# Not WASP and still Trad?



## gardel (Jul 23, 2008)

Can someone who is not WASP be Trad?

For example, could a recently-arrived Mexican immigrant become Trad?

Can anyone become Trad?


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

As much as it seems so at times, Trad is not a state in which one can be.

Trad is simply a clothing style.

So, no and yes. No one can be Trad, but anyone can dress Trad. 

There are many anecdotes about Jewish men dressing the most Trad in a given area or period, for example.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Coleman said:


> As much as it seems so at times, Trad is not a state in which one can be.
> 
> Trad is simply a clothing style.
> 
> ...


Coleman: I don't know about that ('simply a clothing style'). Reading this forum has just about convinced me that it's a state of mind as well. I thoroughly agree it's open to anyone though, gardel.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

It gets complicated, that's for sure. 

We all seem to attribute ideas and ways of thinking to it, but you'd never get everyone to agree (and that's surely for the best).

As much as we disagree on the style, it is still the most consistent piece of the puzzle. The similarities in our methods of thought and action might be more of an explanation for our choosing this style.

In any case, as a great Trad Forumite once said, it's like herding cats to attempt a definition.


----------



## yossarian (Apr 17, 2007)

I am Jewish and tend to dress more Trad than not. I see no reason other than for reasons of exclusion why Trad would be limited to WASPs, even if Trad is a state of mind in addition to a clothing style. That being said, my friend at work does refer to me as an "Unchosen One" for the way in which I dress. I remind him that Jacobi Press was Jewish.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

gardel said:


> Can someone who is not WASP be Trad?
> 
> For example, could a recently-arrived Mexican immigrant become Trad?
> 
> Can anyone become Trad?


I would say yes for the simple reason that, as this forum was created, it treated Trad as synonymous with TNSIL*. If you look at old photos of for example Yale students from the heyday of TNSIL, you'll see a smattering of blacks** and other non-Wasps. IMO the best representation of Trad ever worn was Miles Davis in the late 1950s.

*TNSIL=traditional natural shoulder Ivy League
**I hope this term doesn't offend. I know some prefer the term African American, but with respect to those students, I have no idea of their origins. Top universities have long attracted citizens of other nations.


----------



## M. Morgan (Dec 19, 2009)

*Banish the thought.*



gardel said:


> could a recently-arrived Mexican immigrant become Trad?


I cite the following not for political effect, but because I think it is funny and I read it literally thirty seconds after opening this thread. Nevertheless, here it is:

---
"They will look at the kind of dress you wear, there's a different type of attire, there's a different type of ... right down to the shoes, right down to the clothes."
---

So there's at least one resounding "no" to answer your question.


----------



## Dhaller (Jan 20, 2008)

Trad as a style is "aspirational" - that's why it seems at times to be, among its devotees, a mode of identity.

That said, it's a style. There may be correlations involved - the kinds of people attracted to "trad" style might have (or affect to have) certain ideological preferences - but there's nothing genomic or inherent about "trad folks" beyond a fashion sense.

The greatest irony of trad style is that if there *are* "trad people", they would likely strongly disapprove of anyone making an actual effort to affect a certain style of any kind, traditional or not! 

DH


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

M. Morgan said:


> I cite the following not for political effect, but because I think it is funny and I read it literally thirty seconds after opening this thread. Nevertheless, here it is:


Wow! Using this guys reasoning, I now suspect my friends(college students) of being illegal immigrants.:icon_smile_wink:

(I'm not talking about M. Morgan, but the Link that he posted of the gentleman who made these comments.)


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Anyone can wear the clothes that fit them, but the style is too loaded with connotations of Anglo-Americanism for someone without a certain "look" to be able to pull it off without looking at least somewhat contrived. Not stating my own personal opinion here, just stating what I've perceived to be the general perception of the world outside the message boards.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

Dhaller said:


> Trad as a style is "aspirational" - that's why it seems at times to be, among its devotees, a mode of identity.
> DH


Aspirational means that people are trying to be something they aren't, often associated with being rich. I don't think most people who shop are J Press aspire to being wealthy. By virtually any standard, they are wealthy. The Trad Men thread is filled with pictures of people wearing trad style such as Yale students, George HW Bush, the Kennedys, and quite a few senators. To what are they aspiring?


