Class Notes (922,429)
CA (542,813)
Ryerson (30,892)
PHL (631)
PHL 365 (29)
Lecture 7

PHL365 Lecture 7: Lecture 7
Premium

2 Pages
70 Views

Department
Philosophy
Course Code
PHL 365
Professor
Glenn Parsons

This preview shows half of the first page. Sign up to view the full 2 pages of the document.
October 5th, 2015 Fashion
Readings:
Farenikova and Prinz, What Makes Something Fashionable?
Zangwill, Fashion, Illusion, and Alienation
A problem?
In 1990: something looks good
In 2015: something looks dorky
How do fashion experts guide us? What is the point in listening to them?
A solution?
Farenikova + Prinz arbitrate what’s good in fashion at any given time
Looks good in 1990
Looks dorky in 2015
They are not contradicting those experts in the past they are talking about how the suit
looks now that is consistent with having looked good in 1990
Still contradiction here fashion experts are always talking about the aesthetic value of
things in a specific time
Its aesthetic value can change from one year to the next
The fashion experts are commenting on the changing aesthetic value
Can this make sense?
It doesn’t really make sense – the aesthetic value of something cannot shift in this way
over time
o Example, Pride and Prejudice Jane Austen
Witty, insightful, has well-rounded characters, a coherent plot in 1820
For Stolnitz features of the book itself makes it this way
Humourless, clichéd, has flat characters, an incoherent plot in 1990
How can it be that it was once witty in 1820 to humourless in 1990?
The work itself has remained the same
Aesthetic value is about the work itself
The aesthetic value has changed over time in part by its context
Zangwill on Fashion
Two different concepts of fashion
1. Being Fashionable
o Person X (Mick Jagger) (certain attitude) certain social group
o Looking at you in a certain way (admired)
o A Relational property/A Sociological property what’s involved in being
fashionable is just a certain relationship you have to other people
o That property MJ has doesn’t involve him – but it involves other people (saying
something more to how he is related to other groups instead of the guy himself
Mick Jagger)
2. Looking Fashionable

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade.

Leah — University of Toronto

OneClass has been such a huge help in my studies at UofT especially since I am a transfer student. OneClass is the study buddy I never had before and definitely gives me the extra push to get from a B to an A!

Leah — University of Toronto
Saarim — University of Michigan

Balancing social life With academics can be difficult, that is why I'm so glad that OneClass is out there where I can find the top notes for all of my classes. Now I can be the all-star student I want to be.

Saarim — University of Michigan
Jenna — University of Wisconsin

As a college student living on a college budget, I love how easy it is to earn gift cards just by submitting my notes.

Jenna — University of Wisconsin
Anne — University of California

OneClass has allowed me to catch up with my most difficult course! #lifesaver

Anne — University of California
Description
October 5 , 2015 – Fashion Readings:  Farenikova and Prinz, What Makes Something Fashionable?  Zangwill, Fashion, Illusion, and Alienation A problem?  In 1990: something looks good  In 2015: something looks dorky  How do fashion experts guide us? What is the point in listening to them? A solution?  Farenikova + Prinz – arbitrate what’s good in fashion at any given time  Looks good in 1990  Looks dorky in 2015  They are not contradicting those experts in the past – they are talking about how the suit looks now – that is consistent with having looked good in 1990  Still contradiction here – fashion experts are always talking about the aesthetic value of things in a specific time  Its aesthetic value can change from one year to the next  The fashion experts are commenting on the changing aesthetic value  Can this make sense?  It doesn’t really make sense – the aesthetic value of something cannot shift in this way over time o Example, Pride and Prejudice – Jane Austen  Witty, insightful, has well-rounded characters, a coherent plot in 1820  For Stolnitz – features of the book itself makes it this way  Humourless, clichéd, has flat characters, an incoherent plot in 1990  How can it be that it was once witty in 1820 to humourless in 1990?  The work itself has remained the same  Aesthetic value is about the work itself  The aesthetic value has changed over time – in part by its context Zangwill on Fashion  Two
More Less
Unlock Document


Only half of the first page are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit