Style and Stage

"He had that supreme elegance of being, quite simply, what he was."

-C. Albaret describing Marcel Proust

Style, chic, presence, sex appeal: whatever you call it, you can discuss it here.
Gruto

Thu Aug 18, 2011 4:56 pm

Costi wrote:But I do not think we shall find Style outside of ourselves, in society, or that its manifestations depend on it (even though some of them may take place in the presence and with respect to others), or that we can find our inspiration there. And then society is made up of individuals, I am sure you don't embrace humanity as a whole in practice, either - you have your preferences, your groups, your affinities, like all of us. So what is "society" to you may not be "society" to me...
You don't find style in society. You produce it yourself. However, you need a stage or several stages to produce it. Gary Cooper needed it. We need it.

Telling people "just be yourself", then style will come, is missing that being yourself is being among other people.
Costi
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Thu Aug 18, 2011 5:57 pm

So you think that if men find themselves, know themselves, become themselves (a millenary desideration, not to be taken for granted at all!) they won't have Style unless they relate to "society"? Perhaps we confound usage du monde or "elegant manners" with Style here. Everything - love, intelligence, goodness - can exist for people who live (exceptionally) outside society, with no stage and no audience other than themselves and God. While these attributes (Style included) MAY have an object, they don't DEPEND on it. And even if they DO have an object, it needn't be a human object. They are innate and they can be developed, also in contact with others, but they are not forged in this contact; if anything, they are tempered in it. With this I can agree, but that Style has origin outside of man, in society, or in his relation to others - I cannot...
Or, if you can agree that our first - in order of appearance and in order of importance - stage has ourselves as both actor and spectator, then I might agree to see Style as a permanent dialogue: with ourselves. The world is a witness, in this case, not an audience, in the sense that we are not performing FOR the world, but we don't hide away from it, either.
Costi
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Thu Aug 18, 2011 6:36 pm

Gruto wrote:Telling people "just be yourself", then style will come, is missing that being yourself is being among other people.
If you find yourself, you find everyone else, too - or a place for everyone else. As long as you are not yourself, you don't see others as they are. You assume things and act upon false assumptions about others' expectations, out of a need to be accepted and integrated; when in fact it is enough to be authentic (however that is for each of us) and you will integrate seamlessly, because people GO for authenticity, they FEEL when someone is authentic and RELATE to that, even if they don't share the same views or lifestyle or choices. They RESPECT authentic choices, even if they are not their own. But they equally reject (and sense) people who are not authentic, who build an image, a mask, who act instead of living. They like being seduced, but not by cold-blooded gigolos. They may even give in when they sense that natural charm benefits from the helping hand of a little guiltless artifice, but there has to be a natural basis; as with good perfumes :)
So I would say: be yourself and people among whom you live will start seeing Style.
Perhaps this is one of the best tests of authenticity: if you think you have a definite style, if you are conscious, aware of it, making choices based on predefined principles, then it is not (yet) authentic, it is (more or less) constructed, artificial; if you are aware of your individuality without making a conscious effort to be different, if you feel you couldn't be other than as you are, if you make your choices by instinct (letting go of intellect's interference is not an easy task...), then there is a chance you might have actually found Style within and started manifesting it naturally.
Finally, I believe it is impossible to have found Style and all the qualities and attributes that make it up, and be a misanthrope: so yes, Style certainly brings you closer to people, makes you relate to them better, more intimately, gives you more direct access to their hearts. So once you have found your Style, you will have amplified your social stage tenfold in an instant. But until confronting society, bringing Style to light is a work you need to do with yourself. Even Stanislavsky says it - and he is teaching actors how to act on stage! - in the title of his "actors' bible": "An Actor's Work on Himself".
NJS

Thu Aug 18, 2011 6:56 pm

So far as I understand the premise of the OP in this thread, "style needs to be displayed to exist at all" when, surely, display to impress is the very antithesis of style; even if we accept Emerson's dictum that to be in society a man must serve it. However, surely, Costi is right that a man does not need to be constantly in society (or company) or, for that matter, in it at all, to have style. Moreover, to the extent that X and Y appreciate Z's style, it is as much owing to their sensibilities as his and their mutual good sense in keeping the same company, to the extent that each of them wishes to keep any company at all.
NJS
Gruto

Thu Aug 18, 2011 7:57 pm

Costi wrote:people GO for authenticity, they FEEL when someone is authentic and RELATE to that, even if they don't share the same views or lifestyle or choices. They RESPECT authentic choices, even if they are not their own. But they equally reject (and sense) people who are not authentic, who build an image, a mask, who act instead of living.
What are "authentic choices" :?:

There is nothing inherently bad in masking. Masking can do good, c.f. Benigni's La vita è bella.
NJS wrote: "style needs to be displayed to exist at all" when, surely, display to impress is the very antithesis of style
Style IS displaying.
Costi
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:59 pm

Gruto wrote:What are "authentic choices" :?:
There is nothing inherently bad in masking. Masking can do good, c.f. Benigni's La vita è bella.
Well, if you have to ask... :wink:
A choice is authentic when it is in agreement with who you really are (which relies on knowing yourself). A choice is authentic when there can be no other for you. A choice is authentic when there is nothing fighting it in the back of your mind, nothing that only shows in front of the mirror at night, before you take off your mask and go to sleep. Wearing a mask all the time is extremely tiresome - even when it is not made of iron; or perhaps you think that was a commedy, too...
And why manufacture a mask when none is necessary?! Why complicate things when they are meant to be so sublimely simple? Why use your intellect to counterfeit nature and build a chimera, when you could use it to shed light on how nature works and understand yourself AS YOU ARE, so you can BETTER yourself, not reinvent yourself? If you like to think in Aristotelian terms of potential and act, apply them in the sense of understanding your true potential and putting THAT into act, rather than ACT in a way for which you have no potential.
True style is as natural as laughter. As natural as a smile. Can you detect a contrived smile or forced laughter? Then so can others...
Gruto wrote:Style IS displaying.
Well, I'm afraid this is where all our differences come from... According to your principles, I could even deny that you exist, because I never saw you.
But I don't... :(
NJS

Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:11 am

Costi wrote:
Gruto wrote:What are "authentic choices" :?:
There is nothing inherently bad in masking. Masking can do good, c.f. Benigni's La vita è bella.
Well, if you have to ask... :wink:
A choice is authentic when it is in agreement with who you really are (which relies on knowing yourself). A choice is authentic when there can be no other for you. A choice is authentic when there is nothing fighting it in the back of your mind, nothing that only shows in front of the mirror at night, before you take off your mask and go to sleep. Wearing a mask all the time is extremely tiresome - even when it is not made of iron; or perhaps you think that was a commedy, too...
And why manufacture a mask when none is necessary?! Why complicate things when they are meant to be so sublimely simple? Why use your intellect to counterfeit nature and build a chimera, when you could use it to shed light on how nature works and understand yourself AS YOU ARE, so you can BETTER yourself, not reinvent yourself? If you like to think in Aristotelian terms of potential and act, apply them in the sense of understanding your true potential and putting THAT into act, rather than ACT in a way for which you have no potential.
True style is as natural as laughter. As natural as a smile. Can you detect a contrived smile or forced laughter? Then so can others...
Gruto wrote:Style IS displaying.
Well, I'm afraid this is where all our differences come from... According to your principles, I could even deny that you exist, because I never saw you.
But I don't... :(
Well, Costi, I am with you: 100%. Gruto, you seem to delight in expressing ideas that are antagonistic to the thinking of several on this site. You have seriously browned off some valuable contributors; to the extent that they see no point in coming here any more: no names and no pack drill - but their absence is plain. You are, to me (probably also to them), just a bore. Please tone it down - or go away - and concentrate on writing some schmoozing advertorials at which, promoting the Bling (that you shamelessly promote), you probably excel.
Cheers,
NJS.
Gruto

Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:24 am

Costi wrote:
Gruto wrote:quote="Gruto"]Style IS displaying.
Well, I'm afraid this is where all our differences come from... According to your principles, I could even deny that you exist, because I never saw you.
But I don't... :(
Style is displaying in that sense that it exists in the outher world. It is not only an internal revelation.
Costi wrote: Well, Costi, I am with you: 100%. Gruto, you seem to delight in expressing ideas that are antagonistic to the thinking of several on this site. You have seriously browned off some valuable contributors; to the extent that they see no point in coming here any more: no names and no pack drill - but their absence is plain. You are, to me (probably also to them), just a bore. Please tone it down - or go away - and concentrate on writing some schmoozing advertorials at which, promoting the Bling (that you shamelessly promote), you probably excel.
Cheers,
NJS.
LOL, NJS, I have no idea of what you refer to, when you speak of my advertorials, bling etc? Please tell! BTW, personal attacking or snarking is not in the LL spirit :wink: People are free to read the structure of style section. It is my impression that it does get some reading, not only from Costi and me :D
Rowly
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 2:42 pm
Contact:

Fri Aug 19, 2011 7:51 am

Gruto, I have looked in on this thread and not been bored other than with the realization that, dealing with semantics, it is destined to go around in circles. I am concerned with the congruence of who I am and how I project myself in the Universe, not with how others perceive me, which would be display on a stage and would not be real style. Obsession with image is not style, nor is presenting yourself to impress others. Style is genuine self expression of who you are. Any self presentation other than that is specious at the very least, and an affectation.
To me more dear, congenial to my heart,
One native charm, than all the gloss of art.
Goldsmith
Your posts are welcome as far as I'm concerned, as long as you compose them with style :wink:
Gruto

Fri Aug 19, 2011 8:08 am

Rowly wrote:Gruto, I have looked in on this thread and not been bored other than with the realization that, dealing with semantics, it is destined to go around in circles. I am concerned with the congruence of who I am and how I project myself in the Universe, not with how others perceive me, which would be display on a stage and would not be real style. Obsession with image is not style, nor is presenting yourself to impress others. Style is genuine self expression of who you are. Any self presentation other than that is specious at the very least, and an affectation.
To me more dear, congenial to my heart,
One native charm, than all the gloss of art.
Goldsmith
Your posts are welcome as far as I'm concerned, as long as you compose them with style :wink:
Thank you, Rowly. I realize that some arguments repeat themselves :) I follow that style comes from genuine self expression - too. As I said, I see style as a creation from a clash between inner disposition or will and outer world. When we look at style, we must include temporality, that is, experiences, worldly hopes, dreams, sorrows, aspirations and more to really grasp it.
alden
Posts: 8210
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:58 am
Contact:

Fri Aug 19, 2011 11:21 am

Somebody said to Charlie Chaplin once, “You never have any interesting camera angles.” And Chaplin replied, “I don’t need interesting camera angles—I am interesting!”

If a man can say those last three words and believe them deeply, he will have style. It's a simple as that.

Let's move off stage and stop looking for interesting angles...

Michael
Costi
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Fri Aug 19, 2011 11:51 am

Gruto wrote:
NJS wrote: Well, Costi, I am with you: 100%. Gruto, you seem to delight in expressing ideas that are antagonistic to the thinking of several on this site. You have seriously browned off some valuable contributors; to the extent that they see no point in coming here any more: no names and no pack drill - but their absence is plain. You are, to me (probably also to them), just a bore. Please tone it down - or go away - and concentrate on writing some schmoozing advertorials at which, promoting the Bling (that you shamelessly promote), you probably excel.
Cheers,
NJS.
LOL, NJS, I have no idea of what you refer to, when you speak of my advertorials, bling etc? Please tell! BTW, personal attacking or snarking is not in the LL spirit :wink: People are free to read the structure of style section. It is my impression that it does get some reading, not only from Costi and me :D
The moderating moderator recommends moderate moderation applied moderately
Costi
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Fri Aug 19, 2011 11:52 am

alden wrote:Somebody said to Charlie Chaplin once, “You never have any interesting camera angles.” And Chaplin replied, “I don’t need interesting camera angles—I am interesting!”

If a man can say those last three words and believe them deeply, he will have style. It's a simple as that.

Let's move off stage

Michael
And HE was an ACTOR!...
Costi
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Fri Aug 19, 2011 11:53 am

Style is not a technique, not a method, not a system. It is not en-acting. It is what manifests when all techniques, systems, methods – all acting – has been left behind. Style is a matter of aethics more than a matter of aesthetics; the latter follows naturally as we discover the beauty of being (true to) ourselves.
Style is acting in good faith. Style techniques regard ways to keep true to ourselves, to weed out the garden and clean away parasites, rather than genetically modify or artificially fertilize our flowers; they may look better for a while, but they will lose their natural fragrance, wither sooner and give off a foul fertilizer stench.
Style is the FRAGRANCE, not the good looks – and synthetic fragrances turn up noses.

What is wrong with who we are that we should wear a mask?!
Costi
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Fri Aug 19, 2011 11:54 am

We ought to do like the bees: they make honey without knowing the recipe and it’s always good and perfect. We know many recipes for sweets, but they are all unhealthy and… make you fat :)
Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests