# Lisa Birnbach to publish new "Preppy" book



## Acacian (Jul 10, 2007)

As I'm sure all here know, Birnbach is the author of the _OPH, _that gently satirical "bible" of prep school style_._

Just found this in the latest issue of Library Journal. Publishing date: August 2010.

"Birnbach, Lisa with Chip Kidd. *True Prep: It's a Whole New Old World.* Knopf. Aug. 2010. 224p. 978-0-307-59398-6. $19.95.
Remember _The Official Preppy Handbook_? Ever wonder how those preppies are dealing with the brave new cyberworld? Birnbach reveals all, from the new preppie brands to "We're outta here: When to name something after yourself, and when not." Celebrated designer/novelist Kidd joins in because he claims that the original handbook changed his life. With a nine-city tour to Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, San Francisco, and Washington, DC, plus lots of promotion to go with the 200,000-copy first printing. You'll be hearing about this one."

Hoping this isn't the equivalent of Fonzie jumping the shark...:icon_study:


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

silence...then...

kABOOM

That's the sound of my head exploding. For good...or for bad? Time will tell.


----------



## boatshoe (Oct 30, 2008)

Preview: https://knopfdoubleday.com/marketing/bookseller/TruePrepBlad.pdf


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

Hmm...

Brian


----------



## raincoat (Oct 31, 2009)

Should be fun. 

First time I've really realized this new preppy (or whatever you want to call it) trend is actually happening: Take Ivy reprint, a new OPH. It'll never be as big as it was in the 80s though. Well, actually I wasn't even born so I don't really know, but it seemed pretty far reaching in the 80s.

August is pretty soon too! 

I wonder if they'll reprint the similarly themed Tipsy in Madras and Wasp Cookbook soon. I missed both of those first time around.


----------



## boatshoe (Oct 30, 2008)

raincoat said:


> Should be fun.
> 
> First time I've really realized this new preppy (or whatever you want to call it) trend is actually happening: Take Ivy reprint, a new OPH.


I agree that there is something of a revival. At the same time, every few years you see articles announcing the comeback of preppy style. I first noticed the articles in winter 2000 through summer 2001. Then again in 2004, again in 2007, and of course now. The style has been coming back with such frequency that it barely has time to go away.

"Break Out the WASP Repellent: Preppies Are Back" - July, 1999. Chicago Tribune

"Sons of Muffy: Preppy Style Returns, Extra Dry and With a Twist" - December, 2000. NY Times

"Preppy Redux" - January, 2001. LA Times

"What's Pink and Green and Worn All Over? It's the Preppy Look and It's Back From the 80's" - August, 2005. Boston Globe


----------



## MarkfromMD (Nov 5, 2008)

That preview doesn't look very good.


----------



## Memphis88 (Sep 10, 2008)

This and Take Ivy in the same month?!

Here's the link for the pre-order on amazon.com:

https://www.amazon.com/True-Prep-It...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268107834&sr=1-1


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

I thought the preview looked very promising. I'll enjoy this I think.


----------



## AdamsSutherland (Jan 22, 2008)

"Not as good as it was. Better than it will be."


----------



## Bradford (Dec 10, 2004)

Wow, Birnbach finally decided to cash in -- again.

However, I will likely buy this and keep it with my original copy of the OPH.

Just wish I'd kept my OPH Desk Calendar from back in the day.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*What fun!*

OPH changed my life. There I was, a college student at a large land-grant university in the upper Midwest, just being who I was, always feeling different from my peers. Then, viola! OPH = validation. Here was the vade mecum that codified my life! (Such was life before the Internet and AAAC.)

It's never let me down. Three-button jackets; cuffed, flat-fronted trousers; etc. The only sadness is how many merchants it extolled are no longer with us.

I eagerly await the release. Perhaps I shall queue up outside B&N that night, with my fellow preppies? Yes, there's a plan.


----------



## Brooksfan (Jan 25, 2005)

Pink and Green said:


> silence...then...
> 
> kABOOM
> 
> That's the sound of my head exploding. For good...or for bad? Time will tell.


Probably Newsweek too.


----------



## raincoat (Oct 31, 2009)

Bradford said:


> Just wish I'd kept my OPH Desk Calendar from back in the day.


I saw this listed on Amazon and wondered what it was like. I mean, is it just a pink and green calender or what? There's a new (1982) one selling for $50 on amazon right now actually.



MarkfromMD said:


> That preview doesn't look very good.





Pink and Green said:


> I thought the preview looked very promising. I'll enjoy this I think.


I thought the preview looked good too. I like that it's an obvious continuation of the OPH: "Where were we? Oh yes. It was thirty years ago. . ."


----------



## 4and20blackbirds (Jan 27, 2010)

I'll definitely be getting this one. How could I not? The OPH cemented my desire to attend Hampden-Sydney College and the table of contents for this new book states it will profile my alma mater, "the preppiest in America." Looking forward to it!


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

I'm liking the look of the preview also. I'm a fan of both the OPH and Chip Kidd, so I'm glad to see the combo.


----------



## Galt (Oct 4, 2008)

I will be picking up a copy as well. Interesting how much emphasis is put on JCrew in the profiles, and cole Haan seems to have replaced bass.


----------



## Ron_A (Jun 5, 2007)

Looks interesting -- I certainly will buy it. But, Cole Haan and J. Crew!? C'mon! Almost looks like paid advertising to me.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

It's still a satire and about preppies, not traddies .

EDIT: Although I have to agree that it also came of a little advertisement-like to me, leaning so heavily on J. Crew.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Acacian: a "gently satirical 'bible'." That nails it! The humor of the title is based on idea that something as free-spirited and casual-seeming is in fact so codified that it looks like all preppies consult an official handbook; even more humorously, it _became _one. What made it so much fun was that it was so vividly and encyclopedically observed, through all the ages of man. The tone was satire that loves its object, and, to a degree, creates its object. I look forward to it -- what will it say?​


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Looks to be a potentially fun read, certainly worth the price of a copy!


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

The Official Filthy Rich Handbook of a couple years ago was worthwhile as a follow-up as well, though I don't know if anyone associated with the OPH had a part in it.


