:18 PM
horizontal rule
181

It is no good, at all, ultimately, to try to wear visually appealing glasses. I admit I still fret about it, every 10 years or so when I've been on a glasses-buying mission, but observe:

A few years ago a guy I was dating said, "You look cute in your glasses." A year later, another guy I was dating said, "We really need to get you some new glasses."

Same glasses I was wearing! Having turned this over in my mind a few times, with some amusement, I conclude: either a person could use this kind of thing to reflect on the person one is dating, or not. Either it means your glasses look stupid, or not.

179 is funny.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 5:35 PM
horizontal rule
182

A few years ago a guy I was dating said, "You look cute in your glasses." A year later, another guy I was dating said, "We really need to get you some new glasses."

Were they the same person?


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 6:09 PM
horizontal rule
183

Another guy. Not the same person. They partook of different aesthetics, to be sure, but it's not the case that the glasses went from being cute to being troublesome, as though they went out of style. They were the same semi-out-of-style, fairly noncommittal, but not that bad, glasses.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 6:30 PM
horizontal rule
184

I have noticed finding the really oversized glasses from the 80's adorable on women. I don't think they'd work on me, though.

This is just wrong. They are hideous and should be resisted at all times.


Posted by: Parenthetical | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 7:01 PM
horizontal rule
185

resisted at all times

Like, if you you were of glasses-wearing age in the 80s, you should have resisted them at the time.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 7:14 PM
horizontal rule
186

185: I had no control over it. They were forced on me. If I had my way, I'd burn every picture of me wearing them. (Ok, that goes too far, I was an adorable little kid with hideous glasses.) But seriously, wretched, wretched things.


Posted by: Parenthetical | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
187

I was an adorable little kid with hideous glasses.
So, per 179.5, you were terribly fashionable as a child, is what you're saying.


Posted by: persistently visible | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 11:21 PM
horizontal rule
188

I not so long ago saw some old pictures of myself from my glasses wearing days in junior high. The glasses were huge, but not stylistically in tune with any particular decade. They were really unfashionably hideous. But they were functional: I can wear smaller glasses now only because they've created thinner materials that work on prescriptions as strong as mine.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 07-28-10 11:38 PM
horizontal rule
189

I managed to find an extremely appealing and apparently fashionable (in that people occasionally comment on them, including the very fashion-forward teen Christian rapper I tutor so maybe in fact I'm in the unfashionably fashionable category) pair of glasses when I got new frames last year and now I know that whatever I get next year will be a step down because I just lucked into these.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 07-29-10 5:37 AM
horizontal rule