Being an Intellectual in Radical Times

Adolf Hitler and Che Gueverra were both socialists with different views of what was right. Both hated art (unless it was about them) and destroyed art and artists. They both killed people for different reasons. The same occurred within the communist movement and amongst religious zealots in history who wanted to take control over people. They have killed people too for different reasons. All thought they were fair, right and just for doing so. Now we have the feminist radicals who have gone to the extremes in many ways. We are no longer just seeing “Women are better than men,” thought processes but witch hunts from the “MeToo” movement and destruction of art, “Baby It’s Cold Outside,” to fit their purposes. They are destroying men and art and even women who don’t agree with them for the sake of beliefs that they believe is right and just. This radical approach to turning the world around to their perspective, and this causes them to be incapable of looking at another side of things or listen to their instincts (not their ego). The “I am Right and You are Wrong,” is like with any radical thought process mentioned above, it is always “wrong,” as it is based on the ego, not a mature mindset and destroys society.

To be an intellectual, you have to be a mature person who is capable of criticizing art from an intelligent standpoint vs. a radical opinion. I personally hate most modern art but I still recognize the value of the contribution. I don’t hate all of it because I find that some modern art actually peaks my interest. I think most everyone can stare at a red dot on a white background and say, “Oh, I could do that,” and then the cliché’d phrase will be, “Yes, but you didn’t.” The point is that I wouldn’t say “It is stupid or ridiculous,” just because it doesn’t suit my tastes. Instead, I would comment on the piece and talk about what about it doesn’t suit me. The fact that the piece of art has captured someone’s attention, that they can make some decisions about it and agree that it is their perception and not a given, is being an intellectual.

An intellectual is capable of having a broad perspective because they have knowledge of history, art, theater, politics, or a well-rounded education on the world around them. You might not agree with them but you don’t have to. There is democracy in a conversation where people are “arguing” that the film had artistic merit but did not really engage you as a storyline. It ceases to be an intellectual discussion when you are just there to get people on your side. Politics have become like a gang where it is all about whether you are on the red team or the blue team. There is no longer an intellectual discussion about politics, amongst the political; there is only death to the other side who is “stupid” and “wrong.” We have missed out on so much with the lack of verbal intercourse.

I was on a group recently on Facebook which was a fan club for classic films. A woman was destroying “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” because it didn’t fit within the politically correct realms of today’s society. She and another woman were making non-intellectual judgements about the film and got a few others to join in. I questioned this because I wondered “Why are you in a ‘fan’ club if you are here to bash the films?” The moderator at this point doesn’t seem to be paying attention. It is a movie, so worrying about whether or not a cat is thrown out of a taxi is not relevant. This is not an animal rights documentary. It is relevant that people have to make tough decisions at times in their life. City life is not conducive to having pets. At that time, there weren’t “animal rescue groups,” so it was feasible that an action like this may have happened. It was about the story and the passionate place the character was in. Audrey Hepburn’s character hated having to do this act, which was more than obvious in her facial expressions, but felt forced to. In the end “cat” (the name of the cat character) came back into her lap “and they lived happily ever after.” Even then, the director knew it would not make American’s happy to see a cat being thrown away. We, as a whole, like happy endings.

The woman leading the bash of the movie also suggested that she just couldn’t get into the film. I told her she should try and put herself in that time period, rather than coming from the perspective of 2018. This is the problem with radical people. They bash history on film, paintings, songs, statues, books, all because they are incapable of putting themselves in the shoes of those that came before then. History is not about 2018. To try and judge others in 1815 or 1938 or 1960 by 2018 standards is missing the lessons of that time. It is disrespectful to our ancestors.

Paintings are all we have, until the creation of the camera, to show us what life was like in those different centuries. Yes, bad things did happen then but you don’t destroy art because you are uncomfortable with history. Women who posed nude for paintings were distraught peasant women who were desperate for a penny. They took their clothes off because it was easier than washing clothes all day long for the same amount of money. I am quite sure they were sexually abused by some artists or the men who watched the artists paint. We don’t destroy the masterpiece because of this; we discuss it and have an opinion on this. We certainly don’t take the piece of art out of the gallery because we found out the woman in the painting was sexually abused or paid only a penny.

