american conversations: but, im a product of my environment

i ran across this conversation on one of my friends fb pages... and had to repost it- unedited. *names have been changed to protect identities (lol).

andre initially asks the following question (via his status update):

If I'm a product of my environment and my subsequent conditioned behavior unconstructively contributes to society, which then directly effects my environment... where and how does the cycle end??

melody: the chicken came before the egg

anisha: when you make the conscious effort to end it.

andre: So what's the origin of the conception of the chicken? Is society to blame or am I as an individual to blame for my contributions?

If you've always only known how to write with your right hand, how quickly and to what level of efficiency can you learn to write with your left?

franchesca: depends on how much u really wanna learn to write with ya left hand...
the cycle ends when YOU decide to let it end...

amerie: I agree that it is a matter of the amount of determination that the individual has to change. Doesn't the saying go, so a man thinketh so is he..

andre: What if an individuals attempts to reform and break from their environment's cycle are in vein, as the recipient(s) of the reformation have also been conditioned by society? Although their conditioning may be slightly altered, the recipients then act as entities of society that force the motion of the cycle.

So if you have two groups within an environment that have both been conditioned and are increasingly consumed by an opportunistic cycle with each passing day and experience, unknowingly implementing that learned knowledge to antagonize the progression of breaking both cycles AND the single cycle that is thus created... where or how does the cycle end??

franchesca: the individuals attempts will be in vein ONLY if he gives up and decides not to pursue the desired end. IT still would be the recipients choice 2 ACT as he has been conditioned by his society. Maybe the recipient needs to change the society he's finds himself in then.

again both individuals must decide n want to break the cycle

amerie: I still think that it is an individuals choice. Even for those on the receiving end. If each person makes a conscious decision to live by a certain code of ethic, then even the altered conditioning of society won't take over. You have to deny yourself daily to be become who you are suppose to be.

kenya: I was once a believer that we as "Americans" have the same opportunities to achieve at the same magnitude of our peers if we were determined to do so. I can say that I feel as though I fully used the resources that were given to me to my advantage to become a young college graduate working for a fortune 10 company. Does that mean I was more determined than the next man; or that I had the knowledge and guidance from those around me, to know the resources I had at my finger tips, and how to use them. Sometimes it’s not the lack of determination of a person that keeps them trapped, but the unawareness and the ignorance around them that keeps them there.

andre: A single individual cannot break the complete cycle that effects their environment, the individual can only attempt to change themselves. Furthermore, a single individual can change the environment they're in but cannot change the society of which they exist. If their society directly effects their environment then the new environment will only be a deviation of the original.

Could it be that there is no correct answer, our minds were not created to fathom the intricacy of the synopsis, or that complete reformation is simply too late for our society?

nicole: Indeed a single individual cannot alone break the cycle. Instead, it will only change as a result of a combined effort of many in the society. Let us not forget, though, that society is made up of individuals and institutions. If many individuals decide they want to change the cycle (and actually make efforts toward that goal *KEY*), then, and only then, will they be able to also change the institutions that construct the societal norms.

andre: I agree completely. My only fear is that our society is no longer cohesive enough to make such a change as a unit. This misfortune leaves individuals who comprise the society to ask questions such as the one originally presented. I suppose the only true resolution is the unity of actively reformed individuals from each of the two groups. However, the reformation must be continuous within each individual, otherwise they will once again fall victim to the cycle. Tsk tsk

nicole: agreed. Enjoyed this conversation... Great thoughts.

_____________________

what i enjoyed most about the conversation was the fact that each individual knew exactly what the true nature of the discussion was... they knew who, or what group they were specifically conferring, but conversed in such a way that would not make one who was, let's say, not within the (knowing) group become defensive-- which would in turn takeaway from the progression that is clearly trying to be made... furthermore, this is a perfect example of "our" daily conversations, we, americans, are still fighting to break an "institution" a conditioning that has been so deeply ingrained within our culture, fighting a mindset that was strategically placed there for centuries upon centuries by... well, by our oppressors. . . and now some ex-oppressors and some of the lineage of the oppressed perpetuate behaviors that do our country, our world, a disservice...

we must change one by one... discuss. ask questions. and diversify yourself as a being.

The Dandy: Self-made, Well-dressed, Well-mannered, and Traditional or Flamboyant.

Dandy. When I hear that word a slew of things come to mind, a few of them being: the phrase "well, isn't that just dandy", the image of a flamboyantly dressed gentleman somewhere in Europe, the childhood song "Yankee Doodle", the book "Great Gatsby", and a few stylish men- one being Fonzworth Bentley.

Though I've learned about dandies here and there throughout life, I've never just sat down and researched dandies and dandyism myself. So, I decided to, and this is what I found...

(pictured left, the first dandy George Brummel)

According to Webster:

Main Entry: ¹dan·dy

Pronunciation: \ˈdan-dē\

Function: noun

Inflected Form(s): plural dandies

Etymology: probably short for jack-a-dandy, from ¹jack + a (of) + dandy (origin unknown)

Date: circa 1780

1 : a man who gives exaggerated attention to personal appearance

2 : something excellent in its class

So basically, a dandy is indeed a well-dressed man. To go further he is, "a man who places, particular importance or physical appearance, refined language, and leisurely hobbies." The history of the dandy is rather interesting, being that he's often defined in several ways:

1. a self-made person, who rejected bourgeois values, adapting a carefree, indolent lifestyle while emulating aristocracy

2. a person of middle class background, who imitated aristocratic style

-or simply-

3. a refined, elegant man

I find that, historically, most dandies were either very wealthy or middle class. The wealthy ones would dress extravagantly and were either flanuers- men who wanted to quintessentially experience life and observe beauty and art -OR- men who played many games (billiards, hunting, etc), lived at the cafes, dined at the inns, and were seemingly idle. The middle class dandies were often men who were innately stylish, causing them to be fawned over by the aristocrats, and their elegance and style made them extremely influential in their societies.

A famous dandy, Baudelaire, commented that the dandies had "no profession other than elegance...no other status but that of cultivating the idea of beauty in their own persons....The dandy must aspire to be sublime without interruption; he must live and sleep before a mirror."

So elegance is his job? Hmmm... let's have a closer look into "dandyism".
(excerpt from thedandy.org)

"Dandyism was born "officially" in the early 1800's. At this time there was a lot of change going on politically [the French had recently made their king a bit shorter- by a head], and socially as England was quickly surpassing France as the major cultural influence in Europe and America. What happened in short was this. A young man whose name was George Bryan Brummel, the son of a undersecretary made friends with the Prince Regent, and became one of the most influential, and even powerful men in the nation, not by his birthright, or education, or military prowess, or scholastic accomplishment...but by being well dressed.

George made quite an impression on English society, and caused many powerful people to abandon their gaudy Baroque-ish outfits and adopt Mr. Brummel's clean, elegant, simple toned manner of dressing. George Brummel's perfection of style gained him access to the highest of English society: the Dandy was born. The Dandy was a gentleman first, any other title HAD to come second. The fact that he was of noble blood of any rank, whose job had traditionally been to dress well as a sign of social standing, could be an obstacle to being a Dandy if he relied on his title, and not his style. Thus any gentleman through a command of the dress and manners of good society, could gain access to the social influence of the aristocracy. Thus, an aristocrat could only be a Dandy if his pride was his appearance and manners, not this title. Nor could a nobleman of any rank be a Dandy if he dropped in his title in conversation in order to impress, or took more pride in his heritage than his style. If ever he relied on his title, he lost his Dandyhood. This new standard had a dramatic effect on the English landscape, and wasn't long before heading across the channel to France. We'll stop with the history, and explain a bit more about the characteristics.

A Dandy pursed elegance, it was his ultimate and unique goal. Everything he did was designed to make his social presentation more elegant, thus great care had to be taken not to appear too extravagant in his dress, and of course never slovenly. A Dandy was also not a man who wares flamboyant clothing. His outfits are designed to please and add elegance and swagger to his presentation; not make him stand out a mile away, so Oscar Wilde was NOT a Dandy- in the strict definition of the term.

Oscar Wilde is not a traditional dandy

This trend of using elegant dress to influence people, while not being a novel one, nevertheless was an important one, because as there were Macaronis, Hell rakes, Fops, and other sorts of fancy figures in the history of Europe and America, they never were able to cross that line into real social power unless they had been born there. The Dandy was the first. This meant that as the 19th Century progressed, it was not a narrow aristocracy of birth that ran society, but a collection of well dressed, well mannered gentlemen who all obeyed the same set of rules, and for whom- any of whom, regardless of birth, to break the rules of etiquette, meant banishment form society. Influence and power was based around being well bred, not of noble birth... [The] Dandy is a man whose pursuit of elegance, in matters of dress, manners, and speech gains him a respect that nothing else can give. "

So flamboyant doesn't define a dandy at all, not the original dandy anyway. Using one's style and speech to achieve social status... that's an everyday thing in this century, though many fail with their pedestrian attempts. But still, this isn't far-fetched... there are a ton of phrases that emulate this way of thinking, "Dress for the job you want" "Dress for success". There are many versions of those phrases, and I'd have to agree with them all for the most part. Your appearance is important, they say people make their first impression within three-seven seconds of meeting a person. It sorta sux that people judge so quickly, but that's life... and three to seven seconds isn't enough time to carry out an intellectual conversation, but if you look good then you're off to a nice start. ( this is random, but Will Smith's movie, Six Degrees of Seperation comes to mind)

Okay, so we've covered the definition, history, and modern adaptions of dandy philosophy, now I think it's appropriate to figure out who the modern day dandies are.

Alright, so I did a well-rounded best-dressed list back in June 2008 that included- Kanye West, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, David Beckham, Pharrell Williams, Andre Benjamin, Fonzworth Bentley, Johnny Depp, etc. And I think all of these guys could possibly be dandies, depending on the definition given. But obviously everyone can't be a dandy... here's my dandy check-list:

A dandy must:

1. place importance on being well-dressed
2. be well-mannered and elegant in speech and living -OR- be flamboyant in his "acts" of elegance.

I think there are two types of dandies: the traditional dandy and flamboyant dandy or maybe I should say the intrinsic dandy and the extrinsic dandy. I find that many people these days are moreso extrinsically dandy than intrinsically dandy, either one is okay, but I have a preference for those who are intrinsically dandy.

Fonzworth Bentley is indeed a dandy

Okay, so if I had to categorize the gents of today, then who would be what... well from the best-dressed list two guys instantly stand out- Kanye and Fonzworth. These are the main two guys from the list that I feel places great importance on being very well-dressed, and from those two I'd have to say Fonzworth Bentley is the intrinsic dandy, while Kanye West is an extrinsic dandy. Mr.Bentley doesn't over do it, he doesn't wear "loud clothing" or proclaims himself best-dressed, atleast I don't think he does. And he, much like George Brummel and other traditional dandies, wasn't born into an elite family, but rather found favor with the wealthy elite because of his style and mannerisms. Bentley was a maître d' at a New York restaurant and was "discovered" by Diddy... the rest of the story you know. Mr. West on the other hand, though I love his style, he can often go overboard and places Too much emphasis on designer labels, when that is Not what style is about. The perfect example of the two types would be Kanye's emphasis trip to Paris earlier this year...


I honestly think it's hard to place celebrities in one of the dandy categories because many of them dress nice, ONLY because of their fame. It's hard to figure out who just has "it" and would still have "it" if they were working a regular 9-5. For that reason, I feel photographers, writers, artist and such are better people to give such a title too. Scott Schuman, the Sartorialist himself, is a given traditional dandy to me... he observes people, beauty, style and (from what I can tell) is an intrinsically elegant man. I'm sure many of you have atleast one person in mind that could be either of the two types of dandies....

Scott the Sartorialist

It's easier for me to group celebrities of the past as dandies... Fred Astaire is often categorized as a dandy, I think the Rat Pack (Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis, Jr., Dean Martin, Joey Bishop, Peter Lawford) were dandies of their time, I'd have to be candid and say a good amount people of color in entertainment in the 50s, 60s, were intrinsic dandies- being extremely elegant was the only way many of them would even be given the opportunity to entertain despite their musical genuis (so Nat King Cole, Duke Ellington, etc etc).

Rat Pack

Nat King Cole

Fred Astaire

Perhaps in a decade or so we'll look back and call Michael Jackson a sort of dandy- who knows... I think dandyism is still very much in play today, it's just a little harder to point out. Who would you all consider a (modern) dandy?

Andre Benjamin... I'd call him a southern dandy

sources: mytholoke.com, thedandy.org

Words.

i appreciate websites that consist of nothing but phrases that make you think... or laugh... or agree... you know- makes you feel a certain emotion even if only for a second. ive been discovering these sites alot lately, but mainly because of my favorite site (next to mines) ffffound. the saying above can be found here, it's basically a site that counted down to new years with new years resolutions. neat-o.

define: flâneur- a gentleman stroller of the streets.

to be flâneur or a flâneur. the word often has 2 connatations- positive and negative. but we will take on the positive definition...

The term flâneur comes from the French masculine noun flâneur—which has the basic meanings of "stroller", "lounger", "saunterer", "loafer"—which itself comes from the French verb flâner, which means "to stroll". Charles Baudelaire developed a derived meaning of flâneur—that of "a person who walks the city in order to experience it". Because of the term's usage and theorization by Baudelaire and numerous thinkers in economic, cultural, literary and historical fields, the idea of the flâneur has accumulated significant meaning as a referent for understanding urban phenomena and modernity.

Flâneur: Refers to an urban, upper-middle class ideal man of society. A flâneur takes pleasure in observing the modern, progressive, everyday life. He takes in his surroundings, both the fleeting beauty and the universal, timeless beauty, and he is conscious of social distinction.

“Flâneuse”: The female version of a flâneur. This term was not coined during the Impressionist time period. Woman, according to society, could not actually be an observer of the modern, nor could she be progressive or conscious of the movement of urban, modern life. Artists like Cassatt and Morisot did paintings which placed women in society and portrayed them as observers of the modern and equals of the flâneur.

“The street becomes a dwelling for the flâneur; he is as much at home among the facades of houses as a citizen in his four walls. To him the shiny, enamelled signs of business are at least as good a wall ornament as an oil painting is to a bourgeois in his salon. The walls are the desk against which he presses his notebooks; newsstands are his libraries and the terraces of cafés are the balconies from which he looks down on his household after his work is done.”

––– Walter Benjamin, “The Flâneur”

*the "flâneur" (the one who strolls) and "flânerie" (the act of strolling) are often associated with Paris.

Brooklyn. We Go Hard.

Get me back to Brooklyn... I wanna join the circus. (giggles)

Anyone who knows me, knows I heart my east village... the village in general, but the East Village just contains so many types of areas and has so many kinds of people- the artsy creative types, the skater kids, the really rich but down to earth people, etc etc. But with all that said, these Brooklyn Boys make me wanna cross the bridge.

The Brooklyn Circus- I've heard about them, seen the pictures, at first I couldn't figure out exactly who or what they are but now I understand. The Brooklyn Circus is a brand that extends itself to a lifestyle, and that's what a true brand is. It is also a store- 3 stores to be exact (Chicago, Brooklyn, and San Francisco) and they carry several brands- adidas, Brixton, Cheap Monday, Goorin, G-Shock, J. Lindeberg, Kangol, Maharishi, Nooka, Nudie Co. Jeans, Onie Denim/Bs United, Phaidon, Rich Yung, Sebago, Staple Design, Tachen, The BKc, Umbro by Kim Jones, and Vael Footwear.

I just spent close to an hour perusing their photos (sigh)- why can't all guys dress like this:) So now Jacinda's favorite lifestyle brands for men- Ralph Lauren, Benjamin Bixby, and the BKc.

Photos to experience the The Brooklyn Circus.
(click to enlarge)

for more visit their blog, here.

top photo by SHEITEN M Photography
the BKc photos via The Brooklyn Circus Blog

The Stylish Progression From Boy To Man

I believe there comes a time in every young man's life- in which he must answer the pinnacle question: "Am I ready to be a man?"

When answering this he must consciously think about his past-- and what the future could possibly bring. He must ask himself "Am I sincerely ready to travel and be on my own like those before me-- (insert names of great men that inspire you, fictional or real)". Ready to tell mom and dad, "It's okay, I can handle it." Ready to face it when he has to cut out Friday nights at Stats or Pink Pony because the insurance on the brand new Honda or perhaps Audi just isn't going to pay for itself.

And just as he asks himself these questions about life's essentials, he must also ask himself the same about another "life category" that actually, even if not admittedly, is as important. Just as there is a time in which his actions must ripen from boyish to manly- as must his style develop from the worlds to his own. It is quite hard to know when that time has come. The decision to buy a house, buy a car, or even to get married comes more naturally to most men, than to decide that "I must now own my look, my own style."

The truth is, most men never own up or develop it. They progress from immaturity to dignified maturation while always missing one element that few are able to acquaint themselves with. Many become great men, distinguished, erudite men, but not quite embodying the maximum meaning of those words because he lacks the complete essence of it.

Those before you who took the important leap did so because they felt it necessary to grow into manhood- at it's entirety. It is a complex situation- to decide what style, what look, will sum you up. To figure out what people will see of you before you mutter the simplest word. As you walk through Whole Foods, figuring out where they stash the Bolthouse smoothies- what one second summary will the girl restocking the oranges think? As the red double decker full of tourist pass you while you're off 42nd and 6th- what will be their impression of the true new yorker as they gaze upon you?



And as I ask, you must ask-- travel deep into the depths of who you are and decide. Do you wish to present an outward image that fully reflects your personality? Or do you wish to be true to yourself while yet knowing that providing those on the outside with a particular reflection will only enhance your current position- be it financial, emotional, or simply artificial (in the many ways it can be)? The choice is yours...

It requires reflection, perhaps a long overdue visit to the men who have come before you- fathers, grandfathers, great uncles. Maybe it takes you finally releasing what will make "her" like you and focusing on what will make "you" like you... while hoping she sticks around for the progression.

For some, this journey, this leap, this step happens naturally- happening between 24-28 (lucky bastards). While for others, because of life's circumstances, late 30s, 40s, and midlife crisis's will induce a band-aid pull effect-- this change will be sudden, very quick and fast. But for you, because you were smart enough to be on this particular site and read this particular article on this day- you have the delighted and highly coveted-- choice.

You can choose to further peruse in a stagnated manhood, silently chuckle because you semi-arrogantly but mainly pridefully have already become a man and developed your own style, or you can begin this journey. Flip the coin, roll the dice, choose from the petals of a flower if you wish... I suggest that maybe, just maybe it is time to become an, Urban Gentleman.

- Urban Gentleman editor