Live data from Hacker News

Why did clothing become boring?

resobscura.substack.com

61–70 of 142 posts

Re: Why did clothing become boring?

#62
post #25

Why did clothes ever become NOT boring in the first place? Clothes are above all something that warms/protects/hides us from the world. Aesthetic contemplations are really just an afterthought. Also, "fashion" is one of the stupidest things ever, like oh hey, you should now replace your perfectly good clothes every season because someone says so??

> you should now replace your perfectly good clothes every season because someone says so?

Is that what you do?

If not, then that's a bold move setting up a strawman as you try to start a flamewar.

Re: Why did clothing become boring?

#63
post #25

Why did clothes ever become NOT boring in the first place? Clothes are above all something that warms/protects/hides us from the world. Aesthetic contemplations are really just an afterthought. Also, "fashion" is one of the stupidest things ever, like oh hey, you should now replace your perfectly good clothes every season because someone says so??

Clothes are an important part of how we communicate with each other. It's an important part of the human experience, right up there with art and music.

By having this opinion (and I assume dressing plainly) you are sending your own message to people about what's important to you.

Re: Why did clothing become boring?

#64
First off the historical record in clothing is dominated by the wealthy, and in particular the notable clothing of wealthy. You would need to compare this to haute couture of the present.

Now examples are dominated by average people, wearing inexpensive fashion that is mass produced.

Re: Why did clothing become boring?

#65

I think there are a couple of important things missing from this article. One is that until relatively recently clothing served a very different function to that of today. In Europe, in our grandparents’ or even parents’ childhoods - as late even as the 1970s - housing and transport was very different to how it is now. Clothing was largely purpose-specific; people had far fewer clothes than today but those clothes ha…

> Those layers were still designed to serve a purpose - largely keeping warm Yes and no. Something that people often take for granted is doing laundry. The invention of the automatic clothes washer and dryer changed things dramatically . Before automation, laundry day for a household of 4 was a huge, laborious, and often multi-day task. Not only did garments need to be washed by hand, but there was a lot of attention…

I wonder how much this relates to the placement of a washing machine and/or dryer.

It's typically in the kitchen in a British household, unless you have a house with a utility room or an old outdoor toilet (growing up, my house had an external downstairs toilet but it was just used for storage and the washing machine).

When I moved abroad though it wasn't unusual to see the washer/dryer in the bathroom.

> But the reason people wore those layers was not always necessarily to stay warm. In fact, the layers were worn in the summer in hot climates as well as during winter in cold climates.

This still holds up today. Can't speak for anywhere else but in the UK people will go out in 30ºC weather in an anorak or puffer jacket with a hoodie and tee underneath. The exact opposite of us northern British types who go out in winter wearing just one light layer at 5ºC (tee + jeans, top + skirt).

Re: Why did clothing become boring?

#66
post #25

Why did clothes ever become NOT boring in the first place? Clothes are above all something that warms/protects/hides us from the world. Aesthetic contemplations are really just an afterthought. Also, "fashion" is one of the stupidest things ever, like oh hey, you should now replace your perfectly good clothes every season because someone says so??

> Also, "fashion" is one of the stupidest things ever, like oh hey, you should now replace your perfectly good clothes every season because someone says so??

Have you ever encountered the world of javascript frameworks?

Re: Why did clothing become boring?

#67
What I find interesting is that where traditional clothing has managed to maintain some sort of foothold, it’s almost invariably in women’s clothing. This is largely a superficial observation and is likely becoming increasingly false as time goes on and is based almost entirely on media representations, but I think someone more skilled and knowledgeable than me could find the boundaries of this observation against reality.

Re: Why did clothing become boring?

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your argument could be read as beauty not mattering. For a different POV, countless animals will risk their life to look fabulous/make themselves stand from the pack to leave a legacy. Arguably fashion could be one of the most important thing to people. PS: on a side note, even in technical circles where we could expect more detachment from appearances in general, a lot of comment will revolve around "X looks dumb".…

However, we should use our intelligence to find ways to curb the extent to which clothing has become an obsession, becaue the clothing industry is unsustainable and creates enormous amounts of waste and pollution. With our big brains, surely we can find ways to differetiate and display our styles without so much waste? Or perhaps we should just go back to trying to make AI think like us...

Picking clothes that make us look good, and frequently replacing our clothes, are really two quite different things. You don’t have to do the latter to achieve the former.

Re: Why did clothing become boring?

#69
post #31
post #25

Why did clothes ever become NOT boring in the first place? Clothes are above all something that warms/protects/hides us from the world. Aesthetic contemplations are really just an afterthought. Also, "fashion" is one of the stupidest things ever, like oh hey, you should now replace your perfectly good clothes every season because someone says so??

What's the point in surviving if no one wants to mate with you, evolutionary speaking. Is your type, dating wise, someone who is warm and dry?

> Is your type, dating wise, someone who is warm and dry?

My type is someone who has enough excess wealth to support my kids. Of course what this means is different for different animals, and in the case of humans different styles of raising kids, and different genders. In our modern world we don't think like this, but in 1700 a man could rape a woman and she would have no choice but to bare the child (if one happens), and then society would raise the child (in some cases she could drop the child off with the shakers or similar) - the important point is in this case the man only minimal cost to the child but there are a lot of costs on the woman. Thus women generally need signals that this man will stick around to feed her an can afford, that while the man needs to know the women's body will result in a baby being (as opposed to all too common dies at birth).

Warm and dry is the very minimum you can ask in a potential mate - anything else will die before the child is born and thus you don't pass those genes on. However if you can find someone who has enough free time to not only be warm and dry but also well decorated that implies they have plenty of excess time making warm and dry clothing for the child who then won't freeze to death. Of course different climates have different warmth and dry needs.

Post reply on HN