“Baby it’s Cold Outside,” is a song. It was written by a husband and wife team in a time period when there was no social media. People actually gathered together in people’s homes to have conversations and enjoyed each other’s company. They “liked” each other in real life. They became “friends” with people they met, through others, at these gatherings which boasted lots of food, song, games and plenty of booze.  I was a kid then but it was a lot of fun. I enjoyed watching people laugh and dance. Later, as an adult, I went to a few parties in the 20 years before the Internet became a “thing.”

The song “Baby it’s Cold Outside,” was created to get people to go home (hint, hint). The couple who created and sang this song became quite the item at parties and were actually invited to come and sing this song at the end. Later on, the husband sold the rights to the song, (which upset his wife), to the studios and the rest became history; as it floated up the charts. Cleveland women recently became enraged by this and forced radio stations to stop playing it because the song made them uncomfortable. I have no idea whether it was the action of a feminist organization in Cleveland or just a bunch of radicals who took the initiative. Once there were a local group of women in Salem, Massachusetts, who determined to get back at older intelligent women and thus many people (I believe 19 was the number) were hung for witchcraft. They were not witches, just people that they wanted to destroy.

Rap music on the other hand, also art, but mostly written and “spoken” to a racist audience (not much different than if the Neo-Nazi group began a type of spoken word), and as in most cases; written to destroy people. The Neo-Nazi movement is not much different than inner city folks who feel their rights are being impinged upon. Different history but the same philosophical anger. Rap music once had to be given ratings to protect children from listening to Rated R words, but now parents do not seem to care at all. At least, I haven’t heard of any measures to protect from these newer lyrics which continue to degrade. This music is now allowed by the White slaves of the Politically Correct movement. People who have been shut down by social media for having an opinion so they acquiesce to save face. You can’t say anything wrong about Black people in today’s society because you are considered a racist, even if they are making racist or sexually degrading comments about your person. You can say something wrong about Neo-Nazi groups because it is taboo in today’s society; even though we are in a democracy, where they do have freedom of speech. (Now I must make a disclaimer to ignorant people who may catch this article and state that I am not a Neo-Nazi, I am making an intellectual statement). Therefore, as we see White slaves to the PC movement in today’s society, it is okay to play rap music on the radio but not a cute, flirtatious, song like “Baby it’s Cold Outside,” that was written by a man for his wife.

Personally, I find the play “Hamilton,” extremely offensive as it panders to White slaves of the Politically Correct movement as well. It is racist against White people because it is destroying our culture by putting Black people in the role of White people, showing that figures in history are just meaningless insignificant people and it is not relevant what their race was. It is dishonest because it is lying about history and making a mockery of it at the same time. Playing rap music for the ignorant who aren’t capable of coming to a historical play with some merit; if it were to use music, costumes, hairstyles, from that time period. It is art of course but it is dishonest. Just like the art work that depicted witches as devil worshippers or ugly old hags with pointy black hats, torn black dresses and striped stockings in pointy toed shoes. Most intelligent people today know that this is dishonest and ridiculous but we don’t throw it in the trash. It is a testament to how far the religious zealots went to force pagans, witches and druids, into Christianity or other religions. It is part of history because it reminds us of how ignorant people were (or still are). One day the play “Hamilton” will, hopefully, at some point in the future, be a testament to the ignorance of our society today. Especially when children become confused about historical characters and forget about the history of African’s who were forced into slavery around that same time period.

Films today, in America and abroad, have sought to expand upon themes by placing politically correct but historical inaccurate characters in period pieces. Thanks to the radical celebrities – many who had no artistic merit in the first place, to be considered for an Academy Award, complained that there weren’t enough awards given to the Black people; so the Oscars were therefore racist. It didn’t matter that the awards were voted on by a very diverse group of people, from around the world. The Oscars are voted on by members of the Academy – which equals people who are past recipients. It also didn’t matter that the films, that were selected for awards, along with those who worked on the production; were of superb quality. The fact that enough actors weren’t of color – not the fact that they weren’t grade “A” professionals, but not enough, was more significant. This caused White slavery of the Politically Correct world to become more international. Now you see period pieces where black people are thrown in, even though they would not have been there (in that time period). You will also see the proverbial gay character storyline; attached to all these films – even though this was very rare then, as it is now, and has nothing really to do with the time period or storyline. Having the gay storyline in the film is not much different than having a sex scene that just isn’t relevant and is only there for the sake of having a sex scene (e.g. Death Comes to Pemberley). This is not how art is congratulated.

Films should be awarded a prize because an actor has gone to a place that is exceptional and on a level that far exceeds. My feeling about the Oscars being “racist” is that if the Black community wants Oscars, they should make better quality films. This comment is not based on “Let them eat cake,” a cliché from history; that was taken out of context in that time period. It is a comment based on Black films I have ventured to watch that were uninteresting, typical or copycat. Copycat by taking storylines from “White” movies to begin with and turned them into Black, which lacks originality (of course this is typical for Americans – who steal from foreign films all the time).

Meanwhile there are many men and women in Black history; that exceptional movies could be made about. By only creating movies about the inner city or slavery, it is saying that there were no intelligent Black people in history, that accomplished something worthy of value or merit; which could be turned into a movie. And yet, notable Black people in history, has the potential to be a storyline worthy of merit. It would show society exactly what this culture wants us to know. With good trained actors and exceptional focus on detail (clothes, plot, cinematography, direction, history) there are so many untold stories – why the need to steal movies that have been done? Why are ignorant White people trying to take care of them by inserting them into films where they wouldn’t have been? This is even worse because White directors are saying that they feel sorry for the Black culture so they will give them a job to make them feel better. It is insulting to their culture that they have to be placed in historically inaccurate roles because they weren’t capable of doing anything on their own.

It is not art, however,  when people flock to the streets and demand that statues of General Robert E. Lee be destroyed. It is ignorant people who aren’t capable of opening a history book so that they understand this human being had nothing to do with slavery. Perhaps they need to make a rap musical about him and have General Robert E. Lee played by a Black actor so that our uneducated audience can understand. This is art being destroyed because our society wants to pick and choose what is acceptable art and what is not acceptable, not much different than what Adolf Hitler did in his rise to power.

All art is acceptable as it makes a statement, whether we like it or not. Whether it is offensive or not is a personal viewpoint and the point of art. We shouldn’t shut down or destroy this as it is a reminder of the times. We should see a statue of Adolf Hitler or Che Gueverra or a Communist Leader or a religious zealot and it should make us angry. The job of art is to get a rise out of people, whether negative or positive. This is no different than selling “Mein Kampf,” at the book store, which was written by Hitler and explains his way of thinking. This is education, it builds a stronger intellect to learn and understand. General Robert E. Lee was a soldier who was chosen to lead the south; after he turned down leading the north. It was based on family and his upbringing not on his personal views about slavery. The Civil War wasn’t created to put an end to slavery; it was a war about gaining power because the southerners were in disagreement with the northerners and wanted to split the country. It is not much different from the Republicans and Democrats fighting for attention and power today. The difference is we are no longer in different sections of the country; political sides are mixed together in each state.

Then there is fashion; another form of art. It is not art to wear holey blue jeans 24/7 and have no respect for ones’ self. This is not style, it is laziness. Chanel, Dior, Balenciaga, Poiret, Schiaperelli, and others; this is art and significant to call fashion. They are masterpieces whereas jeans, they are merely graffiti on the wall, by the train station of a freeway underpass. Anna Wintour has decided to focus on having a penchant for politics rather than keeping her perspective strictly on clothing and style. Fashion is based on politics and the current events of the day but those in this field don’t ignore art or style simply because they don’t like their husband. Therefore, talking down about Melania Trump who has brought back elegance, style, intelligence, in a way that is reminiscent of Jacqueline Kennedy, a true connoisseur of fashion would applaud this not destroy it. An intelligent person would not make fun of a woman who speaks multiple languages and is said to have a high I.Q. and appears to be a dedicated mother and wife. She is “in vogue,” for all these reasons which should be enough for the magazine. Anna Wintour would not have gotten away with her behavior in a more dignified society of our past. She continues to bring down the magazine in agreement with the radical opinions of women in our society today. She ignores the point of the magazine, which was to accede to high fashion. The magazine was made for elite women not radical feminists. We have MS. Magazine that was created for feminists and many others that have followed since then.

