Differences between Trad and BCBG

bosthist

Active Member with Corp. Privileges
quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet

quote:Originally posted by Harris

Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet




----------------------

Many thanks for the post. This paragraph in particular prompted a sigh of agreement:

"But it is Mr Watkins who put flesh — and tweed — on the skeleton. As he wrote in his Spectator piece, the Young Fogey ‘is libertarian but not liberal. He is conservative but has no time for Mrs Margaret Thatcher and considers Mr Neil Kinnock the most personally attractive of the present party leaders. He is a scholar of Evelyn Waugh. He tends to be coolly religious, either RC or C of E. He dislikes modern architecture. He makes a great fuss about the old Prayer Book, grammar, syntax and punctuation. He laments the difficulty of purchasing good bread, Cheddar cheese, kippers and sausages.... He enjoys walking and travelling by train. He thinks the Times is not what it was and prefers the Daily Telegraph.’"

The American version of the "young fogey" differs a bit from the British version; still, the same idea is at work. The reaction against (response to) "bohemianism" is also right on the mark. Right on.

Again, thanks for posting.

Cheers,
Harris

That is why I linked to "Albion's Seed"; that is a goodway of gauging just how much it differs or deviates from the British version.

Francis:

How exactly is Albion's Seed relevant to this discussion? I fail to see how Albion's Seed tells us anything about the "young fogey" and would be interested to know what you see in Albion's Seed that is applicable.

Regards,

Charles
 

bosthist

Active Member with Corp. Privileges
quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet

quote:Originally posted by bosthist

quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet

quote:Originally posted by Harris

Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet




----------------------

Many thanks for the post. This paragraph in particular prompted a sigh of agreement:

"But it is Mr Watkins who put flesh — and tweed — on the skeleton. As he wrote in his Spectator piece, the Young Fogey ‘is libertarian but not liberal. He is conservative but has no time for Mrs Margaret Thatcher and considers Mr Neil Kinnock the most personally attractive of the present party leaders. He is a scholar of Evelyn Waugh. He tends to be coolly religious, either RC or C of E. He dislikes modern architecture. He makes a great fuss about the old Prayer Book, grammar, syntax and punctuation. He laments the difficulty of purchasing good bread, Cheddar cheese, kippers and sausages.... He enjoys walking and travelling by train. He thinks the Times is not what it was and prefers the Daily Telegraph.’"

The American version of the "young fogey" differs a bit from the British version; still, the same idea is at work. The reaction against (response to) "bohemianism" is also right on the mark. Right on.

Again, thanks for posting.

Cheers,
Harris

That is why I linked to "Albion's Seed"; that is a goodway of gauging just how much it differs or deviates from the British version.

Francis:

How exactly is Albion's Seed relevant to this discussion? I fail to see how Albion's Seed tells us anything about the "young fogey" and would be interested to know what you see in Albion's Seed that is applicable.

Regards,

Charles

I can't put this nicely so I won't. You must be a willfully illiterate person.


quote:From Library Journal

These four cultures, reflected in regional patterns of language, architecture, literacy, dress, sport, social structure, religious beliefs, and familial ways, persisted in the American settlements.
Yes, I'm willfully illiterate. I admit I kant read. Or is it that I can't read Kant? Oh well, since this isn't the real world I can freely ignore the insult.

That being said, I asked what *you* thought was valuable. I've read Albion's Seed. You've read a capsule review that mentions "dress". Anyone picking up Albion's Seed for what it might say about the "young fogey" and its American variants would be sorely disappointed, because the book doesn't have anything to do with the aforementioned subject.

Regards,

Charles
 

Rich

Super Member
quote:Originally posted by SmartDresser


However, class as a set of mannerisms, beliefs, and circumstances, does still exist.
Every person in this world should be judged by their actions, not who their parents are. To do otherwise is folly.
quote:Thanks, Ice. I was thinking I had no place in this thread. During the day, I met hundreds of people and get to know them despite where they live or who were their parents. Manners, consideration and passion, these traits make our world better.