----------



## PorterSq (Apr 17, 2008)

Are folks intentionally ignoring the intended irony of OPH? She is making fun of preppies, isn't she?


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Yes, fun.


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

It seems that the level of irony depends on the reader!

I was in the fishbowl most of my life and had never thought of myself as "preppy" in the least, but reading through the book (discovered it in my mid 20s) I couldn't believe the parallels to the way I grew up! 

So yes, it's ironic, but it's so well studied that it blurs the line between satire and sociological treatise!


----------



## rl1856 (Jun 7, 2005)

It will be interesting to see how much has changed in 30 years. That said, a few months ago, my daughter and her friends discovered an old copy of the OPH. Much to their surprise the book was a shockingly accurate depiction of their lives. Between the boys and girls in my daughter's circle of friends, they had most of the items in the Prep closet. They have friends at most of the boarding schools listed and the description of life at a day school was spot on accurate for them. "Mummy" and "Daddy" resemble many of the parents they know and so on. To a bunch of teenagers who think everything was invented yesterday, the book was a shock and a reminder that they are not much different than their parents.

The irony for my daughter is that one of her friends is creating an updated OPH for a school project. Her version will incorporate the changes she has noticed and become a reflection of how "Prep" has evolved in her school and community. I am sure they will be comparing the final product to the new book.

What I am detecting so far is that Birnbach's updated OPH will be more egalitarian, which is certainly consistent with the times we live in. But is it still an accurate description of the class of people who by virtue of their hidden eccentricities remained largely insular ?

Given a publishing date of 8/10, at the very least it will be an entertaining summer read.


----------



## Bradford (Dec 10, 2004)

raincoat said:


> I saw this listed on Amazon and wondered what it was like. I mean, is it just a pink and green calender or what? There's a new (1982) one selling for $50 on amazon right now actually.


It looked pretty much like the OPH except it was spiral bound so it could lay flat while open on your desk. It was about the same size as the OPH and each 2-page spread had the dates to cover one week. As I recall, there were places on each day listing to mark your activities. The front had the standard places to put your information with extra items like lines for the name and phone number of your club and alma maters.

It also had a few articles (or at least text boxes) written especially for the calendar. I believe there was at least one regarding appropriate Christmas gift ideas and one regarding summer clambakes.

I really regret that without thinking I got rid of it many years ago - especially now that I see it could be worth as much as $50 :icon_smile:


----------



## Thom Browne's Schooldays (Jul 29, 2007)

boatshoe said:


> I agree that there is something of a revival. At the same time, every few years you see articles announcing the comeback of preppy style. I first noticed the articles in winter 2000 through summer 2001. Then again in 2004, again in 2007, and of course now. The style has been coming back with such frequency that it barely has time to go away.
> 
> "Break Out the WASP Repellent: Preppies Are Back" - July, 1999. Chicago Tribune
> 
> ...


There are a million more, I'd love to just collect them all in one place for occasions such as this.

The OOPH is very enjoyable, scarily true/recognizable, very clever and sometimes laugh-out-loud funny.
I can't wait for them new one, seems well done by the preview.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

Sounds like the kind of book that could easily be called: "The upper-middle class guide on striving to be upper*" With the asterisk footnote saying: "Of course, you still won't get into the Social Register".


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

philidor said:


> Sounds like the kind of book that could easily be called: "The upper-middle class guide on striving to be upper*" With the asterisk footnote saying: "Of course, you still won't get into the Social Register".


This style is a style that has been around for a while. Most people don't strive to adopt it. They simply grow up in it.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

Bog said:


> This style is a style that has been around for a while. Most people don't strive to adopt it. They simply grow up in it.


That's what I'm trying to say. Sounds like a book for strivers. Besides, the popular image of "Preppy" is Abercrombie & Fitch, and other overpriced brands that have their labels everywhere. Yet, oddly, people oftentimes see it as a "trend" instead of a rock against trends. Does the OPH mention that faded clothes are a sign of experience (and thus status)?

Keep in mind that "Expensive" should be adjusted relative to a products quality. A Lacoste shirt that last 20 years ($79.50) is actually more cost effective than a $10.00 shirt at Target that will be unwearable in six months.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Philador: I must disagree. According to my old Professor Paul Fussell, in _Class, _the only difference between the upper-middle and the upper is that upper-middles work for a living, as lawyers, bankers, etc. He says uppers are more likely to emulate upper-middles, because not working is suspect in America. Of course, there's the class above upper, which he calls top out of sight, because they live at the end of very long driveways, or at the beautiful places where other top-out-of-sights congregate, to avoid envy and requests for money. (The corresponding lower class is bottom-out of sight, the indigent, the imprisoned, etc., similarly not seen). Prep Schools are largely upper middle institutions, but since no one (except staff) works there, uppers and upper-middles pretty indistinguishable.

Of course, there's another view of social class, the common one, that equates class with income. This presupposes a lot more class mobility than seems to fit. And then there's the perfectly acceptable polite fiction that we don't have classes in America.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

The Rambler said:


> Philador: I must disagree. According to my old Professor Paul Fussell, in _Class, _the only difference between the upper-middle and the upper is that upper-middles work for a living, as lawyers, bankers, etc. He says uppers are more likely to emulate upper-middles, because not working is suspect in America. Of course, there's the class above upper, which he calls top out of sight, because they live at the end of very long driveways, or at the beautiful places where other top-out-of-sights congregate, to avoid envy and requests for money. (The corresponding lower class is bottom-out of sight, the indigent, the imprisoned, etc., similarly not seen). Prep Schools are largely upper middle institutions, but since no one (except staff) works there, uppers and upper-middles pretty indistinguishable.
> 
> Of course, there's another view of social class, the common one, that equates class with income. This presupposes a lot more class mobility than seems to fit. And then there's the perfectly acceptable polite fiction that we don't have classes in America.


These "Top out of sights" Are these the odd people that pull pranks and get expelled from Ivy-League Universities (e.g.: Richard Mellon Scaife)? Since they are at the top they can, of course, afford to be weird. Why would they try to impress anybody? Maybe members of the British Peerage, but other then that...

