Does your day job justify your "workwear?"

[geneticdrifter]

created this to extend a conversation started herehttp://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showthread.php?t=17302&page=807.

i'm just interested in people's thoughts on the current trend in fashion towards workwear; as well as the often had conversation/debate/argument over the quality and/or perceived value of the "$300 blue jean."

Thoughts, comments, suggestions, rude gestures....

Please. ???

p.s. I created the new thread b/c there are some intelligent folks in this collection of tubes. lets try and showcase that here. no need to make it personal.

PEACE

[mpcec]

Really sick of this conversation/debate. This has been discussed in waywt chat edition, many threads in superdenim, and style forum.

e: Kind of hypocritical now that I'm participating haha.

[geneticdrifter]

you don't have to join in, its okay.

I know its been done before but its an ongoing and evolving idea/debate/conversation. and i started it in trash and everything...

and since you posted you might as well give an opinion. we're all bored here...

PEACE

[mpcec]

I posted my opinion in this thread, so did a lot of other guys, worthwhile reading if you're interested.

http://www.styleforum.net/showthread.php?t=146764

I disagree in saying it's an evolving debate, I think it's been talked about to death and every possible angle has been covered and represented.

[geneticdrifter]

nice link thanks

edit: read the linked thread. good stuff. your posts especially. The average consumer is oblivious to the social conditions of his/her own time period, much less the time period from which their clothes are modeled.

you have any thoughts on the compromise an otaku based brand has to make in order stay profitable? basically in some ways are they watering themselves down by relying on a certain percentage of beast-motivated purchasing? skewing their own image in some way?

[coleslawyum]

You shouldn't worry about trends. Trends especially in the US come and go like piss in the wind. Stores like SE and BiG are actually benefiting from thus recent interest in repro workwear. However repro workwear have never been or might never be the trend in Japan. Most people I've spoken to in Japan do even know half these brands.

All brands have to make some sacrifice to stay business. American business does help some of these Japanese companies, but we purchase differently than the average ameji buyer.

Don't worry this trend will die in a year or two.

[mpcec]

you have any thoughts on the compromise an otaku based brand has to make in order stay profitable? basically in some ways are they watering themselves down by relying on a certain percentage of beast-motivated purchasing? skewing their own image in some way?

I might be confused on what you're asking but is your question if the product is cheapened by the fact that it's trendy, or being consumed by "hypebeasts." If so then I would say no, I'm happy that they can rely on/ or expand their product line as a result of increased stockists (which comes as a result of a widened consumer base.) Ultimately this gives me more opportunity to buy something that might otherwise have been sold out quickly.

For example in the past couple of years WWM and EG have picked up a lot more stockists, and this is great for me because stockists buy different pieces and there are in general more pieces available. I don't care much for exclusivity or rareness, I only care if I can get my hands on what I want.

[geneticdrifter]

true i agree mpecc. more items, i.e. more garment art, more widely available is good. and i speak as a devil's advocate here, you don't think at some point the consumerism will cheapen the brands? having to supply the stockists and the people's demands.

what happens when the 'beasts buy more than the people that like the stuff? i guess i am assuming theses companies would act like the average american company...

i love the idea of an artist who does work he might not like in order to further his dream. in order to make better art, but i don't believe that will necessarily happen. i guess i'm being overly cynical.

I really created this thread hoping to get some spill over from the "spat" in the selfedge thread. i know how i feel. i'm more interested in how the other folks here think. there are some strong opinions on this subject.

PEACE

[TTM]

I use my brain

So no.

[shea butter]

when I spend more than $100 on any garment of clothing I expected it to last as long as possible. I only shop for garments that last as long as possible.

[geneticdrifter]

so do 300 hundred dollar jeans last longer than 6-7 pairs of STF, in your opinion?

does the price of these $100+ items equate directly to their value in your opinion? is a $150 shirt worth 150% more than a $100 shirt. will it last 150% longer, in your opinion?

again, just interested in how people feel concerning this subject. was really wanting to take a conversation from the SE thread, and move it here so as not to "derail" kiya's thread.

more comments. please...

in the SF thread linked here the idea of posing or being a faker, when wearing certain clothes. how you guys feel about that?

PEACe

[goat]

i'm a stripper, so i have some pretty unique work attire.

[geneticdrifter]

@goat. - so you where that around every day right? to make sure you look like your profession? lol. funny stuff, plus rep.

@haploid - well said. i would add that for myself value is my first concern. but its hard to put value on something you appreciate as art in a way. I don't think my Sams are really worth 300 but considering i can't get the same type of garment for any less, there are valued as such by default. value like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

neg rep for starting a thread in 'trash to avoid derailing another more specified thread, is some next level 'ish.

PEACE

[iamstarwars]

Did you start this thread in supertrash or has it been moved here?

[sawyer]

so do 300 hundred dollar jeans last longer than 6-7 pairs of STF, in your opinion?

in terms of durability, any correlation with price is imagined. i work on old ships, and the wear and tear on clothes is comparable to the construction trade, the army, firefighting or lumberjacking. that said, a pair of $15 wranglers can last years. the only reason you pay a lot for brands like EG, mountain research, etc is for their artisan, aesthetic or geopolitical value. anyone who would try to rationalize their purchase by appealing to some quality of durability would be surprised if they decided to trade out their wares for something from walmart

more than anything else, crotch blow out is what destroys a pair of jeans on sufu, and thats mostly cause people wear em so tight.

does the price of these $100+ items equate directly to their value in your opinion? is a $150 shirt worth 150% more than a $100 shirt. will it last 150% longer, in your opinion?

no, no and no

- the durability of an article of clothing has more to do with the frequency and nature of its use than its stitching or materials. there are also points of strain on a shirt or a pair of jeans, especially when the cut/fit are particular. like the armpit of a shirt or the crotch of a pair of jeans, these parts get more chafe and strain than other parts, and are liable to break down in ANY article of clothing.

there is, however, a little correlation between the "soul" an article of clothing has and its price. youre paying for an idiosyncrasy the designer puts into the design and the experience behind the hands that make them. you may also be paying for the quality of the fabric itself (this is hard to establish in my own research) and/or a fabric treatment.

WWM and EG borrow and and expand the ideas of their brand's heritage, i wouldnt consider them practical workwear. carhartt, dickies, wolverine and timberland more or less have a monopoly on what tradespeople wear at work.

as for reproductions of antique clothes, people still seek an aesthetic, although an old one. the premium paid is for the research and labor in resurrecting the clothes.

in the SF thread linked here the idea of posing or being a faker, when wearing certain clothes. how you guys feel about that?

i dont really think people should have to justify wearing the clothes they do, but if they might, the only points of concern should be:

- the person/people that own and operate the brand and the store you are buying it from are good people

- you dig the aesthetic

workwear has this complication of sharing a history of manual labor, which is confounded with the whole idea of the protestant work ethic and being american, which creates all these unneccesary debates about authenticity that dont occur in other aesthetics (excepting streetwear)

[geneticdrifter]

Did you start this thread in supertrash or has it been moved here?

i started it. in an effort to continue the conversation without shitting up kiya's thread. its all documented in the threads. gotta go.

PEACE.

[Bigyen]

people who wear Ed Hardy suck... ALWAYS.

[fix.]

i started it. in an effort to continue the conversation without shitting up kiya's thread. its all documented in the threads. gotta go.

PEACE.

that wasn't the question.

PEACE.

[kyo]

is a $150 shirt worth 150% more than a $100 shirt. will it last 150% longer, in your opinion?

A $150 dollar shirt costs only 33% more than a $100 shirt.

[fallen angels]

is a $150 shirt worth 150% more than a $100 shirt.

A $150 dollar shirt costs only 33% more than a $100 shirt.

you guys, a $150 shirt costs 50% more than a $100 shirt.

PEACE

[geneticdrifter]

that wasn't the question.

PEACE.

sorry i meant i started it here. i don't know what that whole movement of posts was about.

A $150 dollar shirt costs only 33% more than a $100 shirt.

you guys, a $150 shirt costs 50% more than a $100 shirt.

PEACE

sorry, math isn't my strongest suit.

and sawyer i agree, saving one point really. walmart quality sucks. shoes, clothes whatever. electronics even. this is from personal experience. but i agree with your points about monetary value. stf are the best example i think. $300 dollars worth of STF would last longer than $300 jeans. not the same aesthetic or materials, at all tho.

PeACE.

[billy.]

this is fucking stupid.

PEaCE.

[geneticdrifter]

that is true, but why are people so fired up about it then? this conversation, and really the one on the selfedge thread, help to create discourse. this is good.

i think we should talk about the difference between, beasting over something and being a hypebeast. i think we shoudl talk about consumerism, and about how poor people have disadvantages from becoming hypebeasts, if you catch my drift. Is guerilla marketing and the drive for sales going to cheapen the brands eventually? or will it bring more styles, more diversity and etc?

i beast over this stuff. i'm sorry.

this is fucking stupid.

piece.

[sawyer]

the fact that the things i said in my post arent self evident mean you are either young, naive, insecure and/or are easily manipulated by brand marketing

that is why this discussion is stupid

PEACE

BOOYAH

[billy.]

THE SECOND YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT YOUR WEARING YOUR A FUCKING BEAST.

[zissou]

To answer the OP's question:

Yes. I am not allowed to work naked.

[zissou]

Regarding your (in my opinion) extreme and somewhat self-righteous characterization:

taking it to the wire...

.

no one is asking you to justify your clothes. i just want to know why you judge people by theirs? if i did dress like a lumberjack, why does that mean i want to be one? i don't think we as a group of people should be judging people by their clothes. whats fake about me wanting to be a lumberjack in form but not function? my freedom of choice is fake???

my two cents. i agree wear what you want how you want. object to other people's idea of fashion, a.k.a. whats cool, popular, hip. but judging people by there clothes in any way not concerning fashion i think is somewhat.. say bigoted for lack of a better word. i see labeling someone as fake as a small skip from labeling them as gay or stupid or arrogant. etc.

Of the quote from me on styleforum:

As far as escapism, it just seems so fake. To use your example of white collared harley riders, I always have to roll my eyes when I see clean-cut guys with the pristine Harley jackets, stone washed jeans, and white sneakers riding down the road on their shiny Harley. I'm not saying they don't have a right to ride a Harley, it's just that they really look like they should be riding a Honda Gold Wing. With any style one chooses to wear, it helps if it actually fits with the lifestyle and possibly the surroundings in which one lives.

You completely left out the context. It was in a thread created by a guy writing a research paper on why people wear Americana/workwear. He brought up the idea of escapism as it applies to white-collar bikers, and I was offering my meager two cents. So don't act like I sit around judging people all the time by what they wear.

this is fucking stupid.

Agreed. I give this thread *

[cash]

I think most of this conversation, with regard to the conversation here and not at SF, is a lot like what happens in underground-music cultures where prestige is derived from being one of the first to adopt and authenticity has a premium -- for example in Hip-Hop-based subcultures, coming from an urban setting is superior to coming from the suburbs. So, here on SUFU, you have some members that were the first to adopt and among these first-to-adopt, some have experience in "blue collar" trades -- however, with a few exceptions, it seems that very few have adopted a true "blue collar" lifestyle, it seems to be mostly something they did in college. So, these people get a lot of identity from being a denimhead with some blue-collar experiences. Now that "americana" is all the rage -- you can buy selvage at the mall -- the original adopters, in some cases, feel the need to separate themselves from the crowd. Thus, they start to criticize authenticity -- you're a hypebeast, you're blowing the spot, you're not hardcore, you've never worked a day in your life, etc. etc. (personal favorite was a guy trying to justify the need for smokejumper boots because of the strains of life in an urban jungle).

My take: It's a fucking post-modern world. When you're listening to rockabilly or the blues or Hank Williams on an iPod, it starts to get really hard to label and narrowly define things. So, not to call out Ziss, but in this world, does a Harley really mean anything? When you can roll into Hot Topic with a credit card and come out a cutter punk, is their really any authenticity left? I remember when my friends discovered the whole punk thing in the late '80s. We all got really obsessed with it. I mean, I saw a buddy throw away a crate of Beatles LPs. Rules, the cult of cool, authenticity, started to limit our experiences.

Drink the Kool-Aid boys, just don't drink the whole bottle.

[zissou]

So, not to call out Ziss, but in this world, does a Harley really mean anything?

No, not at all. When asked what my opinion was, I offered it. But all along the way, I have made a point to state that my opinion doesn't really matter and I don't really care what people do or wear. It's just that some folks have taken my opinion to the extreme and practically called me a bigot, which is laughable.

I like what I like, and frankly I'd be happy if more people were into the stuff I like. At least then I'd have someone to talk to in person about clothing without them instantly thinking I am weird or gay.

[geneticdrifter]

that wasn't the question.

PEACE.

A $150 dollar shirt costs only 33% more than a $100 shirt.

the fact that the things i said in my post arent self evident mean you are either young, naive, insecure and/or are easily manipulated by brand marketing

that is why this discussion is stupid

PEACE

BOOYAH

who said they were self evident? you need to calm down with the assumptions and such. shit up the thread all you want. call it retarded twice an hour. but don't start making assumptions about this and that. some people are ignorant. whether you like it or not that doesn't make them stupid.

you guys can be so judgemental. you see someone's join date and assume they are twelve year old idiots.

the whole point of this conversation was to create a functional discourse. i'm not trying to get your opinions so i can co-opt them. or trying to learn from any of you because i think you are inherently filled with knowledge. I'm just looking for a broad sampling of people with passionate opinions.

Fashion philosphy. zen and the art of raw denim.

@zissou - i'm not trying to fight with you or single you out; hence why i didn't quote you from SF. I don't object to what you wear or why you wear it. i don't care if you think the harley guy is fake. I'm just interested if you see the irony in that. ??? you seem like an intelligent person and you have some morality too you i presume, (the marriage equality comment) so who are we to say someone is fake. Call them a poseur, or what not? yes the might be trying to escape. they might buy their clothes specifically for how they feel in them. but that is still usage of the clothes? they still enjoy them as much as you, right? so why is he any more fake than any of us?

if you really think you're some how less fake b/c of your job and history than okay i accept your opinion. i just don't see how you can justify one group of people being more entitled to wear a set of garments over another. or how one group of people is more entitled to have a certain marital status that another.

@cash - +rep. couldn't have said it better. thanks for sharing your opinion in succinct non abrasive manner.

the drive to authenticity is a drive to replication. this is the matrix 101.

anyone ever read any Baudrillard? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard#Simulacra_and_Simulation

.diputs si sihT.

.ecaeP