Archinect
anchor

Charcoal with Carbon and Midnight is the New Black

Charcoal with Carbon and Midnight is the New Black





Architects have a reputation for wearing black, but we also have a major perception problem to overcome regarding the maintenance of our black clothes and the composition of our wardrobe – one which, in many cases, keeps us from feeling comfortable wearing the black garb that constitutes an essential part of our professional typology.

The problem, as many architects see it, is that sometimes our blacks don’t match and that many among us feel that this presents an unacceptable attire condition. We might think of it as a black-clashing. (This is especially a problem for those architects who go to work early and have to get dressed in the dark or by non-color-corrected incandescent light.)

I posit that the avoidance of non-coordinating blacks stems from a misconception regarding the potential intellectual stimulus in the mixing – a misconception endemic across the profession and in academia. It’s based on a shortsighted and non-rigorous position, essentially flawed in its original assumptions – a clear failure in architectural thinking. To address the perceived problem what is needed is not a new wardrobe, as many might expect, but a more holistic revision of architects’ sartorial thinking from an architectural point-of-view.

To wit: Matching is a false ideal. During the premodern era, matching was much less common. It was not only not expected, but rarely found. Even a cursory inspection of documentation of the clothing from various historic periods will reveal that matching was simply not a concern. In less choice- and marketing-driven eras, the number of items of clothing a person might own was so limited that color was not an issue. Having color in one’s wardrobe at all cost more due to the expense of extracting and creating a variety of colored dyes. Natural fiber colors or simple homemade dyes were the rule.

Closer to our time, just as a Victorian architecture was an eclectic mix of color and texture, so were the clothes of the Victorians. Portraits of the wealthy of the 19th century reveal as riotous a kaleidoscope of colors and patterns as we would associate with the most over-the-top Queen Anne wedding cake house of Cape May. Not being matched was simply a way of exaggerating the impression of wealth: the layering of texture, color, pattern, and textile weight all adding to a rich and decadent encrustation of clothing.

With the rise of a modern aesthetic, new technologies and new possibilities for quality control allowed for more consistency in the color and texture of clothes. Now matching was possible, so it became a style trend – it was modern, at least for a while. On parallel tracks, however, were a rising interest in hygiene, suggesting crisp whites, and an artistic/philosophical interest in essential qualities of material and the ability to experience these qualities more fully from a position of neutrality. We started to see whites, blacks, minimal smocks, untailored drapes, and other experiments in neutral body image. Interest in a typology of clothing was as prevalent as that in typology of building during this transitional era. Magritte didn’t use the bowler in his work to be clever or to make a fashion statement. It was a wardrobe basic – the bowler man was the everyman.



So, now that the flush and exoticism of the modern ascetic aesthetic has worn off, is it still necessary for our blacks to be signs of neutrality or absence? In a time when we can do anything, when modern can mean neo-baroque expressionism as easily as it can mean minimal expression, can our black wardrobes not express our expanded world view?

Even before the end of the 20th Century (over half a decade ago!) we had entered into an era in which there was a growing attention to the potential for finding inspiration in influences from our varied cultures, races, and histories. In the ‘90s it was multiculturalism; in the '00s, it's global culture. Yet, in this age of diversity, architects remain puritanical - anti-diverse - refusing to allow different blacks to sit next to each other and influence each other in an ensemble!

There is great potential in architects' embracing of a rainbow of blacks into daily use. Our personal attire can serve as a narrative of our laundering history, our attention to the process of textile care, and the quality and colorfastness of the original clothing. Sporting a brown-black with a blue-black may not need to be such a horrific prospect.



It seems that we may be able to talk about the opportunities of varied black clothing from a phenomenological standpoint. But some distinctions should be made when we discuss the phenomenology relative to black clothes. Phenomenology has been understood differently by different black-clad philosophers.

For Hegel, phenomenology was an approach to philosophical observation that begins with an exploration of phenomena (what about our black clothes presents itself to us in conscious experience) as a means to finally grasp the absolute, logical, and metaphysical Spirit behind our wardrobes’ blackness. This has been called a "dialectical phenomenology".

For Husserl, phenomenology was an approach to philosophical observation that takes the intuitive experience of phenomena (what presents itself to us in phenomenological reflection as we look in the mirror) as its starting point and tries to extract from it the essential features of experiences and the essence of what we experience. This has been called a "transcendental phenomenology".