Who equates class with income alone? What about the nouveaux riches and their famous lack of refinement and manners compared to the inherited wealth (some say that it takes three generations to be a proper gentleman)? What about the educational system? What about the honorifics that bestow privilege (e.g.: Porcellian, Edgartown Yacht Club, Links Club, etc)? What about fiberglass and tinted windows vs. teak sail powered schooners?

How can you say that the idea that money alone bestows status is "common"? There isn't a class system according to whom? Especially in light of the obvious evidence that it exists. Such as the common knowledge that inherited wealth and the accompanying pedigree confers more status than somebody who "makes/made their own money" (i.e.: the nouveaux riches) who are stereotyped as parvenu. The sort of people who would take up the armrest at an opera.

What does Fussel say about the Debutante balls, and Swiss Boarding Schools (e.g.: Le Rosey)? Why do some colleges confer greater advantages than others (like Oxford and Cambridge, especially Trinity, being at the top, with Harvard and Yale just below)?


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

philidor said:


> Sounds like the kind of book that could easily be called: "The upper-middle class guide on striving to be upper*" With the asterisk footnote saying: "Of course, you still won't get into the Social Register".


This is funny. Still, I would doubt that the typical striver really knows anything at all about the Social Register or seeks to be listed in it.

I'm not sure what I think about the assumption that everyone in SR is "upper class." Some of the people listed in there are upper-middle, or even middle, in terms of income and wealth. Of course, Fussell teaches that class is different than wealth, although the two often overlap to some extent.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

philidor said:


> That's what I'm trying to say. Sounds like a book for strivers.


The book was designed to be somewhat of a joke, written by someone, I believe, on the edge of prepdom, probably out of her own insecurity/dislike of the style. However, because it is accurate, it has been adopted as a guide by those practicing the art. Remember, people buy books about things they like, rarely about things they don't like or want poke fun at.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

Bog said:


> The book was designed to be somewhat of a joke, written by someone, I believe, on the edge of prepdom, probably out of her own insecurity/dislike of the style. However, because it is accurate, it has been adopted as a guide by those practicing the art. Remember, people buy books about things they like, rarely about things they don't like or want poke fun at.


So it was intended to be satirical. Who wouldn't like the style? It's understated and timeless, with a dash of whimsy, and a contempt for the tacky. Which is where Brooks Brothers, Vineyard Vines, Cape Madras, and Murray's Toggery would come into play.



> from the new preppie brands to "We're outta here: When to name something after yourself, and when not."


I take it that Ralph Lauren will be one of the brands from which to stay away? Methinks (yes, that's a correct word, although archaic) that Burberry would be on the list, since they outsourced to China; and the brand has been ruined by fakes who marketed their fakes to chavs. Besides, J.Crew has scarves made in England made from rabbit hair and wool (I have one).


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

By common I meant "commonly held," as in virtually all political discourse. I don't believe it at all, as I tried to say. As to the idea that we have no social classes in America, I can only say that many people get infuriated by the subject: I fully expect to get flamed for that innocuous post.

The thing about pedigree and inherited wealth is that it's not advertised, but nonthelss conveyed by many things, not least of which, and possibly hardest to change or hide, is speech, use of language. Clothes are perhaps almost equally subtle in the class signals they send, but easier to "upgrade."

College is not a great indicator anymore, because Harvard, Yale, and those English ones (England is much different vis-a-vis class) are pretty merit-based in admissions policies. Swiss boarding schools, upper, top oos, debutant balls, include upper-middle. :icon_smile:


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

The Rambler said:


> College is not a great indicator anymore, because Harvard, Yale... are pretty merit-based in admissions policies.


What is keeping the old club out of Harvard isn't that admissions are merit based (they aren't), but that they are based on different non-merit based criteria than before.


----------



## M. Charles (Mar 31, 2007)

Bog said:


> What is keeping the old club out of Harvard isn't that admissions are merit based (they aren't), but that they are based on different non-merit based criteria than before.


There is a lot of truth in this, although it's also true that many of the kids of very good families, perhaps even with brilliant/talented parents, are themselves duds.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Well, I said "pretty merit based," but, anyway, please explain.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

And by the way, re the Old Club, Harvard accepts 40% of legacies.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

The Rambler said:


> By common I meant "commonly held," as in virtually all political discourse. I don't believe it at all, as I tried to say. As to the idea that we have no social classes in America, I can only say that many people get infuriated by the subject: I fully expect to get flamed for that innocuous post.
> 
> The thing about pedigree and inherited wealth is that it's not advertised, but nonthelss conveyed by many things, not least of which, and possibly hardest to change or hide, is speech, use of language. Clothes are perhaps almost equally subtle in the class signals they send, but easier to "upgrade."
> 
> College is not a great indicator anymore, because Harvard, Yale, and those English ones (England is much different vis-a-vis class) are pretty merit-based in admissions policies. Swiss boarding schools, upper, top oos, debutant balls, include upper-middle. :icon_smile:


I don't think you'll get flamed for your harmless post. I also fail to see why people would find the subject upsetting.

People already know about the class system, there was even a "Yankee vs. Cowboy war" that was a metaphor for inherited wealth versus the nouveaux riches. Why would you take your glove off at a white tie party if the queen was going to shake your hand? Because you acknowledge their social superiority.

England is very different, they have an entire peerage system. I believe the rankings go: Royalty, Dukes, Marquesses, Earls (Counts are the continent's equivalent), viscounts, barons, baronets, knights, then down to the gentlemen. It's more complicated than even that, but illustrates the example.

Also of note is how society makes it seem acceptable to laugh at uncouth behavior instead of trying to help such people make better decisions. The Blue-collar comedy tour is an example. Thinking that tres declasse behavior is humorous and acceptable is disappointing. They even use the pejorative "*******" to reinforce negative working-class stereotypes. Haven't they learned any manners? Why aren't they learning any? I heard a joke (probably an exaggeration) "You might be a ******* if you open a can of beer at a funeral" Television is an excellent way of learning about the working-class, seeing as how it is the main audience for television and advertising.