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

P Hudson said:


> Aspirational means that people are trying to be something they aren't, often associated with being rich. I don't think most people who shop are J Press aspire to being wealthy. By virtually any standard, they are wealthy. The Trad Men thread is filled with pictures of people wearing trad style such as Yale students, George HW Bush, the Kennedys, and quite a few senators. To what are they aspiring?


That's just it - people shopping at these places with aspirations of giving off the look of those who have (and may have always had) money. I think that's the aspirational aspect of it in some - but not all - cases.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

oh, bullcrap, dhaller, ds, it's an upper-middle class style, if anything -- a perfectly acceptable class to aspire to in America.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)




----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

I have posted many times to say that WASP is just one aspect of trad. I argue for an inclusive trad, and one that is based more on principals of economy and aesthetics than on history. This makes post racial trad very possible.


----------



## dmbfrisb (Apr 17, 2010)

+1 for Miles!


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

For sure: I always thought his look set off his not exactly traditional music incredibly well.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

Youngster said:


> I have posted many times to say that WASP is just one aspect of trad. I argue for an inclusive trad, and one that is based more on principals of economy and aesthetics than on history. This makes post racial trad very possible.


I don't have time to find them now, but I have seen pictures of early 1960s gang members (iirc in Harlem) wearing TNSIL. I would guess it was under the influence of the jazz scene.


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

There is also a popular book by Eric C. Schneider called,"Vampires,Dragons, And Egyptian Kings:Youth Gangs in Postwar NewYork." That discusses the "Ivy Look" , that was popular among early gangs in New York.:icon_smile:


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Nice photo. And there's gotta be about a million pics out there to make the point - as the sticky says, it's an American style.


----------



## oxford (Feb 24, 2008)

The Kennedy''s seemed to always dress Trad and they were not WASPS. Lot of Irish Americans like myself have held down the Trad fort for generations. Look at all the Trad products made in Ireland. Up the long ladder and down the short rope, to hell with King Jimmy and God Bless the Pope. God Bless Ireland said the Heroes. Boston College and Holy Cross College tend to be Trad historically.


----------



## Scott Anderson (Nov 20, 2008)

*Hmm*

I don't know where to begin. The term WASP was popularized by E. Digby Baltzell in his sociology book comparing the elite classes of Phildelphia and Boston and their Quaker versus Protestant roots and their respsective effects on the cities and their social structures.

Having had the opportunity to study with Digby I can tell you he was trad all the way. That being said. It's a style that emulates the esthetic of a certain group of people at a certain time. Because the places where these people congregated were "exclusive" they tended to develop a relatively uniform look. But most importantly one must understand that this was a look required to be adopted by the dress codes of New England prep schools, Ivy league Universities and Yacht clubs, Eating clubs and most social organizations of the middle of the 20th Century. Button down collars work better for children and harsh institutional laundries. Tweeds were warm in winter as were flannels and so forth. Even in the late 70s Choate, jeans were only allowed on weekends and a jacket and tie was required at dinner five nights a week. So it's less about your social group and more about the history of how the look evolved. Like anyone, this group of boomer kids and their parents embraced the look that became popular after WWII within their social group. And like most groups they hung onto the look as they got older even though most started wearing it very early.

That's my take.


----------



## Reds & Tops (Feb 20, 2009)

Scott Anderson said:


> I don't know where to begin. The term WASP was popularized by E. Digby Baltzell in his sociology book comparing the elite classes of Phildelphia and Boston and their Quaker versus Protestant roots and their respsective effects on the cities and their social structures.
> 
> Having had the opportunity to study with Digby I can tell you he was trad all the way. That being said. It's a style that emulates the esthetic of a certain group of people at a certain time. Because the places where these people congregated were "exclusive" they tended to develop a relatively uniform look. But most importantly one must understand that this was a look required to be adopted by the dress codes of New England prep schools, Ivy league Universities and Yacht clubs, Eating clubs and most social organizations of the middle of the 20th Century. Button down collars work better for children and harsh institutional laundries. Tweeds were warm in winter as were flannels and so forth. Even in the late 70s Choate, jeans were only allowed on weekends and a jacket and tie was required at dinner five nights a week. So it's less about your social group and more about the history of how the look evolved. Like anyone, this group of boomer kids and their parents embraced the look that became popular after WWII within their social group. And like most groups they hung onto the look as they got older even though most started wearing it very early.
> 
> That's my take.


