The boots suck, and the look sucks. If you want to be horsey, move. I don't know what D-list (seriously, isn't that a potentially great nickname?) could be thinking.
There are some great shots of sharply dressed old dudes on there.
Yeah, agree that the old dudes are the best shots.
the boots are AWESOME. and she's gorgeous. and you're clearly insane. just for that comment, i'm going to mack on w-lfs-n.
I agree, having boots the same color and texture as one's hair is definitely something to strive for.
Let's not go nuclear so fast, Catherine.
Sharp-dressed old dudes are always the best.
I read The Sartorialist regularly, even though I frequently disagree with the local assessments of what is attractive. I'm also struck by how frequently some rather ordinary and lame garment shows up there which turns out to be something extremely expensive. Clearly there's something about the expensiveness that is visible, if only you have the eye to see it.
I am coming round to dapper old-dude style. I bought a vintage Crombie overcoat and some cashmere lined leather gloves for winter, and now I feel, well, less scruffy than normal.
I have a neighbor, probably around 70 years-old, who wears a hat and a three-piece suit when he's walking his dogs.
9: thing is, if you dress like that when you are 30, you can't help but look like a wanker. At 60, you can totally pull it off.
This dude looks as if he's in the 50s.
re: 12
Yeah, a bit of that style goes a long way. Totally going 100% for it, you can look like a wanker.
That said, I used to know a guy years and years ago who always wore vintage tweed three piece suits. This was a working class guy from Glasgow, but he totally pulled it off. He couldn't have pulled it off in Oxford. He'd have just looked a tosser.
Concept: pictures of w-lfs-n and Catherine engaged in sexual intercourse, with captions in the style of the Sartorialist.
you're banned from the flophouse, FL.
I never see sharp-dressed old dudes around Palo Alto, especially not wearing hats. Is it wrong of me to miss Hyde Park because old black dudes always wear hats?
That dude has a terrific eye for clothes. I loved just about all those pics, especially of the Milan girl with the two amazing outfits.
14:agreed it can be location dependent
For a second I thought this was a Joe Tex reference.
"Say man, don't walk ahead of that woman like she don't belong to you!
Just cause hers got them little skinny legs."
Old guys dress well because they've figured out (some/slutty) women care about clothes.
This is also the secret to the "women only care about money" thing. Money helps people dress better.
"See that boy with that guitar
Hes got skinny legs like I always wanted
A girlfriend in his car cause hes got
Skinny legs like I always wanted
Sister look at me again
Youd love me if I were as skinny as him
And see that boy with that guitar
Hes got a shirt and tie like I always wanted
A girlfriend in his car cause hes got
A shirt and tie like I always wanted
Sister look at me again
Youd love me if I were a dresser like him"
I revise 13 to note that the glasses frames would have to be changed.
This is also the secret to the "women only care about money" thing. Money helps people dress better.
I'm inclined to think it's (predominately) the other way around: dressing well signals wealth.
4: Jeebus. Escalate much?
(Ah. ogged said the same. Don't care. Also, I intended no comment about the way the woman looked. But the look is ludicrous.)
it's a classic black dress, coat, and nice boots - that's ludicrous?
20, 21 Is that an oldish song? Because I never could understand why Robbins called his book by that title. If it was a song reference that would clear up the confusion.
Money helps people dress better
s/b "Dressing well is a way of signaling wealth".
31: well s/b expensively. It isn't the same thing.
Everyone knows it's possible to dress extremely well without a lot of money -- although you do need to trade time in order to do so.
I'm generally with the 'dressing well signals wealth' commentators though.
24, I thought it was a Lyle Lovett reference as well.
30:
It's a sixties song, prob. Joe Tex's biggest hit. Good Atlantic soul. I'd have to assume the Robbins title is a reference to the song.
Yeah, of course dressing well, in a certain manifestation of "well" (good suits) signals wealth. (Although in all honesty, a lot of poorish old guys wear old suits, and it looks charming as hell.)
No one ever gets my jokes. Pout.
21 -- Yeah -- looking at Joe Tex's dates, I'm going to aver that a reference to the Tom Robbins book Skinny Legs and All is indirectly a reference to the Joe Tex song "Skinny Legs and All". Thanks for the data, TomF.
This thread reminded me that a somewhat dorky guy I went to school with is now a big fashion industry guy. Fashion editor for a couple of different major style mags, consultant to various big designers, etc. Which is something of an achievement coming from a small industrial town in Scotland.
