This is some sort of sick joke, right?

[MouseWife]

To those commenting on my quest for opinions:

LOL No, I don't think someone who goes to work out in sweats has given up on life. But, the quote made me want to ask, in this thread of fashion, what were peoples' opinions on sportswear and what people think of people in different types of it. I probably was vague but I have been noticing other people a lot more {walking alone gives me too much time to notice too many things} and wonder what others think.

Not that it matters but a lot of times you can look at someone and sort of gauge what they are thinking. But, in this, I really didn't.

I get the point that what is worth a certain amount may not be worth that to someone else. I like to go to concerts, Disneyland and Yosemite. People think I spend too much by going too often. They don't see the value of spending time in those places so often. Or seeing the bands I want. But I do.

Oh, and BTD, I imagine you working out hard and I doubt if you care if anyone doesn't like what you wear!!

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

For me, the only part of fashion that I find truly perplexing is when people are only paying for a name attached and not the product.

For example, I can understand absolutely loving a Thomas Kinkade painting (even though I think his stuff is just atrocious) and being willing to pay $1,500 for a piece. But I don't understand why the exact same painting would no longer be worth $1,500 to you if the factory person who actually painted it had his name put on it.

The exact same painting in both cases. $1,500 if it says "by Thomas Kinkade" on the card next to it; $150 if it says "by Joe Schmoe." And it is the same with clothing fashions. If the only way you know it is worth $100 for a particular t-shirt for you is if you first look at the tag and see Fred Segal instead of Kathy Lee on the label then I'm lost.

Becasue sometime you are paying for a name, a connection to the actual artist, hence all the business with "certificates of authenticity." Sometime we only accept art or fashion if it is made by a specific artist/designer.

This is kind of what I was getting at earlier with my reference to Marcel Duchamp - but I'm betting you don't appreciate dada either. As an artist, he has the power of making something art simply by assertion. You or I generally lack that power (though many of us on these boards have considerable power of decalring "swank").

A forgery may be nice, but sometimes we want the connection to the artist designer maikng it authentic. There may be no basis in logic, it may be delusional having no basis in reality (assuming there is some objective "beauty" to which to measure things by). Yet the distinction is real if we believe it so - and so we do make a big deal about lables, signatures, and scholarly assessments that assert authentic art or fashion.

To go on a bit about fashion, often the big designers are taking their inspiration from the street. The pull out what resonates with them and repackage it for their public. Your bedazzler design may not command much on the open market, but Fred Segal stealling your idea and churning out designer versions will - becasue after all he is "authentic."

[Alex]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

Becasue sometime you are paying for a name, a connection to the actual artist, hence all the business with "certificates of authenticity." Sometime we only accept art or fashion if it is made by a specific artist/designer.

I'm not saying that this isn't or shouldn't be the case, just that it is the point where I get left behind. The person behind the art, or clothes, or architecture, or novels is almost completely irrelevant to me. When I make recommendations or suggestions on such things I almost never recommend a person but rather specific pieces.

I'm sure this also feeds into why I don't collect anything since I don't get a feeling of connection with a person through possession of objects.

If name alone makes something more valuable to you then I certainly have no problem with it, I just don't understand it. Especially with factory "artists" where the limit of their involvement was likely signing off on sketches.

But me not understanding why someone would pay $100 for a t-shirt is not the same as me condemning it. Even if in less serious moments I mock it (as I do people who watch Joey; even though I mock I don't really care).

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

It is Arrested Development. I can't find the episode though, but it is in Season One./ I believe it was said about Lindsay by Michael, but it really could've been said by Lucille or by Lindsay.

GC......Do you remember the episode?

Google is making me think it came from a Seinfeld episode

[Not Afraid]

Jerry to George:
"You know the message you're sending out to the world with these sweat pants? You're telling the world: 'I give up. I can't compete in normal society. I'm miserable, so I might as well be comfortable.'"

Seinfeld "The Pilot"

But, that's not it.

[innerSpaceman]

This ia one step removed from label-worship ... but I have two Disneyland attraction posters. One is a Haunted Mansion reproduction, and the other is an Adventure thru Inner Space original (complete with, ahem, certificate of authenticity). They both look really good. But they are not the same animal.

The one that really hung somewhere in Disneyland at some point in time is precious to me. It has an imaginary connection that (with it being an inanimate object and all) exists only in my head, but I cannot "pretend" the same thing about the fake one.


I would have said the same thing about labels as Alex, when it comes to apparel. But I seem to have something going on when it comes to memorabilia. It was worth more money to me to have something with an actual connection that I could wrap my imagination around.

For some it's watches, for others it's art, still others it's clothes. Most of us probably have some area in which we place value on an intangible.

[Ghoulish Delight]

I feel the need to reiterate that my reaction wasn't aimed at those who might purchase the items. It was a reaction to the setting and surrounding like-items, aimed at those that made the decission to sell them.

I'm sorry if I offended.

[mousepod]

You must spread some Mojo around before giving it to Ghoulish Delight again.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

No work clothes?

No work clothes?

I wear this dress to work all the time. Of course, not with the hat or the wig or the obscenely false eyelashes, but I wear it nonetheless.



I am pretty well-dressed. I've been told this by many people, most notably in one of my co-worker's oh-so-enjoyable backhanded compliments. "You're such a snappy dresser! Most fat people aren't so good with clothes." Oh, THANK YOU for your GENEROUS and MAGANAMOUS compliment!

Larger women who aren't well-dressed? Well, they're not looking hard enough. Lane Bryant is not the only store available. There are several other stores and department stores that offer plus-sizes that are very well-cut. Macy's among them. And Torrid... most of what I buy anymore comes from Torrid, and they're popping up everywhere now. (They ought to be, with the percentage of people in the country who are overweight.) You just have to look beyond the wall-o-punk to find the cute work-appropriate attire.

I'm going to disagree with you on the LB front anyway, GC. Their attire moves in and out at a quick rate and I feel like there's plenty to choose from. I could say the same thing about frat boys. Those frat boys and their Abercrombie shirts. Can't they buy shirts with a little variety now and then?