Having pedigree, class, breeding, etc. doesn't make you better - or even more likeable. Real upper-class people don't regard themselves as fundamentally better than anyone else - they see themselves as lucky, privileged custodians of certain social values and finely distilled traditions they hold dear. Some of them consider that their social position gives them special responsibilities, and are eager to serve the common good. People who think they are better than others merely because of their background are the worst sort of insecure snobs and nouveaux riches.
 
quote:Originally posted by bosthist

quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet

quote:Originally posted by bosthist

quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet


quote:Originally posted by Harris

Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet




----------------------

Many thanks for the post. This paragraph in particular prompted a sigh of agreement:

"But it is Mr Watkins who put flesh — and tweed — on the skeleton. As he wrote in his Spectator piece, the Young Fogey ‘is libertarian but not liberal. He is conservative but has no time for Mrs Margaret Thatcher and considers Mr Neil Kinnock the most personally attractive of the present party leaders. He is a scholar of Evelyn Waugh. He tends to be coolly religious, either RC or C of E. He dislikes modern architecture. He makes a great fuss about the old Prayer Book, grammar, syntax and punctuation. He laments the difficulty of purchasing good bread, Cheddar cheese, kippers and sausages.... He enjoys walking and travelling by train. He thinks the Times is not what it was and prefers the Daily Telegraph.’"

The American version of the "young fogey" differs a bit from the British version; still, the same idea is at work. The reaction against (response to) "bohemianism" is also right on the mark. Right on.

Again, thanks for posting.

Cheers,
Harris

That is why I linked to "Albion's Seed"; that is a goodway of gauging just how much it differs or deviates from the British version.

Francis:

How exactly is Albion's Seed relevant to this discussion? I fail to see how Albion's Seed tells us anything about the "young fogey" and would be interested to know what you see in Albion's Seed that is applicable.

Regards,

Charles

I can't put this nicely so I won't. You must be a willfully illiterate person.


quote:From Library Journal

These four cultures, reflected in regional patterns of language, architecture, literacy, dress, sport, social structure, religious beliefs, and familial ways, persisted in the American settlements.
Yes, I'm willfully illiterate. I admit I kant read. Or is it that I can't read Kant? Oh well, since this isn't the real world I can freely ignore the insult.

That being said, I asked what *you* thought was valuable. I've read Albion's Seed. You've read a capsule review that mentions "dress". Anyone picking up Albion's Seed for what it might say about the "young fogey" and its American variants would be sorely disappointed, because the book doesn't have anything to do with the aforementioned subject.

Regards,

Charles

What defines the young fogey is dress and manners. Nothing more than that. You lack critical and abstract thinking skills. How are most of these things : "language, architecture, literacy, dress, sport, social structure, religious beliefs, and familial ways" not related to that ?

What about the Presbyterian doctrine of "decently and in order" in public at all times which has earned the sect the name the "frozen chosen" ? Do you not think that is related to "manners" in public ? What about social structure and family upbringing etc.. ?


"Presbyterians place great importance upon education and continuous study of the scriptures, theological writings, and understanding and interpretation of church doctrine embodied in several statements of faith and catechisms formally adopted by various branches of the church. References to the adoption of Calvin's theology of predestination and the typical member's predisposition to conduct themselves "decently and in order" have earned them the moniker of the "frozen chosen". However, most Presbyterians generally exhibit their faith in action as well as words, including generosity, hospitality, and the constant pursuit of social justice and reform as well as proclaiming the gospel of Christ."
 

bosthist

Active Member with Corp. Privileges
quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet


What defines the young fogey is dress and manners. Nothing more than that. You lack critical thinking skills. How are these things not related to that "language, architecture, literacy, dress, sport, social structure, religious beliefs, and familial ways" etc.. ?

What about the Presbyterian doctrine of "decently and in order" in public at all times which has earned the sect the name the "Frozen Chosen" ? Do you not think that is related to "manners" in public ? What about social structure and family upbringing ? You must be a real rocket scientist, hmm *snicker* *laugh* ?

Here's the problem Francis:

You've not read the book so far as I can tell. You see a couple of keywords: "mannners", "dress", etc. and automatically think that the concepts in Fischer's book will apply to any discussion regarding "manners" and "dress". They don't, because Fischer is dealing with the idea of cultural transferral in the 17th and 18th centuries. Do we recognize some of what Fischer describes in ourselves today? Of course, but not the manners and dress. And no, I'm not a rocket scientist. I'm a historian specializing in the history of the early republic with a focus on economics and urban life. Being a rocket scientist really wouldn't help in this situation.