For Heidegger, the phenomenological vision of a world of beings must be bypassed toward the apprehension of the to-Be-ness behind all beings. This has been called an "existential phenomenology".

While each can be brought to bear in this discussion, Heidegger’s analysis of the very Be-ness of things may be one of the most useful for architects in considering the implications of the blackness of their clothes and how to transition to a more open and accepting attitude about the potential for diversity within the all-black wardrobe.

The Questions to ask yourself:

1. Basics
So after ruminating on these philosophers’ phenomenological distinctions for a couple of seconds, consider the following – and remember, these are questions to ask yourself as part of your daily dressing routine:

- When does an article of clothing go out of blackness, becoming a non-black color, as opposed to merely changing shades of black?

- Is the black part of the essential nature of the clothing? What are your pants’ properties or relations and how are they related to the pants themselves?

- What features are the essential, as opposed to merely accidental or circumstantial, attributes of a black shirt? Do the things that have happened to the shirt – fading or washing with blue socks – become embedded as parts of its essential nature?

- Does it matter that I wore these black pants earlier this week? (1)


2. Next, consider the influence of decisions we make on the condition of our black attire:

- What do you do, can you do, or might you do to enact changes in the conditions of black articles of clothing?

- Is it about the actions taken while wearing the clothes (crawling on the floor, spilling wine, walking through a carwash) or about the discipline or lack thereof in the care of the clothes – or both.


3. And this gets to the heart of this issue –

- Is your black accidental or intentional?

- Is accidental preferable to intentional? Accidental drift in the shade or texture of your clothing is a more honest record of the life that you have lived in that clothing. But is this what architect’s think about phenomenology for? Isn’t it more likely that we want to control the conditions under which our wardrobe weathers, washes, and wears?

- By extension, if some items of black have changed color because of being washed with red socks, others have changed color because of an intentional bleaching, and yet others have been subjected to staining from when you changed the oil in your Opel GT, should these blacks be worn together? If so, should there be an intentionality about the mixing of the experiences that these clothes have undergone? Can you really seriously ignore these issues if you consider yourself a rigorous architectural designer/thinker?


Strategies (or is it ‘Tactics’, I forget)

Finally, some comments on the appearance that you’re going for, and some further goals you might consider:

To return to the 19th century, it’s helpful to refer to the writings of John Ruskin, who understood something about phenomenological observation even if he didn’t call it by name. We can assume that he would not have understood the compulsion to wear all black clothes. Not only was he of the nineteenth century, he was an art critic – not an architect. Beyond the obvious, however, Ruskin would have understood and appreciated a sartorial application of his observations on distance and detail. (3)

Where Ruskin describes the shadowy profile of a church spire, the increasing distinctions of form that became comprehensible upon approaching the church, and the fine appreciation of the minutest detail rewarding close inspection, we can apply these tests to our wardrobe of black as well. From a block down Prince Street, you’ll cut a striking figure and your blacks will blend, yielding the pure thin profile that you see when you imagine yourself.

As you’re observed moving closer, your audience/observer will begin to recognize the form emerging from the lack of contrast: the messenger bag, the flipped collar, the silk tie, the Prada belt and shoes. Glimpses of sheen will flash out of the flat black field, and the play of light and shadow will begin to describe your figure and your movement.

The key in this discussion is how your audience/observer is rewarded upon close inspection. After the intrigue of the middle distance, is there more to learn? You will want you wardrobe to invite and engage this curiosity. (Won’t you?) This can best be handled via a focused and rigorous design charrette each morning. What are the textures, the lines, and the colors that become visible up close – from within the area you consider your personal space – that intimate proximity experienced during a hug, a handshake, a conversation over coffee, or a subway ride?

Starting from the more basic articles from which you build the foundation of your outfit and working toward accessories/details:

1. Black Jeans:
Starting with an easy one, you know that your jeans are going to fade. It is the essence of denim [derivative of ‘de Nimes’, named for the place where Levi Strauss and his wife summered in Provence] (4) that it fades. Denim must be allowed to engage with this essential characteristic of the material. If you have determined that, in order to protect the purity of their blackness, you must dryclean your jeans, you are denying their very denim-ness, an intellectually suspect position that can lead to sloppy design rationalizations in your architectural work. Worse yet if you allow your cleaner to iron the denim, forcing the textile to take a form for which it was never intended.

