/fa/ - Fashion

d) real human beings don't really put so much emphasis on something so superficial

>>8625222
Aaaaaaaand /thread

>>8625204
I wear normal people gap and banana republic clothes. Like I care about wearing a costume around.

>>8625238
>>8625222
>samefag

You obviously don't belong here faggot go back to reddit to discuss Walmart clothes

it's funny how people talk shit about looking dated or not relevant when in reality the worst kinds of people are people who jump on every single trend there is. why not focus on building a wardrobe instead of being hip? you may think you're more informed or better than other people who are stuck in older trends but in reality you are the least authentic and devoid of personality

>>8625271
Not samefag

Either way, "the next big thing" is such a faggot thing to worry about. Wearing whatever is in is not effay at all.

>>8625282
Post fit

comfycore is as vague and memetic as palewave, but more importantly if it was an actual trend itd still fall squarely under the streetwear, so im not sure what youre even trying to argue

>>8625285
You wear black skinny jeans, sneakers, and tees every day don't you

how could street wear be dated? its just casual wear for when you go out.

>>8625282
this

"Of course, there are artists of hipster-related sensibility who remain artists. In the neighborhoods, though, there was a feeling throughout the last decade that the traditional arts were of little interest to hipsters because their consumer culture substituted a range of narcissistic handicrafts similar enough to sterilize the originals. One could say, exaggerating only slightly, that the hipster moment did not produce artists, but tattoo artists, who gained an entire generation’s arms, sternums, napes, ankles, and lower backs as their canvas. It did not produce photographers, but snapshot and party photographers: Last Night’s Party, Terry Richardson, the Cobra Snake. It did not produce painters, but graphic designers. It did not yield a great literature, but it made good use of fonts. And hipsterism did not make an avant-garde; it made communities of early adopters."

>>8625313
Obviously you didn't read the in b4 caveat, anon

>>8625282
>muh authenticity

Denimbro and superdenim will love you and your red wings and indigo selvedge jeans

>>8625361
so what if they personally identify with and like wearing out of trend heritagewear? whats it to you?

>>8625373
hey man, if they want to look autistic at neckbeard levels in their 2011 gear good for them and good for you

ill be busy lookin dope af while 11/10 models be mirin even though i ain't dressed for them

so just tell me what's the next big thing so I could start copping stuff for new season

>>8625386
real talk get crt300s

they just came out and theyre only $75 so youre gonna be seeing em everywhere you gotta be fresh on the drop ya feel me

>>8625386
greasercore

>>8625204
hopefully we see the influence of normcore in people dressing in a manner that best suits their lifestyle and climate. too much dressing according to nationalized madison ave. synthesized trends, i know a girl in a snowy mountain town who just bought burks because "everyone on trend" is wearing them. thats impractical. i want to see people stop being so easily swayed by ads and trends and start focusing on what is practical and good looking for them.

>>8625414
v dece v pale pic

>>8625251
and u read and post on /fa/
cool

>>8625326
cringing

>>8625302
Don't own black skinny jeans and I only have one pair of sneakers apart from shoes I use exclusively for sport. Try again.

>>8625285
Ding ding ding.

Find what you like and fucking wear it. If a new look comes along that has some cool themes, try them out or integrate them into what you currently wear. There's really no reason for a "wardrobe overhaul" every time a new look comes along, unless you hated the last look (in which case why did you build a wardrobe around it, anyway?)

Also get real about what's "played out." Normcore was first mentioned, what, like 4 months ago on /fa/? I've literally never seen it outside of /fa/. I only see streetwear from hypebeast tier forums. "Menswear" is almost nonexistent in people under 30, let alone under 25.

Face it, most people are wearing slim chinos and OCBDs with plimsolls and wayfarers, and people like OP are going nuts jumping from trend to trend to trend failing to realize that nobody except themselves gives enough of a fuck to even notice. If you want to stand out, you can easily do that with streetwear, workwear, menswear, or prep. Shit like reddit is making people as a whole dress "better," but there are just as few people who break from the pack, no matter what the direction. Menswear is played out? When the fuck did you last see someone your age wearing nice trousers, a nice collared shirt, and nice leather shoes, AND pulling it off? Probably never. So stop whining about how "played out" it all is.

