Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

chronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–118 of 118 posts

Re: The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

#111

Post by sliverstorm »

Fishkins wrote: post #106
overgryphon wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is appropriate for you to wear a suit for an occasion (outside of church, weddings, and funerals), then you are likely making enough from the position to pay for the suit.

This doesn't apply to me, but couldn't this be a catch-22? To get a job/social status where you're making good money, you need to get a suit, but you need the money for a suit in order to get that job. Also, you could just be averse to a perceived waste of money, even if you could afford it (my case).

It isn't a catch-22 so much- you don't need to be making banker money to dress like a banker, so you can climb the ladder over time.

Re: The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

#112

Post by qzxt »

bcbrown wrote: post #67

The article reminded me of a quote by Heinlein I recently came across: 'Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naïve, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their mot…

So basically, we need to engage in superficial nonsense, because people are so immature that they can't settle their differences amicably? I'll make sure to teach my child that.

Re: The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

#113

Post by rokhayakebe »

sliverstorm wrote: post #76
rokhayakebe wrote: post #32

Many people pretend to not care about their clothes, or the way they look, so long as they look clean, and decent. The truth is a man who wears a nice shirt, pants, and shoes will simply not want to go back if he is confident about it. And for your information, you look much much better if you sport nice, fitted clothes.

The truth is a man who wears a nice shirt, pants, and shoes will simply not want to go back if he is confident about it. The truth is I am having a difficult time fitting nice shirts, pants, and shoes into my lifestyle. Less because I am lazy, and more because boulders and bicycle cranks and dirt are hard on nice clothes.

If you are dealing with boulders and dirt on your way to work, then you should find a different path, or consider ride-sharing etc... But I believe you can still ride in style.

Re: The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

#114

Post by bcbrown »

qzxt wrote: post #112
bcbrown wrote: post #67

The article reminded me of a quote by Heinlein I recently came across: 'Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naïve, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their mot…

So basically, we need to engage in superficial nonsense, because people are so immature that they can't settle their differences amicably? I'll make sure to teach my child that.

That's exactly the same thing you're teaching your child when you tell them not to point and say "Why is that man so fat?".

I usually wear tees and jeans, but I recognize that formal wear has a place.

I'm surprised you made such a snarky response, when you said something very similar in another thread:

"I think, that as techies, we are in a unique situation, as far as intellectual development is concerned. The vast majority of the population can't appreciate technical phenomena because it is culturally viewed as "too hard" or "robotic" or "blah blah, boring". We, OTOH, actively refuse to engage with humanistic pursuits, but not out of any perceived difficulty so much as discomfort with the pretensions that come with "cultured society"."

Re: The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

#115

Post by lotsofcows »

grimlck wrote: post #73
sliverstorm wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I suspect the disconnect centers around utility. Beautiful architecture can be beautifully functional too. Good weather is pretty, and also comfortable. Greenery is pretty, and cleans the air. Semi-formal and formal wear are practically the antithesis of functional and comfortable. Personally, I have been making an effort to dress up a step or two, but I have to balance this against carrying more changes o…

If your suit isn't comfortable, then you are wearing the wrong size and should get it tailored.

My tailored suit is uncomfortable.

It requires three layers when often one is more than sufficient. It comes with a noose that fits tightly around my neck. It comes with shoes that have no grip. To keep the cuffs just-so, one wears tight bands just below the bicep. The pockets are easily distended and thus barely useable (I miss the 80s, when a distended suit pocket was the sign of that most ugly of status symbols, the mobile 'phone). Easily smutted, one must carry an umbrella or yet another layer to protect it from the rain.

Still, it pays well...

Re: The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

#116

Post by nja »

basseq wrote: post #48

I wear suits at work fairly often; it depends on the client and if I'm interacting externally often in a given week (month). I like wearing a suit: I have an enhanced sense of professionalism and self-confidence when I'm dressed to the nines. I'm not a developer or in "tech" in the pure sense, and I know this depends on the "culture", but I'm also on the East Coast and a bunch of our devs have Bow Tie Tuesday and rea…

At a former job of mine, we used to have "Formal Friday." Soon enough, some started to attend "Flannel Friday" instead and it became quite the office-dividing phenomenon. Regardless, it can be quite fun and effective to have informally-defined clothing days. Gives people a nice chance too try out new pieces and styles.

Re: The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

#117

Post by eitally »

cmbaus wrote: post #51
philh wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Um, no?" - American businessmen I'm probably overreacting, but your post really reads like "you should wear less comfortable/more expensive footwear because I don't like looking at what you currently own", and that sort of thing kinda pisses me off.

Most shoes sold in the the US are of low quality and made at a low cost and then sold at a huge markup. They don't last very long and aren't serviceable. Traditionally made welted shoes are neither more expensive over the long haul or less comfortable.

The second sentence isn't a reasonable statement. I am not a big fan of Ecco quality, especially not for the cost, but I bought a pair of their GoreTex books at a discount shoe warehouse for $40 and wore them until the soles fell off before I sent them back to Ecco for warranty coverage (the soles literally fell off). They gave me a $200 credit to buy a new pair. I bought two pairs of Ecco loafers from sierratradingpost.com for $60/ea. I wore one pair for about five years until the sole cracked in half. They gave me $190 warranty credit for that pair. The second pair of loafers lasted one additional year before an elastic band on the monk strap gave out. They repaired those free and sent them back.

At this point, I'm not going to purchase any brand new Eccos using my own money, but as long as they keep giving me free pairs I'm happy to wear them. Others in my family have had similar experiences with Rockport and Clarks. I think most people just don't bother trying to take advantage of workmanship guarantees.

Re: The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

#118

Post by qzxt »

bcbrown wrote: post #114
qzxt wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically, we need to engage in superficial nonsense, because people are so immature that they can't settle their differences amicably? I'll make sure to teach my child that.

That's exactly the same thing you're teaching your child when you tell them not to point and say "Why is that man so fat?". I usually wear tees and jeans, but I recognize that formal wear has a place. I'm surprised you made such a snarky response, when you said something very similar in another thread: "I think, that as techies, we are in a unique situation, as far as intellectual development is concerned. The vast m…

So you're comparing common decency and common sense to overbearing vanity imposed on people? If I remark about someone's weight to demean them, that's simply dick behavior. Wearing whatever the hell you like is not. Now imposing that one may be somehow inferior for not paying an exorbitant amount of attention to dress (for vanity, no less), that's dick behavior - which was the crux of OP's comment.

And please, tell me how "if you strip away the pretensions from these things, more people would take to them" is the same as "the pretentiousness is necessary and the untraveled, uncultured, blah, blah, don't understand that, because, you know, uncultured".

Post reply on HN