Somewhere along the line, unless you’re obsessive-compulsive, you will probably wash your black denim with something of a different color and the exposure of the white binding fibers of the denim to this foreign color will cause an ever-so-slight shift in tint. If this happens repeatedly, the tint will become greater and the overall blackness of the jeans will begin to shift toward less-black. This is a natural and appropriate process, a register of the real life of the denim, just as important as the wearing of the knees, the stretching of the wallet pocket, and the fraying of the top edges of the pockets.

2: Microfiber sweater:
It was probably an expensive sweater, unless you got it from the shelves in the back of Banana Republic. Even if you did, it’s a very nice sweater. So the elbows have begun to show wear? Does that mean its tired and ready for Goodwill? Or does it make it more uniquely yours and more rich with history and the trace of life’s trajectory?

3: Black shirt wine stains:
This is a tough one. I mean, just because we’ve left the early modern hygienic ascetic era behind, it doesn’t mean you want to look unclean, right? But those wine stains are a marking, a trace of where the shirt has been, where you’ve been. So some value judgments must be brought to bear. Is is a cotton shirt, a rayon shirt, or a silk shirt? Think about the value of the shirt and its replaceability and weigh this against thoughts about the source of the stain and whether it’s a marking about which you want people to know. Was it a Merlot from an invitation-only gallery opening of new work by Chuck Close or was it red table wine from a winebox at your Mom’s picnic in Poughkeepsie on the Fourth of July? What do you want to have to tell someone when/if they say, ‘Oh, you’ve got something on you right there.’ (I won’t go into the possibility of lying. That’s a different design/intention discussion altogether. But I won’t rule it out. Especially if it’s a silk shirt.)

4: Black pants/skirt, linen napkins:
You know it’s happened to you. Every mid-price sit-down restaurant that aspires to popularity these days has linen napkins that leave fuzzies on your lap. A purist would simply choose the restaurants that choose manmade fiber napkins, but you might want the trace of a certain 42nd Street Chinese place on your lap for some reason. (I have no idea why, but…)

This is not a permanent marking so really should be thought about as merely a temporal condition of your black pants or skirt. It’s acceptable to flaunt your night out for dinner for a wear or two, but really, after that, you have to admit that the item of clothing is just dirty. Whether before or after drycleaning, those pill-balls need to be carefully removed with a lint roller and the experience held in your memory – no sartorial souvenirs here.

5: Acid-washed, stone-washed, and pre-ripped jackets and pants: You’re kidding, right? (5)

6: Belt:
Does your belt have wear around the size hole adjacent to the one you’re using now – indicating that you’ve had a weight change? That’s part of your recent history!

Some belts these days are made with a leather-appearing face that is merely sewn on. When the belt wears, especially the threads along the edge, you might start to see this face material come loose. This is a trace of use but also a little bit too much of a giveaway that you haven’t been shopping at the most upscale stores. You’ll have to change belts if this happens to you, or just start buying real leather so that your belt can show its wear in a dignified way.

While it’s still true that a brown belt with black shoes is not an acceptable accessorizing strategy, a little variety in the blackness of your belt and shoes is less stigmatizing. It’s not like the shoeshine guy in the subway station is going to polish you’re belt for you, right? So the sheen on the belt may suffer a bit. Or spend your evenings polishing your belt instead of drinking Hefeweizen with your archi-buddies. Your choice.



7: Black messenger bag:
Messenger bags come in a variety of materials and forms. For some architects, this has become one place that they can truly express their individuality. A bright Timbuk2 bag is as likely to look like a flag of some small as-yet-not-covered-by-NPR country as it is to be black. Some will still hew to the standard, though. And for these folks you can go manmade materials or natural.

Manmade: Your nylon Swiss Army bag will stay true black forever, giving your wardrobe a kind of control against which to be able to see the distinctions among the other pieces you’re wearing. (Disclaimer: It’s not unheard of that, thought the black nylon fibers won’t change color, if you take your nylon bag to jobsites, wood splinter and other substances can embed themselves in the loose weave. These are to be taken as trophies and exhibited proudly.)

Natural: The old guard had this down perfectly. You have to admire the architect who has spent most of a career shuttling a Peugeot between work and university, tousled overlong hair sticking up in a show of harried brilliance and drooping shoulder holding a very heavily loaded, beautifully misshapen and roughed-up soft leather shoulder bag. It takes a long time to get a bag to look as distressed as the ones these guys carry, and you can’t fake it. If you’re patient and committed, willing to stick with the same bag for years (and willing to spring for one that will last so long) you, too, can grow old with a visible symbol of your commitment to perfectly aged leather.


Follow a few of these tips – and develop your own through constant observation and experimentation - and you’re ready to meet the world as an architect who fully understands that your wardrobe is an outward sign of your approach to design. While phenomenology is not so much a wardrobe strategy as a lens for perception, cognition, and comprehension of the world around us, if you will pay attention to the essential qualities of the clothes themselves and their relative condition when placed together in an ensemble, your attention will impress those who care enough to look at what you’re wearing, giving them a deeper appreciation for your sensitivity.

And if you approach this effort seriously, treating your time in front of the full-length every morning as a design problem to be solved, you’ll start each day with an awareness of the little differences in color, texture, and form that can enhance your ability to pick the right toilet partitions to complement the ceramic tile in the hospital project on which you’re working.




Notes:

(1) David Byrne famously observed that if you always wear the same clothes, pretty soon people will start to recognize you. But you don’t want them to think you’re some creep-o like Mickey Rourke’s character in 9 ½ Weeks. (2)

(2) You might want to be like Mickey Rourke’s character in 9 ½ Weeks because he sure had some fun, but you don’t want them to think that. You want him/her to find out after the fun with the fruit.

(3) Ruskin, John. The Seven Lamps of Architecture (I think).

(4) Aber, Ita. ‘Bluejean Baby’, New York Times Book Review, 3 September 2006, p6.

(5) How dare you think that falsely aged clothing could be at all an acceptable part of this discussion? Pretending that your clothing has a history of use and activity when, in fact, those adulterations were manufactured before the clothing came into its functional life is deceitful. How could any self-respecting architect imagine that false historical garb would be an option? I’m offended that you even read ‘Acid-washed, stone-washed…’ and continued reading as if I was being serious. Stop now. You don’t deserve my philosphical/architectural wardrobe advice.(6)

(6) Well, okay, at some point in the ‘80s this could have been a supportable position given the environment of ironic (not iron-on) application of flattened and simplified versions of architectural specimens of carefully documented provenance onto generic modern boxes. But only then. Not now.


Next Issue: “Fuzzy Split Ends: Time to Go to the Hairdresser – or to Derrida?”




 
Dec 30, 08 7:20 am

The above is offered as a 'Draft'. Please feel free to brainstorm additions or subtractions.

In honor of the publication of this new book. Full Disclosure: I had nothing to do with this book.

Dec 30, 08 7:23 am  · 
 · 

Steven...
Bravo!
All i can say..

Dec 30, 08 8:16 am  · 
 · 
farmer

wow noctilucent! you can write! (not sarcastic)

Dec 30, 08 8:27 am  · 
 · 

Also,

The thing about black on black that bothers, not seriously, but personally (other than the occasional black t-shirt and black jeans) is the blackness of it. I just like to wear more color generally.

Would what you wrote (SW) be applicable to any all solid color mathcing attire?

Personally, i would rather do purple on purple or white on white (Karim style) or something. I just find black too black. But then again maybe i grew up around and despising too many Goths.

Dec 30, 08 9:27 am  · 
 · 
Sarah Hamilton

Very nice, Steven.

Dec 30, 08 10:31 am  · 
 · 
WonderK

This is quite an opus, Mr. Ward.

I don't have the attention span to read the whole thing at once, so I'll be back.

Dec 30, 08 11:06 am  · 
 · 
Living in Gin

I need to go buy some more black clothing, pronto.

Dec 30, 08 11:14 am  · 
 · 






Clorox 2: The Movie


remember "Ich fahr liebstens schwarz."
Dec 30, 08 11:44 am  · 
 · 
farmer

Shock me: your appearances - all to few - always make me smile.

but then again, absence makes the heart grow fonder

Dec 30, 08 12:11 pm  · 
 · 

nocti,
you hardly got to the fun parts (if you stopped at halfway). your experiential associations with certain black fabrics, though, is right on - fairly universal, i'd bet - especially since i know that you're there and i'm here - and therefore maybe those associations are essential aspects of the character of silk shirt vs cotton shirt?

nam,
non-black alternatives really don't resonate as part of the architect-typology, for better or worse. but the matching of other colors could work in a similar fashion...


i've had this around for quite a while and not known what to do with it. i think one of the difficulties is that it's not consistently either serious or not-serious - the archinect eds thought it was possibly too polite for prime-time.

for those who stuck with it all the way through, thanks! it gets better - or worse. not sure.