>>8625500
normcore is less of a trend then a fashion philosophy right? like yes it leads some people to dress v. nineties but it's more about how you choose what you wear than what you actually wear.

>>8625204
Just buy completed outfits from runway. I could pick most any from a given Paris show over the past five years and look fairly outside of trends, despite their playing into almost all of them. The abstracted form of high-fashion, the xxxx-core, xxxx-wave, xxxx-wave, are far more subject to market forces and prone to be whored out as a new niche market for capital to degrade and exhaust the vitality of.

High fashion any year is always "the big thing." If only because it (pretends to be/is) art, and as such grants itself an alternate chronology/half-life.

'streetwear' is timeless. it's been around since the early 90's. you obviously don't know shit about fashion

>>8625607
I legit feel sorry for you if you think streetwear was relevant from 1997-2009

>>8625607
Only 90s kids think it's timeless.

>>8625594
That's how I take it.

Interestingly enough, I was just reading Rob Horning's new essay where he has this to say about normcore (in passing),

"The more you say and interact and connect, the better you can be modeled, and the more your reality can be seamlessly shaped around you, so that control is experienced as freedom within the circumscribed matrix. This is basically The Matrix, only now, much more plausibly, the Matrix is a simulation generated by data streams harvested from phones and social media. You get out of the matrix by disappearing into the mass, by going normcore. Baudrillard argues in 'The Implosion of Meaning in Media,' that 'the system’s current argument is the maximization of the word and the maximal production of meaning. Thus the strategic resistance is that of a refusal of meaning and a refusal of the word — or of the hyperconformist simulation of the very mechanisms of the system, which is a form of refusal and of nonreception.'"

To me this pretty accurately represents the two dominate forms of fashion at the moment:

1. all black everything/goth ninja: "refusal of the word" (literally "void the brand")
2. normcore: "hyperconformist"

It seems the revolutionary aspect of our clothing has diffused quite fluidly and without much notice--I've certainly never seen any here or elsewhere mention their clothes' entanglement with late capitalism,

The next big thing is going to be whatever we start recommending, and we'll probably start recommending it because someone thought it looked good, so just wear shit you think looks good and most people will either think of you as an innovator or not at all.

>>8625625
lol are you serious

streetwear has been huge in Japan since about 94. same in usa. it's okay to be completely ignorant about shit outside of rick tho

>>8625629
no, it's timeless by fact and it'll always be around

>>8625634
>their clothes' entanglement with late capitalism
that's because nobody's really thinking about how what they're wearing relates to their condition or society's general direction as a whole, if I understand you correctly. which i probably don't.

to where has the revolutionary aspect of our clothing diffused?

what do you think is the nbt based on this paradigm?

also i'm surprised there's someone out there who thinks like this, are you a professional in design or a teenager with a lot of time or what what is your life like that you can be this thoughtful on 4chan

>>8625683
general direction as a whole fuck me shit i hate when i type stream of consciousness sorry that probably sounds pretentious as all getout

>>8625634
I won't even purport to totally "get" that excerpt, but it's still interesting.

Why does he suggest that exiting the "matrix" is achieved by blending in (normcore)? I'm not sure how closely he's tying this in with the movie's concept of the matrix, but wouldn't that just further entrench you in that system? Why wouldn't escape be achieved through going against the norm? The whole movie is full of that kind of imagery: The wardrobes of the characters who are unplugged versus the people still in the matrix, or all of the sidewalk scenes in which the main characters are walking in the opposite direction to everyone else.

It seems like the idea of adopting normcore to "refuse meaning" is just the fashion equivalent of covering your ears and repeating "I can't hear you!" It just doesn't make sense.

>>8625699
I think it's a way of showing that you're aware of it. like a caricature/

>>8625699
Not that poster but Baudrillard pre-dates "the matrix" as a film by at least a decade. He coined the term, to my knowledge, and it's used pretty widely in theory, particularly in feminist theory where ideas of assimilation are critical for navigating concepts of gender and sexuality.

>>8625683
>that's because nobody's really thinking about how what they're wearing relates to their condition or society's general direction as a whole

Maybe this isn't exactly what you're talking about, but I've always found it easy to consider clothes in themes. Not just "gothninja" or "workwear," but understanding the potential meanings or, if you want to consider it this way, alternate definitions of certain pieces. Just like a word can mean different things in varying contexts, clothes are the same. Suspenders with a french cuff shirt are very different from suspenders with rough trousers and a tee/rough collared shirt/undershirt.

I think it's fairly sensible to categorize things like that, especially considering that most pieces have some identifiable origin, like jumper boots or chinos, or even jeans. And given the multiple meanings of any one piece, you can construct crazy ideas out of your fits, even if only you're aware of them.

The same thing applies to perfume; it's just another avenue for constructing a unique image/appearance, or creating contrast with what you already have. An old guy who's dressed in menswear might look from head to toe like he smells like wood or tobacco, but if you pass him and he's wearing a floral perfume, that totally changes everything.

I'm rambling at this point; does any of this shit even make sense to you guys?

>>8625715
Woops, my mistake. Thanks for the info.

Dark, slim fitting jeans, a nice looking t-shirt, and converse all-star type sneakers or nice boots are seemingly future-proof. That's how it's been for decades.

Get a haircut like pic related, and you can style it into whatever the fuccbois are doing if you want. That style will remain in place until evolution changes our hair and scalps. Shave if you're going bald.

Focus on these things and you'll save a lot of money and not cringe at your old photos. The man who dresses like this in old photos is henceforth remembered as the coolest and most level headed motherfucker around.

>>8625683
"to where has the revolutionary aspect of our clothing diffused?"

Well, I'd suppose that the network of the clothes must have something to do with their authorial intent (to speak to the only potentials for anti-capitalist movement in 2014 via clothing) being so surely superseded. Then it is fair to interrogate Sufu, Tumblr, /fa/, for their complicity with the cult of capital. Somehow their existence is prefigured by circuits of meaning that deny their ferocious subjectivity.

We might ask something like, "What does comparing geos to dreamboxes do for the resistive properties of both?" And so on.

>>8625730
i'm who you referenced.

again, i don't think people think like that. I think meaning in clothing is as comprehensible to most people, i don't want to call them plebs because we're all in the same five standard deviations of the mean, but most people don't think about clothing like that. they used to. you know?

you used to wear doc martens so you don't slip on wet surfaces in the restaurant you work in or the boat you work on

canvas was tough for all types of slightly rough work

suits were to look good

now its all just a mishmash, no point in wearing docs as a college student but you do because "the matrix" or tumblr or whatever, no point in wearing a flannel around your waist you dont plan on putting on.


i swear we should all be in comfy core to look acceptable at our various low physical effort professions and positions

>>8625772
wait so you're saying rick owens is designing clothes as a kind of anticapitalist statement?

>>8625784
You're talking about clothing for functionality. Almost the entire fashion industry is based on appearance, or what "looks cool," not what is most practical for your environment/lifestyle. There are hybrid companies though, that provide both pragmatic and stylish options.

>>8625699
Right, well, Baudrillard's notion of implosion is very important here and extends beyond standing in as a meaning for destruction.

The point of metastasizing symbols of capital, for Baudrillard, is that it forces the individual to encounter the lack of the "master signifier" and its pure negativity, that is to say its frivolous yet metaphysically assertive nature that forces out alternatives. Upon reaching a critical mass of "simulated" content that a given system of capital produced, it implodes, the lack of meaning reveals itself.

It shows that what a subject of capital takes to be a separate reality (the systemic power, divinely established) is actually the same as the subject's. By this I mean that the "normal" clothing that the matrix has established as a fashion borne of a master signifier can actually be effectively appropriated and its potential to create distinctions upon which it can assert its dominance collapse.

