Monday, December 29, 2008
new clothes for new year
happy new year!!!! for happy new year you could to buy a clothes car. it's will be interesting for your family, for example for a reward maybe. please try it...
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Why clothes make a terrible gift.
No, Really, You Shouldn't Have Why clothes make a terrible gift.
By Amanda Fortini Posted Friday, Dec. 16, 2005, at 5:36 PM ET
Illustration by Nina Frenkel. Click image to expand.Deep in the darkest recesses of every closet, there lies a stack of neglected holiday clothes. Not the festive, sequined numbers women don for the office Christmas party. I'm talking about garments acquired during holiday gift exchanges, presents received with forced smiles and feigned exclamations only to be shoved to the uppermost shelf. These are the neckties decorated with golf balls or Christmas trees, the frumpy sweaters with arts-and-craftsy appliqués—all the items that never looked right, never fit, and never quite got returned. Despite the ubiquity of such clothing graveyards, deluded holiday shoppers insist on buying ties and sweaters for their loved ones, forgetting (or worse, not caring) that they will likely go unworn. This year, please abstain: Clothing is the gift that's impossible to get right.
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss in the FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAILGet Slate RSS FeedsRSSShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Single PageSINGLE PAGE
Yahoo! BuzzFacebook FacebookPost to MySpace!MySpaceMixx MixxDigg DiggReddit RedditDel.icio.us del.icio.usFurl FurlMa.gnolia.com Ma.gnoliaSphere SphereStumble UponStumbleUponCLOSE
Clothing, after all, is chiefly a matter of taste. It's true that givers buying any gift must consider the recipient's preferences: Is it Anita Shreve my grandmother reads or Nicholas Sparks? Still, there's a loose consensus about which books and CDs are worthwhile. And if you're selecting precious stones for a woman, diamonds are generally a safe bet. When it comes to clothing, however, there are no such universals. Further complicating matters, a person's cultural likes and dislikes often come up in conversation, but few people broadcast their sartorial idiosyncrasies, as such matters can seem shallow or banal. A person might think, say, that the color red washes her out, or she might suffer from a rare allergy. One Christmas, for instance—in a moment PETA-types might call poetic justice—my mother received a fox fur coat only to end up with a case of boil-like hives.
from: http://www.slate.com
By Amanda Fortini Posted Friday, Dec. 16, 2005, at 5:36 PM ET
Illustration by Nina Frenkel. Click image to expand.Deep in the darkest recesses of every closet, there lies a stack of neglected holiday clothes. Not the festive, sequined numbers women don for the office Christmas party. I'm talking about garments acquired during holiday gift exchanges, presents received with forced smiles and feigned exclamations only to be shoved to the uppermost shelf. These are the neckties decorated with golf balls or Christmas trees, the frumpy sweaters with arts-and-craftsy appliqués—all the items that never looked right, never fit, and never quite got returned. Despite the ubiquity of such clothing graveyards, deluded holiday shoppers insist on buying ties and sweaters for their loved ones, forgetting (or worse, not caring) that they will likely go unworn. This year, please abstain: Clothing is the gift that's impossible to get right.
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss in the FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAILGet Slate RSS FeedsRSSShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Single PageSINGLE PAGE
Yahoo! BuzzFacebook FacebookPost to MySpace!MySpaceMixx MixxDigg DiggReddit RedditDel.icio.us del.icio.usFurl FurlMa.gnolia.com Ma.gnoliaSphere SphereStumble UponStumbleUponCLOSE
Clothing, after all, is chiefly a matter of taste. It's true that givers buying any gift must consider the recipient's preferences: Is it Anita Shreve my grandmother reads or Nicholas Sparks? Still, there's a loose consensus about which books and CDs are worthwhile. And if you're selecting precious stones for a woman, diamonds are generally a safe bet. When it comes to clothing, however, there are no such universals. Further complicating matters, a person's cultural likes and dislikes often come up in conversation, but few people broadcast their sartorial idiosyncrasies, as such matters can seem shallow or banal. A person might think, say, that the color red washes her out, or she might suffer from a rare allergy. One Christmas, for instance—in a moment PETA-types might call poetic justice—my mother received a fox fur coat only to end up with a case of boil-like hives.
