There is a saying that if you keep the hat from my grandmother for 50 years, it will be in vogue today.
I'm tired of knowing that the "insiders" and "experts" in fashion I describe as insensitive and ignorant perhaps not being a fan of fashion, whatever the field in which they operate. Certainly for me the worst of all is the fashion apparel and accessories, as is brilliantly described in the film "pret a porter".
I know that there is a vast majority of humanity who loves to produce and deploy, and adopt various types of fashion. The Brazilian said: "Mary is going with the other" has a slightly ironic and profound wisdom in especially if we remember the sanctity of the name.
The threshold that defines the fashion and sets it apart from the phenomenon of "contagion", and cultural expansion of a belief or custom is undefined. For that reason I am vulnerable to the objection that there are "fashions" that are providential for societies, for example, "fad" of allegations of political crimes, legal requirements and / or ethical and collective solidarity conveyed by the computer media . I am aware that
propose a differentiation reserved for the spread of an idea or an action considered desirable historic name that has nothing to do with fashion can be arbitrary, eg something that is service, say, universal peace and requires a distinctive definition (collective arrangements or war machine, as Deleuze and Guattari would say) can be several times a matter of perspective, values, or even worse a matter of "opinion." But it seems obvious that the "opinion" itself is a fad and that it is believed that the component "modes" defined, is not necessarily evil, but harmless, fleeting, expensive and repetitive because it belongs to an alleged "human nature ".
we accept that assessment being that we have to appraise it the same way to the excesses own areas of actual urban culture such as the indispensability of the alcoholic beverage of snuff and other toxic and essential component to any and all festive gathering.
What seems to me to clarify things a bit is that global capitalism in crisis redistribution of economic power and fall in the rate of production of surplus value, it is imperative to transform all tangible or immaterial in goods and merchandise is substantially inseparable from the production of its demand and fashion. Just in a matter of illustration, say that some historians say that will never be possible to define a precise notion of what was involved in the spread revolutionary libertarian impulse of the people, for example, from Eastern Europe, "will" of unnecessary consumption and popularized (Mac Donald, the deafening music shows and walk around the mall).
In Brazil, for example, there is a very terminology used to refer to the laws that people do not comply. It is said that "this law does not hit." is obvious that some of these laws should not stick to the good of the community (eg pensions of millions of grandchildren military or Congress). It is difficult to synthesize the variety of "reasons why" a law will not fit. "Some laws (few) does not stick, because they are clearly in favor of exploitation, domination and mystification forces, movements, groups, classes or individuals from minority segments singular or even majorities mass statistics.
But other laws will not stick because the so-called "bases" were not properly consulted or the laws were not properly disseminated and explained to the public.
Ultimately paste that no law is, regardless of content, an important expression of an organization without laws, only collective agreements continued, may be an alternative to experience, and that legalism has failed both in the world. Understanding
sensible thoughts of many, the idea that fashion is an ineradicable due to fashion claims that the "nature" the unconscious desire of subjectivity, is insatiable because it really serves no purpose ..... it's a fad that "sticks" much in fashion in the tainted-by-the fashion and the professionals who profit (surplus value of namely, fees and prestige) with attention to such subject "modes."
may be that over time, my grandmother's hat from back in fashion. Sincerely declare that I keep it by the desire and interest, not to sell expensive or my wife, or women in general use it ... but it will be a reasoned and factually challenged idol.
As for me, all gods are idols, and I see events such as so-called "death of God" Nietzsche, the están cultures but increasingly contaminated dioses (es una moda), la tendre SATISFACTION just around iconoclast (the joy in being who ese sea también una fashion).
Gregorio Baremblitt
hat my grandmother
There is a proverb that says if I keep the hat from my grandmother for 50 years, he will again be in fashion nowadays.
I'm tired of knowing that the "insiders" and "experts" in fashion qualify me insensitive and perhaps ignorant, not being an admirer of fashions, in whatever field they act. Of course to me, the worst of all is the fashion of dress and accessories, as is brilliantly described in "pret a porter".
I am aware that there is an immense majority of humanity who loves to produce and deploy, as well as adopt several types of fashion. The Brazilian said: "Mary goes to the other," has a gentle and profound wisdom ironic, especially if one recalls the holiness of this name, a Brazilian told me jokingly, "here's just Mary." A fashion so it is a surefire appeal to the spread of a belief.
The principle that delimits the fashion and which distinguishes the phenomena of "contagion", and cultural expansion of a belief or custom is undefined. For this reason, I am vulnerable to the objection that there are "fashions" that are instrumental in the companies, for example, "fad" of some allegations of political crimes or of legal and / or ethics of collective solidarity, expressed by means computer.
I am aware that propose a differentiation that allows for the propagation of an idea or a historical work, considering it desirable, a designation that has nothing to do with fashion, can be arbitrary. For example, the service is something that, say, universal peace and that requires a different definition ("agency collective enunciation or war machine, "as Deleuze and Guattari would say) can be, on several occasions, a matter of perspective, values, or what is worse, a matter of" opinion. " However, it seems obvious that the "opinion" itself is a fashion and that there is the view that the component "fashion" defined, is not necessarily evil, but harmless, transient, repetitive and costly because it is itself an alleged "human nature".
We accept that assessment and that, for this, we evaluate the same way that the very excesses of sectors of urban culture as the current need for alcohol, cigarettes and other drugs as essential component to any festive gatherings.
What I need to clarify things a bit is that the crisis of global capitalism in the redistribution of economic power and the falling rate of production of surplus value, it is imperative to transform any tangible or intangible goods, and merchandise is substantially inseparable production of its demand as fashion. Illustrative purposes only, I will say that some historians say will never be possible to define with some precision how much involved in the revolutionary propaganda of the libertarian impulse people, for example, Eastern Europe, the "will of conspicuous consumption and widespread (Mac Donald's, music concerts and ensurdecedoura walk through the mall.)
In Brazil, for example, there is a very terminology used to refer to the laws that people do not comply. says that "this bill is not getting through." it is obvious that some of these laws should not stick to the good of the community (eg, retirements millionaire grandson of the military or Congress). It is difficult to summarize the variety of "reasons", a law does not cola. " some laws (few) do not stick because they are clearly favorable to exploitation, domination and mystification of forces, movements, groups or individuals or classes of minority individuals, or even majorities statistics crowds.
But other laws will not stick because the so-called "bases" were not properly consulted or the laws were not properly disseminated and explained to the population.
Ultimately, that a law is not paste, regardless of its content, a major expression of which is an organization without laws, only with continued bargaining agreements, may be an alternative to be experienced, already legalism that has failed both in the world. In the view of many
sensible thoughts, the idea that fashion can not be eradicated, due to this trend which holds that "nature" of the unconscious wish of subjectivity, is insatiable, because in reality, has no object ... this explanation in fact 'and a fashion that picks up a lot in fashion for fashion addicts and professionals who profit (gain of knowledge, prestige and fees) with attention to "shrink" the subject of this kind of "fashion" .
may be that with time, the hat from my grandmother back in fashion. Sincerely declare that I will cherish the desire and by interest, not to sell it or that my dear wife, or women in general, use it, but because an idol is reasoned and objectively questioned.
As for me, all gods are idols, and I see this happening much-talked about "death of God" Nietzsche, (the crops are becoming increasingly polluted from the gods - is a fashion), I will have the satisfaction of all fair iconoclast (the unless such enjoyment is also a fashion).
0 comments:
Post a Comment