Suits - The Worst Thing to Ever Happen to Men's Fashion.

Hello everyone! Has it been over a year since my last post? I guess I must have accidentally dialed one number higher in my time-booth.

I will take my re-entry into the temporal gestalt to warn of the dangers of suits.

The modern suit as we know it came to be at the end of the Victorian age, initially with a casual array of clothing known as the "ditto suit."

Which was a combination of the morning coat and slacks. Slacks, of course, being the worst male fashion item to ever be invented (aside from the gastly Macintosh of course...).

The more formal dinner coat and white tie were standards for dinner parties and formal events which eventually led to the development of the hideous and horrible Tuxedo.

From this already slovenly dress the whole thing continued to evolve into the horrid standard of modern men's fasion. I'm not sure how much I have previously stated my disgust at the fact that men are supposed to wear one type of dress with slight changes depending on the situation.

With the creation of the modern suit, true Fashion is no longer a part of the man's world. Simply put, anything that is supposedly highly fashionable for men today is nothing but reconfigurations of the standard suit - A sports or morning jacket with an oxford shirt and slacks. Sometimes a vest, with varying neckwear.

The vest -- let it be known, is merely a de-evolution of the waistcoat, a piece of clothing which is one of the all time greatest pieces of men's fashion. Here's a great example of one I recently found was posted on the blog Jane Austen's World:

(Of course, the embroidery and fabric would have to be more sublte for zero-era usage)

Now, since the creation of the modern suit, for over 100+ years men's fashion has remained stagnant and its rules enforced much more harshly than that of women's. The suit, it could be said, effectively killed creativity and imagination in the clothing of men. This is why I hate the suit and why, when told "but they look good," I cringe and shout "THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME!!!"

Unlike in regency period and prior, today color is to be avoided, as is any other kind of flair not designated acceptable by Armani or Gucci -- that these designers are considered in high regard is a testament to how low and crass men's fashion has become.

Now, there ARE a select number of things associated with suits that are not brutal instruments of social conformity. For instance, the long coat has existed for several hundred years and is still the best dress coat a man could wear in this modern age, as this item from Goth Store clearly shows:

 FANTASTIC!!

It is also what I consider one of the essential items needed for any zero-era wardrobe (Alternatively, a Frock Coat will do nicely).

Similarly, while slacks are a horrible item that were invented, seemingly, to further eliminate creativity and individuality in mens clothing, there are other forms of trouser that are really great and can be worn in many different styles and colors which are not dependent on the color of the coat you wear. The concept of the matching jacket and trousers in both color and fabric is again further forced conformity - causing a man look like a suit instead of a man.

Now, some trousers that are not horrendous tools of oppression include the Ankle-Length Men's Pantaloon, and the shorter Knee-Breeches (also known as "britches" and "nickers").

The closest thing in present existence to the men's tight pantaloons of the past are modern tight-cut pants, which are usually in the form of denim jeans today, as Ploomy aptly displays:

Unfortunately, Ploomy author "Roolsuno" seems to be unhappy with this "tight pants fad" as if it were some mysterious virus infecting his own platonic conception of what fashion should be. Well he can go fuck himself and his lack of historical knowledge of clothing. Tight pants have always, and will always, be an acceptable form of men's trousers. In fact it is the loose slack that is the younger invention!!

I must lament, however, that denim is not a proper fabric for zero-era fashion UNLESS the denim pants in question are subtle enough as to not come across as "jeans." Jeans are certainly not a piece of clothing that could be considered timeless -- tight trousers, however, are.

And so I leave you, and hopefully not for the length of time I last did, with an image that if it does not make you shudder with feelings of anger and disgust -- it honestly should.

God, this makes me want to vomit!

The "Gothic Aristocracy" Look

Zooming around the street fashion blog world for wannabe-time agents I found a nice post on La Carmina, delivering this two pics of "goth aristocracy" and a blurb about this style:

"The male counterpart to Gothic Lolita fashion goes by many names: dandy, boystyle, ouji, elegant gothic aristocrat..."

However all the images are of girls (maybe?).
Its a very androgynous look, however, and boys I'm sure look great in this stuff...

Here we have a dashing young dandy, with a top notch Zero-Era jacket and leggings,
but the stripes and the sneaks should be avoided!
Fake riding boots would have been a better choice.
And while the puffy shirt is fine, the new-romantic Klaus Nomi cut is a bit extreme,
it wouldn't quite fit in at a party in 1630's Vienna, now would it?
I like the necklace, but perchance it hangs too low?



Yaargh! This is an amazing overcoat! It could work as a pirate, a longshoreman,
a poor merchant, a soldier... The lettering would have to go, of course...
Hmm, the satchel seems to fit in, minus logo. I will have to research
seamen's personal attaches throughout the ages now...
back to the costume history books at the library!
Oh, and BTW - the pressed oxford and hip ska tie give the game away completely!
Better options are an undershirt with a waistcoat and ascot or handkerchief.

Mmm gothy! I think next post will be about Zero-Era boots for men and women!

Steampunk is not Zero-Era

It has been a while since I've posted... I apologize for this, although I doubt anyone cares since no one ever reads this blog. Anyway, here is some newly minted rants spoken into the great abyss where all solitary cyber-voices go when no audience exists to reify the content.

-----------------------

I am not writing this to piss of the steampunkers... Look, I'll be the first to admit that a lot of the fashions and babbage-age hacks are really cool looking. However, I have to define Zero-Era beyond mere aesthetics -- to the theoretical underpinnings behind the aesthetic. And this is where the two "movements" (for lack of a better word) separate. Whilst Zero-Era is an attack on the contemporary, it is not merely fetishization of the past. In fact, authentic period-piece clothing is the anti-thesis of Zero-Era. Not to do Steampunk a disservice, it is not mere sophistry of Victorian-age worship, it is quite the opposite.