I like how 12 contrasts looking like a wanker with pulling it off.
re: 40
Practice makes perfect ...
This post reminded me that I really wanted the J. Crew sherpa fleece hoodie. I saw it in my roommate's J. Crew catalogue which arrived just a few days ago. I was thinking, "who am i gong to have to have gay sex with to get this thing?" but I checked the site and it's already sold out. Damnit. Why must I be cursed with such good taste?
D-list:
You're OK with a dress, leggings, and what amount to thigh boots? What has happened to the younger generation? She looks like a little girl who got into her mother's closet. Agree with Joe D on the Girl from Milan (esp. top pic.). Also like Philly 2, and love, love, love the Keds for some reason.
(NB: I'm no clothes horse, and D-list might be. But she's still deeply wrong here.)
My point was more that you can also dress badly, but expensively, and totally signal wealth.
44: In which case you look like a wanker, which is not how to score the quality ladies.
I like the suit of the guy linked to in 13. This post makes me want to buy clothes.
I do think some mens fashion looks better on tall people.
45: neither is signaling wealth, generally.
maybe i'm just influenced by the fact that today i'm wearing a somewhat-similar outfit - black dress, black tights, and flat black boots, with long coat. i'm certainly no fashion expert, but i just really like that look.
She looks fantastic, Catherine; this is just SCMT failing the cyborg/human test, once again.
re: 45
Unfortunately, empirical evidence suggests that quite a lot of wankers are a major hit with the ladies.
Whatever, riding crop chick. This, people. This.
Swoon.
Colorful accessories guy from Nov. 30 looks great. I think the jacket and pose in Philly 2 are horrible, however.
Those direct to image links don't work. For me anyway.
yeah, don't link directly to blogspot images, you can't view them that way.
I think I hate myself for liking J. Crew. At the same time: sale!
48. hey, that's an attractive dress. Move over w-lfs-n.
55, 56: Copy the link and paste it in a new window. Works fine.
Catherine, that's a gorgeous dress.
What's going on? I can view the picture linked in 53. It is indeed attractive.
the green jacket lady is hott and lovely, but i could never pull off that look. maybe that's why i like horse lady better - more accessible and more easily done.
I continute to loathe Philly 2, though I am willing to concede that I might like the jacket itself in a different context. The look as a whole there, though, makes me want to throw her under a bus. Also, leggings are not pants.
Oh I see -- the reason I can view it is, I clicked the link in my RSS reader, which opened the jpg in my browser, which meant the browser was sending a request header with no referring page, just as if I had copied the link and pasted it into the address box.
Phila2 is hotter than Phila1, but then I don't like the backwards-coat-wearing look the latter seems to be sporting.
B., if you've got the hips for that jacket, which I assume to be the case (based entirely on inference), swoon is a good description.
One of the things I like about green jacket look is that it would flatter both the petite and the curvy. Also, drape. (Which is what I like about Catherine's dress, as opposed to horse lady's.)
Philly2 could do with a smaller pair of sunglasses.
Philly 1 appears to be wearing a thick throw rug as a jacket.
And less of a smug, self-satisfied expression.
57, 61 - thanks! if there are any atlanta readers, it's from a boutique down there called rene rene in little five points. these two dresses are also from there. pretty affordable, too.
65: Definitive proof of that outfit's fabulousness.
72: Teh awesome! I'll be there in January. Also, my sister has been bitching that all the clothes in Atlanta are ugly--I'll steer her there.
What is Phily2's jacket made out of? Boiled fleece?
(Gah.)
48: So, several things:
(a) The joy of the internetical community is that you can't see how I dress--I'm no expert.
(b) I personally like black dresses. I like leggings. Don't love the boots, but whatever. It's the combination of the three that strikes me as mildly tragic.
(c) The dress in the picture you link, and the woman in the dress in the picture, look great. OTOH, the problem is that you're kind of good-looking, so it's hard to make judgments about your attire. You could wear a crown of tampons and most people would think it looked nice.
(d)Re #49, the first thing anyone should learn is to not take sartorial advice from an Iranian man unless you like the Eurotrash look. But the Iranian women I've known (small sample) dressed exceptionally well, so this one goes both ways (like ogged).
53: See 43.
Complete accord with 69 and 71.
Huh. 78 was me.
Also, a crown of tampons actually sounds like an awesome idea.
Tim, please return to talking about sports. 77 is making me very uncomfortable.
That's Timbot's longest comment in months. I think his cyborg masters are panicking about his blown cover.
81: especially if they are interspersed with special internet-only order xtra-xtra-xtral large condoms.