They joke about their inappropriate "lawn furniture" such as mattresses and trucks on cinder blocks, suggesting an ignorant owner. The Blue-collar people will then say to themselves: "Our being uncouth and ignorant isn't simply acceptable, but also endearing!" Instead of: "We maintain societies infrastructure and keep it safe. To avoid others laughing at us, we should be circumspect regarding our behavior and taste"

What does he say about religion? I take it Broad(leaning towards high) Episcopalian would be middle-through upper. While born again fundamentalists in flyover country would be blue-collar.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

Bog said:


> What is keeping the old club out of Harvard isn't that admissions are merit based (they aren't), but that they are based on different non-merit based criteria than before.


Ethnicity being a criterion. While I see no problem helping minorities fight against discrimination, sometimes affirmative action does go overboard.

As an off-topic, does anybody speculate that FDR enacted his liberal policies as a form of revenge for not making it into the Porcellian? He was, afterall, seen as a "traitor to his class". Even though a relative of Porcellian has a greater chance of getting punched than a non-relative, Tad Roosevelt was a member.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Criteria.


----------



## raincoat (Oct 31, 2009)

philidor said:


> Does the OPH mention that faded clothes are a sign of experience (and thus status)?
> 
> Keep in mind that "Expensive" should be adjusted relative to a products quality. A Lacoste shirt that last 20 years ($79.50) is actually more cost effective than a $10.00 shirt at Target that will be unwearable in six months.


Yes, I believe the OPH does mention that your clothing should not look new.

Also, this is sort of off topic, but since you mentioned it, a new Lacoste shirt at $79.50 is a waste of money that will probably not last as long as a $10 shirt from target. Those are some of the most insubstantial shirts I've seen. The Izod Lacoste shirts were another story. For $80, a Polo shirt is a much better value (I realize most on the board don't like the horse). For an even better bang for your buck: LE, LLBean, etc.

Where did you get that witticism?

This one:



philidor said:


> Sounds like the kind of book that could easily be called: "The upper-middle class guide on striving to be upper*" With the asterisk footnote saying: "Of course, you still won't get into the Social Register".


I've read it before; it's funny. You're missing the point though. It's satire. It's just for fun.

And hasn't the Social Register become somewhat obsolete these days. I mean it's published by Forbes right? I still strive to be listed in it though. Hopefully this new book by Lisa Birnbach will help me learn the subtleties of the upper class and I'll finally be accepted into their ranks. . .


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

raincoat said:


> Yes, I believe the OPH does mention that your clothing should not look new.
> .
> 
> Where did you get that witticism from?


A place where people don't end sentences in prepositions. All joking aside, it is a rule that dates to the 19th century, just like in the 18th it was decided "From whence" was redundant.



> This one:
> 
> I've read it before; it's funny. You're missing the point though. It's satire. It's just for fun.
> 
> And hasn't the Social Register become somewhat obsolete these days. I mean it's published by Forbes right? I still strive to be listed in it though. Hopefully this new book by Lisa Birnbach will help me learn the subtleties of the upper class and I'll finally be accepted into their ranks. . .


I'm going to ask around to see if I can find a copy of the OPH. I'll definitely pre-order the "True Prep". I typically enjoy satire, except of course when it has graphic content, or terrible things happening to good people.

Regarding the Social Register: The right people will know what clubs and organizations you belong to. There is really no need for it.



> a criteria


 Criteria is the plural form of criterion. "A criteria" would be the case equivalent of: "A persons" Doesn't anybody remember what they've learned in Latin anymore? I especially dislike "According to who?" Which is the same case as: "According to he/she" Seems like "whom" is slowly disappearing from our language.

I was born long after the "mine before words that begin in h or a vowel" rule, but wish it would be brought back into popular usage. I also dislike how we have U's in Latin phrases, especially since V's were used for U sounds. Moreover, people say "an agenda" when "an agendum" would be correct.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

raincoat said:


> And hasn't the Social Register become somewhat obsolete these days. I mean it's published by Forbes right? I still strive to be listed in it though. Hopefully this new book by Lisa Birnbach will help me learn the subtleties of the upper class and I'll finally be accepted into their ranks. . .


Marrying in is the easiest way to get listed in the SR. Not to say that it's easy.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

phil: sorry, thought I read "these criterion." You should read Fussel's book, I think you'd enjoy. There's also a good, hilarious one called "The Tastemakers," by Russel Lynes: he uses the word "brows," as in lowbrow, middlebrow, highbrow, and includes an illustrated chart. Both are full of highly specific examples.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

philador, sorry, I thought I read "these criterion." You would probably enjoy Fussell's hilarious book, which is full of specific examples.


----------



## boatshoe (Oct 30, 2008)

philidor said:


> just like in the 18th it was decided "From whence" was redundant.


Don't tell Boswell.


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

raincoat said:


> Should be fun.
> 
> First time I've really realized this new preppy (or whatever you want to call it) trend is actually happening: Take Ivy reprint, a new OPH. It'll never be as big as it was in the 80s though. Well, actually I wasn't even born so I don't really know, but it seemed pretty far reaching in the 80s.
> 
> ...


Eighties preppy music is coming back too. The new hit from "Grizzly Bear":






(The group then convened at a house on Cape Cod to solidify their third full-length album, Veckatimest, which released in May 2009 and was named "after a tiny, uninhabited island on Cape Cod that the band visited and was inspired by, particularly liking its Native American name." ) )


----------



## raincoat (Oct 31, 2009)

philidor said:


> A place where people don't end sentences in prepositions. All joking aside, it is a rule that dates to the 19th century, just like in the 18th it was decided "From whence" was redundant.


Touché. I never did learn to speak real good. It has been edited.

By the way, I was kidding about striving to be listed in the social register. I can't tell if that was made clear. Striving to do anything is so middle class anyway. . .


----------



## raincoat (Oct 31, 2009)

Beresford said:


> Eighties preppy music is coming back too. The new hit from "Grizzly Bear":
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I hadn't seen that video. Vampire Weekend is also pretty preppy.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

It _is _redundant, since it means "from what place."


----------



## gunga (Jul 15, 2009)

Apart from all the bicker above, I'll say that I'm annoyed that she mixed up the high schools in multiple instances when listing off the dog names. You would think some research would be in order--even a google search would do. It is petty, yes, but if you're writing a book and trying to make a mockery of things...


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

That's not bicker--but what are you referring to, dogs and high schools?


