Curtains for the Necktie?

[AdmiralTofu]

It may have been 1933 or '34 but that's beside the point. What they did was take photographs on the streets of NYC, and point out that in the busy street, a significant number of younger men were hatless, tieless, and therefore communists (honestly, i'm not kidding, that allusion is glaring in the article).

bk

lol lol Hilarious, but not at all surprising. Can't wait to see the article.

had to scan half pages and then put them back together, align, sort out the colour match etc. Very time consuming)

fftopic: (Yuck... matching up partial scans. I feel for you. That's about as much fun as zooming in to 1600% to find individial pixels you need to fill in with the pencil because the line drawing you scanned has gaps in the lines that are letting flood fills leak through to the whole image... not that I ever do that )

-Tofu

 

[AdmiralTofu]

I recall a job I had that required that ties be worn even though most of the poeple in the office did the majority of their business over the phone.

It was more a statement about professionalism and professional demeanor. The proliferation of business casual and its degradation to anything goes relates directly to behavior.

Why do companies have to launch new campaigns to put their customers first? To paraphrase a recent car campaign, customer service should be a big DUH.

Ah well, I suppose I'm tilting at windmills.

(disclaimer) This isn't directed at you, nor at any one person in particular. Just musing aloud.

But even as I love wearing ties myself, I've never quite "gotten" how wearing a piece of fabric tied around one's neck is supposed to be professional and respectful while not wearing one isn't. I think what's more important is simply conducting oneself in a polite professional manner, and just generally having an overall neat appearance. I've known folks who've never worn a necktie in their life who were a pleasure to work and be with (and look good to boot) -- and others who wear ties every day who are total slobs and pains in the royal **** (in fact, I work with one of the latter lol ). Looking neat is important, but in the end, it boils down to attitude, I think. If you're a miserable jerk, I think being forced to wear a tie is only going to make you more of a miserable jerk, and you probably shouldn't have that job in the first place.

-Tofu

(EDIT, and slightly fftopic: : I totally agree about customer appreciation days and such. Like you said, isn't that a total no-brainer anyway?)

 

[Feraud]

Is this just something old fuddy duddies whine about every so often, or is the world really going against ties?

bk

It is the former! Once an author references the Kennedy myth it is easy to put the article in perspective.
This is one of "those" articles (The tie is dead, fedoras are back, the hippies are destroying America, etc.) where an author suddenly gets an idea that is neither new nor particularly true.

 

[Ed]

The WSJ article was written by Nicholas Antongiavanni, the pen name of Michael Anton. (MANTON). He is author of "The Suit: A Machiavellian Approach to Men's Style,"

Mr. Anton is now working for the Giuliani campagn.

Referencing Mr. Obama and the president of Iran in the same article
and noting a suggested Islamic prohibition against the wearing of ties
is to say the least a little bit silly.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

An extremely interesting subtext! Thanks.

(due to certain rules 'n regs i'll leave the subtext i'm seeing implicit. Who will destroy the youth of the nation if elected?)

bk

 

[Jovan]

Manton is a member here.

 

[Rick Blaine]

It may have been 1933 or '34 but that's beside the point. What they did was take photographs on the streets of NYC, and point out that in the busy street, a significant number of younger men were hatless, tieless, and therefore communists (honestly, i'm not kidding, that allusion is glaring in the article).

bk

fftopic:

I suspect I was lucky enough to have met some of those young men as old men when lived in NYC in the early to mid eighties & the remnants of The Lincoln Brigade (many of whom were artists) held an annual art sale to raise, well, capital.

Some fine artists & some real gentlemen, many of whom were Reds in that era, or at least "fellow travelers", & many of whom were still sans tie & hat, BTW. For the record I am 47 & have never owned or worn a tie

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Manton is a member here.

and so . . . ?

bk

 

[MK]

.

The WSJ article was written by Nicholas Antongiavanni, the pen name of Michael Anton. (MANTON). He is author of "The Suit: A Machiavellian Approach to Men's Style,"

Mr. Anton is now working for the Giuliani campagn.

Referencing Mr. Obama and the president of Iran in the same article
and noting a suggested Islamic prohibition against the wearing of ties
is to say the least a little bit silly.

I know the man in question. You are reading into this too far. Manton would have written that regardless. His opinions on sartorial matters are not a leaf in wind. That was his take on the subject before working for Rudy and it will still be his position after he has finished.

 

[mike]

I absolutely notice this happening in the Los Angeles corporate/executive world. Which also has had an immediate trickle down effect. It's certainly a problem which I think we can only hope will one day be matched with a general push back in the other direction. But we're well on our way into the heart of the 'tie-less early 21st century fad!' lol

 

[Vintage Betty]

Where exactly was it acceptable to go tieless in 1932? Besides the Cote d'Azur and Hoovervilles, I mean.

I'm assuming in areas where people couldn't afford to dress up.

VB

 

[Mid-fogey]

It's worth remembering...

...that the overwhelming majority of people didn't wear ties to work in the 1930s, being blue collar workers. The onset of the industrial revolution created a number of jobs where ties could be considered a safety risk. In the 1930s there was a fair quantity of industrial work still in NYC. I would be surprised (depending on the borough) to see 50% tie wearers on a regular day at that time.

As far as these days are concerned, I wouldn't be concerned if there as slow evolution away from ties with tailored garments, good fabrics, etc. That is not the case. The modern man dresses like a little boy with short pants, ball caps, athletic shoes -- all at occasions and places that call for better. None of this is surprising; people have shifted from dressing to show deference to others to dressing to solely please themselves.

The move away from the tie is just a small part of that.

 

[Jovan]

and so . . . ?

bk

What MK said right after your post.

Vintage Betty and Mid-fogey: Agreed.

 

[John in Covina]

Re-Focus

Why do companies have to launch new campaigns to put their customers first? To paraphrase a recent car campaign, customer service should be a big DUH.

****************
In many businesses as people move up and others are brought in to bring new ideas to the running of a business it oftens becomes a mantra to have some aspect of business be the focus of somebody in charge. Often to the point of the exclusion of other things, so the regular return to the "customer comes first" edict is often a refreshing change to what was created by the dot the I's and cross the T's sticklers and their pet area of business focus.

Where I work they like talk of streamlining the process, which means other departments become resposible for what was the first departments work. Also they love to change hats as it were, the GM becomes head of sales where he has little expertise. I did catalog research and now do purchasing.

Still better to be working than not.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

What MK said right after your post.

Oh, well, i guess i disagree with MK and you, then.

You cannot read too far into anything. Reading into things is where the fun lies.

bk

 

[staggerwing]

None of this is surprising; people have shifted from dressing to show deference to others to dressing to solely please themselves.

The move away from the tie is just a small part of that.

I generally dress to please myself...that usually means suit, starched shirt, shined shoes, a hat when appropriate...and a tie. That said, as a consultant, I learned to respect my client's wishes. I have had more than one client tell me in no uncertain terms to lose the suit and tie as their corporate culture is "business casual." In those cases I try to comply, but probably end up looking like a slob since I really don't know how to do business casual. I wish businesses would adopt more formal dress codes again, so I don't have to ask new clients how I should dress on company premises.

 

[Feraud]

A quote from the article -

We should hope hat the tie survives. It is too noble a garment to let go for light and transient, or dark and sinister, causes. The good news is that Mr. Obama's foray into tielessness does not stem from deeply held ideology. When it really counts, he does the right thing. No doubt, should he make it to the end, his neck will be covered on inauguration day.
Just like JFK's head.