Well, it looks like this blog is off to a good start! Zoe left an interesting comment on Prof Kalmar's introductory post, and I wanted to turn her comment into a full blog post to make sure that you all see it, because it raises questions about class, identity-formation and belonging (and the everyday!)

Zoe wrote:
"I found myself sitting on the couch with my laptop in front of me so I figured I may as well make use of this time! Since I am taking Prof. Kalmar's last sentence to heart, please forgive me for not writing a post on anything we have talked about. This thought has crossed my mind in the past and am hoping that others will have some comments or ideas on it. Do you ever notice that friends dress like their friends? Is it because we are drawn to people who are like us, and perhaps subtly understand those around us more who share our ideas in how to express ourselves? But then why do we make lasting friendships with people who are nothing like us? I hope this allows some kind of interesting discourse!"

I responded in the comments, so I'll repost that here as well, in hopes of kickstarting a discussion:

"...this fits really well with the recent discussion of class in lecture. There are probably many ways to think about why we dress alike, but the ideas of sociologist Pierre Bourdieu are a good starting point. Bourdieu wrote extensively about how our preferences are shaped by our social class. He argues that our sense of style and taste (and how we present ourselves)is inculcated early on through our upbringing and that these aesthetic choices help us fit in to our particular social niche. In Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, he writes that each class fraction "has its own artists and philosophers, newspapers and critics, just as it has its hairdresser, interior decorator, or tailor." (231-232).

I found this short paragraph that sums Bourdieu's thoughts up nicely:

"Bourdieu rejects the traditional notion that what he calls "tastes" (that is, consumer preferences) are the result of innate, individualistic choices of the human intellect. He argues that this "Kantian aesthetic" fails to recognize that tastes are socially conditioned and that the objects of consumer choice reflect a symbolic hierarchy that is determined and maintained by the socially dominant in order to enforce their distance or distinction from other classes of society. Thus, for Bourdieu, taste becomes a "social weapon" that defines and marks off the high from the low, the sacred from the profane, and the "legitimate" from the "illegitimate" in matters ranging from food and drink, cosmetics, and newspapers; on the one hand, to art, music, and literature on the other."

Source: Allen, Douglas E. and Paul F. Anderson. 1994. Consumption and Social Stratification: Bourdieu's Distinction. Advances in Consumer Research 21: 70-74.
http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=7565

Also, check out this blog entry by a sociologist, based on her observation that many sociologists dress alike:
http://nortonbooks.typepad.com/everydaysociology/2008/07/do-sociologists.html

So, what do you think? Do you buy Bourdieu's assertions? Are we just playing out our class roles, or can we be fashion mavens? Are these ideas relevant in our present-day context?