How far will we go in the destruction of art in our radical society today before we have completely annihilated authentic history and a fondness for nostalgia? The women’s movement, originally, was not created to destroy history but to improve upon the conditions for women and children in the future. The feminist movement sought to continue this once we had the right to vote and gave rise to new expectations for women and children in the workplace and society. This has nothing to do with replacing art with more comfortable lyrics, paintings, or theater productions. Abolitionists sought to give freedom to all people and the NAACP movement and other Black organizations were created to protect their rights, not destroy art and re-create history to massage their egos.

We are in a place in society where we have no sense of values, only extremist mindsets, which have created group think. Social media has caused fear and unrest from bullying, lies, conspiracy theories, and turned all news into sensationalist rags. We can no longer handle the truth and this is not an intelligent society but a very ignorant, intellectually depleted group of people who are destroying our Earth. Will we ever start rising up again or are we destined toward a future that is ruled by violence rather than intellect?

StyleWe Clothing

I haven’t actually purchased anything from this website but I have looked at some of their choices a few times. I am not sure about the quality of the clothing, the difficulty of not having an actual storefront to walk in. I have chosen some photos here to give you a sampling of what is on offer. The clothing is versatile in the sense that they have outfits that could be appropriate for different age ranges. The sizes are a crap shoot between 0-12, so it is frustrating because you are going to open pages and find that it only goes to 8. I don’t see any way of choosing your size from the top. These are considered designer clothes at an average person’s prices but keep in mind some prices are a little steep.

An evening out, an anniversary party, a wedding, the theater. Or perhaps you will don your Irish stepping shoes and get in line!

 

 

 

 

 

A modern work dress with a good length to it for a manager or the owner of a company.

 

 

 

 

 

A throwback to Chanel, a little too short for a work dress but tasteful all the same. This makes me think of a secretary or Administrative Assistant.

 

 

 

 

 

While I don’t like the color, the style is elegant and offers quite a bit of movement. The length is ideal. Definitely a dress for a CEO.

 

 

 

Blue is definitely not sullen here with these bold stripes to bring attention, creating a high waistline and graceful movements. For the upwardly mobile gal.

 

 

 

A fun blouse for a creative office place and paired with a nice pair of trousers can be comfortable and easy for movement.

 

 

 

 

The caption on the site does not say what the heal height is which always gets my goat, though these do seem modest. With the right dress, you will be the envy of the room. They show them in a dark blue color as well.

 

 

 

A working girls shoes with a comfortable height for someone who is walking around the office trying to keep the team together. They can also be used for a day out shopping, luncheon with some friends or even a daytime wedding.

 

 

A darling little evening clutch, though you’ll have to wear it over your shoulder as the flowers aren’t ideal for holding in your hands.

The Language of Fashion

If French is the language of fashion then we are speaking in Ebonics right now. Anna Wintour showed us just how pathetic we have become by putting Kim Kardashian and Kanye West on the cover of the American version of Vogue in April 2014. Two people who have a lack of respect for themselves and the people around them. One makes a name for herself on a reality show and the other for his ruthless behaviors toward Taylor Swift. Neither have any sense of decency nor does our society for allowing this to happen. Women in the workplace are dressed like Rosie the Riveter rather than executive material and technically speaking Rosie dressed much nicer. We have come a long way since Chanel and Dior but instead of being on a continued climb, we are on a downward spiral. Fashion designers boast the newest trends in holey blue jeans that even a farmer would never dare to wear. Boys on the streets pull their pants down and their hats backwards. Schools and offices have given up on dress codes and have given way to selling out to slang rather than teaching work ethics. Corporations have outsourced our jobs to China and India and every other third world country and we have lost any sense of customer service or respect for the consumer in general. Department stores have become dinosaurs as we are forced to shell out online for clothing that often does not fit, isn’t the right color, style, and then we must go out of our way to return it through a subcontractor rather than a store with a nice smiling employee to take down our concerns.

Aidez-moi!!! What does one do? Mostly, it appears we give up and give in. We adopt the motto “It is what it is,” which is no more capitalistic in thought than a collective farm in Russia. What happened to elegance? Stanley Marcus tells us that it died in his first memoir “Quest for the Best.” If he could see his store now partnering with Target, as they did in 2013; no doubt he’d be rolling in his grave. My sense is that the final chapter of elegant society died at the close of WWI. Watch any period piece surrounding this era and you will see what I am talking about.