from: http://www.slate.com
Thursday, December 11, 2008
marital status in clothes
Traditionally Hindu women, once married, would wear sindoor, a red powder, in the parting of their hair. If widowed, they would abandon sindoor and jewelry and wear simple white clothing. Men and women of the Western world may wear wedding rings to indicate their marital status. Also women in the United States, depending on their heritage and/or religion, will usually wear a white gown, although some movie stars have been known to wear a black party dress for their wedding. Observant Jewish women cover their hair if they are married. There is a sect of Judaism in which girls who are old enough to be looking for a husband wear their hair in two braids as opposed to the one braid they wore before they were of a marriagable age.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org
from: http://en.wikipedia.org
Social status in clothes
In many societies, people of high rank reserve special items of clothing or decoration for themselves as symbols of their social status. In ancient times, only Roman senators were permitted to wear garments dyed with Tyrian purple; only high-ranking Hawaiian chiefs wore feather cloaks and palaoa or carved whale teeth. Under the Travancore kingdom of Kerala (India), lower caste women had to pay a tax for the right to cover their upper body. In China before the establishment of the republic, only the emperor could wear yellow. In many cases throughout history, there have been elaborate systems of sumptuary laws regulating who could wear what. In other societies (including most modern societies) no laws prohibit lower-status people wearing high status garments, but the high cost of status garments effectively limits their purchase and display. In current Western society, only the rich can afford haute couture. The threat of social ostracism may also limit garment choice. If one is not wearing a specific brand or style of clothing one's social status may fall. Yet, retailers have converted to fast fashion techniques that provide trendy pieces of clothing at lower price points.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org
from: http://en.wikipedia.org
Origin and history of clothing
According to archaeologists and anthropologists, the earliest clothing probably consisted of fur, leather, leaves or grass, draped, wrapped or tied about the body for protection from the elements. Knowledge of such clothing remains inferential, since clothing materials deteriorate quickly compared to stone, bone, shell and metal artifacts. Archeologists have identified very early sewing needles of bone and ivory from about 30,000 BC, found near Kostenki, Russia in 1988.[citation needed]
Ralf Kittler, Manfred Kayser and Mark Stoneking, anthropologists at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, have conducted a genetic analysis of human body lice that indicates that they originated about 107,000 years ago. Since most humans have very sparse body hair, body lice require clothing to survive, so this suggests a surprisingly recent date for the invention of clothing. Its invention may have coincided with the spread of modern Homo sapiens from the warm climate of Africa, thought to have begun between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago. However, a second group of researchers used similar genetic methods to estimate that body lice originated about 540,000 years ago (Reed et al. 2004. PLoS Biology 2(11): e340). For now, the date of the origin of clothing remains unresolved.[citation needed]
Some human cultures, such as the various peoples of the Arctic Circle, until recently made their clothing entirely of prepared and decorated furs and skins. Other cultures have supplemented or replaced leather and skins with cloth: woven, knitted, or twined from various animal and vegetable fibers.
See also: weaving, knitting, and twining
Although modern consumers take clothing for granted, making the fabrics that go into clothing is not easy. One sign of this is that the textile industry was the first to be mechanized during the Industrial Revolution; before the invention of the powered loom, textile production was a tedious and labor-intensive process.
One approach simply involves draping the cloth. Many peoples wore, and still wear, garments consisting of rectangles of cloth wrapped to fit — for example, the dhoti for men and the saree for women in the Indian subcontinent, the Scottish kilt or the Javanese sarong. The clothes may simply be tied up, as is the case of the first two garments; or pins or belts hold the garments in place, as in the case of the latter two. The precious cloth remains uncut, and people of various sizes or the same person at different sizes can wear the garment.
Another approach involves cutting and sewing the cloth, but using every bit of the cloth rectangle in constructing the clothing. The tailor may cut triangular pieces from one corner of the cloth, and then add them elsewhere as gussets. Traditional European patterns for men's shirts and women's chemises take this approach.
Modern European fashion treats cloth much more prodigally, typically cutting in such a way as to leave various odd-shaped cloth remnants. Industrial sewing operations sell these as waste; home sewers may turn them into quilts.
In the thousands of years that humans have spent constructing clothing, they have created an astonishing array of styles, many of which we can reconstruct from surviving garments, photos, paintings, mosaics, etc., as well as from written descriptions. Costume history serves as a source of inspiration to current fashion designers, as well as a topic of professional interest to costumers constructing for plays, films, television, and historical reenactment.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org
Ralf Kittler, Manfred Kayser and Mark Stoneking, anthropologists at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, have conducted a genetic analysis of human body lice that indicates that they originated about 107,000 years ago. Since most humans have very sparse body hair, body lice require clothing to survive, so this suggests a surprisingly recent date for the invention of clothing. Its invention may have coincided with the spread of modern Homo sapiens from the warm climate of Africa, thought to have begun between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago. However, a second group of researchers used similar genetic methods to estimate that body lice originated about 540,000 years ago (Reed et al. 2004. PLoS Biology 2(11): e340). For now, the date of the origin of clothing remains unresolved.[citation needed]
Some human cultures, such as the various peoples of the Arctic Circle, until recently made their clothing entirely of prepared and decorated furs and skins. Other cultures have supplemented or replaced leather and skins with cloth: woven, knitted, or twined from various animal and vegetable fibers.
See also: weaving, knitting, and twining
Although modern consumers take clothing for granted, making the fabrics that go into clothing is not easy. One sign of this is that the textile industry was the first to be mechanized during the Industrial Revolution; before the invention of the powered loom, textile production was a tedious and labor-intensive process.
One approach simply involves draping the cloth. Many peoples wore, and still wear, garments consisting of rectangles of cloth wrapped to fit — for example, the dhoti for men and the saree for women in the Indian subcontinent, the Scottish kilt or the Javanese sarong. The clothes may simply be tied up, as is the case of the first two garments; or pins or belts hold the garments in place, as in the case of the latter two. The precious cloth remains uncut, and people of various sizes or the same person at different sizes can wear the garment.
Another approach involves cutting and sewing the cloth, but using every bit of the cloth rectangle in constructing the clothing. The tailor may cut triangular pieces from one corner of the cloth, and then add them elsewhere as gussets. Traditional European patterns for men's shirts and women's chemises take this approach.
Modern European fashion treats cloth much more prodigally, typically cutting in such a way as to leave various odd-shaped cloth remnants. Industrial sewing operations sell these as waste; home sewers may turn them into quilts.
In the thousands of years that humans have spent constructing clothing, they have created an astonishing array of styles, many of which we can reconstruct from surviving garments, photos, paintings, mosaics, etc., as well as from written descriptions. Costume history serves as a source of inspiration to current fashion designers, as well as a topic of professional interest to costumers constructing for plays, films, television, and historical reenactment.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org
definition of clothes
Clothing or clothes protect the human body from extreme weather and other features of the environment. It is worn for safety, comfort, modesty and to reflect religious, cultural and social meaning.
The practical function of clothing is to protect the human body from dangers in the environment: weather (strong sunlight, extreme heat or cold, and precipitation, for example), insects, noxious chemicals, weapons, and contact with abrasive substances, and other hazards. Clothing can protect against many things that might injure the naked human body. In some cases, clothing protects the environment from the clothing wearer as well (example: medical scrubs).
Humans have shown extreme inventiveness in devising clothing solutions to practical problems and the distinction between clothing and other protective equipment is not always clear-cut; examples include space suit, air conditioned clothing, armor, diving suit, swimsuit, bee-keeper's protective clothing, motorcycle leathers, high-visibility clothing, and protective clothing.
People also decorate their bodies with makeup or cosmetics, scented perfume, and other ornamentation; they also cut, dye, and arrange the hair on their heads, faces, and bodies (see hairstyle), and sometimes also mark their skin (by tattoos, scarifications, and piercings). All these decorations may contribute to the overall effect and message of clothing, but do not constitute clothing.
Articles carried rather than worn (such as purses, canes, and umbrellas) are normally considered fashion accessories rather than clothing, but hats and small dress sweaters can be called clothing or accessories.[citation needed] Jewelry and eyeglasses are usually considered as accessories as well,[citation needed] even though in common speech these particular items are described as being worn rather than carried.
Historically, there have been many societies where partial or complete nudity was the cultural norm. In the modern world, most cultures find it socially unacceptable to walk around in public without clothes.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org
The practical function of clothing is to protect the human body from dangers in the environment: weather (strong sunlight, extreme heat or cold, and precipitation, for example), insects, noxious chemicals, weapons, and contact with abrasive substances, and other hazards. Clothing can protect against many things that might injure the naked human body. In some cases, clothing protects the environment from the clothing wearer as well (example: medical scrubs).
Humans have shown extreme inventiveness in devising clothing solutions to practical problems and the distinction between clothing and other protective equipment is not always clear-cut; examples include space suit, air conditioned clothing, armor, diving suit, swimsuit, bee-keeper's protective clothing, motorcycle leathers, high-visibility clothing, and protective clothing.
People also decorate their bodies with makeup or cosmetics, scented perfume, and other ornamentation; they also cut, dye, and arrange the hair on their heads, faces, and bodies (see hairstyle), and sometimes also mark their skin (by tattoos, scarifications, and piercings). All these decorations may contribute to the overall effect and message of clothing, but do not constitute clothing.
Articles carried rather than worn (such as purses, canes, and umbrellas) are normally considered fashion accessories rather than clothing, but hats and small dress sweaters can be called clothing or accessories.[citation needed] Jewelry and eyeglasses are usually considered as accessories as well,[citation needed] even though in common speech these particular items are described as being worn rather than carried.
Historically, there have been many societies where partial or complete nudity was the cultural norm. In the modern world, most cultures find it socially unacceptable to walk around in public without clothes.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)