So to wear normcore is to show that capitalism is unable to successfully make symbolic distinctions that break categories/markets into bite-size chunks. The clothes then refer to nothing at all, and capital is left without a body to take.

This may be a bit rambly, it's really late here.

>>8625772
>>8625789
I'd say they're more anti-consumerist than anti-capitalist. Otherwise he'd create a completely different method of selling his clothes.
>implying Rick is dumb enough to think he's fighting capitalism by being involved in capitalism
>inb4 consumerism is capitalism
It can be, but they're not interchangeable at all.

>>8625500
>Face it, most people are wearing slim chinos and OCBDs with plimsolls and wayfarers,
only tryhard faggots wear clothes like that

>>8625789
That was a bit ambitious to say, I agree. I guess we'd need to find a way to give an account of how well these trends (especially when they're actually formed with any distinction first with designers and not just street styles composed of many mish-mashed namesakes) match contemporary approaches to anti-capitalist counteraction that does without Rick's consciousness/unconscious, otherwise we're left with the necessity to create some wild genealogy (which never lives up to its promises) that tries to circumvent celebrity and tidy origin stories as much as possible.

>>8625326

this is such bullshit. so limited in scope.

>>8625831
Christ I wish I could talk like that. All right, so basically if normcore got to the point that everyone looked normal because they tried extra hard to look like they're not trying at all, the "system" would implode? What system is this? Is it the social hierarchy in which we mentally place other people by their appearance? So maxing out normcore would make that hierarchy apparent and ugly? Or am I totally off here?

P.S. Please give me the titles of a few books that would expose me to more arguments in this style, i.e., wordy seemingly bordering on nonsensical, but still a pleasure to read. I like how you write, and the fact that it takes me so much effort to (poorly) interpret your comments is humbling, yet inspiring.

>>8625843
Ah, yes, this is a much cleaner line to draw.

Thanks for that. How could I have missed its anti-consumptive bent? Perhaps when I smell the blood of the commodity in the water, I really want to take it as the emergence of a huge, structural overhaul that's nearly here. Oh well...

>>8625933
wut

>>8625918
Yes, for Baudrillard, the system is codes. Hierarchies included. The code all works off a basic principle of differentiating realities based on master-signification. When anything threatens to meet the code of the system (whatever it may be) with itself, it is an existential threat. So that, revealing the lack of a master-signifier for clothing should in turn cascade; turn the tables in the temple through and through until it is shown that the money that weighed on the surface just before had nothing beneath it that it should have ever been held so sturdily.

I have to admit I've only read a tiny bit of Baudrillard and it was not recently. Do enjoy reading him for me, if you feel so inclined, and see if I am wrong~

Books:

Anything related to critical theory will do--search any theorist in said field on Amazon and check out related books (perhaps start with Walter Benjamin if you want to take off from the beginnings of the modern period (1950-now)). If you want the really intense philopoetic, bullshit-to-brilliance bits in longform, you'll have to read some post-structuralist writing. Most people worship our fair Saints: Deuluze and Guattari. That duo alone encompasses the entire canon. Verso books and semiotext(e) are good (mostly) postructuralist/radical publishers to check out. Selecting a book would be fine without prior inspection. Almost anything they put out is nourishing for what you're looking for.

>>8626011
*Deleuze

Fuck me I am tired

>>8625302
i do, but i also go to college so i dont give one fuck

>>8625730
>I'm rambling at this point; does any of this shit even make sense to you guys?

You sound like a fag and your shit's all retarded. It's just clothes, anon. They don't mean anything.

>>8626011
>>8626021
Awesome, thanks anon.

Damn, I thought this thread was going to a trainwreck when I saw it, but this got good.

>>8625594
http://khole.net/issues/youth-mode/

Popular media coverage of the concept is trash; even Fiona Duncan is pissed off at what NY Mag made of what she turned in.

For the record, I don't think it's a very useful concept at all for talking about the clothes in question, in any incarnation. I'll post more later.

>>8625634
I really dislike that, too, the Rob Horning thing, although I haven't read anything more than the excerpt you posted yet. I hate anything that's *just* refusal. Political/cultural activity needs to create new forms, like how anarchists quit talking about "a new world on the ashes of the old," and started talking about "a new world in the shell of the old."

