“Even if you walk down the street without pants, you have nothing to be ashamed of your butt if you have a hat on your head.”
The above quote from the amazing film “Arizona Dreams” describes this one perfectly. Even with all the attempts to make the hat more accessible, it remains a solid headpiece. But now the hat has gone underground and is less popular than Andrei Gubin. Fashion has become much more democratic compared to the 50s. We believe that this is extremely unfair and tried to give some reasons why it should be worn, using the example of the famous “hatters”.
This is Mikhail Boyarsky, and a curtain for thin hair
A hat is not just fashion accessory, but also, among other things, yours true friend, partner and comrade. You understand, ecology is against humanity, thick hair, like the disco stars of the 70s, is the ultimate dream for many, more and more often heads are turning into sun reflectors. And the older we get, the more skin and less hair. What to do? Shave your head like the bald guy from Brazzers? Not suitable for everyone. Wear a wig? Only gay lawyers in Louisiana wear wigs. Hat. Just a hat. And Mikhail Sergeevich confirms this. After the role of the brave Gascon, it became difficult to perceive him without an elegant headdress. True, in the world Mikhail Sergeevich prefers an ordinary wide-brimmed hat.
A hat without Boyarsky is like Perpetum without Mobile, like Wi-Fi without Fi, like a sober Ozzy Osbourne, like “High Security Vacation” with Oscar - this cannot happen. Mikhail Sergeevich, by his admission, wears hats until they rot. Although there are legends that the hat grows from the top of D’Artagnan’s head, and when it matures, it simply falls off. Otherwise it is difficult to explain the passion for this headdress. There is an explanation though. Mikhail Sergeevich has a graceful baldness in the space under his hat. He doesn’t really hide it, but he doesn’t show it off either, because without a headdress the top of his head resembles a newborn chick. So keep in mind that the hat will gracefully drape your embarrassed parts.
This is solid
Who would the legendary Belgian Hercule Poirrot, brilliantly played by David Suchet in the famous TV series, look like without his famous bowler hat and even with such an elegant mustache? He would have looked like the embittered entertainer of a seedy cabaret. Or Otto von Bismarck. And in a headdress, even though it is a bowler hat, it looks extremely serious and important. Again, the quote from “Arizona Dream” is proof of this.
Or at least remember the glorious cowboys. Not even Clint “Punishing Squint” Eastwood, but two glorious cowboys from Brokeback Mountain. Who are they without their hats? Ordinary homosexuals. And with a hat, something harsh appears in their image.
This is brutal
Mick "Crocodile" Dundee guarantees it. If the famous tamer of Australian wild cattle did not have his rugged hat, like rhinoceros skin, then his image would be completely devoid of any charm. And so the hat (of course, you need the right hat, such a number will not work in a bowler hat) becomes not only an echo of his dangerous profession. Actually, as in the case of Indiana Jones. Without his legendary hat, he would look more like a historian than a desperate adventurer. And a whip and a leather jacket would hardly have saved him. This was especially evident in the last film, where Ford's aged hero looked more like an ordinary physical education teacher, especially in moments with his head uncovered.
It's elegant
There is no and perhaps never will be a more elegant person in the world than Frank Sinatra. As they used to say in the life-affirming film masterpiece “Black Cat, White Cat”: “Elegant as a vampire.” This man knew how to feel amazingly free and natural even in a tuxedo. And his refined, exemplary and damn charismatic image was complemented by the famous trilby. At that time, everyone wore a hat, but not everyone knew how to do it like Frank. By the way, he preferred not to be photographed without a hat and generally tried not to appear in public without his favorite headdress. Film roles and concerts are different; in those distant times, there was such a now forgotten concept as respect for the audience and etiquette. Back then it was considered impermissible to greet a person while sitting and not stand up. Well, God bless him, we are talking about Sinatra, whose formal suit and, of course, expensive hat, which suited the musician, made him a style icon of those times.
From an unwashed head
Indeed, why wash your hair when you can hide rolled up clumps of hair with a headdress. But we still recommend washing it, otherwise it will turn into a zoo. Returning to the topic of hats, indeed, in moments when for some reason you didn’t have time (anything can happen) to wash your hair, a hat can save you. In any case, Lemmy from Motorhead and Kid Rock, due to their lifestyle, most likely cover up their dirty locks.
From bad weather
For those who don't like an umbrella, but want to keep their hair intact, a hat is... the best option. Well, and not only from the rain - the scorching sun is also not particularly beneficial. Therefore, the great Fellini almost always appeared on set wearing a headdress.
Hides imperfections
, groom and cherish like a personal monkey. Only then will it work for you, and not against you. Then you will look in it, not like a swindler and drunkard from the stories of Mark Twain, but like a gangster from the times of Prohibition. By the way, half of these gangsters were uneducated, and instead of a smile, one could see numerous ugly scars and sparse teeth on their faces. But in hats they looked more respectable, and all these shortcomings disappeared. The hat imposes such a layer of solidity that it becomes unimportant whether you are fat or thin, lame or legless, whether you can speak or not. The very plump and very cruel Al Capone seemed more charming with a hat. But this only applies to the classic hat.
It's mysterious
The hat leaves behind some kind of mystery about the person. Its wearer feels safer and more comfortable. She is like a barrier against unwanted people. And we’re not talking about Zorro in his huge sombrero, like a Belaz wheel, or even about Raiden from Mortal Combat, everything is clear with them, they need a hat in their image. We are about ordinary people in elegant hats. It is not for nothing that since ancient times the headdress has been an element of carnival costume.
It's stylish
The Hat Association ("Hat Lovers' Association") in 2011 recognized Johnny Depp as the Hat Person of the Year. By the way, it was his character who uttered the very quote that is listed under the title. A lover of hats of different styles: felt wide-brimmed, light straw, strict classic or mischievous and bright - whichever stylish Johnny wore! But he really is stylish.
And what’s surprising is that Depp played a lot of hat characters in the movies: John Dillenger from the movie “Johnny D” in a classic black hat and the Mad Hatter from “Alice in Wonderland.” Of course, he is far from Boyarsky, but he has potential.
In real life, Depp's favorite is, without a doubt, the wide-brimmed hat. It is in it that the actor most often appears in public.
The hat stands out
A hat makes you recognizable. Look at our heroes: Boyarsky, Indiana Jones, Poirot. Remember Charlie Chaplin in a ridiculous bowler hat. The hat makes you stand out from the crowd. Yes, if everyone starts wearing this headdress again, it will be more difficult to become noticeable. But for now, hats are worn either by pensioners or dudes. So go for it.
Ladies, it's time to stop thinking that hats don't suit you, because the truth is, hats suit everyone! Hats and headwear can generally be worn anywhere and anytime. Although, it’s probably better to take them off during an evening dinner in a restaurant.
(Total 17 photos)
Post sponsor: Subaru Forester timing belt replacement: User manual from professionals!
1. So, why wear hats?
2. Modern hats are very feminine, especially with long curls.
4. ... instead of something like this.
5. But there are many ways to wear a hat, just as there are many types of hats. Wide-brimmed hats look great on the beach and provide protection from the sun! Although it’s better not to wear beads - you don’t want untanned stripes!
6. Hats made from thicker materials are suitable for elegant ladies.
7. These standard hats will go with almost everything - buy a model different colors, and you will be ready for any situation.
8. Girls with short hair they are coming too.
9. Although these felt hats are often worn by older men, they are ideal for girls to wear with T-shirts and shorts.
10. And they look great with outerwear.
11. A turban like this is a great way to hide your hair if you haven’t had time to wash your hair. Immediately gives you confidence!
12. Plus, these turbans not only cover your hair, they also add color to your look!
13. Get real cool girl(or a tough guy's girlfriend) with a cap like that.
Sometimes they overthrow ordinary people at a loss. The expression “wearing a hat on a butch” is recognized as an insult solely by the intonation and facial expressions of the person who throws this phrase in the face. Apparently, this is a very serious insult, because as a retaliatory gesture, the opponent can, without warning, proceed to inflict physical harm. What are we talking about, and why such a reaction?
What does it mean to “wear a hat on a butch”?
First of all, it is worth remembering that we are talking about the so-called hairdryer, that is, criminal jargon. This is a specific slang, in which there are many ambiguous expressions and gradations of offensiveness.
“Wearing a hat on a butch” means having homosexual contacts in a subordinate, passive position. Passive homosexuals are the most despised and powerless caste in prisons, so the violent reaction immediately becomes understandable. "Bucha" is the name of a maximum security colony in the Kyiv region, but in in this case, most likely, the second meaning is meant - the crest of a rooster. Those that are drooping are called roosters.
Why the hat? There is an opinion that the penis is called a hat. Perhaps due to the vague similarity of the head to a mushroom cap, it is impossible to find an exact definition.
Prison jargon
Why is “fenya” so popular outside of prison walls, where do expressions like “wear a hat when you’re in prison” creep into the ordinary world? At the end of the last century, the image of a criminal was romanticized as a kind of knight without fear or reproach, to whom the devil himself is not a brother. The book counters were filled with cheap novels about prison procedures, and criminal lyrics flowed from every window. It is very difficult in such a dense traffic to remain ignorant of criminal jargon. It is not surprising that if they say about someone “he wore a hat in the butch,” which means “he was a pariah in the zone,” then a feeling of rejection immediately arises, especially if the listeners had some kind of prison past.
First of all, they didn't stop. It is a fact that they began to wear it less often, but the hat as part of a man’s suit did not become a thing of the past as firmly and completely as, for example, a sword.
It would be more accurate to say that around the middle of the 20th century. the hat ceased to be an obligatory part of a man's suit and became an “accessory”. True, strictly speaking, it was not an obligatory element of the costume before. You were supposed to have something on your head, but not necessarily a hat. In the USSR they wore a cap much more often.
One way or another, a hat used to be a generally accepted item of men's wardrobe, but now it is no longer so. This is far from the only loss that European countries experienced in the 20th century. men's suit.
A hundred years ago, the costume was very complex. Over the underwear, which completely covered the arms and legs, the European put on a shirt, fastened a disposable starched collar to it, then tied a tie, put on trousers, a vest, a jacket, shoes, on the shoes - boots and, if the street is damp, galoshes, and finally , hat. In winter - also a coat with a scarf. All elements of this system were functional and interconnected: the tie tightened the collar, that is, it served as a top button; the vest hid his suspenders and pressed his tie to his chest. It was not intended that the jacket would be removed, so the back of the vest was made of thin lining fabric. The suit was multi-layered, and the upper layers completely hid the lower ones: only the collar and cuffs remained visible from the shirt, the socks were hidden under the boots.
It’s hard for me to imagine how people walked around in such a pile of clothes. Apparently, they were not very comfortable, since throughout the 20th century, the men's suit gradually lost its complexity and lost its invisible layers. The collar was attached to the shirt, the suspenders and vest were almost out of use, followed by the hat. And finally, we came to what we have - a primitive office jacket pair. And that one is worn less and less.
The classic men's suit was formed at the end of the 17th century. and existed until the middle of the 20th century, changing greatly externally, but almost unchanged structurally. Shirt, tie, two layers outerwear, shoes, hat - all this was worn at the court of Louis XIV.
The period when the classic European men's suit dominated almost coincides with the so-called modern era, an era when humanity believed in reason and progress and hoped that through the means of mechanics and science the world could be rebuilt on new, humane principles and, if not completely eradicate poverty from it , inequality and injustice, then at least greatly reduce their scale. It is believed that “modern” ideology first declared itself during the Enlightenment. It survived the catastrophe of World War II, but quietly petered out in the 1960s and 1970s.
Until the middle of the 20th century, the world lived in more or less the same order as in the previous century; but then everything began to quickly and abruptly break down. Colonial empires collapsed. English has become the language of international communication instead of French. As the children grew up, they began to strive to live separately from their parents and were in no hurry to start their own family. New practices of city life have spread, such as shopping, dating, standing in traffic jams and sitting in front of the TV. Subcultures flourished. People stopped dancing and just started moving rhythmically to the music. Couturiers began producing men's collections. Advertising, instead of praising a product as before, began to exploit the sexual and social appetites and fantasies of consumers. In a word, the modernity in which you and I still live has arrived. This is a colossal turn in the history of European culture, the likes of which have not happened since the 18th century. And the fact that at this moment men en masse stopped wearing suits with hats and began wearing jeans with T-shirts is only a secondary and not the most interesting sign of the cultural breakdown that has occurred.
Very interesting, but the topic of the hat is not covered)) Still, why did they wear a headdress before, but now they don’t? Maybe it was indecent to show hair? Or did people wash them less often than now? Although, on the other hand, the hat was removed indoors. Need to free your hands? In general, it would be interesting to learn more about this aspect, since such a question has been asked.
Answer
They used to wear it, I think, primarily because in winter and autumn it’s cold on an uncovered head. and a modern city dweller, if he goes to work, to the store, and generally goes everywhere in a personal car, does not need a hat or warm clothes at all, since he is practically never on the street. in the 19th century, transport was not heated. and, in addition, an important ritual of city life was daily walks along the boulevards, during which the townspeople, raising their hats, greeted acquaintances and shared news and rumors with each other in short dialogues. back then people spent much more time outside than they do now
In addition, there is the concept of a dress code. Many people don’t know, but in fact, the dress code is not when at the Dyagilev club a security guard looks at how expensive your clothes are, but a set of rules that prescribe what suit to walk along the boulevard in, what to wear for morning visits, and what to wear for evening visits. , how to appear at a ball, and how to attend an audience. rudiments of dress codes have been preserved in some places to this day (for example, everyone comes to the Nobel Prize ceremony in tails, in most countries it is customary to go to the theater in a tuxedo, and you are not supposed to come to the races without a hat); and a hundred years ago they regulated the entire life of a secular person. and these rules, in particular, regulated the style of the hat. so, if you lived by these rules (and if you were a secular person, then you willy-nilly lived by these rules), whether you want it or not, you had to have a hat, and more than one
Svetlana Orlova for the Vladimir region is a Varangian; before becoming the head of the region, she served as vice-speaker of the Federation Council.
Between the first and second rounds, Orlova’s rating increased slightly, but this was not enough for victory, says one of the sources close to the headquarters: “Sociology showed the governor’s loss. It is not clear why the federal center did not follow the same path as with Zimin (on Friday, September 21, the head of Khakassia announced that he was withdrawing his candidacy from the elections. - RBC)».
Based on the results of focus groups that were conducted before the second round, it was possible to conclude that residents had three main complaints against the governor: “She failed to become one of her own; the terrible economic state of the region; Orlova’s behavior—she created a lot of problems for herself with her manner of communication,” says a RBC source close to the headquarters.
The governor of the Vladimir region is a classic example of how a new head enters the region on a wave of love and hope, but after a while people realize that everything is not as it seemed: factories continue to close, and after visits from high-ranking people from Moscow, the lives of ordinary citizens nothing changes, says RBC’s interlocutor.
Vladimir Sipyagin (Photo: Artem Geodakyan / TASS)
What did people and elites not like about Orlova?
The manner of biting public criticism of officials, which, according to an RBC source, was initially liked by voters, ultimately worked against Orlova: “When the governor communicates with everyone like that, and people understand that this can affect not only, conditionally, your neighbor, but and you personally, then sympathy disappears.”
Take the situation with the heads of districts, he continues: after the first round they were summoned to the regional administration and threatened that “they will remember this [Orlova’s failure].” And he adds: “But we had to negotiate.”
Orlova “had a conflict with both the elites and society”: “She was ruined by the image of Saltychikha, the landowner,” the source sums up. The dislike for the governor was such that during focus groups people attacked the moderator, the interlocutor says: “Are you coming from her [Orlova]?! Crooks, thieves!
To say that the governor has done nothing at all for the region is wrong, argues another RBC interlocutor close to the headquarters. But one of the problems was that public consciousness did not associate the improvement with Orlova’s name, he adds: “They thought it was happening on its own, without the participation of the governor.”
How did Orlova’s headquarters try to reduce the protest?
Before the second round, a group of United Russia members went to the region, and preparations for the vote were personally supervised by the head of the Kremlin’s internal policy department, Andrei Yarin, previously RBC sources.
Orlova’s headquarters hoped that the protest voter who came to vote in the first round would not be so active in the second, say two RBC interlocutors close to the headquarters. Political technology moves were also used, one of them clarifies. In particular, the call “Vote against everyone” was launched, aimed at preventing the protest voter from coming or spoiling the ballot.
“We also worked with Sipyagin,” continues one of the interlocutors close to the headquarters. If in the first week after the first round he was active, then they “talked” with him, and the governor’s opponent disappeared from the public space.
Sipyagin stopped campaigning, one of RBC’s sources close to the headquarters previously told: “He handed over all the APM [propaganda materials], stopped going to debates.”
At the same time, the LDPR candidate was offered the post of vice-speaker of the legislative assembly, RBC sources in the regional branch of United Russia. Sipyagin himself called this “disinformation.”
Who prevented you from concluding a deal with a competitor?
The emerging agreements were thwarted by the leader of the LDPR, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, as stated by United Russia and an interlocutor close to Orlova’s headquarters. On September 20, the politician released a statement on the elections in Khabarovsk and Vladimir in his Telegram channel, which said that the party “will go for victory in both regions.” Thus, Zhirinovsky also thwarted the agreement on the Khabarovsk Territory, according to which Governor Vyacheslav Shport offered his rival Sergei Furgal the post of first vice-governor, and he agreed, a source close to the headquarters of the Khabarovsk head told RBC. “Zhirinovsky sensed an opportunity to receive political dividends,” this is how a federal official interprets the statement of the LDPR leader.
Despite Zhirinovsky’s statement, Sipyagin did not become more active in the last two days before the elections, and directly on voting day, when it became known about Furgal’s victory, the LDPR even had some of its observers from polling stations, recalls one of the sources close to Orlova’s headquarters.
The governor herself made a video in which she addressed the residents of the region “as a human being.” Orlova called the result of the first round “unexpected” for herself and promised to correct her mistakes if she wins. “I did something wrong myself. I missed something,” Orlova said.
Did Orlova’s speech of repentance help?
However, no efforts helped: the protest voter still came, although not in such numbers as in Khabarovsk, states an interlocutor close to the headquarters. The fact that Orlova would lose could be judged even by the results of the exit polls, he adds. As RBC reported, during the day the governor and her opponent were neck-and-neck, the results fluctuated between 28 and 31%, while about 40% of respondents refused to answer the question for whom they voted. “As soon as you see that refusal [to answer] wins, that’s the end [for the government candidate]. The air was too overheated with hatred [for Orlova],” sums up one of RBC’s sources close to the headquarters.
Orlova greatly irritated the Vladimir elite and population with her rudeness, impudence and cruelty, argues political scientist Vitaly Ivanov. “It was possible to save Orlova, but the technologists finally finished her off. Her “repentance” speech was extremely unsuccessful. Firstly, the authorities should not ask for anything. Secondly, Orlova admitted her weakness, and the weak are always beaten,” says the expert.
After the story with the second rounds, the Kremlin’s personnel approach to candidates for gubernatorial posts will change, Ivanov is sure: “It will become more difficult for the heads of the “Surkov” and “Volodin” appeals to substantiate their claims for new terms.” They will immediately be reminded of the failed governors - primarily of Orlova and Zimin as the most “decayed,” the expert states.
The reason for Orlova’s loss is clear: there were severe inter-elite conflicts in the region, even the heads of municipalities fought with her, which is extremely rare, says political scientist Andrei Kolyadin. “I am familiar with some of the heads and the speaker of the legislative assembly, and I constantly heard: “Remove her. They will fight with her even in the presidential elections in order to understate [Putin’s] result,” says the expert. But Orlova was not removed, and as a result the people removed her, he states.
After the second rounds in the regions, the Kremlin must reconsider its approach to personnel issues in relation to candidates for gubernatorial posts, Kolyadin believes: “Now people are first trained and then assigned to the region, believing that the person can handle it. And as a result, the “scientist” Tarasenko loses to the “ignoramus” Ishchenko. But we need to do the opposite: abolish the municipal filter so that people first win elections, and then educate them,” the expert believes.
