Skip to main content

What's Your Approach to Life?

Another Leslie Saalburg illustration from decades ago.  An idealized image, yes, but the house depicted is kind of nice.  The car ain't too bad either.  A 1933 Packard I believe.


Calm -- Quiet -- Understatement -- Moderation -- Sophistication -- Elegance -- Refinement -- Discernment -- Polish -- Grooming -- Restraint -- Kindness -- Gentility -- Care -- Planning.  Concepts to be aware of.  Ideals to strive for.  Rules to live by.  

Naysayers might counter that most of  the qualities listed above, much like the illustrations accompanying this post, are themselves impossible ideals.  I would argue that it is entirely possible not only to aspire to such concepts, but to come pretty darn close to living them provided a person exercises careful forethought.  

I suppose, however, that it depends on one's frame of reference and related vision of how life can be.  Do we really want to give up on the game before we've even tossed our hat in the ring, and continue wallowing in the metaphoric primeval green miasma and sludge that engulfs so many in the 21st century?  Or would we prefer to pull ourselves out of that very same ooze and cultivate a more pleasant life? And no, we're not talking about having piles of the filthy lucre here, but rather principles.  The bedrock, perhaps, of classic style.

As The Grand Duchess and I point out so often to The Young Master, during those more difficult episodes that parents out there will be familiar with, you have a choice.  Either X or Y.  It's up to you.  But be aware that your choices have (sometimes unintended) consequences, which might influence other areas of your life.  Choose wisely, in other words, to avoid complications, disappointment , or just plain trouble down the road.  So much in life is tied to that notion of forethought.  Or lack thereof.

As for wallowing in the primordial ooze versus a more pleasant existence, I know which of the two I'll opt for.

-- Heinz-Ulrich



A Post Father's Day Monday P.S.

We can also add other qualities to the above list.  Concepts that aren't much talked about anymore, for example patience, curiosity, integrity, compassion, empathy, loyalty, conscience, character, courage, honor, and respect [Thanks to Mature Style for the inspiration].  Let's also add critical thought (for ourselves) to the mix.  

If we take pains to cultivate these qualities in ourselves, and in our children, along with the aforementioned traits of calm, quiet, understatement, moderation, sophistication, elegance, refinement, discernment, polish, grooming, restraint, kindness, gentility, and care, then it strikes me that a person will be well on the way to living stylishly as well as fostering that same approach to life in the next generation while at the same time avoiding the overt and tacky garishness that characterizes so much of what passes for societal discourse in 2019.  

You'll notice too that the almighty $$$ has very little to do with the points I highlight, so the oft heard protest that an elegant life requires scads of money is a moot point.  People who make that tired argument are looking at the issue in the most superficial way.  In the broadest sense, style and sophistication are more about what's on the inside, and how we channel those various attributes in our approach to life, than they are about trappings like navy blazers, leather dress shoes, stately houses, and vintage luxury automobiles.  Those kinds of items are nice, but they are just things after all.  

This is not to suggest, in anyway, that we shouldn't bother improving our external presentation.  But in the ongoing collective effort to look and behave like we have more than an ounce of sophistication, we need to be aware that we must also strive to be (-come) well-rounded individuals.  In other words, we cannot ignore the internal at the expense of the external.  

To do so risks gross oversimplification of the broad concept of 'Style' and achieves very little.  We might all look a whole lot better than society does at present (maybe), but like Henrik Ibsen's Peer Gynt (1867), there won't be much more to us than that.  Like an onion, once the shiny skin has been stripped away, all we are left with is a pungent and rather unpleasant inside that leaves a bad taste in its wake.  Not much more than that.  Male versions of the externally attractive, but totally vapid and complacent Stepford Wives (1975) to put it another way.  Surely, that is not how we want to come across to others.  Or is it?

-- Heinz-Ulrich


Another idealized image this gray, cool Saturday afternoon, but it conveys the right idea.


Comments

Post a Comment

All opinions are welcome here. Even those that differ from mine. But let's keep it clean and civil, please.

-- Heinz-Ulrich

Popular Posts

The Problem of "Business Casual" Attire. . .

This is how it's done.  Business Casual the RIGHT way, ladies and gentlemen.  Even during the summer months.  A photograph (taken by Studio B Portraits ) which appeared in 425 Business Magazine in May 2017.   T his post on the problem of business casual dress began as a quick postscript to a previous blog entry last week but quickly grew and grew as additional thoughts occurred, were developed in more detail, and revisions made.  So much so, that it seemed, eventually, like a better idea to make the initial P.S. afterthought into its own entry .  Are ya ready, Freddy?  Then, here we go. . .  ------------ U nless you actually plan to sell beach snacks and trinkets on Cozumel, become a serial barista, or greet customers at a fancy nightclub after taking out huge student loans to attend university somewhere for four or five years, plus an MBA afterward, it's really a better idea to err on the side of (somewhat) more formal work attire any time you head into the

The Average Guy's Guide to Classic Style Now on Ebay!!!

Another great old Laurence Fellows illustration of menswear from the classic era, the 1930s. T he Average Guy's Guide to Classic Style is up and running on Ebay.  -- Heinz-Ulrich

Friday Tweeds, Cords, and Coffee. . .

  I made the sojourn into campus this morning to have some coffee and talk shop with a colleague.  We had an enjoyable discussion for an hour in the recently opened library branch of the global abomination that is Starbuck's .  Can someone explain to me. . .  Why on earth do cities like Vienna and Rome even need them? I am of two minds here.  Starbuck's is handy in a lot of instances.  The coffee isn't bad.  Somewhat better than what is sold in the competing, campus owned and run Sparty's .  And the space in the library, occupied by a branch of Sparty's until early last May, is redesigned, bright, airy, and clean with plenty of new tables, chairs, and outlets for  laptop computers, tablets, and recharging phones.  All very convenient.   Yet it is locally owned, non-corporate cafes that have the character and quirkiness that makes them interesting places in which to kill time, work, and people watch.  Why the campus town adjacent to my employer does not have a bette