>I've certainly never seen any here or elsewhere mention their clothes' entanglement with late capitalism,

How long have you been here? I don't mean that pejoratively at all, it just sounds like we might've been missing each other in threads on here.

>>8626011
>Benjamin

Have you read the Arcades Project? I'm working my way through it now and there's even more fashion-related stuff to think about than you'd expect from a book about shopping malls with a section labeled "fashion."

>>8625629
well yeah, that's kinda when streetwear started

>>8625462
believe it or not there are plenty of basic bitches here ; ^]

>>8626011
Thank you for your posts. How grand it is to read one that is not handicapped by a poisoned attention.

If I am not mistaken, you are always welcome here poet.

ITT kids trying to assign skinny black jeans and memesneakers deep meaning & justify them with the same buzzwords people justify workwear with: "timeless" and "classic".

People called the workwear heritage look timeless and classic for years, but now people shit on it for being dated, just like by this time next year (definitely sooner than later) your timeless and classic "monochrome" and "hypebeast" "street" looks will be shit all over too

>>8627448
why do you have to assign a label to everything? you are a product of everything you are exposed to and no matter what you wear there are always parts that can be labeled by trends or "looks". so why not just expose yourself to as many possible things as you can and wear what you like?

>>8627608
Obviously you don't understand fa

>>8627618
ok, I've been here and other places for a year now so perhaps not but why not point out what's wrong with my argument instead of just saying I don't understand?

>>8625204

There was a time when you could wear the same kind of clothes for almost your entire life without being accused of being poor or bad dressed.

Enjoy being a sheep that spends half of his income in clothes and changes his wardrobe every year just because his gods in the Paris Fashion Week tell him so. Your ride never ends.

OCBD with slim chinos/slim jeans

Its literally what was in for the past 5 years, at least for the majority of people I've seen.

It fits with pretty much anything, easy to mix and match, and you don't need a lot of shoes/pants to make it work.

the entire "hurr palewave is kool" movement is stupid, its literally just a color scheme.

>>8627448
Post fit or even just shoe collection

>>8626152
I think, at least from a radical environmentalist perspective, I'd have to at least give my support to both approaches. Will the world be first ash before it can be (re)formed into something new? Is it possible to imagine a world anymore that can be completely reconstructed within a desiring individual (like most anarchists suggest) post-peak everything ( I take the "shell" literally, as a physical reality)? What will be left when anarchism is given its moment again? Along those lines, how does that limit our "political/cultural forms"? It does immensely, I'd contest. In fact, I'd say it's nearly impossible to promise anything of anarchism at the moment.


Oh yes, Benjamin! I've read the Arcades Project once, and then again and again of a few portions. I confess to reading his 18 theses in "On the Concept of History" as if they descended from Sinai. From "IX",

"There is a painting by Klee called Angelus Novus. An angel is depicted there who looks as though he were about to distance himself from something which he is staring at. His eyes are opened wide, his mouth stands open and his wings are outstretched. The Angel of History must look just so. His face is turned towards the past. Where we see the appearance of a chain of events, he sees one single catastrophe, which unceasingly piles rubble on top of rubble and hurls it before his feet. He would like to pause for a moment so fair, to awaken the dead and to piece together what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing from Paradise, it has caught itself up in his wings and is so strong that the Angel can no longer close them. The storm drives him irresistibly into the future, to which his back is turned, while the rubble-heap before him grows sky-high. That which we call progress, is this storm."

Such a vast radiance from this passage, I have to imagine all other writing dims for a moment as I read it.

This thread is really fucking sad. A picture of /fa/'s ineffectuality.

The type of people that make threads like this, ask questions like this, they're trying to piggyback on >>8625634 , or people who don't even actually think, but just read ABOUT thinkers. They need SOMEONE to chew up what's 'going on' and spit it into they're mouth because they're too lazy/stupid not even just to think for their own self (which is why they're so concerned about 'the next big thing' in the first place), but to fucking READ about it.

Why? I'm generalizing, but it's to belong to a small club that 'get' something that other people just don't. They're on the inside, they can identify other people with superior perception by appearance. Their taste is optimal. They certainly didn't 'earn their place', but who cares? Once they understand the language they don't need to be able to grasp the underpinning.

(Continued)

>>8627981
The baffling part is that here, in /fa/, these people have somehow even managed to delude themselves into thinking that they play even some minor role in bringing this 'next big trend' about, that they somehow helped shape it's language or add to it's momentum in some way. The height of arrogance. This is perpetuated by a tradition of defending ones tastes with obfuscate logic and a very strange, very 4chan cycle of division and homogenization. Here, things are compartmentalized so that they can be compared, and so one thing can dominate for the benefit of people's ego. /fa/ is an excellent miniaturization of 4chan in that respect.

Alas, /fa/ has hardly played any role in advancing fashion, especially in the last 3 years. Here there is no progression. The internet has moved on, along with anyone's attention except your own. /fa/'s greatest contribution is as a stage from which to troll from, as slater, colton and casemods knew, and they've moved on.

Anyway, just sick of this circlejerk insistence you're on the bleeding edge, which led to the prolonged clinging to rick owens etc. Most of all sick of people waiting for confirmation on what is cool so they aren't left out.

>>8627652
>>8627629
How did you dress three years ago? Describe a typical outfit
Do the same for two years ago, one year ago, and today.

Is it the exact same shit?

>>8627679
You first

>>8627990
/fa/ is literally nothing more than a place where I can call people poor and remind them that they look bad and their preferred aesthetic isn't cutting edge any more. If anyone takes it as anything else, they're literally retarded

>>8628037

No, because I didn't have an interest in clothes back then. The journey just began. I know it never ends and I'll keep adding and modifing, correcting the course, but I seriously don't plan to change my whole style every year to fit the new trend. That's such an stupid idea.

You can always wear a white shirt. Now, a tee with your favorite animus printed on it I bet you're going to get sick of it really fast.

>>8625380

*cringe*

>>8628065
>/fa/'s greatest contribution is as a stage from which to troll from, as slater, colton and casemods knew, and they've moved on.

why haven't you moved on?

>>8628090
Because it's fun to make kids insecure once or twice a month

>>8628102
people who make fun of others are the most insecure

>>8628109
So all of fa

>>8628120
>everyone on /fa/ is a bitter asshole who is needlessly mean to others
no, just the fuccbois

>>8625414
does this mean i should buy jordan's and x tall tee's because i live in north philly?

>>8628126
>fuccbois

so all of fa except me

>>8625784

Fucking Christ! Can the fake deep, intellectual masturbation get any more intense?

Beyond the functional aspect, clothes are about belonging. They are a shared subcultural uniform - a signifier of your membership in the group.

A natural consequence is that fashion becomes divisive and exclusive. It erects boundaries between the members of your subculture and the world at large.

Normcore is about breaking down those barriers. By adopting the most generic style possible you blah blah blah connected to the most people blah blah blah. Who gives a fuck? It's all bullshit if you ask me. Just another subcultural uniform.

>>8628206
people trying to understand something in a new way = fake deep, intellectual masturbation

Has there been another period in the past couple hundred years that has rivaled this one in its hostility to thought? Holy shit m8, how else are we going to get as enlightened as you if you won't let anyone go through the process?

>>8625747
Shit, I dont want to admit it, but there may be some truth to this post.

Camp One: Believes fashion is an over analysed subject, that some modern pieces of fashion are timeless and these should be a wardrobes foundation. New ideas are styles are sparsely added and worked in to keep the wardrobe relevant. They focus on quality of craft, timelessness, wardrobe functionality, and the fit itself. These people are unphased by the heralds crying of 'x trends demise' or 'y trends ascendance'. They know who they are, and have cultivated a wardrobe which suits them.

