Style. Elegance. Dressing Well. These three terms are often used interchangeably when discussing clothes and fashion. This mistake propagates confusion and controversy, easily witnessed on the more popular internet discussion boards devoted to such matters.
I prefer to consider these three terms as independent – though occasionally intersecting – domains:
- Style is a clearly characterised and expressed mode of dressing.
- Elegance is expressing oneself according to accepted parameters of good taste, especially as espoused by those viewed as arbiters in such matters.
- Dressing Well involves choosing items that fit the wearer, are of good fabric, and are well-made.
When choosing how to dress, I would advocate actively deciding which domains you wish to target.
For instance, a junior professional in a conservative industry may prefer to initially focus on Dressing Well. Too strong a Style may attract undue attention, especially if the Style being chosen doesn’t overlap with Elegance. Equally, too much focus on Elegance at a junior level may be seen as affected rather than natural and so be looked down upon.
Those who are a little more advanced in their careers or years, and especially those who move in traditional circles, would be well-advised to aim for both Elegant and Well-Dressed status. However, many of those successful in these two areas will still lack Style. Their outfits are correct and the lines are pleasing to the conventional eye… and yet the person within cannot project themselves beyond this.
Still, for people with such lifestyles, this is a safer position to take than being Stylish and Well-Dressed without Elegance: when shunning traditional perceptions of classic good taste, one can be seen as dandy, bohemian and foppish.
On the other hand, such attributes may be very much in demand by those with lifestyles not dependent on conservative careers and who rather enjoy making the point that they can avoid such restrictions. The fashion industry in particular works hard to fill this niche. It is also where I would instinctively place my own sartorial ethos, despite using traditional tailored men’s clothing and not high fashion pieces in my attempts to achieve it.
Perhaps the most interesting group are those who are both stylish and elegant, but without being conventionally well-dressed. Finding such beauty in the generic, or even the superficially ugly, is a rare treat. It happens when a person’s underlying character and personality is such that they impress everyone they meet, despite appearances. It is a wonderful thing.
Unfortunately, a lot more people believe that they have this charismatic and magnetic personality than actually possess it. This “I’m special too” attitude is partially responsible for the large numbers of poorly dressed people in the world.
Finally, there exists a very small subset of stylish, elegant and well-dressed people. I struggle to think of real-life, well-known examples who have achieved this. It is perhaps rarer today than in the past, as it requires a longer-term approach to dressing, combined with unusual strength of character. Brummell, Chanel, Hepburn… these are the historical names that spring to mind. The reader may be able to suggest more!
I do not necessarily hold any one of these domains (or combinations of domains) as being better than the others. It is more important to actively decide which most appeal to your heart and soul, and dress accordingly. This is not a laissez-faire, “anything goes”, approach to dressing. On the contrary, once you set the target, you should aim high! But the target should be set by yourself, in accordance with your personality and life goals, and not by an outside agency.
I loved this post, Chris! You certainly lay out the whole question of fashion and dress in a logical and clear way. And it elicits a deep emotional response for me —
No problem with the elegance, at least according to recognized standards. No problem with dressing well. BUT —
I have always most admired and envied those who have STYLE. As you say, it surely comes from within, one’s own sense of self, knowing who one is, being comfortable with that, AND with being able to translate that into clothes. I still haven’t developed my own style, and I’m running out of time to do it in — with the added challenge of being well over 70, when most clothing manufacturers figure you should be wearing sackcloth, with or without ashes.. But you boost my resolve. There’s a worthy goal, and I will do it!
Helen Mirren has a fairly clearly defined style that shows that age is certainly no bar. For example, her recent Oscar dress: http://diydilettante.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/9093b07608695b84_helen-mirren.jpg I’m not suggesting that ruched gowns are an everyday choice, but her more informal outfits are usually stylish too.
The French Finance Minister, Christine Lagarde, is somewhat younger but also has a very coherent look most of the time that should evolve well naturally as she ages.
I think both these ladies have found in clothes a medium that comfortably expresses who they are.
P.S.: This, in today’s New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/05/business/05uniform.html
Good read. Yes, clothes when used as uniforms can have potent symbolic power. I skimmed over this topic a while back: http://beyondanomie.wordpress.com/2010/07/10/the-psychology-of-clothes-part-i-uniforms/
That NYT article provides a very complementary perspective, thank you!
Your article is excellent; I hadn’t found your blog back then.
My hair is like Helen Mirren’s. I suppose it’s a start. She is one cool lady.
I will be on the lookout for photos of her, and of Christine Lagarde: thanks. Role models help.
Hi there! New to your blog (was interested in the “getting into med-school” bit…)
I don’t have much to add to this particular post, since me and fashion haven’t exactly been chum-mates (we’ve mostly been diametrically opposed to one another). I lean more towards substance than I do style….and I suppose you can say the former leads to the latter (perhaps?).
