Re: The math of fashion

1

This raises something of a chicken and egg question. Do people do retro-revivals of fashions from 20 years ago because they look less ugly, or do they look less ugly because people have done retro-revivals?


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:09 AM
horizontal rule
2

Clothes from eighteen years ago are cool, because they are the reappropriated nostalgia of people just reaching adulthood. Clothes from fifteen years ago are goofy and kind of charming because they're about to become hip again among the fashion forward. Clothes from more recentlyare identified in the minds of the youth with the previous generation, and are thus garishly horrible.

On the other hand, JNCOs are gonna be coming back any day now, which'll be handy for me around the office.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:11 AM
horizontal rule
3

Maybe they're not back just yet.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:18 AM
horizontal rule
4

Yep, not back yet.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:20 AM
horizontal rule
5

Beyond disconcertingly, I have a t-shirt from one of the "Top Brands" on the site in 4 that I still wear regularly. Should I stop, do you think? Am I my high school guidance counselor?

Yesterday, one of the kids in my lab said to me "you can still buy cargo shorts?!"

Oh boy.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:22 AM
horizontal rule
6

Yesterday, one of the kids in my lab said to me "you can still buy cargo shorts?!"

That is hilarious.

I was always glad that cargo pants (and parachute pants before) missed my middle school years, because I would have thought "Boy this is convenient! I can put bulky things in EVERY POCKET!" and then thought I looked fabulous.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:25 AM
horizontal rule
7

I used to wear enormous orange raver pants to work. I'm pretty sure I thought I looked damn good. Luckily, it was '90s SF and I worked at a videogame company.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:30 AM
horizontal rule
8

6: Gosh, um, that would be embarrassing.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:49 AM
horizontal rule
9

feel genuine embarrassment over a picture of themselves from 1998

The key is to be chronically afashionable.

I've been wearing variations on basically the same T-shirt+jeans ensemble for the last 15+years.

Of course working in academia is part of what makes that possible.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:52 AM
horizontal rule
10

8 > 7


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 6:55 AM
horizontal rule
11

Clothes from eighteen years ago are cool, because they are the reappropriated nostalgia of people just reaching adulthood.

According to Laver's Law, they're on the cusp of going from hideous to ridiculous.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:04 AM
horizontal rule
12

I bet that those of us who are not "fashionable" tend to be dressed according to the 1/2xAge + 7 rule. Me, being about 30, would currently be most comfortable wearing the fashions of 2003. So I can expect to adopt skinny jeans in 2027.


Posted by: Annelid Gustator | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:06 AM
horizontal rule
13

9: But it's not like the jeans of 15 years ago don't look ridiculous now, unless you've settled on wearing 501s your whole life. (And if so, godspeed!)


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:12 AM
horizontal rule
14

unless you've settled on wearing 501s your whole life.

Guilty.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:20 AM
horizontal rule
15

Is there anything wrong with that?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:47 AM
horizontal rule
16

13: That's me. I like them, they are comfy, they let me avoid dealing with fashion, and they saved a friend of mine from accidentally chopping his cock in half.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:53 AM
horizontal rule
17

unless you've settled on wearing 501s your whole life
Why would one do anything else? When wearing jeans, I mean (I bought a couple of low-end department-store brands when I was in college. Never again.).

Similarly, button-down dress shirts and dark slacks have continued to exist in a steady boring-but-fashion-agnostic manner for a long time.


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:02 AM
horizontal rule
18

Slightly apropos, I got to look at some of the suits being made for the second season of Boardwalk Empire the other day. To the naked eye, such garments look much more costume-y than they look on television. They are being made, in many cases, with details that are rare, if not wholly unheard of, these days (hacking pockets, turnback sleeves), but the loud colors and weaves are really astonishing to behold. It would take a lot of brass to wear them now. Also, the materials are about twice as heavy (15-16 oz.) as most modern tailored clothing fabrics: too warm for most of the year in most parts of the country, especially for climate-controlled offices.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:23 AM
horizontal rule
19

I guess that "lagging window" system might make sense if you look at fashionable people as a distinctive subculture. But if you look at attire in Western culture as a whole - not just fashionable people but also nerds and jocks and the rest of the high school clique stereotypes, not just twentysomethings but also thirtysomethings and fourtysomethings - I think you'll find that fashions from the 1980s to mid-1990s went from fashionable to hideous in about 15 minutes, and were objectively goofy all along, or as close to objectively as such a thing as possible. I mean, seriously, legwarmers, shoulder pads and big hair? And for the men, is anyone prepared to defend either leather jackets with puffy sleeves or Tom Selleck mustaches?

I realize it's suspicious that my theory just happens to mirror what the "lagging window" theory says is outmoded at this particular moment. But I'd say that the 80s-to-early-90s really stand out. With some exceptions, mainstream fashion from other eras would look vaguely acceptable in most eras not its own - varying degrees of staid or outmoded, and if you go back far enough certain materials are harder to make clothes out of, but few things would look all that bizarre - whereas come on, someone try to name another era in which this would not have looked ridiculous on a human in real life.


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:35 AM
horizontal rule
20

[W]hereas come on, someone try to name another era in which this would not have looked ridiculous on a human in real life.

"Sire, the peasants are revolting."

"You said it: they stink on ice!"


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:38 AM
horizontal rule
21

I don't know about other people but most Levi's jeans are a really odd fit that are profoundly uncomfortable on me. This has held true for me both when I was really skinny, and when I was fat. Particularly standard red-tab 501s which seem to be made for someone with a much bigger arse and much higher waist than me. Women, basically.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:39 AM
horizontal rule
22

19: whereas come on, someone try to name another era in which this would not have looked ridiculous on a human in real life.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not so sure you're right either. Joan Collins' dress looks like something that could have been worn (with a little bit more material) any time from 1885 to 1920 without too much comment. As does the dress of the young woman opposite her. Given that this image is from a theatrical presentation focused on the lives of a group of very wealthy people, and that nobody in 1985 would have expected to see people dressed like this while in line at the In-And-Out Burger, I'm not so sure this goes to the larger point.


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
23

My wife gets annoyed at how irritated I can be by certain clothes she likes. To her they are just mildly quirky/cool, whereas to me they look like half-arsed hipster retreads of really really bad memories of the late 80s.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:45 AM
horizontal rule
24

I've dressed pretty much the same -- work clothes, sport shirts, jeans, boots, army surplus -- since I was 14 or so. But that's more of a response to not being able to find other types of clothing cheaply and in my size. So pretty much every picture of me looks like it could have been taken yesterday, depending on hair & glasses.

I did procure a pair of parachute pants once in the early 1990s, but as soon as I'd done it, I knew I'd made a mistake.


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:46 AM
horizontal rule
25

But it's not like the jeans of 15 years ago don't look ridiculous now

This is exactly right. I've had similar shirts all of my adult life (plain v-neck knits)*, but the kinds of jeans I've had very wildly.

*The trend, now many years ongoing, of putting ruffles and floral appliques and all this decorative shit all over tops cannot die soon enough for me. Ditto for little gathers at a round neckline. Gathers + large chest = I look like a peasant.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:01 AM
horizontal rule
26

I got some jeans recently which I really like but which I am painfully aware will, when they do turn into jeans that look ridiculous, look really, really ridiculous.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:03 AM
horizontal rule
27

This thread is worthless without pics.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:04 AM
horizontal rule
28

26: Do you have any idea when this "turn" might happen? Do you worry that it might happen right in the middle of a date?


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
29

I was recently at a bar where they were playing "Pretty in Pink" on the TVs, and was impressed at how cool James Spader looked. Not sure how this fits in with anything else, really; just thought I'd share.


Posted by: trapnel | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
30

Ruffles and applique can fuck right off, but I would be happy to have the round neck with gathers stick around for a while. Gathers + small chest = at least a little mystery about the smallness.

Question: how long do we think all this ruching of sides is going to last? Because I am eyeballing an otherwise classic little black dress with side ruching, but it's possible that no suitable occasion for wearing it will arise before the trend is dead and gone.


Posted by: Gabardine Bathyscaphe | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
31

If I get to wear a sword I'm down with a return to doublets and hose.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:17 AM
horizontal rule
32

29: I watched part of that movie recently, and I was struck by how it really seemed to be all about clothes.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:18 AM
horizontal rule
33

I hate gathers/ruching/shirring -- anything like that. Hate it all. I'm not sure if I've identified it as unflattering on me, or whether there's something else going on in my head.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:20 AM
horizontal rule
34

It's going to take a lot of googling for me to understand 30.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:20 AM
horizontal rule
35

@19if you look at fashionable people as a distinctive subculture.

I think they definitely are. Not that I don't appreciate the fact that such people exist. The world would be a significantly duller place if everyone dressed like me.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:21 AM
horizontal rule
36

"In ruching, a large number of increases are introduced in one row, which are then removed by decreases a few rows later. This produces many small vertical ripples in the fabric, effectively little pleats."


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:22 AM
horizontal rule
37

I've dressed pretty much the same [...] since I was 14 or so

Same here. I have placed a premium on finding jobs that allow me to continue doing so.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:22 AM
horizontal rule
38

I got my first article of clothing with ruching on the sides in 2004. I don't know whether that means it's here to stay, or just about to go out now! But the way it's often done on dresses seems pretty 80s to me, and I think we're a pretty long time from 80s looks becoming completely passé.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:24 AM
horizontal rule
39

32: Of course it is. But how often do you hear people lauding the contributions of Marilyn Vance to their 1980s teenagerhoods? Pretty goddamn rarely.

Directors get way too much credit for Mise-en-scène.


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:26 AM
horizontal rule
40

I don't know. THe 80s revival seems like it has gone on long enough that it just has to end at some point. Also, men's ankles: put them fucking away.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:26 AM
horizontal rule
41

Someone pass ttaM the smelling salts.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:27 AM
horizontal rule
42

27: Here you go.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
43

Counterpoint.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:30 AM
horizontal rule
44

It's almost like we read the same thread.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:31 AM
horizontal rule
45

I would like teenage-girl jeans to stop being skintight. Mostly because it means that they have to fit fairly well, which is really really annoying when you're buying them for someone who's growing. Skinny jeans can bite me.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:32 AM
horizontal rule
46

When everyone on the Sartorialist started looking exactly the same -- ankle flapping trousers, etc -- I stopped reading.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:32 AM
horizontal rule
47

42: All those kids just look like they're extras on Blossom. I don't remember real people dressing much like that.

Also, doesn't it look like the girl in the center of the August 19th picture is holding a bong?


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:32 AM
horizontal rule
48

It's almost like we read the same thread.

Following which I read almost all of the awesome 90s tumblr.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:36 AM
horizontal rule
49

Blume, are you thinking of the late-80s dresses that looked like the Michelin Man had been flayed and the skin stitched to a dress form? Those were a mistake. This is the dress I'm thinking of. The fact that it has shoulder pads, however small, is cause for some concern.


Posted by: Gabardine Bathyscaphe | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:37 AM
horizontal rule
50

THe 80s revival seems like it has gone on long enough that it just has to end at some point.

It has been going on a while, but I feel like it has only just recently reached full saturation. That is, where I see people who are not obviously hipsters wearing things on the street and I think, wow, that's a really 80s look and I'm not sure they even realize it. Which means that 80s-style clothing still has a good several years before it will look actively outdated.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:38 AM
horizontal rule
51

I LOVE ACID-WASHED JEANS!


Posted by: Pauly Shore | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:39 AM
horizontal rule
52

I recently watched an episode of "My So-Called Life" in which the Clare Danes character dresses, for Halloween, as a "50s girl.". Except, she looks exactly like the kind of 90s retro hipster that would emerge roughly three years after the episode originally aired. So confusing!


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:39 AM
horizontal rule
53

49: Ooh, pretty! Get it, get it! Is that acutally ruching, though? It looks like it's just on one side. I think of ruching as being on both sides. And if it's not, I guess I think of it as gathers.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:41 AM
horizontal rule
54

Wait, cargo shorts are out? I was just thinking of buying a pair.

I notice the kids are wearing aviator sunglasses and Chuck Taylor all-stars. That was my look in 1998. My problem might be that I am just way ahead of the times. Maybe in another 15 years, all the kids will be wearing chinos with crocks.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:41 AM
horizontal rule
55

I LOVE YOU GUYS! WHO WANTS A HUG?


Posted by: Pauly Shore | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:42 AM
horizontal rule
56

||

Whee, unnecessary vaccinations make Sifu loopy. Next time I try to register for some fancy ass private school with some kind of a ridiculous thing against infectious disease, remind me to find my goddamn medical forms in time. At least I got a lollipop.

|>


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:43 AM
horizontal rule
57

53: Well okay then! I have been teetering on the fence and the word of an imaginary internet person is enough to make me topple. And you're right, I've been lumping ruching and gathers into a general category of excess topographic variation.


Posted by: Gabardine Bathyscaphe | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
58

I do feel like TV costuming departments tend towards the extreme and are thus unreliable historical indicators of fashion. Few kids dressed like Blossom, few adults like Seinfeld. The Golden Girls seemed pretty accurate for how old ladies dress.

For menswear, California male lawyers have basically been wearing the same uniform -- a blue or white dress shirt with pants-- now for 13 or so years. And yet, older versions of this same look are hideously ugly, though it's difficult to say exactly why.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
59

57: That kind of gathering can be amazingly flattering. Somehow it draws attention to the waist if the waist is really small, and can mask it if you've got a bit of a belly.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 9:53 AM
horizontal rule
60

Skinny jeans can bite me.
Wide-legged jeans are back, but it looks like that's only going to help from the knees down.


Posted by: mcmc | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:02 AM
horizontal rule
61

Somehow it draws attention to the waist if the waist is really small, and can mask it if you've got a bit of a belly.

Like a thermos!


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:13 AM
horizontal rule
62

"How does it know?"


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:14 AM
horizontal rule
63

Thank you, LB.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:16 AM
horizontal rule
64

Today I'm wearing trouser-cut jeans. One of my very favorite things to wear to work.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:18 AM
horizontal rule
65

Re: cargo pants, they probably aren't fashionable at the moment, but sometimes it's just plain practical to have extra pockets. Surprise at their continued marketability is unwarranted.

58
I do feel like TV costuming departments tend towards the extreme and are thus unreliable perfect historical indicators of fashion.

Fixed that for you.

Seriously, of course TV and movies tend towards the extreme. They have to create settings with certain moods and atmospheres, costumers have to justify their budgets, actors have to maintain their own images, etc. But that doesn't mean they're bad examples of fashion. If a real-life version of a certain fictional character would wear expensive designer clothes somewhat more than most people, then the fictional version would dress like that any time it's even vaguely plausible, just to make sure viewers get the message. Directors and costumers aim for an idealized version of whatever era they're depicting, but they do work from some version of the era rather than make things up from scratch.

You could probably find lots of people wearing t-shirts in public ever since their invention, just because they're a simple, casual, practical article of clothing for warm temperatures. But they won't show up in any surveys of fashion for certain eras until people started buying them with artful rips or witty slogans or pictures on them. That's not because people didn't wear them in earlier times, it's just because they weren't fashionable.

But then, what do I know about fashion?


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:21 AM
horizontal rule
66

I'm wearing cargo shorts and a cheap polo shirt, just like I wear every warm day. When it's cold, I wear jeans and a cheap polo shirt. And sometimes a sweater. Truly, I am a man out of time.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:25 AM
horizontal rule
67

49 is really cute.

I need to buy some jeans that fit. This is really hard to do because the stretching and whatnot are unpredictable, plus maybe my body is unpredictable or something. Blech. I really need to just make an effort and shop more, because things I've been wearing for 5-15 years are wearing out.

I did see a girl in a halter top and super baggy cargo pants walking by as I drove to lunch just now.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:28 AM
horizontal rule
68

This is the least comprehensible Unfogged thread ever.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:30 AM
horizontal rule
69

I don't think there's any significant difference between jeans I wear now and jeans I wore 10 or 15 years ago, except size. This probably means people are secretly gaping in horror whenever I wear them, right?


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:31 AM
horizontal rule
70

essear, I think the difference is probably that you're a boy. Women's jeans change in wacky and unpredictable ways, or so it seems to me. I never did embrace the skinny jean thing and I will not try. They'll be gone soon, I hope.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:34 AM
horizontal rule
71

Blume encouraged me to switch to jeans that actually fit me. I tried some expensive-ish (not really expensive, but, like, not from Target) ones but the crotch wore out too fast, so we canvassed some gay friends and they came up with some numbered Levis (not 501s) that work well. It was all pleasingly straightforward, and I can even tell that they look better.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:35 AM
horizontal rule
72

Today I'm wearing trouser-cut jeans.

Dear God no.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:38 AM
horizontal rule
73

I am! And I look delightful!


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:44 AM
horizontal rule
74

This probably means people are secretly gaping in horror whenever I wear them, right?

Not secretly, no.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
75

Everybody in my office is trying to figure out whether we just felt a little earthquake.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:55 AM
horizontal rule
76

Earthquake in DC? Funny.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
77

Type "earthquake" into Google and it shows the most recent ones. 5.8 in Virginia 5 minutes ago.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
78

76 not to 75, but in response to my twitter feed, newly full of earthquake talk from DC folks.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:57 AM
horizontal rule
79

Whoa. Yeah, that was an earthquake. Never felt one on the east coast before.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
80

77 -- That's pretty serious.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
81

Felt that here! That's pretty weird.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
82

Although it doesn't sound serious enough to be evacuating the Pentagon.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 10:59 AM
horizontal rule
83

Or the capitol or Main Justice, or the NYT building.

I suppose, though, if there's another bigger one coming, then maybe the answer is to abandon the East Coast altogether.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:02 AM
horizontal rule
84

Coordinates I have seen put it between Richmond and Charlottesville. A bit north of a line between them--not sure how accurate that is.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:07 AM
horizontal rule
85

Where's Stanley these days?


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
86

Near Mineral, VA, says the USGS


Posted by: Annelid Gustator | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
87

Felt it here, very clearly.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
88

86 not to 85. Though I guess as he is a drummer, they might be able to keep tabs on him.


Posted by: Annelid Gustator | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:09 AM
horizontal rule
89

Our building swayed an impressive amount; I don't think I've ever been this high up during a quake before. Some coworkers thought it was cool, some were disbelieving, some fled the building.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:09 AM
horizontal rule
90

And now the GS is saying 5.9.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:10 AM
horizontal rule
91

A few of my co-workers say they felt it.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:14 AM
horizontal rule
92

I felt the earthquake in my living room in Cambridge. Very strange.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:19 AM
horizontal rule
93

Huh. I was out for lunch, at ground level, and didn't feel a thing. But there was a funny moment when people on the street seemed kind of excited about something.

I really have to start paying more attention.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:22 AM
horizontal rule
94

Here's a "shakemap." Looks like it would have no more than "very light" damage potential in Charlottesville, Fredericksburg, and maybe some Richmond suburbs. Everywhere else just a little shake.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:25 AM
horizontal rule
95

Appears that it would have been just north of the "Central Virginia Seismic Zone but it is not that active, from the site apparently 4.8 was the largest historical quake. This site seems a good overview of Virginia and earthquakes.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:33 AM
horizontal rule
96

I'd love to see a Twitter earthquake propagation map of the kind posited in xkcd, but real.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 11:42 AM
horizontal rule
97

89: I don't think I've ever been this high up during a quake before.

Same here. Have felt stronger motion (not a lot, though) around LA, but was on 6th floor here. Not real high nor was it that strong, but unsettling all the same and my biggest fear was that it was some non-quake-related building integrity issue.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:11 PM
horizontal rule
98

Although it doesn't sound serious enough to be evacuating the Pentagon

I beg to differ! The shaking was very impressive. The expectation of a massive explosion was not fun. My group bugged out pretty fast.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:27 PM
horizontal rule
99

Are you back?


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:29 PM
horizontal rule
100

Yeah. We are back inside. There was some damage even. A co-worker who was eating in a food court said that some folks were screaming and very freaked out (especially as they didn't know how to evacuate from an unfamiliar location). Many people thought it was another attack.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:34 PM
horizontal rule
101

I didn't mean to suggest, md, that people in the P shouldn't have been concerned when they felt/heard it. Rather, that a formal evacuation after it's over seems a funny response. Jaded from my time in CA, I guess.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:37 PM
horizontal rule
102

It was the strongest I've felt since 1989 (when I was in the East Bay), but it wasn't all that long. A legitimate quake though, for any Californians out there who are amused by some of the responses.

I'm about to head over to see if I can get back into the Library of Congress. They sent everyone out and even put up the barricades on the streets on Capitol Hill (or at least on Independence) to keep the traffic out.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:39 PM
horizontal rule
103

Some chunks of rock fell off a church nearby, but it doesn't look like anyone was hurt.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:41 PM
horizontal rule
104

Yes, apparently some structural damage in a few places in and around DC. I assume it has some areas with less competent subsurface that might have a tendency towards liquefaction. So potential for some "disproportionate" shaking for an earthquake of that size and distance away.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:41 PM
horizontal rule
105

The Cathedral was damaged, and that's on pretty good ground, I would think. Better than the Pentagon, surely.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:43 PM
horizontal rule
106

Charley, I agree. We didn't wait on anyone to tell us to leave. And they were pretty good about quickly checking the building and letting us back in. But as it ramped up it went from "is that a B-52 flyover or yet more construction" to "uh oh, let's go". It lasted a good 20-30 seconds. Solid building though.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:44 PM
horizontal rule
107

The cathedral! It is an all-masonry building. And those finials are way up there.

The P's swampy foundations are notorious. But, the rehab (and the original work) was pretty good. One burst water pipe that flooded & closed a section on one floor. That was quickly fixed. Some stuff fell off of shelves, but that's to be expected.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:49 PM
horizontal rule
108

98: we did not evacuate, but it did not occur to me that it was an attack, as it seemed too earthquakey


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:49 PM
horizontal rule
109

108. TJ?


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 12:58 PM
horizontal rule
110

The Library is still closed, but they're letting people sit outside and re-opened the street. I hate to think of what the stacks might be like.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:00 PM
horizontal rule
111

indeed


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:00 PM
horizontal rule
112

108. Dr. Evil's earthquake device!


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:03 PM
horizontal rule
113

I BLAME ARCHITECTS.


Posted by: OPINIONATED MEGAN IMPERSONATOR | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:05 PM
horizontal rule
114

Sooo, has there been a elevated number of earthquakes lately? Or is it my imagination/media coverage?
Every time something like this happens, I have this strange reaction where I think "Man, Obama just can't catch a break.".


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:15 PM
horizontal rule
115

114: Well, bob might say you're not being paranoid enough. You don't think somebody has the technology to generate an earthquake? Guess again.

But seriously, this is good for Obama. Any distraction is good for him.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:18 PM
horizontal rule
116

You don't think somebody has the technology to generate an earthquake? Guess again.

Bank for International Settlements was totes behind this one, enabled by their liberal backers like Matthew Yglesias. Fucking liberals.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:30 PM
horizontal rule
117

Al Gore would have caused it if he'd been elected.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:33 PM
horizontal rule
118

It's Wegener's fault.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:37 PM
horizontal rule
119

Mikkos Cassadine could have done it, but Luke killed him in like 1982.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:38 PM
horizontal rule
120

115: ME!


Posted by: Nikolai Tesla | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:39 PM
horizontal rule
121

They're still not letting us back in.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:40 PM
horizontal rule
122

96: I'd love to see an xkcd earthquake strip link map.


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:47 PM
horizontal rule
123

They're just now re-opening the Capitol, according to some loudspeaker around the corner.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:53 PM
horizontal rule
124

Heard about it here before the house staffers I'm eating with right now. Wow, you guys are good.


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 1:57 PM
horizontal rule
125

OK, back to fashion. I regret that just as slim and tailored cuts are finally available everywhere, I am no longer of slim and tailored form. I could be with some effort, but it would have been nice if effortless form and effortless form-fitting would have matched up. I feel like I always have about 1 1/2 decent-looking outfits and otherwise look blousier than I should.


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 2:05 PM
horizontal rule
126

118: Probably Long Branch's (or maybe Spotsylvania's) fault.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 2:14 PM
horizontal rule
127

125: Yes. I got a couple of shirts from here last winter, very happy to have found what looked like a source of affordable and nice-looking slim dress shirts, but when they arrived I was too bulgey for them. Somehow I lost weight during finals and they now fit me, but I'm not expecting it to last.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 2:16 PM
horizontal rule
128

126: I'm here for your explicitization needs, Eggplant.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 2:17 PM
horizontal rule
129

This wait is getting ridiculous. I guess the problem is that the building is on top of a big parking garage, which has more intense inspection needs. Or so the rumor goes.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 2:41 PM
horizontal rule
130

122: If you're asking for a link and not going to direct me to Standpipe's blog, here.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 2:47 PM
horizontal rule
131

This Earthquake Impact map from the USGS has an easier to read version of the shaking contours.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 3:13 PM
horizontal rule
132

Sooo, has there been a elevated number of earthquakes lately? Or is it my imagination/media coverage?

There have been a lot of earthquakes recently caused by natural gas extraction, mostly in Arkansas. Being in Pennsylvania I presumed they were now gracing our fair state, but that seems erroneous.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 4:13 PM
horizontal rule
133

The earth is deflating.


Posted by: tierce de lollardie | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 4:14 PM
horizontal rule
134

re: fashion

I was quite taken with the high-waisted, slim but loose 50s suits in The Hour. I'm very much not the shape for them.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 4:19 PM
horizontal rule
135

130: I thought Cyrus was asking for a map showing the rate/distribution of people's links to that xkcd.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 5:06 PM
horizontal rule
136

56: A co-worker of mine had a really strangely behaved bat in her apartment, so she's in the process of getting rabies shots. It's more than one visit, but the only place they have them is the ER, so 2 $100 co-pays.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:18 PM
horizontal rule
137

Did not realize *how* close that nuclear plant was to the epicenter. About 10 miles or so. And close in other ways: Dominion spokesman Jim Norvelle said the plant was designed to withstand an earthquake of up to 6.2 in magnitude.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:19 PM
horizontal rule
138

In JP we felt no earthquake.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:22 PM
horizontal rule
139

It very much depended on where you were; I think I only felt it because I was up high.

||

Hey, we should plan a Boston meetup soon. Like maybe uh some weeknight in the first half of September? I'll try and send an email if nobody else does.

|>


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:28 PM
horizontal rule
140

My office is sort of submerged, so maybe that's why.

Yes to a Boston meetup. I'm not cool enough to organize one myself. I've been wanting to see Bave since he transplanted himself.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:30 PM
horizontal rule
141

And his kidney was perfect.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 7:38 PM
horizontal rule
142

127: I want to lose 5 pounds and then get some of those.


Posted by: emdash | Link to this comment | 08-23-11 8:10 PM
horizontal rule
143

130/135: Yes, that's what I meant, a map of people linking to it, because I had seen at least one such link within 20 minutes of the quake. After I posted 122 I realized I had forgotten a word. I meant "I'd love to see an xkcd earthquake strip link propagation map", which would have made the parallelism clearer. Oh well.


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 08-24-11 5:49 AM
horizontal rule
144

"For menswear, California male lawyers have basically been wearing the same uniform -- a blue or white dress shirt with pants-- now for 130 or so years."

fixed that for you.


Posted by: yoyo | Link to this comment | 08-26-11 10:02 PM
horizontal rule