75 - tell your sister to try east atlanta village as well. there's a boutique there called pieces of adrene i bought stuff at nearly weekly.
Iranian women often dress like Eurotrash as well, but it's not so stigmatized a look for women.
Iranian women often dress like Eurotrash as well
Boy howdy.
83: It is telling that you think the word "masters" can be usefully applied to the Borg. You will not be assimilated. (But then, post-Family Circle discussion, I guess we knew already knew that.)
Wait, so the fabled "no makeup, no heels" stuff really just means "no Eurotrash"?
86: Dunno. I think "Eurotrash" implies "faux-slutty" in some way, and the Iranian women I've known were pretty conservative in both behavior and attire. But who am I to disagree with the faithless son in #87?
Well, I have dress like Eurotrash in my time as well, ogged, if you were taking offense on behalf of your womenfolk.
I wasn't taking offense, I was agreeing with you.
77(c) has to be the best come-on I've ever heard. "Crown of tampons" is light-years ahead of "nice shoes".
I went to Thanksgiving dinner at the home of the Pistachio King of Iran, and there was an Iranian woman there wearing a bizarre, gigantic, mink collared sweater thing. Surely, I thought, she will take this off to eat---but no. (It was a rather unpleasant evening all 'round.)
Pistachio King of Iran
Is he related to the Lemon Ice King of Corona?
I also beheld a nose job the likes of which I had only seen on "Awful Plastic Surgery"; it was on a very nice woman, so I felt bad about having been tranfixed by it.
This comment probably belongs on "Friday Confession."
Seriously, Iranian women (and men, actually) are some of the worst dressers in the world. Farsi makes no distinction between "gauche," "eye-catching," and "tasteful."
(Who is not related to Rosie the Queen of Corona BTW)
100(!) -- because those are not Farsi words, you mean?
100: But how many words does it have for snow?
103 -- "snow" s/b "sand"
100: The use of "actually" is a nice touch. Actually.
You're much better situated to judge the women than I am, but I so don't have that impression. But I've only known a few Iranian women, and they were part of a greater ME contingent, so...who knows.
Farsi makes no distinction between "gauche," "eye-catching," and "tasteful."
Therefore, the concepts must not exist!
97: Once went to a Thanksgiving where a friend of the hosting family, just married, brought his wife, a middle-aged Egyptian woman. And her outfit was so absurd, I believe it involved wearing underwear on the outside, as then-fashionable for teenagers due to Madonna but in a lunatic interpretation, that the whole affair was acutely uncomfortable as a result. Fortunately — this wouldn't have happened at my parent's house — it was a drinking family, and I could feel better fast.
This will teach me never to accept a compliment on my clothing from a person of the Iranian persuasion.
Yes, JM, a simple "I'm sorry, but I can't accept that," is the standard polite response.
If I refuse the compliment three times, will they stop offering it?
You might have to take a compliment on an accessory to placate them.
But then I have to reciprocate with a compliment on something of theirs!
110 -- I think after you refuse them 3 times, they crucify you. Or something.
If you're going to be among us, you need to learn to lie like us, JM.
Either that, or I have to embrace my inner cultural imperialist.
Maybe you can just say "I like your nose job" and let them assume it's a compliment.
I just know Ogged is dying that nobody is acknowledging his new acronym. While I do love to watch him squirm, I will say that I approve. If only you'd come up with it sooner.
It's not in the Unfogged culture to acknowledge my good works, Becks. In other words, you're banned.
Nah, busy on Thursday, but thanks for asking.
I was going to explain 119 but I think it's more fun just to go to bed now, leaving you hanging.
Wait, 119 actually stands for something? I'm impressed.
I was thinking:
And not in that good way that means I don't have to deal with the [something] [something--commentariat, maybe] when the shit goes down.
Seems reasonable. Implies some inconsistency in representing function words, though.
I think she was borrowing the ANGW from me.
"ANITGW" would abbreviate "and not in that good way".
Undoubtedly. I think the S should be "site," btw.
Yes!
Still can't figure out the HC though.
"howling commenters" seems too random (and of course they wouldn't be able to howl when the site is down).
No, that's probably it. They howl in comments at her site.
Ok, Becks in the morning, we say:
And not in that good way that means I don't have to deal with the howling commenters when the site goes down.
Damn, you guys really can read my mind by now. HC = hosting company but otherwise correct.
I knew it wasn't "howling commenters"; I think that guess probably tells us about ogged, and that's about it.