I will say, however, that I have an aversion to the superficial notions of what style is perceived as. I’ve met people that would be considered as harboring some sort of style, but that I’ve found to be unbearably boring and predictable–and a bit on the shallow end. But I’ve also met some that were fairly interesting, but we’rent the best of company (i.e. mean, prickish, etc). I think at the end of the day, it doesn’t seem to matter much. First impressions are usually moot anyways.
Welcome! My blog entries tend to be somewhat irregular in time and haphazard in topic, but I hope you enjoy reading them.
I think you do human nature a disservice when you say that style doesn’t matter much and that first impressions are usually moot. There’s a fairly large body of research indicating that people’s emotional impression of, and therefore perception of, individuals is strongly affected by appearances (and other non-verbal cues) and that primacy and recency effects (first and last impressions) have a major impact also.
I don’t think this is something easily eroded, as human beings are by nature pattern-recognition machines, designed to quickly draw heuristic conclusions about the world (and other people) based on very limited and inadequate information. Rapid and efficient stereotyping is ingrained into our brains, in that sense. And in most life situations, is pretty helpful, as we don’t need to reprocess the core environment we operate in every time we wake up.
So thinking about, and understanding, the effect we have on others (which includes, but is not limited to, clothes and style) is important from a purely practical level. I also think it has benefits in terms of self-insight too, and of course, it also happens to be great fun, at least to me!
Good luck with your plans re: med school!
Wow! Thank you for your very thoughtful response. Far be it for me to argue with a psychiatrist
I don’t disagree, however (and not simply because of your profession).
I understand that we automatically draw conclusions from a person’s appearance…and I do it too. All the time, in fact. But I take the initiative, and question why I came to such a conclusion in the first place. Is it my own bias? I am judging them unfairly? Could I be jealous/bigoted/prejudice/etc. ? Maybe their clothes are torn because they really didn’t have the cash to buy a new pair of jeans. Or maybe the reason they dress so nicely, is because mommy and daddy provided them with the financial means to afford designer clothes (not stating much for their character, at the same time). Although at my age, it would be the job they were able to secure…which, to be honest with you, still wouldn’t be much of factor in terms of determining if I should befriend this person.
I guess what I’m trying to get at here, is that I try to not let a person’s outer appearance get in the way of my getting to know them as a person. I try to judge their character, and not the clothes they’re necessarily wearing. If they’re hygienically sound, and the only lingering scent they leave behind is just a faint hint of their cologne or perfume, then I’m fine with hanging out lol
On another note, I was wondering if you have posts I should watch out for with regard to trying to get in med school. It’s still quite some time before I’ll actually even make the attempt, but I really wanted to know (from an insider source) the distinctions between a DO and an MD. Why you choose psychiatry over neurology (I know the two are very different…but, then again). If you know of people with certain diseases that still practice medicine, etc. I’m so sorry to bombard you with all these questions, but if you already have a post on the them, I would love to read them! My situation is a little unique, since I’ve already gotten my BS years ago, and I’m going back for a second one…but if you’ve already written on it, it would such a great a resource for me!
I liked neuro too, and did briefly consider it (and my non-medical degree included a Neuroscience dissertation). But I chose psychiatry because I liked the idea of understanding _why_ people tick, rather than _how_ they tick. It seemed a deeper form of understanding.
Regarding your other questions about medical training, they’re probably a bit complex to get into in this reply, but the DO/MD distinction is something you’re better off asking a US-based clinician to explain rather than I. We don’t have that split in the UK. My superficial understanding is the MD is a more traditional, allopathic qualification, but that both have to pass essentially similar state board certfication to practice.
A very well-written post. This would have been a nice addition to Social Graces (I sense that if you have a sarcastic side, your writing would be similar to Anthony Bourdain’s, who is a contributor to that book).
Those of us whose jobs require a more simple dress style, feel robbed by current Gap “fashion” which entails sequins, gaudy colors and an overall tacky look. It’s nearly impossible now to get simple, well-made cotton clothing. But as you pointed out, some people are talented enough to pull off any look with their inherent elegance.
Thank you! I suspect most who know me IRL would classify my sense of humour as more dryly sardonic than openly sarcastic, but nonetheless I trust that knowledge doesn’t diminish your enjoyment of the post.
Funnily enough, I was just discussing the difficulty to getting well-made/well-fitting basics elsewhere. Part of the problem is the increasing cost of cotton, which means that manufacturers who make to a specific price point (like Gap, for instance) have to cut even more corners in production quality than they have in the past. Modern factories (such as many in China) are exceptionally good at adjusting manufacturing quality to meet a requested target price. They’re not poor quality factories; they’re just very flexible. They titrate the quality of the product to the stringency/demands of the customer.
The Western consumer has got very used to buying manufactured goods cheaply. But the old truism of “Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick Two” still holds true. High quality, nicely fitting, simple cotton basics now cost more than mainstream America (or the UK) is willing to pay for them. So they’re rarer to find in many shops (including a fair chunk of designer/fashion brands).
I’m a big fan of cotton items (and indeed natural fibres generally, reserving man-made ones solely for technical/waterproof type garments), but always they end up costing more than you think, if you also aim for lasting quality (especially if you also demand good fit). Worth it, though, IMO.