Welcome to the Playpen, our space for ferrety banter and whimsical snippets of things that aren't quite long enough for articles (although they might be) but that caught your eye anyway.
But then again, maybe he is very suave and charming in person...
For example, a big part of the reason this chap's photo seems unfortunate is that, shorn of context, it looks like he's dressed up all formal in order to visit Toys 'r' Us and hang out with the ponies.
He looks like a very weedy looking hitman from some classic era of organized crime or an Observer. Either way, his presence in a toy store raises some unsettling questions.
Anyways, dressing all fancy like is fun on occasion, but there should be some sense of time and occasion, since that toystore guy, while his get up might've been okay in some previous generations, now seems to be more appropriate for funerals and more sober circumstances.
It's also curious that the choice is so obviously to dress in the Mad Men era of style as if this sort of style is more timeless or classic than pre-WWI for example. Of course, before WWI the male fashion was much more in a state of flux as aristocracy was more in their strength and a much stronger trend-setter than nowadays. There seems to be this idea, that the sort of look they are copying is somehow essentially more stylish or sharp, when it as much a fashion thing as anything.
Not that I don't like a snappy suit now and then, it's just that to do that comfortably on a day to day basis actually demands a lot of money.
And really, the modern suit solidified from aristocratic and upper class style and it's prevalence is just as much about hierarchy as anything else. That seems to be another element not considered by these sort of geek dandies. If you're not projecting status and worldliness successfully, then what is the point of dressing like that?
- Guys start wearing fedoras in an awkward fashion (about which I'll say more later).
- Reddit's Atheism board did a "faces of atheism" thing where people took pictures of themselves and wrote stuff on them about their experiences with atheism. A striking number of guys wearing fedoras in an awkward fashion are included in the results, which often include a lot of simplistic dismissals of, petty sniping at, or overt hatred towards religion and religious people in general. This poor soul became an unintended icon of this but he is hardly alone.
- At around the same time you get the Fedoras of OKCupid thing starting up, where people would pass around screenshots from OKCupid of guys wearing fedoras in an awkward way along with snippets from their profiles of them saying offensive, silly, or otherwise embarrassing things. The original tumblr is gone but there's a lot of material out there from it still circulating.
As far as guys wearing fedoras in an awkward way goes, generally there's a bunch of errors you can make when wearing a fedora and all of them seem to have a strong correlation with guys who hang out on Reddit declaring that people who believe in God are idiots, or people who hang out on OKCupid crying on their profile about how women don't like Nice Guys.
1: The more common error is to treat the fedora as a magical charm which will automatically make you look stylish. Fashion doesn't work like that. Wearing a formal, business-style fedora with your ordinary, scruffy clothes does not magically make your dragon shirt and cargo pants suave and sophisticated. It's like wearing a tie, in that simply wearing a tie won't make you look smart professional unless everything else you are wearing is similarly smart and professional. See this guy, who seems to be under the impression that if he wears a hat which is "classy, sharp, and old-fashioned" then that doesn't somehow clash with his meme shirt and khakis (which are the opposite of classy, sharp, and old-fashioned).
2: Trying too hard. The other extreme seems to be people trying very hard to pull off the Don Draper old-fashioned gentleman look and either not really pulling it off, or actually kind of pulling it off well but taking it into contexts where it isn't really merited. For example, a big part of the reason this chap's photo seems unfortunate is that, shorn of context, it looks like he's dressed up all formal in order to visit Toys 'r' Us and hang out with the ponies.
3: Head shape is a thing. If you wear a hat which is too large or too small, or whose shape isn't flattering in conjunction with the shape of your head, it'll look bad, just as wearing a shirt which you can't quite button up over your belly isn't a great look. A narrow-brimmed trilby (which a lot of these "fedoras" actually are) atop a large, broad head tends to look comical.
4: Not being comfortable in what they are wearing. This tends to be exacerbated in photographs, especially if people tense up when being photographed, but even so as a general rule if what you're wearing doesn't feel natural for you it probably isn't going to look natural for you. This will sabotage even the best tailoring.
"The overall effect of 'Mouth Sounds' is akin to dropping acid at a Media Play going-out-of-business sale[...]" -Katie Rife, The A.V. Club
"The mixtape equivalent of touring the killing fields in Cambodia. I loved every minute." -Wearedevo, AV Club comment thread.
"If I had someone in my trunk, this is what I'd put on the stereo. It's that kind of amazing." -GrantB, same.
"I'm not saying that listening to this was an unpleasant experience, but I think the Homer/Dave Matthews mashup might work better if my head faced backwards so that I could weep tears of anguish onto my own buttocks." -The Artist Formerly Knows As Y, same.
"Why do you hate me, Neil? What wrongs have I perpetrated against you? I'm sorry for all of it. Just, please, let it stop. This must end." -Jay Jackson Newman, Soundcloud comment.
So, with much to do and so much to see, what's wrong with taking the back streets? You'll never know if you don't go. You'll never shine if you don't glow. Listen to it. You know you have to.
(If Soundcloud isn't your thing, the separate tracks have been uploading to Youtube. And, FYI, Will Smith is very concerned about the bees.)
I like a good newsie hat. And bowlers. And top hats. I do think fedoras have an air of pretentiousness that bothers me. That being said, they do have a certain stylishness.
The Disposessed is amazing. I do really enjoy parts of the Earthsea series, and haven't gotten to Left Hand yet, but Dispossessed is good enough that it catapults her to top tier for me.
Fedoras never really had negative associations for me until I found out J*hn C. Wr!ght had one. All my resentment was reserved for berets--when I was an undergrad, I never met someone who wore a beret who wasn't completely insufferable. (See also: fixies)
And yeah, but it's apparently becoming a truism on the internet that the Venn diagram of men who are assholes and men who wear fedoras has a massive overlap. I've only seen this second-hand, so I couldn't tell you how or why this association has come to be.
@Axiomatic: I wasn't massively taken with Mists of Avalon, and while I don't dislike any of Le Guin's books that I've read (except The Left Hand of Darkness), the only one I'd say I really like is The Dispossessed; so I guess I'm not at that far of a remove from you myself.
(I also think this kind of self satisfied "bow before the authority of my progressive judgment" thing is pretentious and pointless, but truth be told, I feel more strongly about the hat.)
What does a fedora connect to, though?
I feel like this summarizes the attitude they've become associated with remarkably well.
I do strongly recommend Gillian Bradshaw's "Hawk of May" trilogy (Hawk of May, Kingdom of Summer, In Winter's Shadow), which was recently republished in very nice paperback editions and kindle. The first two books focus on Gawain's (here called Gwalchmai, similarly to Rosemary Sutcliff's historicized Sword at Sunset), the last on Guinevere (Gwynhwyfar). In addition to being really beautifully written, they're also the first time I didn't finish an Arthur story and want everyone involved to die. :)
@James D - Idylls of the Queen was really fun! There was a solid mystery, a really fun sense of "this is the world where all that Malory happened, but this is what they're like when the big events aren't happening." A sense of consequence and lived-in-ness that was very appealing. I did come away from it with a strong sympathy for Kay.
@Axiomatic - I didn't like the 100 or so pages of Mists that I tried, but I do think LeGuin is amazing. What does a fedora connect to, though? If I didn't have a hatred of my head being hot, I think a fedora would be nice. :)
It's a retelling of The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnell(e), published I think within the last decade or so, possibly as part of a larger series, and by a female author. I don't remember the book's title or the author's name - I just read a review of it ~5-6 years ago on site which I think was called Fantasy Book Stand.
The closest match for the book a web search turns up is Sir Gawain and the Loathly Lady, by Selina Hastings, which was published in the 80s, does not seem to be part of a series, and moreover is a children's book, which I don't think is right either. Attempts to find the website where I read the review have been fruitless, and since I don't have the correct url (which is to say, fantasybookstand.com and all other iterations were rejected) so has consultation of the Wayback Machine.
By any chance, does this description strike a chord for anyone?
Beer Sheva campus has a good trove of Brutalism as well. (I love this one.)
This kind of thing has never seemed oppressive or imposing to me in an educational context, vis a vis the students. More like...un-shy. Like, it's right and proper that libraries and classrooms should be housed in buildings that are bold, startling, uncompromising and unapologetic. No classical fripperies or fussy pastel makeup trying to make their presence sweet and quiet and digestible.
It, uh, might show that i'm from a place with just a bit of a tendency of religion, wrapped in its ancient/traditional architecture, impinging on the landscape. For me, I guess, in that context, there's almost a necessary starkness to the statement being made for secular/scientific learning. This is a break with the past, and it feels no need to make itself pretty.
(I cannot stand brutalist architecture: it's probably terribly bourgeois of me, but I find it oppressive and ugly and gloomy and depressing. Then again, I'd probably still hate it if it was called something less negatively suggestive, like Concretism. Or even something like, I don't know, Sculpturism or Integr(al)ism.)
I've always thought it was kind of a weird message - these imposing, blocky buildings housing libraries and classrooms. "We have ways of making you learn."
I think I may need to write something substantial about this. For now, a few lighter observations:
- You can tell that the villain is very serious business because his theme is a industrial noise track. "Know what? Forget sounding imperious or powerful, I want something that says 'Hi! I'm a wide-awake nightmare!!!'"
- In the grim future of 1960, English people drive on the right hand side on autobahns where the speed limit is marked in kilometers. Also, London is a gigantic slum, and the metropolitan boroughs have been bulldozed and replaced by a Brutalist spaceport which is guarded by a Metal Gear. I feel these are all positive changes.
- I think I like Brutalism now.
- "Okay, they put a Nazi on the moon. Fuck you, moon."
- Tekla is the best.
- BJ Blazkowicz is the saddest brick of meat I've ever seen. I think he actually beats out Dwayne Johnson's character from Pain & Gain.
On the subject of Arthurian Myth-themed books written by women, I really liked The Idylls of the Queen by Phyllis Ann Karr. It's essentially a murder mystery in which Queen Guenevere is implicated
@Chris A: I might just have to give Mists another try at some point. If I can set aside the latest Bradley revelations.
While the last thing I want to do is stake out a position in defense of The Mists of Avalon, my best recollection (of a book I read as a teenager) is that this is unfair to Bradley, who is doing something rather more complex with Uther and Ygraine than just "redeeming" a rape story by making the sex consensual.
As Alula points out, magic and prophecy collide with consent, and while I don't recall whether the word "rape" comes into it, Ygraine is troubled by that collision - and a lot of misery comes from it. Think Leda and Zeus. At the very least, this prompts the reader to consider the events of the novel critically, perhaps even to ask whether the vanishing world of the Goddess and her pagan devotees is really any kinder or wiser than the patriarchy of the White Christ.