Unit 12
Clothes Make the Man — Uneasy
Anne Hollander
clothes什么意思1.    The last decade has made a large number of men more uneasy about what to wear than they might ever have believed possible. The idea that one might agonize over whether to grow sideburns or wear trousers of a radically different shape had never occurred to a whole generation. Before the mid '60s whether to wear a tie was the most dramatic sartorial problem: everything else was a subtle matter of surface variation. Women have been so accustomed to dealing with extreme fashion for so long that they automatically brace themselves for whatever is coming next, including their own willingness to resist or conform and all the probable masculine responses. Men in modern times have only lately felt any pressure to pay that kind of attention. All the delicate shades of significance expressed by the small range of possible alternatives used to be absorbing enough: Double- or single-breasted cut? Sports jacket and slacks or a suit? Shoes with plain or wing tip? The choices men had h
ad to make never looked very momentous to a feminine eye accustomed to a huge range of personally acceptable possibilities, but they always had an absolute and enormous meaning in the world of men, an identifying stamp usually incomprehensible to female judgment.  A hat with a tiny bit of nearly invisible feather was separated as by an ocean from a hat with none, and white-on-white shirts, almost imperceptibly complex in weave, were totally shunned by those men who favored white oxford-cloth shirts. Women might remain mystified by the ferocity with which men felt and supported these tiny differences, and perhaps they might pity such narrow sartorial vision attaching so much importance to half an inch of padding in the shoulders or an inch of trouser cuff.
2.    But men knew how lucky they were. It was never very hard to dress the part of oneself. Even imaginative wives and mothers could eventually be trained to reject all seductive but incorrect choices with respect to tie fabric and collar shape that might connote the wrong flavor of spiritual outlook, the wrong level of education, or the wrong sort of male bonding.  It was a well ordered world, the double standard flourished without hindrance, and no man who stuck to the rules ever needed to suspect that he might look ridiculous.
3.    Into this stable system the width-of-tie question erupted in the early '60s. Suddenly, and for the first time in centuries, the rate of change in masculine fashion accelerated with disconcerting violence, throwing a new light on all the steady old arrangements. Women looked on with secret satisfaction, as it became obvious that during the next few years men might think they could resist the changes, but they would find it impossible to ignore them. In fact to the discomfiture of many, the very look of having ignored the changes suddenly became a distinct and highly conspicuous way of dressing, and everyone ran for cover. Paying no attention whatever to nipped-in waistlines, vivid turtlenecks, long hair with sideburns, and bell-bottom trousers could not guarantee any comfy anonymity, but rather stamped one as a convinced follower of the old order -- thus adding three or four dangerous new meanings to all the formerly reliable signals. A look in the mirror suddenly revealed man to himself wearing his obvious chains and shackles, hopelessly unliberated.
4.    In general, men of all ages turn out not to want to give up the habit of fixing on a suitable self-image and then carefully tending it, instead of taking up all the new options. It seems too much of a strain to dress for all that complex multiple role-playing, like women. 
The creative use of male plumage for sexual display, after all, has had a very thin time for centuries: the whole habit became the special prerogative of certain clearly defined groups, ever since the overriding purpose of male dress had been established as that of precise identification. No stepping over the boundaries was thinkable -- ruffled evening shirts were for them, not me; and the fear of the wrong associations was the strongest male emotion about clothes, not the smallest part being fear of association with the wrong sex.
5.    The difference between men's and women's clothes used to be an easy matter from every point of view, all the more so when the same tailors made both. When long ago all elegant people wore brightly colored satin, lace, and curls, nobody had any trouble sorting out the sexes or worrying whether certain small elements were sexually appropriate.  So universal was the skirted female shape and the bifurcated male one that a woman in men's clothes was completely disguised, and long hair or gaudy trimmings were never the issue. It was the 19th century, which produced the look of the different sexes coming from different planets, that lasted such a very long time. It also gave men official exemption from fashion risk, and official sanction to laugh at women for perpetually incurring it.
6.    Women apparently love the risk, of course, and ignore the laughter. Men secretly hate it and dread the very possibility of a smile. Most of them find it impossible to leap backward across the traditional centuries into a comfortable renaissance zest for these dangers, since life is hard enough now anyway.  Moreover, along with fashion came the pitiless exposure of masculine narcissism and vanity, so long submerged and undiscussed. Men had lost the habit of having their concern with personal appearance show as blatantly as women's -- the great dandies provided no continuing tradition, except perhaps among urban blacks. Men formerly free from doubt wore their new finery with colossal self-consciousness, staring covertly at everyone else to find out what the score really was about all this stuff.  High heels and platform soles, once worn by the Sun King and other cultivated gentlemen of the past, have been appropriated only by those willing to change not only their heights but their way of walking.  They have been ruled out, along with the waist-length shirt opening that exposes trinkets nestling against the chest hair, by men who nevertheless find themselves willing to wear long hair and fur coats and carry handbags. Skirts, I need not add, never caught on.
1.    过去的十年里，为了穿什么衣服，戴什么饰品许多男士感到很不自在，连他们自己都不曾相信过会有这种可能。有人竟然会为要不要留络腮胡，或者要不要穿条式样迥异的裤子而苦恼，这种念头过去一代人连想也没有想过。在20世纪60年代中期以前，要不要系领带是服饰方面最大的一件事儿了，其余的都只不过是表面上的变化，无足轻重。女士们面对新潮时尚长期以来习以为常，因此下一步会发生什么事情，她们应付自如，包括她们自己是愿意坚决抵制，还是顺应潮流，以及男人们很可能做出的各种反应。现代的男人仅在最近才觉得有需要对此关注的压力。过去只要稍作变更就呈现出来足够的微妙作用：是双排钮，还是单排钮的裁剪？是穿运动夹克衫和裤子，还是着正装？是穿双普通的鞋子，还是穿双尖头、翘边的鞋子？男人必须要做的选择在女人的眼睛里从来不算一回事，因为她们早已觉得可以接受的各种可能性都顺理成章。然而，这些选择在男人的世界里绝对举足轻重，是一种象征着档次的标记。女人对此一窍不通，无法评论。装饰了一小片几乎难以觉察的羽毛的帽子与没有装饰羽毛的帽子有天壤之别，那种织有白花纹的白衬衫，织得几乎看不清楚地复杂，会被那些喜欢牛津布衬衫的男士们拒之门外。女人也许始终不明白男人对这些细微差异的感觉和追逐，而且对他们对肩膀上垫肩相差半寸或者裤脚长短一寸等服装上的细小方面会看得那么重，她们表示同情。
2.    不过，男人知道自己很幸运。按照自己的身份穿衣着装从来就不是难事。甚至连想象力丰富的妻子和母亲会最终训练有素地拒绝做出在领带面料和领子式样上任何好看，但不正确的选择。这样的选择或许暗示着精神方面的错误情趣、受教育的错误层次，或者男人择友的错误人选。这是个井井有条的世界，双重标准大行其道，通行无阻。凡是遵循这些规则的男人无需怀疑自己会因穿着而成为笑柄。
3.    在这个稳定的体系中，突然于20世纪60年代中期爆发了那场领带应该多宽的争论。突然之间，好几个世纪以来第一次，男性时尚的变化速度急剧加快，颇令人困惑，但是给所有按部就班的老规矩带来新的光明。女人们袖手旁观，暗暗自喜，因为显而易见的是，在接下来的几年里，男人会以为他们能够抵制这些变化，但是他们将发现不可能对这些变化熟视无睹。事实上，让许多人狼狈不堪的是，正是那副忽视了变化的模样突然成了一种与众不同、标新立异的穿着方法，结果大家都唯恐避之不及。对收腰的上装、鲜艳的翻领衫、留长发和络腮胡须以及喇叭裤视而不见并不能保证无人知晓而心安理得，相反却正好打上了抱着陈规旧习不放的烙印，因此给原来可靠的式样添加了三四个危险的新意思。镜子里的形象让男人看到自己枷锁缠身，脱身无望。

版权声明：本站内容均来自互联网，仅供演示用，请勿用于商业和其他非法用途。如果侵犯了您的权益请与我们联系QQ:729038198，我们将在24小时内删除。