If you're truly interested in a book that would help folks on AAAC understand the American variant of the "young fogey", I would suggest John Kasson's "Rudeness and Civility: Manners in Nineteenth-Century Urban America" which deals extensively with dress, deportment, and manners, including the codifying of rules concerning the same.

Regards,

Charles
 

Innovan

Active Member with Corp. Privileges
>Every person in this world should be judged by their actions, not who
>their parents are. To do otherwise is folly.

Even Nelson W. Aldrich in "Old Money: The Mythology of Wealth in America" https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1880559641
notes the best polo player at his school who everyone thought "born to manners" --was actually the son of a plumber who had speculated in Las Vegas real estate. But the American system too often results in "shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations". Perhaps in old europe they don't drain their rich back to poverty as quickly as we do here in the land of the self-made man.

That said, the way people treat their parents is a huge tip-off as to how they will act in marriage. Those that treat their family rudely will treat you just as rudely as well when you legally become their family. And if the family relishes shrill accusations and screaming fights as a way of resolving inter-family disputes, well, there's some that enjoy that kind of high drama home life, I suppose...
 
quote:Originally posted by bosthist

quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet

quote:Originally posted by bosthist

quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet

quote:Originally posted by bosthist

quote:Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet

quote:Originally posted by Harris

Originally posted by FrancisPlantagenet




----------------------

Many thanks for the post. This paragraph in particular prompted a sigh of agreement:

"But it is Mr Watkins who put flesh — and tweed — on the skeleton. As he wrote in his Spectator piece, the Young Fogey ‘is libertarian but not liberal. He is conservative but has no time for Mrs Margaret Thatcher and considers Mr Neil Kinnock the most personally attractive of the present party leaders. He is a scholar of Evelyn Waugh. He tends to be coolly religious, either RC or C of E. He dislikes modern architecture. He makes a great fuss about the old Prayer Book, grammar, syntax and punctuation. He laments the difficulty of purchasing good bread, Cheddar cheese, kippers and sausages.... He enjoys walking and travelling by train. He thinks the Times is not what it was and prefers the Daily Telegraph.’"

The American version of the "young fogey" differs a bit from the British version; still, the same idea is at work. The reaction against (response to) "bohemianism" is also right on the mark. Right on.

Again, thanks for posting.

Cheers,
Harris

That is why I linked to "Albion's Seed"; that is a goodway of gauging just how much it differs or deviates from the British version.

Francis:

How exactly is Albion's Seed relevant to this discussion? I fail to see how Albion's Seed tells us anything about the "young fogey" and would be interested to know what you see in Albion's Seed that is applicable.

Regards,

Charles

I can't put this nicely so I won't. You must be a willfully illiterate person.


quote:From Library Journal

These four cultures, reflected in regional patterns of language, architecture, literacy, dress, sport, social structure, religious beliefs, and familial ways, persisted in the American settlements.
Yes, I'm willfully illiterate. I admit I kant read. Or is it that I can't read Kant? Oh well, since this isn't the real world I can freely ignore the insult.

That being said, I asked what *you* thought was valuable. I've read Albion's Seed. You've read a capsule review that mentions "dress". Anyone picking up Albion's Seed for what it might say about the "young fogey" and its American variants would be sorely disappointed, because the book doesn't have anything to do with the aforementioned subject.

Regards,

Charles

What defines the young fogey is dress and manners. Nothing more than that. You lack critical thinking skills. How are these things not related to that "language, architecture, literacy, dress, sport, social structure, religious beliefs, and familial ways" etc.. ?

What about the Presbyterian doctrine of "decently and in order" in public at all times which has earned the sect the name the "Frozen Chosen" ? Do you not think that is related to "manners" in public ? What about social structure and family upbringing ? You must be a real rocket scientist, hmm *snicker* *laugh* ?

Here's the problem Francis:

You've not read the book so far as I can tell. You see a couple of keywords: "mannners", "dress", etc. and automatically think that the concepts in Fischer's book will apply to any discussion regarding "manners" and "dress". They don't, because Fischer is dealing with the idea of cultural transferral in the 17th and 18th centuries. Do we recognize some of what Fischer describes in ourselves today? Of course, but not the manners and dress. And no, I'm not a rocket scientist. I'm a historian specializing in the history of the early republic with a focus on economics and urban life. Being a rocket scientist really wouldn't help in this situation.

If you're truly interested in a book that would help folks on AAAC understand the American variant of the "young fogey", I would suggest John Kasson's "Rudeness and Civility: Manners in Nineteenth-Century Urban America" which deals extensively with dress, deportment, and manners, including the codifying of rules concerning the same.

Regards,

Charles





"

Originally posted by Kidkim or somone in this thread :

Related, from MSN:

"Madonna ( famous USA music artist) may want to rethink her attempts to morph into British gentry, 'cause it doesn't seem to be working out all that well. Not only did she break several bones while horseback riding a few months back at her country estate, but she gave up another upper crust sport after a bloody encounter. "I was mad for shooting a couple of years ago," the erstwhile Esther admits to Tatler magazine. "I loved my bespoke outfits and everything. It was so much fun. That all changed when a bird dropped in front of me that I'd shot. It wasn't dead. It got up, and it was really suffering. Blood was gushing out of its mouth." Madonna says her shooting days ended then and there because "I realized I had a kind of bloodlust, and was manically shooting things and trying to kill as many birds as possible." That's quite a change from 2001, when the Big M was crowing to the BBC about her love of picking off her feathered friends: "I eat birds. You have more respect for things you eat when you go through, or see, the process of killing them."


It must be sad to be so mentally retarded or mentally challenged, hmm ? Did your mom drop you on your head when you were a child or something ?
 

Rich

Super Member
quote:Originally posted by Innovan

>

Even Nelson W. Aldrich in "Old Money: The Mythology of Wealth in America" https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1880559641
notes the best polo player at his school who everyone thought "born to manners" --was actually the son of a plumber who had speculated in Las Vegas real estate. But the American system too often results in "shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations". Perhaps in old europe they don't drain their rich back to poverty as quickly as we do here in the land of the self-made man.

Social mobility (both up and down the ladder) is at least one generation slower in Europe than in the US, I'd say.
 

jlmwrite

Active Member with Corp. Privileges
I'd earlier written -- and thankfully had not posted -- a rather self-important diatribe regarding class in modern day America. Luckily, my wife peered over my shoulder and burst out laughing!

However... Class DOES still exist, albeit not to the extent it once did. This is in part to the homogenization of America but mostly to the general rise in disposable income. Ask anyone who attended the "right" prep schools and colleges. Although eastern schools are the most visible, we southerners have long prided ourselves on our prep schools (most of which have military roots).

Believe me, even in our callow youths, we could spot the outsiders or intruders, no matter how perfectly they wore the school blazer and tie, or worked to imitate our particular drawl and dialect. It takes several generations to be accepted into any social class.

Buying his-and-her Mercedes SUVs and a McMansion in a posh area of town will never make you part of a social class. They'll take your money, let you attend charity balls, speak to you at the trendy eatery-of-the-month, put you on the list at the country club, but you'll never truly be part of their class. I've observed this happening even more so in Colorado in the fifteen years I've been here.

Ok, ok, so I still sound like a stuffed shirt. No Kant, no broad discourses on historical developments -- just an observation from a guy who grew up preppy. It's something from which you can never get away!
 

Acct2000

Connoisseur - Moderator
Do you consider that a good thing?

I grew up around a lot of wealthy people in a small town, although our family was more upper middle class. While I may not have learned all the preppy stuff, I did learn that money does not solve all problems or guarantee happiness.

The wealthy families that were good families (not the majority) would have been good poor families because of their values and the people they were.

I hope I'm not offending you. I think that "class" based on birth is irrelevant. The kind of "class" that relates to manners, integrity, etc. is invaluable.

(And yes, I know that those who have "class" would never actually use the word in that sense.)
 

kidkim2

Active Member with Corp. Privileges
While many "upper class" Americans have a good deal of money, this is neither a necessary nor (especially!) a suffcient condition of upper class membership. There are many, many more rich people in America than there are aristocrats. Take a peek at the Social Register. Or try to buy your daughter's way in to Miss Porter's.
 

xcubbies

Super Member
When I was a little bitty baby my mommy would bounce me on her knee and tell me things for use in latter life. I think it was she who said something like 'people who talk about class don't have it." Or was it Mae West. Can't remember but the point is still valid.
 

SmartDresser

New Member
quote:Originally posted by Rich

quote:Originally posted by SmartDresser


However, class as a set of mannerisms, beliefs, and circumstances, does still exist.
Every person in this world should be judged by their actions, not who their parents are. To do otherwise is folly.
quote:Thanks, Ice. I was thinking I had no place in this thread. During the day, I met hundreds of people and get to know them despite where they live or who were their parents. Manners, consideration and passion, these traits make our world better.

Having pedigree, class, breeding, etc. doesn't make you better - or even more likeable. Real upper-class people don't regard themselves as fundamentally better than anyone else - they see themselves as lucky, privileged custodians of certain social values and finely distilled traditions they hold dear. Some of them consider that their social position gives them special responsibilities, and are eager to serve the common good. People who think they are better than others merely because of their background are the worst sort of insecure snobs and nouveaux riches.

Breeding and pedigree were not mentioned. Manners, consideration and passion are attitudes toward the world, not born with.
 

Innovan

Active Member with Corp. Privileges
>Talking about class is taboo. Only bad people talk about class.

Nonsense!

Ever since Thorstein Veblen's one-joke-that-goes-on-too-long parody, we've had the idea that the lower classes can freely attack the upper at any time and place, however they want, and the upper classes are just supposed to lump it out in silence, taking it lying down. That the upper class is to play the doormat, and let everyone else loudly clod upon them, while they in return are allowed to say... nothing. And saying anything at all means that they instantly are no longer... upper class.

What rubbish!
 

globetrotter

Super Member
quote:Originally posted by jlmwrite

I'd earlier written -- and thankfully had not posted -- a rather self-important diatribe regarding class in modern day America. Luckily, my wife peered over my shoulder and burst out laughing!

However... Class DOES still exist, albeit not to the extent it once did. This is in part to the homogenization of America but mostly to the general rise in disposable income. Ask anyone who attended the "right" prep schools and colleges. Although eastern schools are the most visible, we southerners have long prided ourselves on our prep schools (most of which have military roots).

Believe me, even in our callow youths, we could spot the outsiders or intruders, no matter how perfectly they wore the school blazer and tie, or worked to imitate our particular drawl and dialect. It takes several generations to be accepted into any social class.

Buying his-and-her Mercedes SUVs and a McMansion in a posh area of town will never make you part of a social class. They'll take your money, let you attend charity balls, speak to you at the trendy eatery-of-the-month, put you on the list at the country club, but you'll never truly be part of their class. I've observed this happening even more so in Colorado in the fifteen years I've been here.

Ok, ok, so I still sound like a stuffed shirt. No Kant, no broad discourses on historical developments -- just an observation from a guy who grew up preppy. It's something from which you can never get away!

I would agree with what you are saying, but I am not sure with the complete idea.

I think that it is very hard to fake your way into being preppy. I have no intention of trying. every now and again you get some idiot, like that map dealer who was cought recently stealing maps from a library, who spends their life trying to fit in, and do a pretty good job. Doesn't appeal to me at all.

and, yes, it is hard to aquire class, if you don't get it as a kid - I know a lot of new rich people who are simply horrible people.

on the other hand, the only really wealthy people I know, who are very trad, aren't the nicest people, with the happiest lives, either.

you can have class without having wealth. you can have wealth without having class. and you can be happy with both, or with niether.
 
Your email address will not be publicly visible. We will only use it to contact you to confirm your post.

IMPORTANT: BEFORE POSTING PLEASE CHECK THE DATE OF THE LAST POST OF THIS THREAD. IF IT'S VERY OLD, PLEASE CONSIDER REGISTERING FIRST, AND STARTING A NEW THREAD ABOUT THIS TOPIC.