Dec 30, 08 5:32 pm  · 
 · 
farmer

Steven: I read this after supper. Betrays not a hint of irony or camp. a tour de force of sincere quirkiness. Congratulations to you on accomplishing this literary high-wire act with dignity and gravitas. It is so serious it is hilarious.

Dec 30, 08 6:47 pm  · 
 · 
liberty bell

Steven, this belongs in the Features section, not just the Discussions!!!

Fantastic. Much more extensive than I expected and far more fun too! Bravo indeed.

I *do* have an old leather briefcase distressed to the perfect point of "harried brilliance" (of course I'm neither) - it's lovely especially because it has straps to be both briefcase and/or backpack, so it has a bit of Schoolboys in Disgrace vibe as well. I put it away when I moved to the Midwest and stopped walking, but I believe I'll pull it back out again now.

I think farmer put it best: "sincere quirkiness". It's good to be able to laugh at ourselves while still having sympathy for those things we, however illogically, hold dear.

Dec 31, 08 10:43 am  · 
 · 
liberty bell

I forgot to add: I don't appreciate black denim. Denim should be blue, IMO. Black denim looks too contrived, like you're trying to dress in all black. I think the all black look should appear less studied.

But then, it's actually a very intentional unstudied look, yes? In my case it is - it's that design charrette every morning that Steven mentions.

Dec 31, 08 1:11 pm  · 
 · 
chatter of clouds

I saw the irony not in the inherent saturnine attributes of different sartorial essences but in the difference between the essentially inherent but figuratively contingent/fickle saturnine in the mode of the sartorial (black silk) and the essentially contingent but figuratively essentialist sartorial in the mode of the saturnine (cotton blackness). The distance between being black and meaning black. Also the second half was worse since what bored me more than the content was the lukewarm gush of a tone. No embers, no dense coagulation of thought. But being a party pooper, maybe I didn't get it.

Dec 31, 08 3:55 pm  · 
 · 
liberty bell

Aw, noctilucent, obviously you're only perceiving of yourself as a party pooper because you're going to the wrong parties.

Dec 31, 08 9:16 pm  · 
 · 
aspect

black clothing are not UV protected, meaning the longer under the sun, the faster it will fade from pure black...

btw, do architects still always wear black? do they know they suck?

Dec 31, 08 9:46 pm  · 
 · 
aspect

i tend to agree with noctilucent, i also get bored reading it.

Dec 31, 08 9:48 pm  · 
 · 
AP

happy new year (on the way out)

Dec 31, 08 10:21 pm  · 
 · 
SDR

Wow. Well, this trumps the "architects' shoes" thread all in one go, doesn't it ? And what about glasses -- spectacles -- or is that too obvious: round vs squinty (old guard vs avant garde) ?

Congratulations in any event. A tour-de-force and a fun read.

Black pocket T's for me (what's with your boss who has to borrow your pencil or pen because he can't be bothered to carry one ?) and black jeans. Like a Spartan or a Amish person -- "no" style. This year's discovery: black Crocs, and cheap but apparently long-wearing plain black Chinese-made socks from Mervyn's. Oh, and of course my black web belt from the Army-Navy store, with a black enamel steel slide buckle, when you can find them.

Why think about clothes when you can just wear them, and get on with life ? But then, I don't have to make a statement, or present myself in any particular way, in my trade. . .

Jan 1, 09 2:13 pm  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

w
t
f

Jan 1, 09 5:19 pm  · 
 · 
Emilio

don't know about women, lb, but this is the only man in black worthy of the name.

love the puffy sleeves...

Jan 1, 09 8:24 pm  · 
 · 
liberty bell

I'm certainly a Johnny Cash fan, Emilio, but I'd also allow this man in black to rescue me.

SDR, you're right - a black uniform worn as a "no style" workingman's uniform has a definite appeal. I went to school with a guy who wore workmen's gear - blue trousers, blue long sleeve button up shirts - every day, and he did do amazing work. Sometimes I feel like buying seven Mao suits and wearing nothing else every day. But with some kickass black combat boots, of course.

Jan 1, 09 9:07 pm  · 
 · 
SDR

Heh heh -- thanks, liberty. Yeah, there's something to be said for "uniformity," isn't there -- in personal terms as in architectural detail ?

I drifted into it as I got older; color just didn't feel like "me." And black IS slimming. . .

