?

Log in

No account? Create an account

George Will, nutcase: Addendumb - The online computery journal thingy of a turtle

Apr. 16th, 2009

08:58 pm - George Will, nutcase: Addendumb

Previous Entry Share Next Entry

Huh. The Washington Post also ran George Will's anti-jeans rant, but it's got one extra paragraph in it (which I guess the Houston Chronicle cut for space):

"This is not complicated. For men, sartorial good taste can be reduced to one rule: If Fred Astaire would not have worn it, don't wear it. For women, substitute Grace Kelly."

Well, dang. So I guess the next time I go out to pick up some Chinese food, I guess I better peek in my closet and ask myself, "WWFAW?" And the answer is obvious: I must put on my tuxedo, tie my bow tie (only posers wear clip-ons!) and shine up my shoes before I set foot outside the house.

And then, of course, when I get back home with my fried rice and my beef & snow peas, I better take off the tuxedo so it doesn't get dirty while I eat! And THEN AND ONLY THEN may I put on my jeans, I guess.

Y'know, I can't help picturing two guys walking down the street after a rainy day, one wearing jeans, the other wearing a suit. A car drives through a puddle, splashing them both. The man in jeans says, "Dammit. Welp, guess I better hang these up to dry when I get home and then toss 'em in the laundry." The man in the suit says, "AAAAGHH!!! This suit cost $500! It's RUINED! Get me to a dry cleaner NOW!!!"

Comments:

[User Picture]
From:q_pheevr
Date:April 17th, 2009 02:26 am (UTC)
(Link)

Would Fred Astaire have worn this outfit?

(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:kinkyturtle
Date:April 17th, 2009 02:35 am (UTC)
(Link)
Ooh, burn. :}
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:lcremeans
Date:April 29th, 2009 01:02 pm (UTC)
(Link)
More like "OH GOD THE YELLOW IT BURNS". Seriously.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:varro
Date:April 17th, 2009 03:20 am (UTC)
(Link)
Piffle!

If Mr. Will is so concerned about arrested development among responsible adults, why did he support that Texan man-child...twice???
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:rikchik
Date:April 17th, 2009 03:42 am (UTC)
(Link)
When you put it that way, this is really just another attack on the poor - if you can't afford the expense of maintaining a suit you're "childish" and shouldn't be allowed to vote - only rich people are real citizens, after all. What a prick.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:orv
Date:April 17th, 2009 06:20 am (UTC)
(Link)
Believe me, I'm grateful that I have a job where I don't have to wear a suit. I must be saving an absolute fortune in dry-cleaning costs.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:nefaria
Date:April 17th, 2009 11:07 am (UTC)
(Link)
Guess I need to buy a top hat and tap shoes now. And do they still make those black canes with white tips on the ends?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:murakozi
Date:April 17th, 2009 12:38 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Somehow I doubt that Fred Astaire wore a tuxedo, top hat, and white gloves when he was doing yard work or going to the store or putting gas in his car. Just because he tended to be dressed up in movies doesn't mean he looked like that all the time.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:orv
Date:April 17th, 2009 07:19 pm (UTC)
(Link)
True, although it strikes me that photos of industrial scenes in the early 20th century often show laborers in surprisingly formal attire. Either they dressed up for the photo, or digging a hole was a vest-and-tie job. Check out this 1938 photo, for example.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:wbwolf
Date:April 17th, 2009 11:59 pm (UTC)
(Link)
It was pretty common up into the 1950s, at least in some circles. I'm always a little amused and boggled how teenagers in those mental hygiene films are running around in suits and ties, and wearing a sweater was considered dressing down. Granted, with those films, you never are quite sure how close to reality they were, but it certainly started to wind down even for the straights in the 1960s.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:shockwave77598
Date:April 17th, 2009 05:21 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I still don't know who this George Will is or why I should give a damn what he says about anything - particularly when it comes to my personal attier.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:deckardcanine
Date:April 17th, 2009 05:25 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Well, I'd vaguely heard of him before. As conservatives go, he's pretty well respected by liberals -- or was.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:orv
Date:April 17th, 2009 07:22 pm (UTC)
(Link)
He's a well-respected, Pulitzer Award-winning newspaper columnist who writes for the Washington Post and Newsweek.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:deckardcanine
Date:April 17th, 2009 05:27 pm (UTC)
(Link)
What a reactionary, to demand that fashion never stray from what it was 75 years ago... in sensational movies.

Irony: Early in Swing Time, Fred Astaire is tricked into a unique fashion faux pas that indirectly costs him his wedding.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:kinkyturtle
Date:April 17th, 2009 07:43 pm (UTC)
(Link)
And nowadays, it's almost unthinkable that a wedding could be called off over something as trivial as a fashion faux pas. Which world would you rather live in: the world of millions of difficult, meaningless and possibly even self-contradictory sartorial rules taken seriously enough to be used to play "gotcha" and deny good people valuable opportunities in relationships and business, or today's more relaxed, casual world where most sane people realize what a load of nonsense that was?

Explain again what's so great about the former option, George.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:deckardcanine
Date:April 17th, 2009 09:46 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Of course, weddings were taken more seriously when divorce was much less common.

Actually, I kinda misled you. Astaire's wedding is called off because he takes too long to show up, having searched hard for a tailor who would agree to his unorthodox fashion demand.

In the end (spoiler alert), Astaire foils another man's wedding by playing the same trick on him. This time, the wedding really is called off on a fashion faux pas. Because he rips his good pants, the groom shows up on time, but wearing the pants of a much fatter (and, alas, Sambo-ier) servant. The bride cracks up and makes the decision she had already half-wanted: to be with Astaire instead. The now ex-groom smiles and approves -- probably the most sporting rejectee in the history of motion picture.

Hmm, maybe they really didn't take marriage more seriously then.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:trudyscousin
Date:April 21st, 2009 01:36 pm (UTC)
(Link)
"If Fred Astaire would not have worn it, don't wear it. For women, substitute Grace Kelly."

I've heard of "walking around in another person's skin" (I've been reading "To Kill a Mockingbird" these days), but this is ridiculous!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:lcremeans
Date:April 29th, 2009 01:09 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Fred Astaire was a bad example to use, IMO, because he was a dancer. Ever try to dance or do calisthenics in jeans? Yeah. (That and Astaire wasn't in a suit and tie all the time; consider, for example, the hatrack number (yes, really) from Royal Wedding, where he's just in a shirt and pants.),
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:kinkyturtle
Date:April 29th, 2009 10:39 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Yeah, he was wearing slacks and a collared shirt. I'm pretty sure, though, that George Will would still approve, because it's not jeans and a T-shirt.

So, Astaire's actually a good example for the point he was making, absurd and out-of-touch though that point may be.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:lcremeans
Date:April 30th, 2009 12:29 am (UTC)
(Link)
Hmm, yeah, I was exaggerating his position just a tad, I suppose. That and I had that scene stuck in my head earlier today.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)