----------



## raincoat (Oct 31, 2009)

The Rambler said:


> That's not bicker--but what are you referring to, dogs and high schools?


I think he's referring to page 9 and 10 in the preview.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Beresford said:


> Eighties preppy music is coming back too. The new hit from "Grizzly Bear":
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Too much cardigan, not enough colour to be preppy. Non-trad special effects.


----------



## Bradford (Dec 10, 2004)

Bog said:


> What is keeping the old club out of Harvard isn't that admissions are merit based (they aren't), but that they are based on different non-merit based criteria than before.


Of course, the OPH pointed out that Harvard and the other Ivy League schools were already merit based back in 1980 in the p. 86 article, "The Ivy League Dilemma".

In fact, Birnbach's top 10 prep colleges back then was Babson, Hamilton, Hampden-Sydney, Hollins, Lake Forest, Pine Manor, Princeton, St. Lawrence, Sweet Briar and UVA.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Bradford said:


> Of course, the OPH pointed out that Harvard and the other Ivy League schools were already merit based back in 1980 in the p. 86 article, "The Ivy League Dilemma"..


Except they aren't merit based, that is an oft repeated misunderstanding.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Well, that assertion has been repeated twice by you, without further comment--I wonder if a person who had spent any time at all at Harvard or Stanford or Yale could possibly say such a thing.


----------



## M. Charles (Mar 31, 2007)

The Rambler said:


> Well, that assertion has been repeated twice by you, without further comment--I wonder if a person who had spent any time at all at Harvard or Stanford or Yale could possibly say such a thing.


I have two Ivy league degrees; it is certainly the case that admissions are not entirely merit based, both with regard to legacies and affirmative action. The admissions people are rather up front that they are looking for a diverse class and that legacies and minorities enrich the student body, and so it is justified to admit them over other candidates whose test scores and grades are better in certain cases.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

well surely not merit based in the sense of the top 1500 sat scores or gpas in the applicant pool; but the athletes I knew were very smart, the african-americans were too, and often from very lowly educational backgrounds to boot (surely, that's merit), even the legacies. I was responding to what I took to be a standard complaint about affirmative action.


----------



## M. Charles (Mar 31, 2007)

The Rambler said:


> well surely not merit based in the sense of the top 1500 sat scores or gpas in the applicant pool; but the athletes I knew were very smart, the african-americans were too, and often from very lowly educational backgrounds to boot (surely, that's merit), even the legacies. I was responding to what I took to be a standard complaint about affirmative action.


I think the situation is a bit different at any Ivy League school anyway. You've got over 5x more applicants than slots. Sure, you could fill those slots with those who have the best grades and scores, but the resulting class would be disproportionately filled with nerds. So there is a threshold in terms of academic merit-based qualifications that has to be met, but after that they choose the people they want based upon other criteria. There are dangers in this system, I think, but overall I think it is fairer than some other systems; it could be improved, though, by extending the consideration of diversity to factors other than ethnicity and socioeconomics. Some, however, question whether it is legitimate to enroll disproportionately larger numbers of minorities simply to do social engineering, to correct for "historic injustice," and this is really where the debate begins. You have to form an opinion about whether it is the job of a college not merely to seek a well rounded class but to go beyond that and try to right society's past wrongs via the admissions procedure. I say no.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

M. Charles said:


> it could be improved, though, by extending the consideration of diversity to factors other than ethnicity and socioeconomics.


Geographic diversity also plays a role in the current admissions system.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Well, seen in terms of "social engineering" to "right history's wrongs," I say no, too. But making a diverse class _does _consider other factors than ethnicity and socioeconomics, and always, presumably, has. You need scientists and poets, musicians, latinists, social activists, a good halfback, etc. Everyone at HYPSM is highly intellegent, a good student, and has something else they do exceedingly well. Including African- Americans, who are not there in great disproportion.


----------



## Epaminondas (Oct 19, 2009)

gunga said:


> Apart from all the bicker above, I'll say that I'm annoyed that she mixed up the high schools in multiple instances when listing off the dog names. You would think some research would be in order--even a google search would do. It is petty, yes, but if you're writing a book and trying to make a mockery of things...


Worse - she got the names of the dog breeds wrong. Prince William's dog Widgeon (which I assume is now deceased as he was a gift from his mother quite some time ago) was not a "gun dog" in the breed sense, but a Black Labrador Retriever.


----------



## Bradford (Dec 10, 2004)

Bog said:


> Except they aren't merit based, that is an oft repeated misunderstanding.


True, my guess is that Birnbach realized that most readers wouldn't get into Ivy League schools, so she lists the other choices to make people feel better about their colleges.

Plus, how interesting would it be to say that the only acceptable schools are the Ivies? Everybody knows those schools, she had to do something different.


----------



## Epaminondas (Oct 19, 2009)

Bradford said:


> True, my guess is that Birnbach realized that most readers wouldn't get into Ivy League schools, so she lists the other choices to make people feel better about their colleges.
> 
> Plus, how interesting would it be to say that the only acceptable schools are the Ivies? Everybody knows those schools, she had to do something different.


Execept that (though I didn't go to either - Sweet Briar being only for women and all....) schools mentioned in the OPH like Hampden Sydney, Sweet Briar, etc., even in the '80s probably were far more preppy and WASPy than any of the Ivy Leagues at the time. I am reminded of a comment from a Princeton undergrad who was at Foxfield with me circa. 1989 and said in wonder of the Hollins, Sweet Briar, UVA, Hampden Sydney, W&L, etc. cohorts who were attending, "they all look so blonde, so preppy.....this looks like it should be in a magazine or something...." The Princeton guy also didn't know how to tie his dinner jacket bow tie for later that evening, FWIW.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Epaminondas said:


> Execept that (though I didn't go to either - Sweet Briar being only for women and all....) schools mentioned in the OPH like Hampden Sydney, Sweet Briar, etc., even in the '80s probably were far more preppy and WASPy than any of the Ivy Leagues at the time. I am reminded of a comment from a Princeton undergrad who was at Foxfield with me circa. 1989 and said in wonder of the Hollins, Sweet Briar, UVA, Hampden Sydney, W&L, etc. cohorts who were attending, "they all look so blonde, so preppy.....this looks like it should be in a magazine or something...." The Princeton guy also didn't know how to tie his dinner jacket bow tie for later that evening, FWIW.


