love hearing about everyone’s dads not wanting them to be a walking billboard... makes me feel warm! my dad, a king who still buys all his clothing in packs from the center aisles at Costco, once bought me a Patagonia Snap-T for my birthday and painstakingly used nail scissors to unstitch the front label before wrapping it up for me. no disrespect to yvon chouinard but fuck a label!!
William Gibson wrote a novel called Pattern Recognition, which probably won’t change your life all that much, but which does deal in part with just this subject. The main character has developed and allergy to branding and marketing of any sort, and therefore only wears clothes which “could have been worn, to a general lack of comment, during any year between 1945 and 2000.” This means, among other things, having a confused Korean locksmith in the Village file down the insignia on the buttons of her black 501s. Buzz Rickson eventually started a line devoted to anonymous black versions of outerwear, as an homage to the author.
Figured as much. When I pulled out the book to check the quote above, I also stumbled upon the following sentence, which could have credibly been passed off as the fragrant seed that fifteen years later blossomed into the weird bouquet of cilantro that is your newsletter: “Cayce herself has been tracking the street-level emergence of what she thinks of as “urban survival” footwear, and though this is still at the level of consumer repurposing, she has no doubt that commodification will soon follow identification.” It reminded me both of your own brand of cultural socio-meteorology, and of your seemingly limitless love for craggy shoes that disrupt both the cleanest and the weirdest of outfits. This is not criticism, by the way, I too wear shoes that severely reduce any chance of promotion, by fucking up my otherwise polite appearance. Though in my case it’s a consequence of Haglund’s heel, rather than part of some oblique strategy of aesthetic warfare/lovefare.
Ah, should’ve known he’s au courant. When it comes to sniffing out the zeitgeist in its infancy, and realizing the social implications of trends before they even materialize, I think he’s on par with Guy Debord, and Yeats in vision-mode. Similar also in the way his work at first glance can (could) seem allegorical, slightly caricatured or even verging on farcical, and then ends up being tragically precise. Not just with regards to technology, but also cultural undercurrents and, well, human interaction and language. He seems to understand Us as Time, and Time with us in it, basically. Plus I think he usually dresses really well.
Lacoste was founded by a tennis player, and initially made actual tennis shirts. Polo seems like it's in a different 'fantasy sportswear' category. Maybe this is pedantic but it seems like there's a distinction. Lacoste also claims to be "the first example of a brand name appearing on the outside of an article of clothing". So maybe they're the O.G. villains here.
Stone Island considers itself sportswear ("Sportswear Company S.p.A") but that seems like a stretch.
I'm trying to justify getting the badge in but really I know this Spyplane Holy Decree to be true.
i mean yeah it's fascinating: ralph lauren's huge triumph as a marketer~designer~huckster~showman~world-builder was to totally explode any "gold standard" of authenticity that clothes "should" refer back to ... lacoste had the gold standard of his tennis history "backing" the crocodile; ralph found a way to cook without anything "backing" the pony
Niche, but wearing a fashion logo also reminds me of when you walk into a kid's Bar Mitzvah and their name is plastered all over everything in the room and up in neon. Like, we all know why we're here! Turns the whole thing into an effort to impress rather than a celebration of something awesome :/
So low that no more high horses, so hard to wear Polo
When I do, I cut the pony off
Now there’s a hole where there once was a logo
How do we feel about “cutting the pony off” i.e. removing logos from clothes. I’ve became accustomed to using my seam ripper to remove logos from Carhartt pants and Patagonia jackets. I appreciate the utility of these brands and there accessibility on the secondhand marketplace. Yet, deeply feel the aversion to make advertising apart of my being in the world. I personally love the impression the removed logos leave suggesting a brand but making no claims to it.
My take - I love a blast over, nearly abstract level logo on 90s gear from a shit brand like Nautica. It's like how camo becomes a solid color from a distance, it loses all meaning and context.
was getting at a version of this dynamic with the carve-out about how "vintage designer logo jawns can, in some cases, take on an archival aspect that helps neutralize the 'thirst badge' quotient" -- but i like that camo metaphor, that's a cool way of putting it
Ok, so I haven’t even finished reading this yet, but that thing about your parents not wanting you to be a walking billboard? My dad said the same thing to me when I was like, 6, and wanted a red Coca-Cola t-shirt like one of the other neighborhood kids had (this was around 1978, for context). He flat out told me that I wasn’t going to give any company free advertising, before I could even do multiplication tables or write in legible cursive. To this day I still can’t go there with the logo jawns.
Love this, insightful as ever. I'm pondering the distinction between a straight-up logo and a "motif" that's associated with a brand. Case in point, I have a pair of socks from that Christopher Kane "More Joy" sub-line; the one that deploys ye olde graphicks from "The Joy of Sex" by Alex Comfort. I love these socks despite the fact (or because) I find them inherently silly - but does the "More Joy" typography count as a logo, given the clear and known association with Christopher Kane? I mean, I'm going to wear the socks regardless (no haters for my feet), but I wonder if there's a blurry line around what actually constitutes a logo?
Another e.g. I just thought of, are those Bella Freud "1971" sweaters - again, it's not a logo, but the motif is instantly identifiable as a Bella Freud piece. Maybe it's not about the logo per se, but any visual element that immediately acts as a sartorial thirst trap?
I remember when the “1970” sweater came out and I snapped one up - it’s the year I was born, so it really resonated with me. Then they were everywhere (including on the host of the GBBO) and I tucked it away, thinking maybe I’ll just wear it to my funeral. LOL.
Loved this post!! Also have always had innate logo-allergy but that’s because my culty boarding school in s india banned logos. I think that was part their counter-culture bent and also from some prudish impulse to not let adolescent eyes have cause to linger on adolescent chests :) but I do have a weakness for non-clothing brand merch, makes me feel grounded in time and place :)
love hearing about everyone’s dads not wanting them to be a walking billboard... makes me feel warm! my dad, a king who still buys all his clothing in packs from the center aisles at Costco, once bought me a Patagonia Snap-T for my birthday and painstakingly used nail scissors to unstitch the front label before wrapping it up for me. no disrespect to yvon chouinard but fuck a label!!
shout out to seam rippers
Madam, Sir,
William Gibson wrote a novel called Pattern Recognition, which probably won’t change your life all that much, but which does deal in part with just this subject. The main character has developed and allergy to branding and marketing of any sort, and therefore only wears clothes which “could have been worn, to a general lack of comment, during any year between 1945 and 2000.” This means, among other things, having a confused Korean locksmith in the Village file down the insignia on the buttons of her black 501s. Buzz Rickson eventually started a line devoted to anonymous black versions of outerwear, as an homage to the author.
Hope you are well.
Best,
plod
🔥
U don’t need to tell us about Cayce Pollard baby
Figured as much. When I pulled out the book to check the quote above, I also stumbled upon the following sentence, which could have credibly been passed off as the fragrant seed that fifteen years later blossomed into the weird bouquet of cilantro that is your newsletter: “Cayce herself has been tracking the street-level emergence of what she thinks of as “urban survival” footwear, and though this is still at the level of consumer repurposing, she has no doubt that commodification will soon follow identification.” It reminded me both of your own brand of cultural socio-meteorology, and of your seemingly limitless love for craggy shoes that disrupt both the cleanest and the weirdest of outfits. This is not criticism, by the way, I too wear shoes that severely reduce any chance of promotion, by fucking up my otherwise polite appearance. Though in my case it’s a consequence of Haglund’s heel, rather than part of some oblique strategy of aesthetic warfare/lovefare.
Bill is a longtime Classified Spyfriend but i don’t think he pops into the chat. If he does I bet he’ll get a kick out of encountering Cayce here 😉
Ah, should’ve known he’s au courant. When it comes to sniffing out the zeitgeist in its infancy, and realizing the social implications of trends before they even materialize, I think he’s on par with Guy Debord, and Yeats in vision-mode. Similar also in the way his work at first glance can (could) seem allegorical, slightly caricatured or even verging on farcical, and then ends up being tragically precise. Not just with regards to technology, but also cultural undercurrents and, well, human interaction and language. He seems to understand Us as Time, and Time with us in it, basically. Plus I think he usually dresses really well.
Beat me to it. What a great book; the whole Bigend Trilogy is one of the better chronicles of post-9/11 sci fi
Lacoste was founded by a tennis player, and initially made actual tennis shirts. Polo seems like it's in a different 'fantasy sportswear' category. Maybe this is pedantic but it seems like there's a distinction. Lacoste also claims to be "the first example of a brand name appearing on the outside of an article of clothing". So maybe they're the O.G. villains here.
Stone Island considers itself sportswear ("Sportswear Company S.p.A") but that seems like a stretch.
I'm trying to justify getting the badge in but really I know this Spyplane Holy Decree to be true.
ffs
i mean yeah it's fascinating: ralph lauren's huge triumph as a marketer~designer~huckster~showman~world-builder was to totally explode any "gold standard" of authenticity that clothes "should" refer back to ... lacoste had the gold standard of his tennis history "backing" the crocodile; ralph found a way to cook without anything "backing" the pony
Niche, but wearing a fashion logo also reminds me of when you walk into a kid's Bar Mitzvah and their name is plastered all over everything in the room and up in neon. Like, we all know why we're here! Turns the whole thing into an effort to impress rather than a celebration of something awesome :/
So low that no more high horses, so hard to wear Polo
When I do, I cut the pony off
Now there’s a hole where there once was a logo
How do we feel about “cutting the pony off” i.e. removing logos from clothes. I’ve became accustomed to using my seam ripper to remove logos from Carhartt pants and Patagonia jackets. I appreciate the utility of these brands and there accessibility on the secondhand marketplace. Yet, deeply feel the aversion to make advertising apart of my being in the world. I personally love the impression the removed logos leave suggesting a brand but making no claims to it.
Can be a very solid move
My take - I love a blast over, nearly abstract level logo on 90s gear from a shit brand like Nautica. It's like how camo becomes a solid color from a distance, it loses all meaning and context.
was getting at a version of this dynamic with the carve-out about how "vintage designer logo jawns can, in some cases, take on an archival aspect that helps neutralize the 'thirst badge' quotient" -- but i like that camo metaphor, that's a cool way of putting it
Always appreciate a brand that gives you the opportunity to take a seam ripper to a logo to make the item unbranded
Was just coming here to mention Cayce Pollard but I see that the Spyfam beat me to the punch :)
Ok, so I haven’t even finished reading this yet, but that thing about your parents not wanting you to be a walking billboard? My dad said the same thing to me when I was like, 6, and wanted a red Coca-Cola t-shirt like one of the other neighborhood kids had (this was around 1978, for context). He flat out told me that I wasn’t going to give any company free advertising, before I could even do multiplication tables or write in legible cursive. To this day I still can’t go there with the logo jawns.
Love this, insightful as ever. I'm pondering the distinction between a straight-up logo and a "motif" that's associated with a brand. Case in point, I have a pair of socks from that Christopher Kane "More Joy" sub-line; the one that deploys ye olde graphicks from "The Joy of Sex" by Alex Comfort. I love these socks despite the fact (or because) I find them inherently silly - but does the "More Joy" typography count as a logo, given the clear and known association with Christopher Kane? I mean, I'm going to wear the socks regardless (no haters for my feet), but I wonder if there's a blurry line around what actually constitutes a logo?
Another e.g. I just thought of, are those Bella Freud "1971" sweaters - again, it's not a logo, but the motif is instantly identifiable as a Bella Freud piece. Maybe it's not about the logo per se, but any visual element that immediately acts as a sartorial thirst trap?
I remember when the “1970” sweater came out and I snapped one up - it’s the year I was born, so it really resonated with me. Then they were everywhere (including on the host of the GBBO) and I tucked it away, thinking maybe I’ll just wear it to my funeral. LOL.
💯
Fire dropping this at 4:00am the plane never sleeps
Red eye posts
the BBSP effect, exactly one year later: https://www.wsj.com/style/fashion/the-new-status-move-designer-logos-so-subtle-theyre-barely-there-fa3a94b3
I’ve de-branded clothing since I was a kid and still do, but I somehow ended up becoming a graphic designer.
Trying to explain my 'Preme x South2West8 tenkara rod to my friends
Loved this post!! Also have always had innate logo-allergy but that’s because my culty boarding school in s india banned logos. I think that was part their counter-culture bent and also from some prudish impulse to not let adolescent eyes have cause to linger on adolescent chests :) but I do have a weakness for non-clothing brand merch, makes me feel grounded in time and place :)
believe this is similarly articulated in architecture as the duck vs decorated shed discussion