next »

[amazona2]

After a years in another profession and learning to dress, I am appalled at academic dress standard. I am in a school where one of the fields of study is aesthetics. You wouldn't know it by looking that any cares one bit about clothing as a culturally significant art form. The male professors are disheveled and the women look like they shop at the Salvation Army store. It's hard to take some of these people seriously when they have not looked in the mirror in about 20 years. That's just the professors. The students are even worse. Thirty year olds that look like they are living in a frat house.  No wonder the general public thinks that academics are out of touch. What's up?

I found this article on line which tries to explain it. http://www.wiu.edu/users/mfbhl/180/steele.htm

In the meantime, I am wearing my fashion forward but classic clothes and continually getting positive comments. I am not flashy or distracting, just put together like I hope my mind is.

Does anybody agree?

[bewilderedta]

I think it depends a lot on the university and department. I think most grad students (and faculty, in my department anyway) at my school tend to look fairly well put together. Not cutting edge, maybe, but clean and tidy, could go to a nice restaurant without looking out of place.

I think this might be because I'm at a large state U and a lot of the grad students are also primary instructors for undergrads. At least in my case, I like to give the illusion of being an authority figure. And I have a lot of business-casual type clothes left over from my office worker days, so that tends to be my style.

[daniel_von_flanagan]

No.

My responsibility is to (a) hide the wiggly bits, and (b) be comfortable enough that I am not distracted from my job.  My authority derives from my mastery of  my subject and reputation in my field, not from my togs.

If you think that fashion should be important for university faculty, then perhaps you are in the wrong line of work.  - DvF

[georgia_guy]

Why do you care so much what others wear?

Honestly, the few fashion obsessed people I know seem to be doing it to hide self-esteem problems.

An empty Armani suit, is still an empty suit.

[goingcrazy]

It is not necessarily about "fashion" but instead, it is about repsect. I agree with the OP when stating most professors on campus look disheveled. Dressing "professionally" as opposed to "fashionably" would be a better word.

Truthfully, people in general look like crap anymore. I believe in the old-school days where suits and the like, for both men and women, were the only appropriate form of attire for a professional. It shows respect for yourself and your place of employment.

[patchouli]

OP,

I agree with you in some ways.  I had a prior career and a prior major which focused me clearly in the "fashion" camp.  I also like to wear cosmetics (not perfume) and find myself nearly alone (I keep that low-key) in that regard.  There are some on these boards who like fashion.  (This summer there was a long post about "girly" things.)

I really enjoy seeing all the clothes the students wear (even the guys) because I love to see the new fashions, but I don't indulge in them like I used to as I have to dress age-appropriate and not look ridiculous. 

You can indulge in fashion in the academic world, but it probably needs to be a toned-down color if it is a high-fashion piece, or you could wear more color if it is low-fashion piece.  Bright color and high-fashion looks will bring comments, unfortunately.

Using cosmetics and dressing fashionably in some places puts you in a different class--either lower, as per the staff and support--or higher, as per the administration.

[amazona2]

Wow! I didn't expect to get so much hostility to "fashion."

This is about aesthetics. Is not an educated person one who has an appreciation not only for the life of the mind but for the material world? I refuse to choose between these two.

It's hard to take some one who teaches aesthetics seriously when they do not in any way show appreciation for material beauty either on their person or in their environment.

This is not about being a fashionista ala Paris Hilton ( which is total hijacking of fashion as art by consumer culture). This is about having regard, appreciation, and respect for the material world and others.

I must be suffering from a more sensitive eye. There may also be some gender issues wrapped up in this conversation.

[larryc]

"I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes."

[daniel_von_flanagan]

Wow! I didn't expect to get so much hostility to "fashion."

This is not hostility by CHE standards.

This is about aesthetics. Is not an educated person one who has an appreciation not only for the life of the mind but for the material world?

No.  I mean yes. (Trying to navigate the double negatives here.)

I refuse to choose between these two.

Your choice; wear what you want.  Your original post didn't ask anyone what you should wear, rather you were criticizing other people who didn't meet your standards.

It's hard to take some one who teaches aesthetics seriously when they do not in any way show appreciation for material beauty either on their person or in their environment.

First of all, your complaint seems to be about everyone at your university, not just the teachers of aesthetics.  Second, as an academic subject, "aesthetics" can be found in a wide variety of departments, from the arts to the humanities to home economics, and if your program is in a philosophy or art department instead of a School of Fashion then it is likely that your faculty do not share your belief that this year's couture has any relationship at all to their academic discipline.  Third, you are in serious trouble as a graduate student if your metric of a faculty member's "seriousness" is his or her fashion sense.

respect for the material world

Are you making a pun here?

There may also be some gender issues wrapped up in this conversation.

Are you really suggesting that women are more superficial than men? - DvF

[holyhush]

It's hard to take some one who teaches aesthetics seriously when they do not in any way show appreciation for material beauty either on their person or in their environment.

It's like you haven't even considered that someone might find aesthetic satisfaction in something you don't similarly appreciate.  Such active resistance to the multiplicity of possible engagements with the material doesn't really make me think highly of you.  No matter how you dress.

[fiona]

 This is basically Warts.

The Fiona

[frack]

I'm with Thorstein Veblen on this issue, who said "academics should eat well, dress poorly, and smoke fine cigars."

Well, except for the cigars ... can't stand the damned things.

[carebearstare]

This conversation is interesting. I think the issue that is underlying the conversation here is that for some academics, so-called "unfashionable" dress is a point of principle. That is, to be an intellectual means to not be cowed by the vagaries of something as superficial as fashion. Couple this with some of the obvious truths about the world of fashion (that it's highly classist, completely arbitrary and often ridiculous), and you get a fairly convincing argument as to why certain profs rock the same outfits week after week for years on end.

The other issue at hand here is in some ways part and parcel of the same thing. "Professional" is code that derives from a similar line of thinking that perhaps at root is just as tied to income, but less tied to trends (though that is changing some); it is also highly gendered. But I agree with some of what previous posters have said. Out of plain fact that everybody works, "professional" has become a wide enough category to encompass trendy fashionistas, old boys, and people who haven't bought a new suit since 1987. I think the fashion industry would ideally like to usurp this democracy and staidness of professionalism. But that's another conversation.

Where I teach, the students look great even in 900am classes, and most of the profs dress superbly as well. But I'm in an urban environment where it's very difficult not to do so. I personally think the point of clothing (when I'm teaching anyway) is camouflage--it's to get people not to notice that you're wearing so that they pay attention to what you're saying. In that sense, abiding by the "rules" of "professional" society, however ideologically detestable they might be in debate, is worth it. It's easy enough to put on a pair of black pants and a sweater, so why not?

[grasshopper]

This is basically Warts.

The Fiona

Possibly. But it's Warts about fashion, and you all know how I love a good clothes and bags discussion.

[grasshopper]

I must be suffering from a more sensitive eye. There may also be some gender issues wrapped up in this conversation.

No, you're not quite that precious; and yes, there are. And a vast body of literature about it. Check out key terms like adornment, dress, the body and culture, material culture, writing the body, playing/acting/performing gender.

Two good places to start are with Judith Butler and Nancy Chodorow.