So where does one shop if they are clearly not interested in following these trends but remembering the values taught to them by their grandmothers, aunts and mothers? I find this to be a struggle and I hope that those of you who follow this blog have some insight on where to go. This website is for classic minded women who hope to reclaim fashion as it really has nowhere to go.  If we are in the depths of despair, it is time to throw down a rope so we courageous ladies can start climbing. I am not a designer, just a writer, so I have no ability to reshape this industry in any way other than my thoughts. I hope to find more of you out there who are hiding behind your fresh pressed suit at your place of business or the belle of the ball because you are the only one who knew how to dress for the occasion. Only the bride seems to be interested in a traditional dress for a wedding but we know she is not a virgin. The guests now show up like its casual Friday, yet thousands of dollars are spent on an overrated party because the couple is likely going to divorce within a few years.

Class cannot be bought or sold. You either have this or you don’t. Once we had a time where people knew their place in society and this was dependent on their economic standing. I don’t think this was wrong, I think it makes sense that people of wealth shop and eat in one place and people of middle classes at their place and lower incomes at their places. It meant that you couldn’t walk into doors unless you were dressed a certain way. I don’t think the attitudes of the day were correct because people were left out for religion and race as well but the overall rules made sense. It gave you something to strive for in life or it helped you to be comfortable with where you are at. Now you see people in nice restaurants who are dressed in jeans and flip flops and this ruins the ambiance. If I have gotten to a place in my life where I can afford certain things, I don’t want to feel like I have made all this money just so I can see the same thing I will see if I walk down the streets of the inner city.

Likewise, I enjoy luxury. This means I do not prefer to wear faux anything. It is nice that some people have beliefs of advocating for the rights of this and that, but this is not what I am taking a stand for. I don’t think it is right that other people’s rights should be enforced upon me anymore than being told I should vote for X, Y or Z. A democracy means that we each have a right to our opinion. Communism is group think and I don’t aspire to being like everyone else. Naturally I would prefer that furriers have a more ethical approach to preparing a coat but I don’t want to wear polyester. Leather is much healthier for the feet than polyurethane as it allows for your skin to breathe.  I certainly would rather wear a diamond that wasn’t mined by slaves but I won’t be wearing cubic zirconia. I eat chocolate not carob. I drink Dom Perignon when the time is right and this has happened about twice in my life. I would rather be caught dead than enter a franchise for gastronomic delights. Good food comes from the energy of the cook and from a person who is passionate about his or her menu and recipes. Therefore, I would prefer not to enter the universe looking as if I have no self-respect. I would prefer not to be the best dressed person in the room but in competition with other women of considerable taste. Sadly, it is a rare day when I actually like what someone else is wearing.

In fact, I have loved fashion since I was a young girl. Even going to church was a parade of costumes worn by the ladies and the most special time was around the holidays. Once I begged my parents to stop the car so I could find out where a lady had purchased her shoes – they didn’t. I adored weddings as this was a time to wear a formal and special dress shoes. When I met my first fashion buyer, I was in love with the career on the spot. The idea that she got to travel and purchase clothing for the store was the most amazing concept to me. Heading off to FIDM was a dream come true. But then the bubble began to burst. I saw the type of personalities in fashion that I was not accustomed to back home. They did not respect work ethics but friendships and secret passwords and handshakes it would seem. After leaving the industry and choosing an alternative career, I began to notice with the advent of computers was the decline in moral standards. With a decaying of our society will naturally result in a lack of interest in what we wear. I once told a friend, after watching the Calvin Klein commercial in the 80’s that being naked will be our fashion statement one day. He thought I was nuts. Like the decline in the U.S. Vogue magazine in 2014, the next year news headlines for the Hollywood Report would say “Met Gala 2015: Who Was the Most Naked on the Carpet?”

S’il Vous Plait, throw some of us women a rope! For those of us who care enough about the future of our society and want to bring fashion back to a place of respect. Who are tired of seeing young women in 6” heels and mini-skirts without panties; only to find them pregnant without a man in the near future.  If these were “working women” of the streets one could understand but we are talking about girls who are giving up their chance at college and a career for a boy whose name they can’t remember from a party where they aren’t sure how they got home.

Ladies, I have sounded the alarm. Stand behind me and lets prepare to shift the fashion realm of consciousness and find a psychic to help us channel in Gabrielle and Christian and Jean and Elsa or whomever your favorite designer was of yesteryear.