Speaking of hosting, I can't get over how well the site is working now.
Me neither! I think this has been our highest traffic week ever, too.
Is it too much to hope that we could revert the "ARCHIVED COMMENTS" hack? Mind you, I don't really want to screw with a good thing.
Actually, the hack is gone--the "archived" comments are in the database and being used to build those pages, but it seemed to us that closing old threads hadn't bothered people too much, and the benefits in spam-blocking outweighed the potential gains of re-opening.
I think this has been our highest traffic week ever, too.
Seriously? How much traffic goes through here?
142 - We usually get 12,000 - 15,000 page loads a day (this excludes RSS but includes people refreshing their browsers to see new comments). This week we've had between 22,000 - 25,000 loads per day.
Can you tell if they're newcomers, or just obsessively refreshing oldtimers?
Usually when we have a traffic spike, it's because of a link from a major site but this has happened absent of that. We've had a slight uptick in unique readers this week (more like 5000 per day rather than 4000) but I bet most of the traffic is just people refreshing more than ususal. It also could be because some of the hoohole gaps are closing, causing more searches that hit the archives.
Huh, interesting. I actually did say to myself yesterday that the comment-counts on posts were up, and thought, well, that's just crazy anecdotal eye-balling. So I was intrigued when you said the data back that up. Thanks.
Of course, it may be that the comment-counts are not actually up, I just thought they were, and the data on site traffic so happen to bolster a story that isn't really there....
But if I keep commenting, I'll drive up the comment-counts, and ratify my suspicion....
Definitely more comments lately. It seems like a couple of weeks ago, we magically acquired a bunch of new regulars. Not quite sure where they came from.
Little early to be Becks's style, isn't it?
Ogged, it's just "Becks style".
Little judgmental, aren't we? After all, that was after noon, Unfogged-time.
If I'm feeling a little Becks-style, it's a natural high. Although, right this minute, it's not for fun, but for work.
It seems wrong to give away location information like that, ogged. Nobody else knew slol was in Hawaii until your comment.
But there must always be some flux and transition. A fair number of people regular a few months ago have almost dropped out, and others, like me, will come back after several weeks off, but not expect to stay long.
Indeed, my apologies. Natural highs for everyone!
Natural highs for everyone!
Cheapskate.
Weekends sure are slow around here.
Natural highs are easier to come by if you get wicked stoned first.
I made another batch of that no-knead bread, this time with an extra step that improved the flavor and was hardly any extra work at all. The new timeline goes like this:
Evening 1: Mix together 100 grams of the flour, 100 grams of the water, and 1/8 t. of the yeast. Cover and let sit on the countertop.
In the morning: Dump in the remainder of the flour and water, the other 1/8 t. of yeast, and all of the salt (more salt than is recommeneded in the recipe, to my mind, is best -- I think I used about 8 grams). Mix together, cover, and walk away.
Evening 2: EITHER proceed with the recipe as written, with the spreading out and folding up and baking, and so on, OR (best) put in the fridge for up to 24 hours before going on to that part.
I can't remember what precipitated my move to becoming a new semi-regular.
Why did I start commenting more? I tired of reintroducing myself every two months. Figure if I'm around more, I won't have to introduce myself so much.
redfoxtail - I clicked to your food blog a little while back and learned from it what fresh lychees looked like. Thanks for answering something I'd been wondering -- I'd been buying them from the street vendor outside my building for a while but had no idea what they were and he doesn't really speak English so the few times I'd asked, we both walked away confused. (I'd had canned lychees before a couple of times but never made the connection between the two since the canned ones are much sweeter and have a different texture.)
Can you tell if they're newcomers, or just obsessively refreshing oldtimers?
Mostly it's me because I reduced my meds dose.
Man, fresh lychees are really, really tasty.
I had a mystery street food when I was in Izmir, Turkey last year, and I still don't know what it is. It was green and crunchy and kind of citrus-y tasting, and looked kind of like a giant bean. The guy would salt them before serving them in a coned piece of newspaper. No peeling required. Any ideas?
165 - It's called The Hungry Tiger, I think? But I can't get the link to work right now.
Fresh lychees are tasty but their texture is almost distractingly sexual.
their texture is almost distractingly sexual
I always think they look like eyeballs or little alien brains, myself.
When I think sex, I think alien brains. Don't you?
Surely you don't mean you prefer pornography to sex, b.
No, I mean I keep my eyes open, Teo.
Does anyone else want to try explaining things to young Teo, here?
Don't worry, I'll figure it out in due time.