In fact, Steampunk is born out of a trans-dimensional construct first introduced in literature. It presupposes advanced technological progress during the gilded age - thus demolishing the historical timeline of known reality. It runs as a parallel reality to our own.

For instance - in the film Sleepy Hollow, Ichabod Crane is not a lowly schoolteacher caught up in ghoulish plot, he is a constable with fantastical gadgetry -- CSI meets 18th century New England.

Yet it is obvious we are dealing with an alternative universe. The townspeople do not gasp with horror at such diabolical wizardry. They simply deride him for being so reliant on technology (a prescient issue, no doubt).

And while this Ichabod may be the Cadfael of his day, his rational and scientific mind is not depicted in the film as far ahead of the times, but perhaps just on the cutting edge.

This is the heart of Steampunk - a past where technological wonders are part of the time and place, not fearsome constructs of some future world.

Zero-Era is unconcerned with technology, only fashion and aesthetic. Steampunk glorifies accessories and unique, stand-out things, while Zero-Era shuns them. This is for a very good reason. For the theoretical underpinnings of Zero-Era are not based on the existence of an alternative reality, but our very own reality and shared history. It comes from the basic concept of "how would one blend-in in any time period without having to change one's wardrobe?" While Steampunk looks to accentuate and extrematize

Both concepts are based upon Science-Fiction speculation, Steampunk's being the existence of alternative realities, and Zero-Era being that of the existance of time travel. But while Steampunk is wholly anachronistic and already well defined (to some degree), one could think of Zero-Era as having something of an unobtainable, ephemeral quality.

A fashion for all ages escapes the imagination, for as we are caught in linear time the best we could hope for are approximations of such a fashion. It may even be an impossibility. Yet, unlike Steampunk, it is not based solely in the past, for Zero-Era must consider also the hypothetical fashions of future times. Thus, unlike Steampunk, I feel it has actual relevance to the dialectic of aesthetics going on at present. While some might, understandably, feel the premise for such excercises into the deconstruction of fashion silly -- there is no time travel and there most likely won't be for any imaginable time in the future, with hindsight -- was the underpinnings of Futurism or Surrealism any less silly?

Surely, their ideals were just as unobtainable as that of Zero-Era, but are they given more credence because they embarked on ridiculousness with stony faces and post-modern philosophy to back them up?

Neither Zero-Ero nor Steampunk claim any such heady idealism to our respective aesthetics - but are we not living in a world when the lines between high and low art are muddled and mixed? Can not solid and toothful critiques of modern fashion come from genre fiction as easily as from philosophical diatribes?

But I digress!!! I am starting to bore even myself. Zero-Era is not Steampunk, and thus I will sum up the differences with a few bulleted points.


STEAMPUNK:

• Anachronistic
  
• Techno-centric
• Concerned with Authenticity
• Derived from a Parallel Universe

ZERO-ERA:

• Wholistic in time-frame
• Unconcerned with technology
• Concerned with Utilitarian and Multi-Purpose clothes
• Derived from Time Travel

Ok, peace out! If anyone ever lets me know they read this thing - that would be pretty nice! *wink wink*

It has been a while!

But what does time mean, anyway? We're time travelers, silly!!!

I found a great site, http://www.kittyhats.co.uk/
They sell authentic replica period hats:


Well, the period costuming is a little silly and not zero-era, but the Tricone hat has never officially gone out of style, and it looks fantastic! Grey, brown, dark brown, navy, and black - the three-cornered hat is versatile (and usually reversible!).

Check out this badass and his hot wife:
she loved the tricone!

Around, Then Under

The proper way to wear a scarf of course! Scarves are great for men and women, and this scarf is exceptionally nice:



Not quite Tom Baker length, but it would suit very nicely in any zero-era wardrobe. Perhaps it could be a bit less colorful, but the scarf itself is classic. Timeless... innocent, yet wild full of a male potency with a dash of a certain naiveté... Ok, so I don't quite have a handle on describing accessories, but trust me on this one. Imagine it in dark brown! Oh wait, miracles upon wonders, the magic of photo editing can make your imagination unnecessary! (You'll still have to imagine away the Wilson's leather jacket and grey hoodie...)



Wow! What a scarf!!! Of course, the poor bastard should have worn a bomber jacket, cheap leather and a sweatshirt don't really quite make such a scarf worth wearing, eh? But then again, he wouldn't look as much like Beck, whom I understand many ladies find very handsome and attractive (Even though he's a crazy Scientologist who hasn't put out a good album in over 10 years).

But I suppose if we really want to find out what to wear in order to complement a fantastic scarf we must go to the lord of time himself, "the doctor" I believe he's called:



Best wishes to you too, oh mighty bescarfled one!

Some (Over)coats

Remember, the term "coat," while now in modern parlance a real word, is actually a shortened form of the word "overcoat." This is very much different from the "waistcoat," which in these days pretty much just means a button-up shirt.

Anyway, here's some really good Zero-era overcoats:



Not quite sure what the fellow is up to with his groin region, perhaps he is trying to hide a massive scrotal hernia. The coat is magnificent, and his whole outfit is grade A zero-era style.



This is an excellent period-less coat this lovely woman is wearing. I like the cut and especially the big sleeves. Those boots are not very zero-era, however. Personally, I have a deep hatred of that style of boot. They'd be great if they were flat, but that stupid pointy heel is like a spike driven deep into my soul.

Where's This Sailor Going?

And where's he from??



This dignified old seaman gives away the gig with his brand new sneaks, but otherwise illustrates an almost perfect example of zero-era fashion. The Krueger-sweater and long tipped pipe are definite pluses.