My first thought was "why are we even talking about this?

Then I read Scott's post. Thanks, Scott. I still wonder why this is even a topic, but at least you add some concise, intelligent thought to it.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Excellent post by Scott. Kudos.

I would add only that many WASPs are Trad, but not all Trads are WASPs.

This is why I love America: You can be whatever you want to be. Just ask Ralph Lauren.

The fact that a Jewish clothing designer can sell WASPs Trad is a beautiful vision of what America can do for you - you are who you make yourself. It's what makes us different than England. They seem to have the same opportunities, but not society, or perhaps beliefs about reinvention.

God bless the USA.


----------



## Reds & Tops (Feb 20, 2009)

Pink and Green said:


> Excellent post by Scott. Kudos.
> 
> I would add only that many WASPs are Trad, but not all Trads are WASPs.
> 
> ...


Ralph sells an idea - an image - but not "Trad" or "WASP" simply. He sells his interpretation of it all.

Scratch that, not his interpretation. He sells what the next new young thing out of FIT that Chuck Fagan has a "thing" for presents to Ralph for each season.

I love the man; he's done incredible things and his legacy will live on far beyond my years, but he's lost (over)sight of his company and its image.

Black Label is a very illustrative example of this.


----------



## Scott Anderson (Nov 20, 2008)

*Why we're talking about this*

The topic was raised by someone who I can only speculate wanted to feel included and welcomed into a group where the pictures he sees and the people he meets may not look or sound or feel like what he sees in the mirror. I rarely weigh in on non Anderson-Little topics but as someone who has benefited greatly from being raised in the thick of the WASP milieu, I identify with the question. Could I be a preppy and a Jew? I look like a WASP, am educated like a WASP, belong to all manner of traditionally WASP elite social organizations and bear the name of a WASP. But I'm not one. And I can promise you that there were those chilling moments growing up when someone's parent or grandparent would ask, "what does your father do for a living." And that would be that. Pegged as a shmata merchant.

Fortunately, in my generation it was never an issue and I was never excluded or blackballed from anything. But I understand that need to know. Can you be part of something just because you want to be? Yes, you can. But you have to decide you belong first and then everyone else will get used to the idea.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Scott, that's a heartfelt post. I love your last comment - that you have to feel you belong.

Trad as a style is one which makes the people who wear it feel comfortable. Some will never be comfortable in shirt and tie - others not in T-shirts and jeans.

Anyone can be Trad, if they feel it. And in my opinion, Trad is not now about blatant or subdued racism.


----------



## Scott Anderson (Nov 20, 2008)

*I agree*

No, no it's not racist at all. Exactly my point. But like any fashion, it does comes from somewhere. And it was the uniform of the elite class, most of whom were WASPS at that time. But fashion may also come from the runways of Paris or the streets of Harlem or the ranches of Texas or the beaches of Southern California. But it usually emanates from a group of people who invent and adopt and adapt it to suit their actual need at the time. By the time 50 years have passed and a look has been mass merchandised and so forth, it's a commercial object and an element of personal taste. After that, it's just a style choice.

I mean how silly would it be if we were talking about everyone who wore blue jeans was a biker and rebel because it was a style that caught fire from the Wild Ones. That being said jeans still do represent that hint of the casual, the comfortable and maybe even the rebel. Just as trad can represent simple elegance in men's fashion from a bygone era of glamorous women and suave men who dressed up before they left the house.

I think clothes elevate, express, define and refine who we are and want to be. That choice is open to anyone who can put the clothes on and carry it off.


----------



## G Charles Blue (Oct 18, 2009)

*Mexican-American Trad Wears Wasp*

Timely topic for me . . . me, with my hispanic sur name & heathenic ways, wore his gold wasp "emblematic" tie yesterday. The subtle GTH or FY.

I've only had one person get it, a Californio descendant . . .


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Scott Anderson said:


> The topic was raised by someone who I can only speculate wanted to feel included and welcomed into a group where the pictures he sees and the people he meets may not look or sound or feel like what he sees in the mirror. I rarely weigh in on non Anderson-Little topics but as someone who has benefited greatly from being raised in the thick of the WASP milieu, I identify with the question. Could I be a preppy and a Jew? I look like a WASP, am educated like a WASP, belong to all manner of traditionally WASP elite social organizations and bear the name of a WASP. But I'm not one. And I can promise you that there were those chilling moments growing up when someone's parent or grandparent would ask, "what does your father do for a living." And that would be that. Pegged as a shmata merchant.
> 
> Fortunately, in my generation it was never an issue and I was never excluded or blackballed from anything. But I understand that need to know. Can you be part of something just because you want to be? Yes, you can. But you have to decide you belong first and then everyone else will get used to the idea.


Wonderful reply Scott. Your use of the word schmata takes me back to the London of my childhood. Thanks. The "rag trade" in London seemed to change hands sometime in the 80s (give or take half a decade) from the Jewish traders & workshops to various Indian, Pakistani and other Asian traders. My first ever job, every day after school, was with a Jewish firm in Notting Hill Gate, so I picked up quite a few useful and rude words in Yiddish.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Scott, I very much enjoyed your posts. Did you take a class from Digby Baltzell at Penn? Was it good? I encountered him a few times in non-academic settings, when he was a crusty old gent, and I always thought he must have been great in the classroom. The Boston/Phila book remains a classic of socio-history, or whatever, very penetrating.


----------



## R0ME0 (Feb 10, 2010)

I'm Latino and I've been dressing trad or preppy since 2005. I've always been quite fashionable and was always conscious of what i wore since I was 13 years old. 

But in 2005 I wanted to embrace a classic style and it all started with Polo by Ralph Lauren and then I found this forum. 

Everyone that knows me says I dress very "classic" or like a college professor because I sometimes wear bow ties.

I love GTH trousers because they always make someone smile. I wear them to church or casual settings. Trad alone without GTH clothing would be boring, IMO.

But I don't embrace this trad/preppy look exclusively. I also wear boutonnieres and double breast suits. 

I guess I'm a dandy. I'm far from being a WASP, I've never been a member of a yacht club, never been to New England, I didn't go to a preparatory school, or an Ivy League university. 

I embrace the trad/preppy look because I like it and I like classic clothing.


----------



## Tom Buchanan (Nov 7, 2005)

While I have enjoyed the responses, I am not convinced that this is not a troll thread, particularly the reference to immigrants that is so in the news lately.

If this topic is really of interest, the original poster may want to search some of the very many prior threads that beat this topic to death.

https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?t=70240&highlight=protestant


----------



## M. Morgan (Dec 19, 2009)

Tom Buchanan said:


> While I have enjoyed the responses, I am not convinced that this is not a troll thread, particularly the reference to immigrants that is so in the news lately.
> 
> If this topic is really of interest, the original poster may want to search some of the very many prior threads that beat this topic to death.
> 
> https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?t=70240&highlight=protestant


I mentioned the immigrant bill and am not a troll, though who knows about the OP. Feel free to check out my profile for my other, boring posts.

That doesn't change the fact that yeah, this is not exactly a novel topic on this board, unless my experience from years of lurking here is mistaken.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

hmm ... I wondered about that, recent Mexican immigrant seemed a bit much. As for searching old threads that beat the topic to death, it's obviously not dead yet, though it may be like the arch-villain at the end of an action movie, who you only think is dead. Troll-inspired or not, an enjoyable thread, and while I'm not about to look up old threads about anything (too lazy), I bet this one had some new stuff.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

The Rambler said:


> I bet this one had some new stuff.