174 - I usually am not wearing glasses or contacts at that point and can't see much beyond general shapes and blurs, so other senses are far more important to me.
Maybe that's why my sexual experiences with glasses-wearing men have been more successful. They usually take them off, and then they can't see me. Excellent.
Dude, that's some serious myopia. Or else some seriously long cocks/tongues.
181: Dude? I hope you're not feeling down about your unexpected singletude. (Apologies if I'm misreading that. Or if I'm not and misstepped anyway.)
Speaking, just briefly, of the original post, I really really love this woman's shoes. I went to Bloomingdale's this afternoon to see if anyone was selling them, and the only pair that was even close was by Channel and cost about $800. I'll have to scour the old-lady thrift stores and see if I get lucky, I guess.
Or so the mullahs would have you believe.
183: I assume this is the source of leblanc's mood.
184: This is far and away my favorite guy from November. I would love to be able to pull that shirt/jacket off. If he had the Brit umbrella, he'd be really rolling.
Fresh lychees are indeed tasty, and sexy-eyball-ish.
I do have a food blog, and it is called The Hungry Tiger, but I've been increasingly terrible about posting anything to it, to the point of nigh-complete abandonment.
Please stop objectifying, B. Plus, his forehead is gigantic and it looks like his chin or jaw is fucked up.
Yeah, that guy is working a look that's pretty tough to pull off succesfully.
He has something of a lantern jaw. I like that sort of thing.
188: Who, me? Probed? Or was that a threat? Because for all you know, I might like nothing more.
194: Nice hair, though. For as long as it lasts.
195: Hm. I can't find the recent comment where I said I might have to invest in strapons in preparation for the inevitable Ben seduction in DC, but anyway, now I have two reasons, huh?
I would love to be able to pull that shirt/jacket off.
By this point Tim's desire to see another man's naked torso surprises no one.
198. f'reels. I think it's up to our strong heterosexuality to keep this place from turning into a den of queers.
Most queers prefer the gambol of the rumpus room to the solemnity of the den.
Or so the mullahs would have you believe.
197: Are you trying to woo me, B? Because I run fast* and like to play hard-to-get.
*For a cripple.
Okay, with the whole "dress signals wealth" thing, how do we think this works? I have a variety of theories, some of them more obviously wrong than the others:
1. For reasons of fashion or perhaps occasionally of actual quality, nice looking clothes are expensive. Thus, only when you have more money [or time to hunt around the right secondhand shops] can you get individually nicer-looking things.
2. We associate the "nice" look with "what the wealthy are wearing these days", so you want to dress like whatever that style is. If you grew up with that, it's natural, and if you didn't, you have to explicitly learn what bits are the look. If you have what amounts to clothing-aesthetics-autism, forget it.
3. A wealthy person is likely to be good-looking and thus make the clothes they wear look good.
4. A wealthy person can pay someone with actual clothing talent to pick/design a wardrobe for them.
I think I mostly believe in #2, and that #4 exists. If I have more money than I know what to do with (which isn't much, but it's relative to what I know), how do I make #4 happen, even in small doses?
202: Nah. Just saying I'm here to help.
With something the mullahs would have us believe.
203: I'm confused. Are we conflating two ideas here? Because these thread started out being about fashion, and I assocate "dress signals wealth" with quality far more than fashion sense or trendiness.
Yes, people with limited means can put together amazing outfits as long as they have enough time. And wealthy people can buy "fashion" either in the sense of having enough money to buy whatever is a la mode*, or (if aesthetics are not their strong point) paying for a fashion advisor.
But that is different from the judgments that even I, with a very limited eye for clothing, can make. You can gauge the weight of fabric or the tailored fit without understanding fashion at all. And that has nothing to do with trendiness and everything to do with paying handsomely for things that will wear well for the next ten years.
Depends on the social circle, too. Sometimes the wealth-signal is "I can afford the newest and flashiest;" sometimes it's much more understated.
*French speakers feel free to criticize the lazy typing; w-lfs-nians feel free to remark on nonstandard punctuation.
Maybe there are two ideas there. I'm not as certain as you are about how separate they are. I certainly do not have the eye for the weight or fit of clothes; to my eye, it's almost all an issue of fashion. Since I don't have much sense for that, either.... well, I stick to what I've learned isn't outright embarrasing.
The virtue of the "I can afford the newest and flashiest" is that I will occasionally recognize it, so if I were to give someone sums of money to accomplish it for me, I'd have a better chance of judging if they did anything helpful.
