To reply to one point: the fact that they abstain from drugs and alcohol does not necessarily make "strangely conservative." It is fairly mainstream in Western and sub-Saharan Africa to do this due to the influence of Islam. Many rappers in West Africa who dress like American rappers abstain from alcohol and scantily-clad women. Although this clashes with our notions of rappers and dandies, the religious context in Africa different. Also, it shows how dress can be appropriated by different people to mean drastically different things. Perhaps this phenomenon would be better addressed through the lens of the specific political and social situation in the DRC. It seems there is a tendency in the post and the comments to see this style of dress as post-colonial European imitation against a backdrop of African poverty. Perhaps it is the inverse.
The fact that only men are shown (I'm not denying that women can participate in similar modes of fashion and representation) is somewhat troubling to me. Maybe it's the fact that I just finished reading "Ruined" (the Pulitzer Prize winning play about war and rape in the DRC)...but I wonder how these men are getting all this money.
I really hate-hate-hate how, for some reason, the press -and some of us- think that fashion is something exclusive from the US and (some countries of) Europe and there must be some sort of trick when people of some other country loves fashion, especially if they're from some non-white country.
Same thing was with BryanBoy a few years ago: when talking about his style, his sense of fashion and his love for luxury labels, there was the remark of how the Phillipines are third world and there is needy people and half naked kids on the streets over there.
And it could be read as 'what do this non american people do to pay that expensive clothes' and 'why is he/she disconnected from that country's reality?'
Like if they weren't mere individuals, and like if there is a hungry kid on the street that's totally the status for all of their citizens.
They over there could see pictures of Anna Wintour on the streets of Manhattan wearing a 5k dress, and this is a rich country but that does not mean that the average american have a black amex in their pocket.
Individuals, that's what we are, and people does not dress themselves after reading what their country's GDP is.
It's all about showmanship and 1 upping each other. Fally Ipupa is 1 of the biggest Congolese stars out, hence the video below. Bentley, fur coat, American pop-star, people went WILD.
How do I explain this, my people are flashy.
Even in the US, if you pull up to a Congolese party, everyone is dressed to the nines. It is part of the cultute. when my uncle who lived in Paris came to visit, the young guys in the neighborhood used to line up on the corner to see what he was wearing, when he left in the morning with my father. The man got kudos for never repeating an outfit.
In most instances, people usually borrow and exchange clothing. Yes, we are surrounded by war, chaos and utter poverty, but life goes on. Hell we've been in turmoil since the 1800s.
@Sarah Dove: I used to be a Dapper Dan Man, but it has been my experience that many "DDM" use foul language and often engage in fisticuffs in family establishments such as Woolworths. I do not wish to be associated with such non-bonafide men.
Something about the captions rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe it was the somewhat paternalistic "oh don't they know they're oppressing themselves" vibe that describes these men as somehow "duped." There are always people who make choices that don't 100% benefit the bottom line, but this book is about a certain sub-culture's style and it illuminates that style well. Should anyone spend $1000 on a bespoke pair of shoes when a $100 pair will do just as well, no, but there are choices that we ALL make that are a detriment to ourselves or the common good in the name of individualistic self-expression.
Fuck it. When the world around you is shit, what do you have left? Dandy it up.
@foodandshoes: I love you for saying "dandy it up," first of all. That should be on a (bespoke) t-shirt.
On a more serious note, I agree with your critique of how the story gets told here. I think the way the book itself approaches the story seems truer to how the men want to be perceived -- as taste-makers rather than as receptacles for our pity. There are plenty of people in plenty of circumstances who spend money best used elsewhere on how they look. Why is this case so heartbreaking? I mean, if we're going to use this story as a springboard for calling out The Real Problem, it's certainly not that these guys are dressing in a way that reflects how they see themselves regardless of how we might see them because of their circumstances. The real problem is that there's a disconnect in the first place.
There are so many layers to this. My first thought was that they look so charming and handsome, and then I started thinking about the situations in Congo and the DRC started wondering what was wrong with the world if clothing is more important than food or shelter. And did it arise from their own culture or is it another byproduct of globalization? And aren't they just setting themselves up to be robbed by walking around with such nice things in the middle of such poverty?
Questions, questions. What I do know is that the photos are stunning.
@MalinaMango: It's a culture. The war/fighting is centered in the east. It is relatively quiet in the west. Not all Congolese are poor, but a good chunk are.
Interestingly, the Mobutu regime actually banned Western-style dress in a bid for African 'authenticity.' Mobutu himself designed the abacost jacket (short for 'a bas la costume' or 'down with the suit') for men and required women to wear the traditional pagne, or wrap.
The revival of La Sape was partly in response to these ridiculous restrictions.
This reminds me incredibly of the gay dance halls in "Paris is Burning": notably, the use of designer clothes and looking good not only to promote your status within a minority and subjugated subculture, but to more importantly as a means to rise above the difficulties they've faced. Clothes and labels are so much more than "clothes" and "labels," especially to people who have limited means and a hard way of life.
