I’m sad today because this is first non-Friday weekday in about six months that I haven’t worn a tie to work. I sliced a bunch off the tip of my thumb, and tying a tie just didn’t seem possible.

But when I do wear ties, I love to experiment with new knots. So that’s why I was glad to see an app called “TieSight” featured on Gizmodo.

Using the camera in your computer, the app will show you what to do with your tie and your hands to turn that length of silk into a knotted marvel ’round your neck.

It will show you how to tie 10 knots:

  • Windsor
  • Half Windsor
  • Pratt
  • Four in Hand
  • Small Knot
  • Cavendish
  • Balthus
  • Victoria
  • Plattsburgh
  • Saint Andrew

Want.

TieSight Instructs You in the Art of Constructing Cravats.

 

 

Here is a link to full instructions on how a man can fashionably tie a winter scarf. It is complex. It is more complex than tying a tie. It is so complex that it could possibly be a hoax — leading scores of unsuspecting men to self hogtie.

But I hope not. Apparently it was created by a stylish man with a high pedigree — someone who says he “taught the stylists at Ralph Lauren how to do it for their mannequins.”

I will try it out when I get home.

 

You know the glasses with the eye holes in ‘em. Have you or anyone you know actually worn them? Or have you just seen them on TV? Personally, I’m more a noisemaker kind of a guy.

But the glasses, which seem ubiquitous in coverage of New Year’s Eve, have only been around since the early 1990s, when someone realized that the two loops in the adjacent 9s could be eyeholes.

And who was that marketing genius? Leave it to the Wall Street Journal to delve into this important part of our collective history — in a two-part series!

According to Part One of their series, it was Seattle musicians Richard Sclafani and Peter Cicero — after beer-fuelled inspiration  — who came up with the idea. They sold 500 frames the first year they marketed them, in 1991, and 3,000 the next. And, they quickly got ripped off by imitators.

Then, in Part Two, the WSJ delves into the design challenge of 2011, “with those slender and inhospitable 1s.”

Sadly, it appears we are doomed to artificially widened and weird-looking numbers on our New Year’s Eve glasses until at least 2016.

Will reveller fashion survive? Stay tuned.

(Photo from Flickr user Doxieone)

Dec 012010
 

If it’s not collagen in the lips or silicone in the boobs, I guess it’s air in the sleeves? My buddy Matt points out that this lady looks a little inflated all the way along from left to right, too — and this would be in a pre-silicone age!

This 180-year old drawing is from the New York Public Library. They have quite the collection!

Nov 212010
 

Now this is ‘Star Wars’ piracy I can get behind — a stormtrooper/Jolly Roger mash-up! Ever since I first saw this photo, I’ve been imagining post-Empire days in the Star Wars universe, when the Rebellion was still fairly weak, but the power structure of the Empire had crumbled, and I’d totally bet that loads of those star destroyers quickly went ‘privateer.’

This pic was taken by globe-trotting journalism consultant (how can I get that job?) Robb Montgomery, who posted it on twitpic and commented that:

Ironic: When Star Wars debuted this store did not exist, the location where it is now being sold was behind the wall, and East Berliners were not allowed to see the movie.

Nov 042010
 

I’ve never really understood people who dress up their pets in little coats and booties. Dressing them up for a laugh is one thing, but buying little sweaters and hats as a serious endeavour is something completely different.

Enter a line of doggy clothes called Rover, who really go above and beyond in terms of puppy fashion. Here is the description from the about section:

Taking a refreshing departure from pink ruffles and glittered decals, Rover introduces the new approach to dressing your dog. Classically tailored garments paired with fresh detailing epitomize the Rover style.

Which looks a little something like this:

Little Skipper here has a nicer coat than I do. I don’t know how I feel about that.

(via)

Your pants are lying to you

 Posted by Grant Hamilton on 7 September 2010  Modern Life
Sep 072010
 

Darn it all, I kind of figured this out all on my own, but to see the actual measurements is really depressing. Especially for someone who does actually buy jeans from Old Navy.

Esquire investigates — and tells me that the waistline is a lie. The chart:

But that’s not all — it’s not just a vanity thing. Style blogger Abram Sauer says:

Down-waisting is genuine cause for concern. A recent report published in the Archives of Internal Medicine found that men with larger waists were twice at risk of death compared with their smaller-waist peers. Men whose waists measured 47 inches or larger were twice as likely to die. Yet, most men only know their waist size by their pants — so if those pants are up to five inches smaller than the reality, some men may be wrongly dismissing health dangers.

He also points out that these are, at least putatively, measurements:

This isn’t the subjective business of mediums, larges and extra-larges — nor is it the murky business of women’s sizes, what with its black-hole size zero. This is science, damnit. Numbers! Should inches be different than miles per hour? Do highway signs make us feel better by informing us that Chicago is but 45 miles away when it’s really 72?

Exactly!

Jun 292010
 

Now you know.

 

I literally cannot count how many times this would have come in handy. Normally, tucking a napkin into the top of your shirt kind of counts as dressing down, you know? But this simple printed piece would make it like dressing up!

You just have to remember not to do it upside-down. Or sideways.

(from Hector Sorrano)

Mar 262010
 

If you browse on over to Nerd Boyfriend, you’ll find Roxana Altamirano posting some classic style pictures and then trolling online shopping sites to give you the same look, but today.

Here’s a video from Slate that shows her getting an Errol Flynn look for her friend Justin:

What I really like about it is that it’s male-focused. Although would like to dress well — well, better than I do — I’m continually put off by either sky-high prices in male clothing stores, or the fact that more affordable stores have one corner of a closet devoted to menswear. I can look through all the clothes, belts and accessories, and Amy’s still not through the short-sleeved blouse section.

Finally, on the Internet, my inner metrosexual can find expression and affordability!

 

Last night I heard a fascinating interview with former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who was talking to someone at the BBC World Service (carried on the CBC, where I heard it). I can’t seem to find a stream to the program online, so you might be out of luck to hear it yourself, but the occasion was the release of Albright’s latest book: “Read My Pins.”

I knew (thanks to Zoolander) that fashion was a language, full of codes and hidden meanings, but I found it fascinating to hear how Albright used her trademark brooch pins as part and parcel of her diplomacy.

Apparently, she would use “happy” pins — like a sunflower or a bunch of balloons — when negotiations were going well, and other pins to send messages when things weren’t going so well — like a turtle, to show that the pace of things was slow.

According to the official HarperCollins site, it all came about because of Saddam Hussein:

When U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Madeleine Albright criticized the dictator, his poet in residence responded by calling her “an unparalleled serpent.” Shortly thereafter, while preparing to meet with Iraqi officials, Albright pondered: What to wear? She decided to make a diplomatic statement by choosing a snake pin ….

From that day forward, pins became part of Albright’s diplomatic signature. International leaders were pleased to see her with a shimmering sun on her jacket or a cheerful ladybug; less so with a crab or a menacing wasp. Albright used pins to emphasize the importance of a negotiation, signify high hopes, protest the absence of progress, and show pride in representing America, among other purposes.

There’s a slideshow of some of her pins on the New Yorker site, as well as an article about the book, which is worth the read.

And now I’ll be scrutinizing the various charm bracelets, necklaces and earrings that I see around me, every day.

Dec 132009
 

Of course, we don’t have cloning technology quite perfected yet, so the T-shirt is limited to sets of twins, where I’m sure it will spawn endless fights over who is the original and who is the copy.

ctrl-c-ctrl-v

Hey, at least it’s not Ctrl-Z.

 

Wow, I just finished reading an interesting column in the Washington Post about the rise of the waif and the uber-thin model.

According to Robin Givhan, the culture of “thinner is better” is directly attributed to the fact that fashion, an aspirational business in the first place, is surrounded by overweight and obese people who are desperately clinging to unrealistic goals. She cites no studies or surveys to back up her assertion, and correlation does not imply causation, but I found her arguments to be persuasive:

By its very nature, fashion is a business of falsehoods and costumes, all in service to self-definition. The uncomfortable truth about the fashion industry is it has a knack for tapping into unspoken cultural obsessions and taboos. Fashion sets up a rarefied world of perfection that is, in many ways, defined by how much it differs from the mundane, from the norm. And all indicators suggest that as a culture, we hate what we are becoming: fat.

Touché.

Oct 022009
 

500x_Mojito-shoe-by-Julian-Hakes-sq2_01

This is a shoe. Seriously. It looks more like a sculpture though, which is fitting considering it was designed by an architect named Julian Hakes.

I can’t imagine this would be comfortable OR functional. I also can’t imagine who would want to wear it. But then again, I could care less about shoes (or purses, or any other cliche girl item).

Admittedly, the shoe does have an aesthetic appeal to it. But it does not look wearable.

It reminds me of another ridiculous shoe that I’ve seen some celebrities wear:

11shoes.2

You’re seeing it right. It has no heel. There’s really no redeeming qualities to this shoe. It’s just ridiculous.

(First shoe)

(Second shoe)

 

The Washington Post is reporting that the company that makes Crocs — those ridiculous rubber shoes with holes in them — is heading for bankruptcy:

“The company’s toast,” said Damon Vickers, who manages an investment fund at Nine Points Capital Partners in Seattle. “They’re zombie-ish. They’re dead and they don’t know it.”

The basic problem is that they have a surplus inventory of shoes, they’ve gone into debt to expand their manufacturing capacity, and demand for Crocs has evaporated.

All of this is happy news for the bloggers at IHateCrocs.com. They hate Crocs so much they bought a pair just to cut it up.

On their blog, they link to a T-shirt selling site, where they offer some anti-Crocs merchandise. Best slogan? “For those about to Croc, we refute you.”