The Power and the Money

Some benefit to the Great Sloppification

It is fairly well undeniable that sartorial standards have collapsed over the past half-century. It has been hard for me to see the benefit. I understand that most people I know in Florida disagree that a long-sleeved lightweight cotton jacket or shirt is more comfortable than a terrible looking T-shirt in the heat. But that does not mean that I understand their disagreement. 

And when it comes to the collapse in standards in more temperate climes, I am utterly befuddled. At least in cold weather people still look somewhat dignified when being sloppy. But once it hits about 60, well, it is possible to dress informally and look good but most Americans do not bother. 

Plus, you really can look quite good and be comfortable in the Miami heat if you know what to buy, even in dark colors:

But finally now I have found a possible benefit! In 1965, women spent 48 minutes a day on laundry and men spent ... uh ... one. By 2012, that was down to 19 minutes for women and up to ... uh ... five minutes for men. (Table 2.1.) So it is possible to argue that the Great Sloppification freed women from the drudgery of washing men’s clothing and allowed men to get away with increasing their laundry time from basically nothing to merely risible. 

Might it be just the spread of washing machines what let people spend less time on laundry? Nope. Household penetration in America hit 75% by 1950. (See Table I.)

Clothes dryers, on the other hand, might account for some of the decrease: they were introduced in 1950 and only hit 50% in 1972. (Same table.)

Still, while I cannot eliminate the hypothesis that the fall in joint laundry activities from 49 to 24 minutes a day might be due to cheaper clothes dryers, I have my doubts. I suspect that the effect is indeed due to the Great Sloppification. 

So there you have it. The world is an uglier place, people no longer show each other respect when going out in public, and is damnably hard for young up-and-comers to signal seriousness. But assuming that men should be spending at least 19 minutes a day on laundry, all those people wandering around in T-shirts with logos on them have a little more than 1½ extra hours a week that I am sure they are spending very well on personal advancement and societal improvement. 

Fashion tips from a senior colleague

 I am advising the government of Albania, as you know. It involves private and public presentations. My presentation style can be a little gonzo, but it is effective. 

I received some much-appreciated (if unsolicited) advice on how to make it even more effective from a very senior (and very very smart) senior colleague. (Colleague in the broadest sense; the person does not work at HBS or GWU.)

“Your style would work even better, well, I understand that you are not as young as you appear, but you should look older.” 

“I was wearing a suit.”

“Yes, but on you it doesn’t look classy.”  

“I’ll die my hair gray?”

“Excellent.”

My working hypothesis is that suits don’t look classy on me because when I’m not playing with my children or in extremely hot weather I wear them all the time. (Albeit often with T-shirts.) They’re my leisure wear and I guess that shows.

Or maybe I just need to die my hair gray.

Pants on the ground! Pants on the ground!

 It has been a little harder to keep up the blog than I had thought. Work is quite pressing. But every so often, something comes up that the rest of the internets seem to be ignoring. So, in the interest of showing how Boston is changing, I would like to mention that Sunday was the fourth annual “No Pants Subway Ride,” in which people ride the T without any pants.

Of course, as you might expect, the “No Pants Subway Ride” didn’t start in Boston in 2007. It started in New York in 2002, and has since gone international. An example of the influence of the internet! I can hear some of you shouting. Well ... probably not. I mean, I’m sure that this idea in particular spread via the internets, but anyone familiar with the 1960s will find lots of similar events, and let’s not mention the decade after that one. Moreover, the participants physically rally before removing their pants. So please no conclusionamating about the awesome marveliciousness of our new interlinkeded planet. 

It isn’t really a surprise to find that it’s spread to Boston ... Boston has a giant 250,000 person college town laid atop the real city of 1.7 million. While Boston itself is not the sort of place that would smile upon pantless T-riding, the college town appended onto it certainly would. So no surprise there. And it has also spread to such unsurprising places as Philly. After all, the city that celebrates Mummer’s Day is not going to have a problem with pants-removing on the Orange Line. 

I have to admit that it was a bit more unexpected to find that it had spread to the Mexico City. But when you think about it, that reaction makes no sense. The D.F. long ago left behind its cultural conservatism. 

My excuse is that the rapidity of the cultural changes in Mexico between 1990 and today have left me reeling. Still, the United States changed even more between 1960 and 1980. So it is far from unprecendented. And why wouldn’t the chilangos take advantage of the opportunity to ride the subway without any pants?

My worry that it presages the end of Mexico’s unofficial ban on shorts.

Here is a much better photo of the Mexico City event, courtesy of El Pinche Holandés:

 

A George Will moment

  Some time ago, George Will published an odd screed against blue jeans.  Gancho mentioned the column on this blog here, where he pointed out that I was, in fact, wearing blue jeans while travelling in Greece. 

But I have to say that I have my own George Will moment when it comes to male sartorial style in early 21st century America.  Below is a picture of the street outside the Palacio Nacional in Mexico City, where I met with some officials from the country’s Treasury department to ask some questions about the recent petroleum reforms.  What don’t you see in the photo?

That’s right!  Shorts.  Only one guy is wearing shorts, thankfully long ones, and yes, he turned out to be a European.  What about looking in the other direction?

What about out front?

None!  No shorts.  This is true throughout Latin America.  If you’re over the age of 18, standing on a hard surface, and cannot see the ocean, then you don’t wear shorts.  Not in Panama, not in Venezuela, not in Mexico. 

And I agree with that convention.  The only exception is if you are actively engaged in exercise.  Period.  Adult men in shorts look ridiculous.  I have felt this way since I turned 18; my high school graduation was the penultimate time that I broke this rule.  I ultimate time was while I was travelling in Trinidad, and I looked ridiculous.  It won’t happen again.

As for sandals?  Gimme a break.  At least shorts are comfortable.  Sandals and flip-flops don’t even manage that.  I found flip-flops useful in the Army for the prevention of athlete’s foot, and that’s about it.  They are not comfortable.  They flip, see.  And flop.  Sandals, meanwhile, manage to be shoes without the advantage of keeping your toes safe if you drop something on them.  So, WTF?

Ban ‘em.  End.  None of this.  C’mon Americans.  Get some dignity.  No more shorts.  And no more capri pants on men either, which have started to infiltrate the USA from Europe.  So all you shorts-wearing flip-flopping young people?  Get off my damn lawn. 

Nobody likes my shirt

One way of telling a Boricua isn't always accurate.

My fiancee, my father, nobody else likes it.  No clue why.