Roman and Neapolitan Styles

[Gruto]

... to tweak a standard, one must know that standard well....

I think this is a great point, as is your connection of it to the jazz greats.
m

Indeed, this is interesting.

I think the field of classical music has resemblances with the field of dressing as well. With atonality in the beginning of the 20th century a world of rules eroded. I'll come back to that ...

[andreyb]

When googled for Mario Blasi, I found the following article: http://dellamoda.it/fashion_dictionary/ ... loring.php.

Not sure if what it says is correct, but an interesting read nevertheless. Also, quite a few names spilled around.

Andrey

P.S.: Italian original (for our friends from "Convivio Italiano" forum ): http://dellamoda.it/dizionario_della_mo ... letana.php. It reveals who wrote the article: Stefano Grassi.

[RWS]

Voxsartoria has eloquently voiced my own unspoken thoughts on the matter. I've long considered the interwar period to have been pivotal in modern Western history and culture as a whole; and dress is, of course, both a superficial and a highly refined aspect of both.

[storeynicholas]

RWS - Agreed but I, for one, just wish that the pivot hadn't swaung quite so far......
NJS

[couch]

Well said, Voxsartoria. What we can only approximate is a sense of the dynamism of former styles, the degree to which their effect depended on their relationships with what preceded and surrounded them. Alas, as L.P. Hartley observed, the past is a foreign country; they do things differently there. But perhaps that should liberate us both from fear of improvising on a classic foundation and from fear of failing at being historical replicas.

[MTM]

... to tweak a standard, one must know that standard well....

I think this is a great point, as is your connection of it to the jazz greats.
m

Indeed, this is interesting.

I think the field of classical music has resemblances with the field of dressing as well. With atonality in the beginning of the 20th century a world of rules eroded. I'll come back to that ...

I first learned this in martial arts, and then in ethics and theology.
In martial arts the progression is shown in that black belts break the old "make a fist" rule and fight with open hands, but they do this successfully only after years of following the rule. In theology and ethics, the thought is demonstrated in the saying that "The Sabbath is made for man, not man for the Sabbath."

What best illustrated the progression for me though, was the Miro museum in Barcelona. There his works are presented chronologically. We first see his doodles as a child, then his efforts to master the classic styles, and eventually his familiar abstract art that seems like doodles but is founded on an impressive intelligence and mastery of the rules that he breaks.

[storeynicholas]

MTM - I think that Christ generally observed the sabbath but said this to explain that it was not culpably breaking the sabbath to feed necessity on that day. I know little of eastern martial arts and precious little beyond my sight of fine art - but was Miro really breaking other people's rules and, if so, which ones, - or was he making his own? Is there a substantive difference between breaking other people's rules and making one's own? In particular, do the unsupported 'rules' or anarchy of an individual have any validity in society generally if they break society's rules? For example, if one turned up in a DJ at Royal Ascot, there would be a perceived attempted rule-breaking and entry to the Royal Enclosure would be refused. The man who tried would not have any meaningful rules of his own because it would be a club of one. If occasional sartorial rules are no longer recognized and no one cares, because of personal preference, part of the point of dress falls away and we could end up lunching in Piccadilly in our pyjamas and monogrammed slippers or even going shopping at Borough Market in full morning dress. When I speak of dress rules I am not speaking of the desirability or undesirability of wearing discreet or any tweeds on a shopping trip or to visit a museum in town. But there are still some rules and places that apply either a contractual and legal sanction (such as exclusion) or a social sanction (such as censure). The latter is just short of actual enforcement of positive morality. If I refuse to take my hat off in a court of law I risk a legal sanction - arrest and punishment for contempt of court. If I refuse to take my hat off in Church I risk no legal sanction but a good deal of censure. In either case, most people would accept that I should remove my hat. Whether I should remove my hat in an elevator at Fortum & Masons might be the subject of (petty) heated debate. All that I am saying is that there times when, if we find ourselves in Rome, we should do as the Romans do.
NJS

[Costi]

Voxasartoria makes the interesting proposition that the success of the 30’s “icons” who broke rules and showed an individual dress style triggered the total dissolution of rules, turning dress into a means of individual expression. This reminds me of the motto of a fellow LL member (who has been missing for the past few months): “Quod licet lovi, non licet bovi”: not only did these men master the “rules” perfectly, but they bent (rather than broke) them WITH TASTE. The vulgarisation of this highly refined talent is best seen in what “fashion” produces today and in the way men strive to “express their personalities” in dress: loud colours, gaudy combinations, trashy clothes; some nice personalities out there!

[MTM]

You make some great points and raise some very interesting questions, storeynicholas.

I agree completely that JC would have observed the Sabbath and its rules in the main, particularly when compared to Miro's observance of classical painting. (Although JC's observance levels might depend on where the borders of the Sabbath are located, and by whom. I've heard it said that some groups, like the Pharisees, were not content to abide by scriptural "fences" and instead "grew hedges" around these fences. We might also talk about the spirit and the letter of the law...)

In any case, my analogy, like all analogies, had one primary insight, which was that in order to break the rules well, one must master them. But you're right that such breakage admits degrees, and that in the extremes one could be said to be creating new rules rather than to be breaking existing ones. I really like that point of yours.

I'm reminded of Manton's "turning corners" thread.
My apologies to all to the degree that this derails the thread!

[storeynicholas]

MTM Thank you for your extra thoughts on my contribution.
NJS