There’s certainly a question of semantics to be asked. Does a standard imply intentional social enforcement or not? How would it be similar or different to a general apathy? There’s arguments for and against that merit consideration.
I always liked the scene in Downtown Abbey where Henry Talbot, a new arrival, expresses qualms and discomfort from being attended to by a butler. Lord Grantham explains to him that Talbot is now part of a household where there are accepted roles and customs. In a great house like Downtown, there are traditions and class expectations - the upper class requiring the expertise of a butler and the butler, not a mere servant, but an important figure in maintaining the propriety and dignity of the entire household. Or as you noted in the words of T.S. Eliot, to "preserve and communicate standards of manners – which are a vital element in group culture."
My guess is that after half a millennium of the kings versus commoners dynamic, they realized a reciprocal relationship was the best way to maintain social cohesion.
For what it's worth, "kings vs. commoners" is largely a myth. In Christian Europe, at least, kings were often the most stalwart defenders of the poorest in society. Theirs was a far more reciprocal relationship than that of us and our rulers today
Excellent. I have owned and designed for my historical pattern company since 1997, and I tend to dress in a way many perceive as “vintage,” although I would classify it as choosing timeless designs that are dignified and flattering. What drives me batty are the cosplayers who want to wear (say) 1940s or 1950s outfits but loudly declaim they are for “vintage styles, not vintage values.” Our values create our styles. You can’t have it any other way.
Exactly! And refusing to see the that values are upstream of cultures is why we’re seeing people put the cart before the horse so often. It’s an inversion of order that’s been ongoing for a while now, sadly.
It's a bit simplistic, but my general rule has always been to consider what is likely to be the general attire in whatever social situation I'm entering, and then take it up just a notch. For example if I'm going to a friend's house for a dinner, and I know that they'll all likely be wearing jeans and t shirts, then I'll wear khakis and a sweater. I think that strikes a nice balance between dressing well enough to show people respect (and that I care about my own appearance), without making other people uncomfortable. This is really the essence of good manners.
I truly believe Christians should wear black or dark colors to a funeral. We mourn. It’s proper to mourn. As Ecclesiastes says, there is a time to mourn. Because of sin, we all have to die, and that’s hard, and we can acknowledge that. It is sad how many times I see a funeral turn solely into a celebration of life for a Christian, or the family requests that you not wear black.
There’s a line of thought that says we live in a “death denying” culture, unwilling to think about or dwell on death out of fear. This may extend so far as to deny the usual rituals and signs associated with funerals as they center death.
Of course, wanting to focus on celebration has its place within a funeral, but if even death doesn’t merit taking by notice by dressing up or soberly meditating, then what does?
I follow certain self determined rules. I was a CPA in the days where women wore suits with skirts not pants. I continued to dress for work in skirts or dresses although I was managing a medical clinic rather than a downtown CPA firm. Ditto for church. Always a dress or skirt and blouse, heels although now they tend to be a kitten heel.
I rarely wear jeans in public unless I’m at a rodeo.
Even when I lived in the big city I was often the finest tiger in the jungle. I just don’t feel comfortable dressing down.
Great piece, though I would submit that there is a prevailing standard: the standard of slovenliness
There’s certainly a question of semantics to be asked. Does a standard imply intentional social enforcement or not? How would it be similar or different to a general apathy? There’s arguments for and against that merit consideration.
I always liked the scene in Downtown Abbey where Henry Talbot, a new arrival, expresses qualms and discomfort from being attended to by a butler. Lord Grantham explains to him that Talbot is now part of a household where there are accepted roles and customs. In a great house like Downtown, there are traditions and class expectations - the upper class requiring the expertise of a butler and the butler, not a mere servant, but an important figure in maintaining the propriety and dignity of the entire household. Or as you noted in the words of T.S. Eliot, to "preserve and communicate standards of manners – which are a vital element in group culture."
It’s an interesting observation that this isn’t just a top down relationship but, as your example shows, it has elements of symbiosis as well.
My guess is that after half a millennium of the kings versus commoners dynamic, they realized a reciprocal relationship was the best way to maintain social cohesion.
For what it's worth, "kings vs. commoners" is largely a myth. In Christian Europe, at least, kings were often the most stalwart defenders of the poorest in society. Theirs was a far more reciprocal relationship than that of us and our rulers today
Excellent. I have owned and designed for my historical pattern company since 1997, and I tend to dress in a way many perceive as “vintage,” although I would classify it as choosing timeless designs that are dignified and flattering. What drives me batty are the cosplayers who want to wear (say) 1940s or 1950s outfits but loudly declaim they are for “vintage styles, not vintage values.” Our values create our styles. You can’t have it any other way.
Exactly! And refusing to see the that values are upstream of cultures is why we’re seeing people put the cart before the horse so often. It’s an inversion of order that’s been ongoing for a while now, sadly.
It's a bit simplistic, but my general rule has always been to consider what is likely to be the general attire in whatever social situation I'm entering, and then take it up just a notch. For example if I'm going to a friend's house for a dinner, and I know that they'll all likely be wearing jeans and t shirts, then I'll wear khakis and a sweater. I think that strikes a nice balance between dressing well enough to show people respect (and that I care about my own appearance), without making other people uncomfortable. This is really the essence of good manners.
This is the way.
I truly believe Christians should wear black or dark colors to a funeral. We mourn. It’s proper to mourn. As Ecclesiastes says, there is a time to mourn. Because of sin, we all have to die, and that’s hard, and we can acknowledge that. It is sad how many times I see a funeral turn solely into a celebration of life for a Christian, or the family requests that you not wear black.
There’s a line of thought that says we live in a “death denying” culture, unwilling to think about or dwell on death out of fear. This may extend so far as to deny the usual rituals and signs associated with funerals as they center death.
Of course, wanting to focus on celebration has its place within a funeral, but if even death doesn’t merit taking by notice by dressing up or soberly meditating, then what does?
I follow certain self determined rules. I was a CPA in the days where women wore suits with skirts not pants. I continued to dress for work in skirts or dresses although I was managing a medical clinic rather than a downtown CPA firm. Ditto for church. Always a dress or skirt and blouse, heels although now they tend to be a kitten heel.
I rarely wear jeans in public unless I’m at a rodeo.
Even when I lived in the big city I was often the finest tiger in the jungle. I just don’t feel comfortable dressing down.
Hopefully you now feel a little less alone in your perfectly natural desire to maintain decorum!