Jan 2, 09 12:05 am  · 
 · 

an ode to form fitting fashion in muted platform. Steven I did enjoy this, mostly for the effort you put into writing it. I am curious as previously mentioned about the accompaniment of shoes - burnished, polished or plain; I feel that they like a well worn bag adds a certain authenticity to the whole architect argument. As does the addition of a scarf say in pewter. Imagine if you will an architect in the Caribbean, Dubai or Vietnam with 30 degree weather donning a scarf for architect's sake. Again enjoyable

Jan 2, 09 12:29 am  · 
 · 
farmer

i have had a formal event (a boat race dinner) i have gone to the past four years at which i have worn black tie. it felt uncomfortable the first year. Mainly because i was wearing navy socks instead of black!

amazing how the bits come together to look and feel absolutely right for the occasion. you don't want to take it off at the end of the evening!

(my next goal in life is to wear white tie somewhere. . .)

Jan 2, 09 12:30 am  · 
 · 

Farmer I have a cream tie that i often wear...
When i have to wear a tie.

Jan 2, 09 10:37 am  · 
 · 
farmer

Cambridge may balls the undergrad men have to wear white tie and tails - it's de rigeur.

Wittgenstein was denied dining at Trinity College high table because he refused to wear jacket and tie

Jan 2, 09 11:00 am  · 
 · 
Emilio

ok, lb, i'll give you him (good movie btw)...and he's wearing a puffy shirt too...ha ha.

Jan 2, 09 1:03 pm  · 
 · 
newport2009

so pretentious.....i feel like i'm choking to death whenever i see these architects covered in black, it's just so over the top + you top it off with what i call the architecture "goggles", such posers. ugh!

c'mon, have some individuality, they take themsleves way too seriously.

this is why i love seeing the sight of renzo piano, it gives me a sense of breezy fresh air as if i'm on a beach~ (i'm not talking about his oxford shirts but in his color choices) and he can damn build as well as his black cladded counterparts.

i told all my friends that once i become and architect, to shoot me if i ever start looking like those dang self-important architects. sorry, just an opinion.

Jan 27, 09 8:00 pm  · 
 · 
liberty bell

I confess: I dressed entirely in black yesterday: boots, skirt, stockings, turtleneck(!), overcoat, gloves, glasses, bag.

I rarely, rarely, dress like this but I also confess, I enjoyed it.

Jan 27, 09 8:51 pm  · 
 · 
SDR

It makes the skin so. . .white !

A red tattoo in a noticeable place would have been the perfect accessory ?

Jan 27, 09 9:00 pm  · 
 · 
newport2009

well...if you're white :)

Jan 27, 09 9:15 pm  · 
 · 
vado retro
NoirC'estNoir!!!
Jan 27, 09 9:27 pm  · 
 · 
jealous of the world

The way you've framed your position on the subject between smarmy and serious is essential to the writing. I suggest you continue in this mode, but perhaps a drawing that explores the non-matching blacks would serve the research better at this point. I also am still having trouble with the section on black denim and believe the text needs a more rigorous approach here. The nature of denim seems to lie more in it's blueness, but there is perhaps a shift or desire to get to something that approaches blackness via the dark jean.

Jan 27, 09 9:36 pm  · 
 · 
SDR

I wear black Levi's or Lee's -- but I don't know if that fabric is correctly called denim. Is it ?

Jan 27, 09 10:01 pm  · 
 · 
Distant Unicorn

Not to bump this thread and or be an asshole.

But i am bumping this thread and being an asshole.

Black is for poor people. Synthetic dyes are quite a recent invention!

And also, learn to fucking color or dye your clothing. Also, black clothing should only be washed in vinegar and borax.

Black clothing has be be "blackwashed." This basically means you stamp your clothes in india ink and fermented piss.

Oct 10, 09 4:09 am  · 
 · 
Distant Unicorn

Also, SDR. Yes is it denim... the only requisite to be called denim is that it has to be a double-herringbone weave of broad cloth (the only acceptable cloth used in riding wear) of a spun yarn (around the range of a half a milimeter).

Technically, expensive wool trousers are "denim." But denim refers to any twill (double herringbone) made of cotton.

Double herrignbone generally isn't a requirement or even a definiton as americans prefer the "weft" weave... but that weave is total shit.

Serge de Nîmes is the name of true denim-- Levi stole the concept and even color from the savonese/turinos and mass -marketed this as some hot new shit.

It isn't. It is fucking pauper clothing. And it is fucking cheap. Denim is the "as seen on tv" product of the 19th century.

GROSS TOWN.

Oct 10, 09 4:22 am  · 
 · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: