The Bane of Leafblowers

In my mind, there is no modern appliance so annoying as the leaf blower. They vibrate at a pitch  that is designed to destroy concentration, are ubiquitous and guzzle energy.  But their worst fault is that they are unnecessary. A broom removes the leaves from a front lawn or porch just as efficiently with less noise and distraction to every one else.

But this desire for complex technology to do the job of simple objects is not restricted to leaf blowers. I see it many different appliances- especially for the kitchen- and begin to wonder if the bit of ease which this specialized tool offers our lives is really worth the increase of complexity and clutter. When I have thought about this idea more, I'll write a longer post. But I wanted to see if anyone else found overly specialized objects to be more a help or a hindrance to their lives.

Why Fashion Does Matter

Let us play a little game.

First, let's pose a hypothesis: fashion is a moral consideration.

No, not insofar as fair trade organic cotton fills your closet or you only buy handmade works of art to support local artisans (both noble goals). But because integration of life and ideals is a worthy goal and fashion is one of the best expressions of an Aesthetic.

Consider it from the point of view of philosophy. If metaphysics is to be anything more than an agreeable waste of time and intellect, it must have some baring on one's personal ethics, world view, and general lifestyle.  What use are convictions or beliefs if they are not practiced as well? After all, if we saw a person claim to love all life on earth, but go home each day and ruthlessly abuse her significant other, there would be some question to the validity of her claim. Hypocrisy in another word.

So, why don't we hold this same standard with Aesthetics? If you claim to love the Steampunk aesthetic, but your wardrobe consists of jeans and plain colored tee-shirts, why are you not branded as a hypocrite? Why is it acceptable to love a fashion or an ideal, but never express it in our daily lives?

The answer may lie in our perception of fashion: it is perfectly acceptable to have many different interests or styles of clothing where it would be reprehensible to have many different sorts of morals. Acceptable to dress as a Neo-Victorian one day, a modern celebrity the next, or search your closet for the perfect dress to match an event. But to put on one set of values to suit a certain situation and then replace them with another when the scenario changes and people become wary of your presence.

Is this distinction between Philosophy and Aesthetic a wrong one? Should faithfulness to one's aesthetic  be regaled as highly as one's monogamy to a certain set of values? If yes, both can and should evolve over time, but our current closet of hodgepodge fashions mingling next to each other shows a distinct lack of discretion and taste. Therefore, if multiple styles appeal to your Aesthetic, investigate further and discover the root cause for each. Find the first principles of your Aesthetics in a sense. Once done, embrace those principles and never deviate.

Clothing, then, is the easiest and most accessible way to express our Aesthetics to the outside world. Our choices of clothes, reflect our choices of what is beautiful or good as much as any action. Fashion does Matter.

Penniless Aristocrat: In Praise of Thrifting

Once upon a time, shopping wasn't a recreational sport.

Actually according to various etiquette books written prior to the fifties, it was considered bad manners to enter a shop just to browse. The phrase 'I'm just looking' was incomprehensible; you went out shopping list of goods and stores in hand, intending to purchase something.

As an ex-sales girl, I bemoan the death of this custom. It would have made my job so much easier and more satisfying, but I realize a return to this mindset is impossible. Shopping is now recreational. The urge to buy and consume is now an epidemic in most of the Western world. There are many other, better blogs, articles, studies and philosophies to explain this problem. You've all read them before, so I won't waste our time. Needless to say: more stuff does not equal more happiness. Clutter damages the serenity of our homes, our pocketbooks, and, potentially, the environment.

The logical solution would be to stop buying so many things. With the extra money, you can invest in one high quality item that brings delight and charm to your life- rather than a houseful of items that are only 'maybes.' So why don't we do it?

The fault lies with our increased desire for la nouveau- the new. There are so many novelties in modern life: new products, new ideas, new fashions, and new entertainments. Every time we fire up our computers or turn on our televisions, our brains are bombarded with the new, the different, the exciting. Our capacity for boredom has diminished with our attention spans. Why force yourself through "Vanity Fair" when you can flip to facebook or netflix in a second?

This desire for novelty extends  not only to our mental landscape but to our possessions as well. The thrill of a new pair of shoes, a new accessory or a knicknack is still delightful, if diminished, even if we are constantly buying new things. It will take a change far more than my willpower to keep me from wanting to acquire and consume.

So the Neo-Aristocrat faces a dilemma. Financial independence, ecological consciousness, and a desire for unique and high quality items directly compete with the drive for the new. This is where thrifting plays a role.

Again, countless other alternative fashion blogs rightly laud thrift shops for their unique and cheap clothing and accessory options. It's true. Especially if you live near a rich city, the pickings of thrift stores are a superb  place to build your wardrobe  But they also are a superb place to scratch the itch for the new. You can pick up a new mirror or skirt- have all the excitement of buying something new- while still maintaining the values of an Neo-Aristocrat. As second hand stores, the items of thrift shops do not pull more resources from the environment, are no expensive, often support a local charity, and can contain surprisingly wonderful items.

In short, Thrifting is a responsible and fun way to deal with a modern neurosis while maintaining some of the values of a Neo-Aristocrat.

Grace Notes:

~ A closet packed full of thrifted items is just as bad as a closet of items from designer brands or other clothing stores. Buy responsibly and purge your closet twice a year when switching out wardrobes.

~ Learn your fabrics, brands and cuts of clothes. Something from the Banana Republic will be of higher quality than something from Forever21. 100% pure silk or wool is generally higher quality than polyester or spandex.

~ If you can sew or alter clothing, the value of the thrift store expands exponentially. Same if you are learning to sew. Some thrift stores carry craft supplies or material. But if you want practice drafting patterns or making a mock up of a pattern, I recommend buying a bed sheet or table cloth to experiment with.

~ Wash everything before wearing it. Dry clean if necessary.

What about you? How does shopping at a thift store compare to a mall? Do you tend to value your thifted items more or less? What do you look for when you go into a Thrift store?

Re-breaking the Lense

Sometimes in life, it is necessary to take a step back from a project and let it reform in your mind. I do this often: sometimes for an hour, a day, a week, or, in this case, more than seven months. But with more life experiences under my belt, I am still very interested in continuing to explore the foundations of the Neo-Aristocratic aesthetic and applying it to my l.
Though I'll still undertake the more philosophic discussion of comparative lifestyles and what exact it is to be Aristocratic, the gist of my interest has turned instead to applying the aesthetic to my current lifestyle. After all, a philosophy is just so much hot air unless applied to your day to day life.

With that in mind, here are three new themes I will follow:

The Penniless Aristocrat

Neo-Aristocratic behavior and lifestyle should apply to everyone- not just those with a fat wallet. But it is easy while poor to fall into some bad and very un-aristocratic behaviors. I'll try to find the most Neo-Aristocratic way to deal with the mundane problems of public transport, landlords, thrift shopping and otherwise. 

Reflections on Refinement

Though the process of refinement is an internal one, the quality of material we have to reform matters a great deal. Here I will be reviewing various pieces of literature, music, art, theater, etc that I find to be Aristocratic. More importantly, I hope to offer tools to look at these pieces of fine art and literature so they can be fully appreciated.

Maintaining Health 

Finally, health of both body and mind is essential to living a good lifestyle- tortured poets aside. As I am studying Acupuncture and have always been interested in holistic medicine  this will be a small forum for me to put some of the lessons I've learned into practical use.
With these themes and others in the trend, I hope this next installation of "Life Through a Cracked Lens" will be an interesting read. As always, if you have any questions or suggestions, feel free to email me or comment below. 

When Steampunk is too Fantastical...

Unlike my long but mild interest in Goth or my recent but great fascination with Lolita, Steampunk captured my fancy the Autumn of 2006 when I first picked up Neil Stephenson's The Diamond Age and became entranced with the Neo-Victorians. Read this book even if Steampunk is not your aesthetic for the superbly visioned future, nanotech wizardry and brilliant characters.

The Neo-Victorians were a phyle of individuals who had recreated the ethics and aesthetics of the Victorian Era in an age of Nanotech. Where the lower classes had The Feed create food, clothing, and shelter on the atomic level, the Neo-Victorians had their necessities handmade. Where the other Phyles spent a good deal of their time tapped into immersion video games or gang warfare, the Neo-Victorians embraced the disciplined, intellectual rigor of  the bygone era. They had the exquisite clothing, the perfect manners, the strong moral system and my complete admiration.

Subsequent searches for 'Neo-Victorian' necessarily led to the subculture of Steampunk, the wonderful Steampunk Magazine, various steampunk messageboards, forums, fashion sites, and more. My writing soon abounded with fantastical tales of airship captains, living automatons, brass goggles and dashing pirates. The margins of my school pages were rarely without some design of crudely drawn gears or poor sketches of my airship 'The Element.' (Long story for why such a brilliant ship has such a poor name.)

I still love Steampunk today. I'll happily devour the plethora of contemporary steampunk literature. My highschool friends still call each other by the titles and characters spewed out by the Steampunk Name Generator. I still sigh over the beautiful corsets, accessories, and dresses from online stories and steampunk meetings. Many of my day dreams include standing at the prow of my ship and feeling the wind whistle through my hair and nip at my nose. I love Steampunk.

But Steampunk isn't real. Thus my love will never move beyond a distant fascination. How can I love something that takes no part in this real world? One of the catch phrases for steampunk is 'a history that never was.' This image contains the core of the problem: Steampunk is a 'history that never was' not a 'future that might be.' We have moved past the age of steam two hundred years ago and won't go back unless an Apocalypse occurs. If such a calamity does come to pass, we won't invent air ships or automatons, because the struggle for life will be too great.

Steampunk is not life-applicable. Yes, it is possible to decorate one's home to look more industrial or Neo-Victorian or like the inside of an Airship. Yes, it is possible to dress as you think your character in a Steampunk world would dress. Yes, it is possible to modify your every modern device into an antique equivalent, but these are real.

The competnacy and capability that I admire so much in Steampunk are for items or situations which do not exist in this world. The adventures I read about or problems I see characters overcome are not adventures or problems I will face. Yes, Steampunk still glorifies the spectacular, the great, the wonderful and capable, but it offers me no insight into how I imbue the ordinary, non airship worthy aspects of my life with the same spirit.

One of the appeals of Steampunk is the ability to fix the machines with which we live. It seems everyone can throw open the back of their personal automaton, reveal the whirring, clicking gears and springs, bang a few with a wrench and fix the problem. That technique is impossible with today's technology. Open up the back of a computer or a phone and, unless you have a very specialized skill set, it is impossible to physically fix the problem. We can barely fix our cars any more with all the advanced technology.

I am not anti-technology. But Steampunk hearkens back to a simpler, more comprehensible world where the average man or woman could become a hero or create a marvelous new invention. This is no longer possible today but Steampunk does not encourage or embrace the aesthetic that would make us so capable in this world. It looks towards past accomplishments rather than future our of an understandable anxiety and confusion about the complexities we face today. But looking back to a history that never was will not help us succeed or overcome the present that is today.

This is why Steampunk will always be more costume than culture and why I call myself a Neo-Aristocrat rather than a Neo-Victorian.


(As always, I welcome questions, comments, or outright disagreement over the ideas presented. This post represents a slight break from the more rigorous, structural critiques of Goth or Lolita. Does it work? Do the Ideas make sense? Happy Solstice!)

When Lolita is Too Sweet II

Due to time constraints and length, I have decided to divide my critique of Lolita in two . My previous post praised Lolita; here is the critique.

However, a disclaimer is necessary. I have not, as of this moment, worn Lolita. My critique is based on the knowledge found in various blogs and message boards throughout the internet. Like my critique of Goth, I am not condemning the fashion as a whole, merely stating why I will not embrace this aesthetic fully.

Clothing tells the story of your life. The garments you chose, the seperates you match, the care and attention you pay to your hair and makeup, proclaim far more to a person than we would like to admit. But consider two people: one dressed in jeans and a baggy hoodie from some name brand store, the other wearing a well tailored skirt and blazer. Who would you invite back to a job interview? Look twice at in the street? Think was more successful? 

The question of the validity of this judging remains to be explored, but we are being naive if we think that people first judge by the qualities of we display rather than the clothing we wear. The right outfit can create an story about our lives that, I believe, our personality fills in to match.

But what is the story that Lolita clothing provides? What is the lifestyle of someone who has applied the aesthetics to Lolita to every aspect of their life?

I imagine her life would resemble that of a pampered cat.

Let me try to paint the picture:

The Lolita wakes as the sun paints golden paths along the pink and white walls of her room. She yawns, rubs her eyes, smiles and clambers out of her canopy bed to begin her day. Her ruffled and lace-frilled night gown is carefully stored in her matching cabinet and the Lolita skips over to her overflowing closet to choose what she will wear today. Naturally, her closet is full of only the best and most beautiful of brand dresses, shoes, socks, blouses, petticoats, skirts, belts, bolero's, head peices, rings, necklaces- the list goes on. After all, Lolita is fashion before philosophy and the clothing is the most important part of her day. 

After dressing, the Lolita descends to the dining room looking over the gardens. Breakfast is already laid with tea, scones, butters and jams prettily arranged on fine china. The Lolita finishes her meal and retires to the garden for a turn among the flowers. After enjoying the beauties of Nature perhaps she meets up with her fellow Lolita's for afternoon tea or a day of shopping and photography in the city. Perhaps she goes on another walk for the afternoon. Perhaps she spends her time embroidering or crafting some pretty new design for a dress or head piece. It doesn't matter; the day is hers.

After a light dinner, the Lolita perhaps reads a novel or finishes her crafting. Perhaps she visits more friends or plays with her pets. Whatever she does, the Lolita returns to her bed happy and content at the hours of her day.

This is not a bad life. Indeed, I would quite willingly spend a month or more spending my days in such a fashion. At first, I would glory in late mornings and days with nothing to do but engage my mind in the most feminine of things. But eventually, I know I would grow restless. After all, what was I doing?

Lolita fashion is fantastically impractical; it is part of the charm. But if I had spent the better part of two hours preparing my outfit, I would think twice about doing anything that might ruin my hard work. 

That 'anything' encompasses most of what is valuable in life: running, dancing, exploring new areas of the woods or parks, lounging, art projects, eating strange and potentially messy food- all the spontaneous adventures that can arise. I would be hesitant to engage fully in any of those because somewhere, in the back of my mind, I would be worried about ruining my clothing.

The activities suited for the Lolita are small and domestic: petting cats, taking pictures, baking cookies and cakes, small crafts. The aesthetic contains no passion or Greatness within itself. If I saw that the best woman general or inventor or politician or writer wore Lolita, I would think they had achieved greatness inspite of rather than because of their fashion.

Perhaps there is no fashion, yet, that can inspire greatness. This is part of my goal in exploring the Neo-Aristocratic philosophy and aesthetic. But if I do find such a fashion, I don't think it will be Lolita with the impracticality, the excessive sweetness, and delicacy of the garments and look. 

There is not enough passion in Lolita, not enough Greatness. The fashion hearkens back to a time when small crafts and activities were the focus of a woman's thoughts not world or life changing ones.

Now, such focus on the smaller sphere of life is necessary at times, but it must be tempered by times for Greatness. Lolita offers the former, but no chance for the latter and a proper, applicable aesthetic should offer both.

Again, I am more than happy to discuss any of my ideas if they raised questions or concerns. If there is some place where my argument was weak or confusing, please let me know. 

Why Fashion Doesn't Matter...

(I am taking a break from my series of Inspirational Aesthetics as my final inspiration, objectivism, needs more consideration before I can coherently say why it is not for me. Please enjoy this interlude.)

As I browse through the online catalogs of beautiful and extravagant alternative fashion, I would willingly admit to admiring the outfits. But would I ever wear them? The answer, whispered from some hidden nook of my soul, is no.

No, those fashions are for the models.

No, those fashions are for the brave, the dramatic.

No, I may love those fashions, but I am a modest person whose clothing will brush against the edges of whimsy but daren't cross.

Why? I ask myself. Why wouldn't I wear what I love?

Because of the people, the small voice whispers back. Because of the stares, the glances, the mocking amusement lifting the brows of those who see you. What would they think of you? What would they whisper to their friends after you pass by?

It is when confronted by a swarm of doubts and insecurities as these that I turn to another one of my passions: Astronomy.

America is a large country, impossible to see every part of it. It is, however, only a fraction of the size of the earth. The earth itself is very small compared to the other planets in the solar system; more than a 130 can fit inside Jupiter. More than a 900 Jupiters can fit inside our sun.

I've had this for ages on my computer...

Yet our sun is a very small sun compared to others.

Found on Wikipedia

The entire solar system is located on the far edge of Milky Way, our beloved galaxy.

Yet even how unimaginably vast our galaxy is to us, it is but a speck in the cosmic scale. This is a one minute clip of the wonderful documentary series "How the Universe Works" showing far better than any picture could just how large our universe is:

Yet, even this entire, enormous galaxy is nothing compared to the other wonders of the universe. Because this will be one of the few times I will allow myself to indulge in my Astrophilia, here is one final picture:

From "How the Universe Works"

All the points of light in that beautiful image are galaxies. This is a possible description of the universe" webs of dark energy where Galaxy clusters are studded like jewels. The entire Universe could actually look like this.

Humans are very, very small and our lifespans are very, very short.

Why in the Universe am I letting fear of what someone whispers keep me from doing what I love?