Foxfields is a great, great time. Kudos to the Princeton guy for at least being able to make it to dinner after a day like that. Having graduated from one of the schools you specifically mentioned, I was disappointed (but not too surprised) when I visited a friend in New Haven and met some Yale undergrads. Not a preppy bunch at all.


----------



## Bradford (Dec 10, 2004)

Epaminondas said:


> Execept that (though I didn't go to either - Sweet Briar being only for women and all....) schools mentioned in the OPH like Hampden Sydney, Sweet Briar, etc., even in the '80s probably were far more preppy and WASPy than any of the Ivy Leagues at the time.


I agree. One of my cousins went to Hampden-Sydney. Very preppy.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Bradford said:


> True, my guess is that Birnbach realized that most readers wouldn't get into Ivy League schools, so she lists the other choices to make people feel better about their colleges.


I disagree. There is very little in the preppy handbook that is conciliatory or apologetic about the topic - how many of her readers actually attended the schools, partook in the traditions, or lived in the places that were listed in the book? The OPH wasn't a college guide, after all, and Columbia was even slammed as being "out of the league" if I remember correctly. Today's Ivy League schools want to whitewash their elite origins and many of the people who would have once attended them simply cannot get in or wouldn't want to go anyway. Consequently, they now go to schools like Trinity, Hampden-Sydney, UVA, W&L, Sewanee, etc.

And while Hampden-Sydney College is without a doubt among the preppiest, I don't think it deserves to be called _the_ preppiest. From what I've seen, the camouflage, dip, and Red Wing boots contingent is the most visible on campus - more ******* than preppy, I'd say. Not to imply that they are actually ******** - I always assumed that it's just a hyper-macho defensive mechanism stemming from being one of three remaining all-male colleges in the country.


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

Bradford said:


> my guess is that Birnbach realized that most readers wouldn't get into Ivy League schools, so she lists the other choices to make people feel better about their colleges.


In other words, the Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin, and W&L classes of 1980 and earlier felt better about their colleges after Lisa Birnbach published her preppy book? I wonder how well received that suggestion would be with some of the crusty old alumni of the 1940s and 50s?

But you say "most readers _wouldn't_ get into" (emphasis added), which implies that most of her readers were still in prep school in 1980. I agree, the book _was_ aimed at readers under 30, because it had whole chapters devoted to each of childhood, prep school, college, and young graduates beginning careers and getting married -- and then just one chapter covering whatever-it-is that grown-ups do with the whole rest of their lives. I expect, now that Ms. Birnbach is 30 years older, this new book will have a more adult perspective. For one thing, she apparently covers city clubs this time, which were hardly mentioned in the first book. Again, a teenage reader in 1980 would have been familiar with yacht clubs and country clubs (which Birnbach did cover) at the least through swimming lessons, tennis lessons, sailing lessons, and also children's Easter and Christmas parties, but might never or rarely have seen the inside of Daddy's (boring, old) city club. I'm looking forward to this book and the reprint of _Take Ivy_.

Is the publication of both books at the same time a coincidence? Or are the marketing experts predicting a wave of renewed interest in this sort of thing, similar to what happened in 1980? That wave coincided with Ronald Reagan's election, leaving Carter in his wake as a perceived weak, ineffectual one-term president. Will there be a similar Republican sweep at the polls in 2010 and 2012? It should be fascinating to watch.

"Preppy" _as promulgated by Lisa Birnbach_ was more than wearing a popped collar and driving a BMW. It was her humorous take on the next generation of the old money set that, in the popular imagination anyway, filled America's prep schools, yacht clubs, country clubs, debutante balls, Junior Leagues, symphony, opera, ballet, and art museum boards, and certain expensive suburbs. Yet the world Lisa Birnbach described is in one sense imaginary - certainly she listed real suburbs, schools, fraternities, clubs, bars and restaurants, and clothing stores, but if you actually went to them, were the people, clothes and cars _exactly_ as she described? Somewhat, yes. Exactly, no. Lisa Birnbach's satirical look at Prep, to be successful, had to contain both an element of truth and an element of exaggeration. That her satire was so successful at capturing both elements was I think a key to the book's popularity.

Lisa Birnbach's late Preppy Handbook co-author Mason Wiley insisted in a 1982 letter to Time magazine that the book was "as satirical as [a Doonesbury] comic strip. In the guise of a 'how-to,' the handbook openly lambastes the smug, anti-intellectual attitudes of a group of people whose only concern is their own pleasure and security. To the careful reader, The Preppy Handbook subtly explains why it's better to think, act, dress and talk for yourself," which evinces startlingly bitter disdain. One can find this attitude in the book itself, for instance in the chapter on charity work, which is titled "Doing Good While Looking Good." 

Link to his letter is here:


----------



## Bradford (Dec 10, 2004)

I suppose I assume the book was aimed at younger readers because I was in 7th grade when it came out, therefore I'm just basing it on my experience.

Also, my point was not that anyone would feel better about their school, more so that if you are targeting the book to the widest possible market you need to give options that are more realistic for the vast population than just the Ivy League. I think she gave examples with which she or her friends were familiar. In a related vein, I could argue that my alma mater of Hillsdale College in Michigan was just as preppy and quite popular with the Grosse Pointe set who are referenced in the book, yet it's still not as well known as the schools mentioned in the book.

Finally, as to your point about a conservative resurgence. That may well be the case but I suppose its a question of chicken and egg. Does the political mood follow clothing styles or vice-versa? I guess we will have to wait and see. :icon_smile:

P.S. Should mention related to my earlier comment, I don't know that Hampden-Sydney was "the" preppiest college, just that it was quite preppy when my cousin attended - although he would fit well into the country styles mentioned as well.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Bradford said:


> P.S. Should mention related to my earlier comment, I don't know that Hampden-Sydney was "the" preppiest college, just that it was quite preppy when my cousin attended - although he would fit well into the country styles mentioned as well.


Bradford - Didn't mean to attack your comment about Hampden-Sydney at all. I was referring to the claim made by the book itself - sorry if the distinction wasn't more clear.