Camp Two: Believes fashion is ever evolving and changing. The edge is real and they want to get as close as they can without falling off into absurdity. They will ruthlessly consume the trends and themes which dominate their landscape. Theirs is a struggle for individuality, to capture an original aesthetic through the consumption of byte sized amounts of internet data. Like another anon said 'the ride never ends'. They will never be satisfied. Their quest has nothing to do with fashion, rather; the neurotic quest for perfection, to actualise an idealised self which is superior to their peers and will be the physical consolidation of their ego driven superiority complex.

Camp Three: Believes fashion is a reflection of larger cultural forces. Seeks to identify the scent of the times and observe how this affects what is fashionable. For example, the CCTV enriched urban landscape inspires a techwear aesthetic.

>>8628281
And now camp three is being called on to explain to camp two what they should do post-memechrome. Who decided it was dead? Camp Twos anxiety has formed an inter-subjective consensus, a hype-mind that memchrome need be usurped, surpassed by a superior nxtlvl theme or trend. Camp Two lacks the creative foundation to make this happen, so they splash around in a cesspit of their own anxiety, waiting for the next mutated cultural identity to be manufactured and act as a vessel for their ego. What they do not understand is the influence of environmental factors, of organic necessity.

Fashion does not dictate culture, culture dictates fashion. Ours is a culture which extols individuality and freedom in a time of consumerism and the internet. There is nothing here. It is dearth of meaning. A culture of individuality, freedom, mass-communication, and consumerism has…what a surprise, created memes, to be packed as individualism and sold to a crowd of anxious consumers to self-medicate their modern neurosis.

Don’t be a fuccboi.

>>8628229
> people trying to understand something in a new way = fake deep, intellectual masturbation

No. Just that I could have used a hidden markov model and a random number generator to come up with something more meaningful than the vapid bullshit you posted.

to whoever posted khole:

i got linked to /fa/ because of that and i read your post and it's wrong

>>8628303
I really do not see anything on this page that looks like an excerpt of a Sokal paper, not even close. Seriously. What is so offensive to you that's been posted?

>being a trend hopping babby
>getting sick of an aesthetic this quickly
>actually believing you have a real interest in fashion and arent just a fuccboi trying to be popular
>buying pieces that aren't timeless
>not building a wardrobe over years to create a personalised, clear aesthetic

>>8628399
>over aesthetic this quickly

Memeochrome has been going on for 4 years

>timeless

*tips fedora*

>>8628409
>>>/h&m/

>>8628413
Your favorite store?

>>8628421
maybe tres bien or farfetch purely for range
who has a favourite store? i shop where the thing i want is the cheapest

transparent and topless women, not fully exposed, but something like an undone jacket or some shit, both of those have already started but i feel theres more of a future in it. also, jumpsuits

http://www.apc.fr/wwuk/men/t-shirts/apc-embroidered-t-shirt_pFVAAE3U1/colour-chestnut-brown_dBA00003082-BV00307958.html

M and L sold out. Palewave is a thing

Bumping a thread with potential from the grave

>>8625730
I understand completely, this is one of the biggest decisions I make about my fits. It doesn't just have to go together but it has to have a cohesive statement. This is why I hate (and I believe why many people) hate fakes, the statement that was originally created becomes lost and replaced with unoriginal and inauthentic. Something that every fashion aware person tries to avoid. My biggest issue with dreamboxes is that you sacrifice the beautiful craftsmanship and quality that it took to make the piece and the shoes' message then becomes "I wish these were geobaskets". Its then impossible to build a quality fit with a cohesive statement with this in mind. Similarly "meme" shoes and played out items (e.g. white converse in Sydney) can lose they're original statement and are replaced with unoriginality. I think someone can only be truly effey if they have a consistent message that is repeated or referenced in everyone of they're fits.

>>8628138
depends on if you play basketball or have a gun you need to conceal under a giant tall tee.

>>8628303
you're really angry

>>8628899
2nd the jumpsuits and one-piece garments both in men's and women's fashion

bump

>>8628899
A $15 AA transparent jumpsuit might just do the trick.

http://store.americanapparel.net/nylon-spandex-micro-mesh-jumpsuit_rsa0322

one last bump.