The London Lounge

There might be two types of style. The first one is what we see on a blog like The Sartorialist. It contains photos of people who often brilliantly embody a collective fantasy. We do not know there personalities, and we don’t care. We like them because of the elegant representation. The other style embodies a person. We might call it the Costi Style, or even the LL Style It is about maximizing personality escaping categories. It will often take place in a traditional bespoke suit but in principle it could take all sorts of clothing.

I'll take the latter.

Yes, the former is styling, the latter is Style. To Costi
Maximizing personality is an effect, though, more than a target. The process by which this comes into being is freeing oneself. And don't we feel like we could place these rare uncaged birds in any category, or indeed all of them, rather than none? Profound humanity has this effect. The process is often one of de-construction, except in those rare cases when one has an inborn ability to maintain, rather than regain it.
Styling, on the other hand, is construction.
However, what's in a name, Style or another? When the rose smells sweet, we know it does and all we really want to do is relax and enjoy it, rather than bother to understand what it is and how it works on us. But when there's no rose around, the best we can do is talk about it

I prefer the latter too, although I see it as a construction too rather than a de-construction.

Then perhaps you don't really see it
If you prefer another term - an un-veiling...

Gruto wrote: The other style embodies a person..... It is about maximizing personality escaping categories.

I know we are posting quotations in the other thread but......constructed or unveiled:
"Style is the perfection of a point of view"
Richard G. Eberhart

" Style is the result of an unconscious effort rather than a conscious aim " Oscar Wilde

So very true.

"Unconscious Effort"... ? Hmm

Yes, it made me wonder, too...
The "unconscious effort", in my view, is that tension, that propensity of the human spirit toward higher ground, as it were. There is no point of destination (as in a "conscious aim"), it is a way - as long as you are on the way, you are there.
It's interesting (and maybe Wilde has a great stroke of intuition here) that he describes Style as "the result" of this "unconscious effort", therefore as the derivative of a function in mathematics. Therefore, Style is not "speed", but "acceleration". This is similar to a metaphor I used once that Style is not the electricity that runs through a wire, but the magnetism generated by the current flow. This is why you can hardly "do" anyhthing on purpose ("conscious aim") to have Style, it is all in the WAY you do (all) other things.
Style is non-linear.

This is style (in every way):

What though on hamely fare we dine
Wear hoddin-gray an' a' that
Gie fools their silks and knaves their wine;
A man's a man for a' that
For a' that and a' that
Their tinsel show and a' that
The honest man, tou' e'er sae poor
is king of man for a' that.

Robert Burns had it right. Thank you Luis.
Style as a result of an unconscious effort, and not being able to do anything on purpose, sounds a lot like setting a static and unsolvable divide between the have and the have nots.
But wait a minute, we CAN do something about it. It is Costi´s concept of WAY of doing all the other things.
Being honest (a la Burns) or true in all the other things in life leads to Style.

True style is the father in "The Bicycle Thief"

but why do one have to choose?

some times i wear baggy pants with a t-shirt (and yes i basically only ever listen to rap music)...

some times i want to wear my balmain jeans, a givenchy tee and a pair of margiela sneakers...

and some times, i just want to wear my best bespoke suit and shoes...

a side note, it's also very interesting what people consider as style, depending on your demographic or location. the term style is defined very differently in brixton vs camden vs shoredtich vs mayfair... i am a different person depending where i am, and i am perfectly happy with that.