----------



## mack11211 (Oct 14, 2004)

Mixed emotions about the new book.

The OPH made a big impresion on me back in 1980. Of course it was a work of satire, but it was a good one because the authors knew what they were writing about.

Both co-authors knew the preppy family world but could stand outside of it. One a Jewish woman, the other a gay WASP.

I also suspect they acted like editors, and the OPH was almost a magazine in book form. The list of contributors was long.

Now Birnbach is back...with Kidd, who is foremost a designer. Reading the chapter headings of the new book mentions some contributor names I would want to read (Chris Buckley, for ex).

But even if the new book has more knowledge of mid-life, I doubt Birnbach and her squad will ever again be as merciless, or as funny.


----------



## Hobson (Mar 13, 2007)

What is interesting to note is that within a short time of the OPH's release, The Official Sloane Ranger Handbook came out. Many found it to be an intersting exercise to compare and contrast the two books. However, I don't think the latter every received the attention of the former.


----------



## Exquisite Decay (Dec 22, 2009)

philidor said:


> Does the OPH mention that faded clothes are a sign of experience (and thus status)?


This thread caused me to find my old copy and skim through it. Regarding the question above, the OPH does not specifically state that old and faded clothes have status but it is hinted at in several places. On page 120, at the end of a side bar on madras it states "Old madras takes on a lovely soft look and feel with many washings (the crux of the fabric's appeal to Preps)." Then on the following 2 pages under the ten underlying principles for fashion it mentions that clothes will be worn for 25 years plus, that clothes are built to last and will be worn until they fall apart.

If I recall correctly, Fussell, in _Class_, does specifically state that the higher up in status one is, the more status attached to old and faded clothes, among other factors on clothing.



mack11211 said:


> But even if the new book has more knowledge of mid-life, I doubt Birnbach and her squad will ever again be as merciless, or as funny.


I share your doubts. I also wonder how much knowledge and background of the OPH will be needed to understand the humor in this new book.


----------



## Hobson (Mar 13, 2007)

Old and worn has added appeal when the item has not been commercially available for a very long time. I particularly treasure items that I know I will never be able to replace, current incarnations are rarely as good.


----------



## Sir Cingle (Aug 22, 2009)

From reading the materials for the new book, I find myself a bit skeptical of the brands chosen for the outfits. Yes, Birnbach is discussing "preppies," not trads. But a wardrobe full of J. Crew and Cole Haan smacks of product placement to me.

In the original Birnbach book, one cartoon model sports a pair of Aldens. Now the shoe of choice is Cole Haan? I smell pay-for-play. Let's hope that the book's fashion pages weren't sold to the highest bidder.


----------



## katon (Dec 25, 2006)

Sir Cingle said:


> But a wardrobe full of J. Crew and Cole Haan smacks of product placement to me.


I can imagine it with Cole Haan, but J. Crew is kind of a taste-maker among the younger preppy set.


----------



## Epaminondas (Oct 19, 2009)

Sir Cingle said:


> In the original Birnbach book, one cartoon model sports a pair of Aldens. Now the shoe of choice is Cole Haan? I smell pay-for-play. Let's hope that the book's fashion pages weren't sold to the highest bidder.


I don't think Aldens were ever specifically mentioned. Brooks Brothers loafers were mentioned in the shoe section. One cartoon menioned Church's shoes and another merely referred to tassel loafers.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Cole Haans seem to have stepped in for Weejuns in the same way that Barbour jackets have replaced LL Bean field coats. When you see young, preppy professionals at the bar, they're typically wearing a patterned button-down (that may or may not have come from Brooks Brothers), khakis, a Barbour, and nice loafers, usually Cole Haan drivers or pennys. The inclusion of Cole Haan is not at all outrageous. In fact, if any accusations of wishful product placement are applicable, I think "head-to-toe" J. Crew is a better target.

It also seems to me that the decline quality of Bass shoes since the publication of the original OPH makes Cole Haan a natural choice. Even if Cole Haan's quality has gone down over the same period, they certainly can be no worse than the budget-priced Weejuns of 30 years ago, especially at Cole Haan (retail) prices.


----------



## Galt (Oct 4, 2008)

D&S said:


> And while Hampden-Sydney College is without a doubt among the preppiest, I don't think it deserves to be called _the_ preppiest. From what I've seen, the camouflage, dip, and Red Wing boots contingent is the most visible on campus - more ******* than preppy, I'd say. Not to imply that they are actually ******** - I always assumed that it's just a hyper-macho defensive mechanism stemming from being one of three remaining all-male colleges in the country.


This seems to be an overly critical dig at HSC. There are only about 1000 students that attend Hampden-Sydney every year, and khaki's, oxford's, polo's, and blue blazers are pretty much standard issue for everyone. 

There is certainly a large interest in southern outdoor activities such as hunting and fishing, so you will see some of the items you mention above, but I don't think they overshadow traditional dress. I think Hampden-Sydney is one of the few places where everyone still wears a tie to football games.

I think most males going away to college have some level of a "hyper-macho defensive mechanism," so this seems a bit harsh&#8230; especially considering how much emphasis HSC puts on etiquette, manners, and their honor code.


----------



## hbs midwest (Sep 19, 2007)

The original OPH was a read-for-grins page-turner; I look forward to a repeat performance three decades later.

Enjoy the week!:icon_smile:

hbs


----------



## Literide (Nov 11, 2004)

D&S said:


> Cole Haans seem to have stepped in for Weejuns in the same way that Barbour jackets have replaced LL Bean field coats. When you see young, preppy professionals at the bar, they're typically wearing a patterned button-down (that may or may not have come from Brooks Brothers), khakis, a Barbour, and nice loafers, usually Cole Haan drivers or pennys. The inclusion of Cole Haan is not at all outrageous. In fact, if any accusations of wishful product placement are applicable, I think "head-to-toe" J. Crew is a better target.
> 
> It also seems to me that the decline quality of Bass shoes since the publication of the original OPH makes Cole Haan a natural choice. Even if Cole Haan's quality has gone down over the same period, they certainly can be no worse than the budget-priced Weejuns of 30 years ago, especially at Cole Haan (retail) prices.