For some reason, I'm thinking that the last statement: "perhaps they are doing it because self-presentation is one of the few powers they have" is the key here. I'm reminded of the fact that the times in history where women have had the least autonomy have been the times when fashion went totally nuts. Victorian bustles went out the door when women got the vote; in were the flapper's midlength skirts and lack of confining undergarments. After WWII when women were ousted from the workforce, Dior's New Look replaced sensible skirts with European fashion and the kind of hairstyles that took hours to accomplish.
Obviously I'm probably simplifying a very complex issue, but it would be interesting to think about in more depth.
there are so many fascinating issues raised here.
I had to point out that it's somewhat troublesome to me that some of the analysis of this subculture has the air of "why are these people spending so much on clothes when they live in such a poor country?" as though each of these men has an individual responsibility to spend that money on their impoverished neighbors rather than themselves. while sure, that would be nice, i don't see why these people have to be saints. why does any person anywhere spend money on ostentatious sartorial displays of wealth? because they can! should they spend that money on their less fortunate neighbors? maybe, but just because these men live in a country where the impoverished is so much more prevalent, doesn't mean they automatically have a higher moral imperative than any other luxury shopper. if these men find the money, however in the world they manage it, it is theirs to spend as they please, whether or not i approve of its use.
@browngirlinthering: Thank you. I didn't know how to say it! People don't have a responsibility to spend less on themselves just because they live in an impoverished nation.
Regardless of people think of the luxury goods/fashion industries, people (no matter where they live) can/should spend money how they want. Social responsibility/justice is a great thing, but expecting higher "morals" of a people because of their surroundings is just off.
I remember reading an article about this very subject a couple of years ago and it made me feel sad. An African man living in Paris who worked as a janitor would save up his whole month salary to buy a pair of designer shoes. He had a photo of Prince Charles up on his wall and would buy the same exact outfit that he was wearing down to the exact labels.Mind you, buying the suit,tie, shoes would take over almost a whole years salary. He would go without food for some periods of time to pay for it all. What made it even sadder was he seemed to instill this ideology into his son, who would seemly continue in his footsteps.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
Same thing was with BryanBoy a few years ago: when talking about his style, his sense of fashion and his love for luxury labels, there was the remark of how the Phillipines are third world and there is needy people and half naked kids on the streets over there.
And it could be read as 'what do this non american people do to pay that expensive clothes' and 'why is he/she disconnected from that country's reality?'
Like if they weren't mere individuals, and like if there is a hungry kid on the street that's totally the status for all of their citizens.
They over there could see pictures of Anna Wintour on the streets of Manhattan wearing a 5k dress, and this is a rich country but that does not mean that the average american have a black amex in their pocket.
Individuals, that's what we are, and people does not dress themselves after reading what their country's GDP is.
11/18/09
11/18/09
Even in the US, if you pull up to a Congolese party, everyone is dressed to the nines. It is part of the cultute. when my uncle who lived in Paris came to visit, the young guys in the neighborhood used to line up on the corner to see what he was wearing, when he left in the morning with my father. The man got kudos for never repeating an outfit.
In most instances, people usually borrow and exchange clothing. Yes, we are surrounded by war, chaos and utter poverty, but life goes on. Hell we've been in turmoil since the 1800s.
11/18/09
And these gents have style. As a dandy (well, more of a fop), I approve.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/21/09
#tips
11/21/09
11/24/09
#tips
11/18/09
Fuck it. When the world around you is shit, what do you have left? Dandy it up.
11/18/09
On a more serious note, I agree with your critique of how the story gets told here. I think the way the book itself approaches the story seems truer to how the men want to be perceived -- as taste-makers rather than as receptacles for our pity. There are plenty of people in plenty of circumstances who spend money best used elsewhere on how they look. Why is this case so heartbreaking? I mean, if we're going to use this story as a springboard for calling out The Real Problem, it's certainly not that these guys are dressing in a way that reflects how they see themselves regardless of how we might see them because of their circumstances. The real problem is that there's a disconnect in the first place.
11/18/09
11/18/09
Questions, questions. What I do know is that the photos are stunning.
11/18/09
11/18/09
The revival of La Sape was partly in response to these ridiculous restrictions.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
It's like someone finally made Andre 3000 King of the World.
11/19/09
#tips
11/18/09
11/18/09
Obviously I'm probably simplifying a very complex issue, but it would be interesting to think about in more depth.
11/18/09
I had to point out that it's somewhat troublesome to me that some of the analysis of this subculture has the air of "why are these people spending so much on clothes when they live in such a poor country?" as though each of these men has an individual responsibility to spend that money on their impoverished neighbors rather than themselves. while sure, that would be nice, i don't see why these people have to be saints. why does any person anywhere spend money on ostentatious sartorial displays of wealth? because they can! should they spend that money on their less fortunate neighbors? maybe, but just because these men live in a country where the impoverished is so much more prevalent, doesn't mean they automatically have a higher moral imperative than any other luxury shopper. if these men find the money, however in the world they manage it, it is theirs to spend as they please, whether or not i approve of its use.
11/18/09
Regardless of people think of the luxury goods/fashion industries, people (no matter where they live) can/should spend money how they want. Social responsibility/justice is a great thing, but expecting higher "morals" of a people because of their surroundings is just off.
11/18/09