+1

If anything, Scott's posts made the pain of this discussion (yet again) worth it.

You should post more often, Mr. Anderson, about non-Anderson-Little related topics.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

yossarian said:


> I am Jewish and tend to dress more Trad than not. I see no reason other than for reasons of exclusion why Trad would be limited to WASPs, even if Trad is a state of mind in addition to a clothing style. That being said, my friend at work does refer to me as an "Unchosen One" for the way in which I dress. I remind him that Jacobi Press was Jewish.


We can all be divided into man-made divisions such as Jew or Gentile, or Muslim and "Infidel", but where would that get us?

I personally would encourage individuals who immigrate to America to adopt some traditional American elements that are representative of the best of American culture (e.g.: elite secondary schools roughly as good as those in England and Switzerland, The Ivy League, New York City, Boston,various museums, places to Summer, etc)


----------



## randomdude (Jun 4, 2007)

D&S said:


> Anyone can wear the clothes that fit them, but the style is too loaded with connotations of Anglo-Americanism for someone without a certain "look" to be able to pull it off without looking at least somewhat contrived. Not stating my own personal opinion here, just stating what I've perceived to be the general perception of the world outside the message boards.


A very perceptive point.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

Scott Anderson said:


> And I can promise you that there were those chilling moments growing up when someone's parent or grandparent would ask, "what does your father do for a living." And that would be that. Pegged as a shmata merchant.


The social profiling goes deep. Notice how they cared about what your parents did. The false mask of an egalitarian society where one is valued for one's merits comes right off when one reaches the "top" and finds that words such as parvenu, nouveau riche, and even middle-class are used as pejorative terms to express contempt for newcomers, who didn't even know they weren't "supposed" to be there in the first place. Everyone knows how you made your money is important.

Also, there is something called cultural capital which is inherited from one's parents. If a child has a father who is a construction worker or a police officer then the child would use all sorts of working-class slang in the classroom. Moreover, the middle and owning-class children would already have been raised in a family where they have a valued cultural currency.

How did Zara Phillips become an outstanding equestrian? Because her family purchased her "talent". Economic capital is then exchanged for cultural and social capital (such as sending your children to a boarding school.

As far as religion is concerned it has done much good in civilization. However, the Triumph of Christianity by Tomaso Lauretti represents the destruction of the best aspects of western civilization, degradation of culture, and the power of Human Consciousness with superstition, fear, and ignorance. It wasn't until the Renaissance, though the biggest changes happened during the Age of Enlightenment, that Western civilization started making a comeback. Montesquieu, Beccaria, Adam Smith, Thomas Paine and others have contributed much to our current civilization and are worth looking into.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

I'm not a WASP I'm a WIC! :icon_smile:


----------



## Brownshoe (Mar 1, 2005)

"Ivy for everybody!"


----------



## bd79cc (Dec 20, 2006)

gardel said:


> For example, could a recently-arrived Mexican immigrant become Trad?


Yes! I know this person! He liked my clothes when we first met, so I gave him a pair of my Bills and a couple of Brooks OCBDs. He has now bought and wears almost all Trad clothing. Doesn't care about Trad or TNSIL or any of the associated social or cultural connotations the way we do. But he sees the close similarity between certain parts of the Trad uniform - white or pastel OCBDs, khaki pants, Aldens - and the traditional laborer's clothes of south Texas and northern Mexico - chambray shirts, khaki pants, Red Wings or the often-excellent sturdy lace up Mexican-made shoes in black or whiskey color. Apparently, my Trad idea has given him a handle with which to grab on to our larger culture!


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

philidor said:


> We can all be divided into man-made divisions such as Jew or Gentile, or Muslim and "Infidel", but where would that get us?
> 
> I personally would encourage individuals who immigrate to America to adopt some traditional American elements that are representative of the best of American culture (e.g.: elite secondary schools roughly as good as those in England and Switzerland, The Ivy League, New York City, Boston,various museums, places to Summer, etc)


Your argument defeats itself. Jew, Gentile, Muslim, etc. are all "man-made" divisions that provoke certain judgments and imply particular connotations, just like the places and institutions you mention. They are what they are not necessarily because of their innate qualities but because of the beliefs, habits, conventions, and attitudes of the people who frequent them, just as the difference between racial groups are more than skin deep. If you were to apply your logic, the distinction between Coney Island and Nantucket Island is similarly "man-made," but that doesn't mean that one isn't more socially desirable than the other.


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

gardel said:


> Can someone who is not WASP be Trad?


Yes.



> For example, could a recently-arrived Mexican immigrant become Trad?


Yes.



> Can anyone become Trad?


No. The recently deceased, unless already dressed Trad by their undertaker, stand no chance of becoming Trad.

Also, most car salesman, politicians under 50 and all televangelists cannot as they've already sold their souls downward and that contract explicitly forbids anything like classic style.

In addition, recently arrived extraterrestrials would have a very hard time becoming Trad as nothing off the rack would fit and they'd have to figure out the made-to-measure world first. And what tailor would not shy away from adapting that perfect collar roll to four adjoining necks, not to mention taking the inside leg of sixteen different legs?

Other than that, anyone can become Trad.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

D&S said:


> Your argument defeats itself. Jew, Gentile, Muslim, etc. are all "man-made" divisions that provoke certain judgments and imply particular connotations, just like the places and institutions you mention. They are what they are not necessarily because of their innate qualities but because of the beliefs, habits, conventions, and attitudes of the people who frequent them, just as the difference between racial groups are more than skin deep. If you were to apply your logic, the distinction between Coney Island and Nantucket Island is similarly "man-made," but that doesn't mean that one isn't more socially desirable than the other.


 True, one can be more desirable than the other can, it is simply that as human beings we subconsciously create many divisions, and thus many divisions develop organically. In the ancient tribal societies, certain marks would identify a member of the tribe, such as language, clothing, etc. Throughout the centuries and all over the world this was further refined.

Additionally, other fields such as art and philosophy also became staples of one's culture. If we ask the question: "Who declared the king to be the king?" We can answer ourselves, since individuals agree among themselves to recognize the monarch as such. The vast majority of those in a monarchy believe in the rule of one's lineage, since the monarch would grow up with the necessary cultural, economic, and social capital to run the kingdom, at least in theory. Maybe said king's ancestors emitted alpha pheromones which made everyone in the said prehistoric tribe subconsciously agree to make him king? Perhaps said individuals developed consciousness before their bicameral followers? (cf. "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" by Julian Jaynes)

Other divisions are more based more on one's philosophical camp (determined both by inherited genes and one's environment). An individual always falls somewhere on the subjectivist-objectivist spectrum. The absurd notion that "Truth is what truth is to you" would be an example of one who is in the existentialist subjectivist camp. Of course, since truth has objective connotations independent of the individual such a statement is ipso facto refutable. Majority consensus hasn't changed the fact the solar system is heliocentric, and that Zeus isn't responsible for the creation of lightning.

Great ancient civilizations such as Egypt, India, Greece, China, and Assyria all had their own unique aesthetics, subtle variations in government and commerce, and different philosophical concepts. Yet, all managed to achieve a greatness because of the diversity of human consciousness.

Just because some Muslims wish to unjustly murder somebody for drawing a cartoon; or because centuries ago some dogs decided to unjustly burn various individuals at the stake or hanged them for different reasons (greed, superstition, etc) does not mean that all individuals within these groups wish to engage in these uncouth, immoral behaviors.

Socrates once stated: "A man calling a horse a human does not make the horse human." Likewise, to call a just and moral Atheist/Jew/Muslim/"Pagan"/etc unjust would not change the fact he/she is, indeed moral and just. Likewise, it would be incorrect to call a terrorist, barbarian inquisitor, etc just and moral.


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

Tom Buchanan said:


> While I have enjoyed the responses, I am not convinced that this is not a troll thread, particularly the reference to immigrants that is so in the news lately.
> 
> If this topic is really of interest, the original poster may want to search some of the very many prior threads that beat this topic to death.
> 
> https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?t=70240&highlight=protestant


I think it very ironic that in a thread about whether or not immigrants can be trad, you have chosen to take on the moniker of a character who was an overt racist. I'm not implying that you are, I just think that it is funny.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

philidor said:


> Just because some Muslims wish to unjustly murder somebody for drawing a cartoon; or because centuries ago some dogs decided to unjustly burn various individuals at the stake or hanged them for different reasons (greed, superstition, etc) does not mean that all individuals within these groups wish to engage in these uncouth, immoral behaviors.


To them, these behaviors are or were moral, rather than immoral. Few go around claiming to do immoral things.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Even after he enlarged it, the Malcolm cottage remained a conspicuously modest place, a New England summer house, spacious and comfortable, but not at all grand, a rambling, white-shingled, somewhat ordinary house, the chief distinction of which lay in the great swath of lawn that separated it from Nantucket Sound.

Watching the neighbors wave after her brother's election to the presidency, Eunice Shriver commented sourly, "They never showed such interest." The Kennedy "compound," however unglamorous that formulation sounds, was actually an improvement on the original name. For years the Kennedy property was known simply as the "Irish house."

He must initially have hoped for acceptance. He would not repeat the mistakes he had made in the Brahmin resort at Cohasset, where he and Rose had been blackballed at the country club. By taking a modest house at Hyannis, Joseph Kennedy would impress his Protestant neighbors with his restraint, would convince them that he, too, despised vulgarity. Far from resembling the gaudy perfection of a Rockefeller residence, with Picassos and Miros on the walls, Joseph Kennedy's houses tended toward a distinct shabbiness. Guests were surprised to discover that, despite the expense of their upkeep, the houses were never quite clean. But the ingenious strategies failed; the modest houses, the modest sailboats, the modest cocktail hour (one drink before dinner) failed to convince the Yankees (and the Middle Western WASPs who were becoming increasingly prominent at Hyannis) that Joseph Kennedy was one of them. "It was petty and cruel," one WASP recalled. The women "looked down on the daughter of `Honey Fitz'; and who was Joe Kennedy but the son of Pat, the barkeeper?"

Joseph Kennedy did not speak George Plimpton's language, but the result of his efforts at assimilation was that his sons did speak it, and as fluently as Plimpton himself. He did not understand what his sons had become, but at some level he was glad they had become it. Joseph Kennedy was not what the preppies called a clubbable man. Bobby, Jack, and Teddy were. They were initiated into the rituals of the preppy elite, made friends with the George Plimptons, the Ben Bradlees, the Joe Alsops of the world, were invited to join all the clubs from which the father had been excluded. Kenny O'Donnell said that Bobby had been invited to join "almost all" the best clubs at Harvard. (In 1950, alas, not even a Kennedy could aspire to Porcellian.) The brothers became masters of the "New England manner," in Arthur Schlesinger's words, and so consummate was their mastery that some critics were incapable of distinguishing them from the genuine article.

https://www.nytimes.com/books/first/b/beran-patrician.html


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

philidor said:


> True, one can be more desirable than the other can, it is simply that as human beings we subconsciously create many divisions, and thus many divisions develop organically. In the ancient tribal societies, certain marks would identify a member of the tribe, such as language, clothing, etc. Throughout the centuries and all over the world this was further refined.
> 
> Additionally, other fields such as art and philosophy also became staples of one's culture. If we ask the question: "Who declared the king to be the king?" We can answer ourselves, since individuals agree among themselves to recognize the monarch as such. The vast majority of those in a monarchy believe in the rule of one's lineage, since the monarch would grow up with the necessary cultural, economic, and social capital to run the kingdom, at least in theory. Maybe said king's ancestors emitted alpha pheromones which made everyone in the said prehistoric tribe subconsciously agree to make him king? Perhaps said individuals developed consciousness before their bicameral followers? (cf. "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" by Julian Jaynes)
> 
> ...


Whaaaat?


----------



## Tom Buchanan (Nov 7, 2005)

Youngster said:


> I think it very ironic that in a thread about whether or not immigrants can be trad, you have chosen to take on the moniker of a character who was an overt racist. I'm not implying that you are, I just think that it is funny.


You were reading your Fitzgerald closely. Actually, I have been a member for 5 years, so I did not take on a moniker for this thread. Yes, Fitzgerald drew Buchanan as a rather ignorant racist, but I was thinking more along the lines of his being described as "an elegant brute" when I chose the moniker. That, and the names Nick Carraway and Gatsby were taken 

Look, my earlier point about the OP needing to search earlier threads was because this Forum has had numerous trolls that come on and try to stir up contraversy by insinuating that Trad is somekind of white, racist, elitist, or whatever fantasy. Or they ask for the most trad toothbrush. If you look at my posts on these types of threads over the past five years, you will see that I have always pointed out the numerous immigrants, minorities, or non-protestants were very trad (fitzgerald, o'hara, buckley, rfk, DC's former Mayor Williams, Charlie Parker, etc.) When someone with 20-something posts comes on and starts asking about Mexican immigrants in the midst of the whole Arizona legislation contraversy, my BS detector goes off. If I am wrong, it will not be the first time.

As to people who took objection with my suggestion that some topics could be searched, that is fine. But there are some great posts by alot of very smart people in those. Some left because the same questions keep getting asked over and over. I guess that it the nature of the beast.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

It _is_ the nature of the beast: it's a somewhat limited subject, with new people joining in all the time; and it's more like a conversation than an encyclopedia (we'll leave that to you-know-who).


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

Tom Buchanan said:


> You were reading your Fitzgerald closely. Actually, I have been a member for 5 years, so I did not take on a moniker for this thread. Yes, Fitzgerald drew Buchanan as a rather ignorant racist, but I was thinking more along the lines of his being described as "an elegant brute" when I chose the moniker. That, and the names Nick Carraway and Gatsby were taken
> 
> Look, my earlier point about the OP needing to search earlier threads was because this Forum has had numerous trolls that come on and try to stir up contraversy by insinuating that Trad is somekind of white, racist, elitist, or whatever fantasy. Or they ask for the most trad toothbrush. If you look at my posts on these types of threads over the past five years, you will see that I have always pointed out the numerous immigrants, minorities, or non-protestants were very trad (fitzgerald, o'hara, buckley, rfk, DC's former Mayor Williams, Charlie Parker, etc.) When someone with 20-something posts comes on and starts asking about Mexican immigrants in the midst of the whole Arizona legislation contraversy, my BS detector goes off. If I am wrong, it will not be the first time.
> 
> As to people who took objection with my suggestion that some topics could be searched, that is fine. But there are some great posts by alot of very smart people in those. Some left because the same questions keep getting asked over and over. I guess that it the nature of the beast.


I am largely in agreement with you, on all of those fronts, and I have never found your forum conduct the least bit brutish. Just a shame that Nick Carraway was already taken.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

I was about to suggest James Gatz as a username. However, I see it too is taken.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

what's wrong with "an elegant brute?" but I like Tom Buchanan for its connotations of haughty menace. (with apologies to TB -- wait, that has other connotations ...).


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

The Fitzgerald character Tom Buchanan was loosely based on the polo player Tommy Hitchcock, who was admirable in countless ways. That Fitzgerald had Buchanan make reference to the academic work of Lothrop Stoddard (cleverly called "Goddard" in Gatsby) hardly makes Buchanan "ignorant." Of his times would be a more appropriate way to describe him.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

I lived next to Tommy Hithcock's estate in Millbrook, NY for a few years in the 70s--he was long gone of course, but the thousand or more unbelievably prime acres, complete with abandoned Buchananish mansion, and a ruined walled garden, full of weeds and gorgeous peonies, was intact. The most recent resident had been Timothy Leary. It was the site of an epic battle between Leary (some kind of relative of Hitchcock, it was said) and local DA G Gordon Liddy. Thanks for jogging my memory, Taliesan!


----------