Yea but, Bass are $50 and while Cole_Haans are hundreds. Even the offshore made Bass will last longer than the flimsy stuff C-H is trying to peddle these days.

Indeed the top to toes JCrew too reeks of product placement.

My take;
JCrew selectively, but also Gap selectively. Izods maybe, private club shirts definitly.
Shoes, Cordovan from Brooks Brothers (Alden) Tassels and unlined Penny loafers.
Blazers: Brooks, Press, Anderson Little
BB for button downs for casual, English shirts for the office (and club with a blazer)

As for the books, agreed the first was satire, this new one appears to be farce.


----------



## Sir Cingle (Aug 22, 2009)

Epaminondas is correct: it was Churchs, not Aldens, that are mentioned in the original OPH. Like John Dean, I misremembered. Mea maxima culpa. (My God: People on this forum really know their stuff!)


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

What about Paul Stuart ties and royal oxford cotton shirts? At roughly $200.00 for an oxford button down it should last forever, and feel like angels are massaging me. Paul Stuart even has ties that have schooners on them. 

Paul Stuart also makes good blazers from what I've heard. Although I myself wear J.Crew, I think the product placement is a bit obvious. And I've always seen them more of as an acceptable brand. They make great products such as lambswool sweaters, scarves (actually made in England, unlike today's Burberry) pants, and oxford button downs. Although L.L.Bean still makes some good products in the oxford button down and sweater department. And also make good work out clothes. 

Would it be alright to violate the "natural fibers only" canon while going running? It's hard to find a natural fiber track jacket for those windy Spring days.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

philidor said:


> Would it be alright to violate the "natural fibers only" canon while going running? It's hard to find a natural fiber track jacket for those windy Spring days.


Absolutely. Artificial fibers are much better than cotton for exercise clothes. I still wear cotton T-shirts when I run to avoid chafing my nipples, though.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Literide said:


> Yea but, Bass are $50 and while Cole_Haans are hundreds. Even the offshore made Bass will last longer than the flimsy stuff C-H is trying to peddle these days.


I guess the point I was trying to make is that Bass shoes were once comparatively more expensive then they are now. Maybe not $200 expensive, but close enough in market position to where Cole Haan is today that CH has come to be a substitute.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Galt said:


> This seems to be an overly critical dig at HSC. There are only about 1000 students that attend Hampden-Sydney every year, and khaki's, oxford's, polo's, and blue blazers are pretty much standard issue for everyone.
> 
> There is certainly a large interest in southern outdoor activities such as hunting and fishing, so you will see some of the items you mention above, but I don't think they overshadow traditional dress. I think Hampden-Sydney is one of the few places where everyone still wears a tie to football games.
> 
> I think most males going away to college have some level of a "hyper-macho defensive mechanism," so this seems a bit harsh&#8230; especially considering how much emphasis HSC puts on etiquette, manners, and their honor code.


I know many good people who went to HSC and I did not mean disrespect. You're right that my comment might have been a little unfair.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

D&S said:


> Absolutely. Artificial fibers are much better than cotton for exercise clothes. I still wear cotton T-shirts when I run to avoid chafing my nipples, though.


I wear 100% cotton shirts underneath and it still makes my nipples bleed  Only for marathon training runs though.


----------



## Scott Anderson (Nov 20, 2008)

*Thanks Literide*

Always appreciate the recommendations!


----------



## qwerty (Jun 24, 2005)

Haven't read all of this thread, but I did read all of the New OPH teaser.

Observations:
- Abbreviated TOC is hilarious
- Wardrobe section is pathetic. Cole Haan? J Crew? Ugly people?
- How could a book like OPH confuse Andover and Exeter? Both GWHB and Bogart were Andover I think. These pages claim they were Exeter. Quality control issues...
- The "sections" of the dog were hilarious also.


----------



## qwerty (Jun 24, 2005)

Sir Cingle said:


> From reading the materials for the new book, I find myself a bit skeptical of the brands chosen for the outfits. Yes, Birnbach is discussing "preppies," not trads. But a wardrobe full of J. Crew and Cole Haan smacks of product placement to me.
> 
> In the original Birnbach book, one cartoon model sports a pair of Aldens. Now the shoe of choice is Cole Haan? I smell pay-for-play. Let's hope that the book's fashion pages weren't sold to the highest bidder.


+1000000. First thing I thought here was that product placement was the name of the game.

The OPH (the original) listed "Brooks Brothers loafers" (which were Alden-made), Church's shoes, Sperrys, Bean boots, and Bean field coat when it came to brands. That said, I really don't think that was product placement. I think it was true. This new "JCrew head-to-toe ($$$$$ from Mickey Drexler), his and hers Cole Haan (owned by Nike)" thing makes me angry.


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

Although I have no problem with J.Crew we have to understand that the actual name brand isn't important, just an indication of quality. For example the little crocodile on a Lacoste makes the statement: "I'm well aware of the planned obsolescence racket of the cheaper labels. I'll leave the Wal-Mart consumerism to those that let themselves fall victim to it, they think they are getting low-prices, but will one day learn about the concept of adjusting price relative to quality and realize they are actually getting their money's worth." although regarding Lacoste I've heard that their quality has suffered compared to the 80's.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

I have a few I bought in the 80s, and still wear them.


----------



## Hobson (Mar 13, 2007)

The Rambler said:


> I have a few I bought in the 80s, and still wear them.


I have several as well and would still be wearing them if sizing hadn't changed to the point where a medium circa 1980 wasn't so much smaller than a medium circa 2010.


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Is there anywhere to buy the original? It sounds like a fun read. Amazon marketplace has one for $32 with water damage. I doubt it was more than $19 new. They need a reprint of the original to be released.


----------



## C. Sharp (Dec 18, 2008)

It had a $3.95 cover price. :icon_smile:


OldSchoolCharm said:


> Is there anywhere to buy the original? It sounds like a fun read. Amazon marketplace has one for $32 with water damage. I doubt it was more than $19 new. They need a reprint of the original to be released.


----------



## swb120 (Aug 9, 2005)

"J Crew head to toe"? That strikes me as being written by lazy authors. Still...it looks like fun. But nothing will replace the OPH.


----------

