Love at First Sight
In his book “Material Culture in the Social World”, sociologist Tim Dant cites sociologist Gabrielle vom Bruck's 1997 study, in the “Journal of Material Culture”, on the sexualization of spaces. The subject of vom Bruck's study is the attribution of gender to material objects, such as women-only spaces, among traditional Yemeni tribal communities. The excerpt cited by Dant reads:
"What is read into space depends on what is read into their bodies. For example, Yemeni prepubescent boys are permitted to enter spaces occupied by unrelated women because their gaze does not yet indicate carnal desire." (vom Bruck, page 142)
This field observation resonates with many people. As a child growing up, I was told not to stare — it was considered rude. The rule held little meaning for me, however, until I read about the monastic rule requiring nuns and monks to avoid eye contact with each other for religious convictions. Still, the wisdom behind that explanation, which had been part of my childhood training, remained latent until I moved to New York City, New York.
People in New York are, for the most part, congenial. However, I soon discovered it was better practice not to make eye contact with the many strangers encountered on the city’s sidewalks as a pedestrian. The semantics of looking — and being looked at — became firmly grounded in reality. Finally, reading Sigmund Freud’s study Fetishism, from his 1927 theory of sexuality, provided a rational frame of reference for the matter of "glances."
Freud’s study is widely known. I merely wish to reiterate his use of the German term “Blick” for glance. “Blick” so resembles the familiar term blink, that it more effectively characterizes the mercurial sexuality of flirting than the banal 'glance,' thereby expressing the furtive — possibly guilty — nature of adult social interaction. Let us say about eye contact, that it is not only a provocation for conflict, but may also be perceived as a solicitation —a real possibility on the sidewalks of any city or town.
Returning the library book by Dant, I caught my eye on a large encyclopedia of popular fashion (augenblick), passing by. It was in the same general section on culture and sociology as Dant’s book —mentioned here if only to dispel any hint of serendipity. It was a perfectly reasonable association to make with the subject I had been reading about moments before. Fashion’s function is to attract attention —naturally, that includes sexual attention.
At 400 pages (each in full color), “The World Atlas of Street Fashion” by Caroline Cox (2017), is encyclopedic by anyone's definition. The contents are broken down by continent, beginning with North America. The first topic in actual order is the chapter on "Grunge" style. Tribute is appropriately paid to that icon of grunge, Kurt Cobain, who is represented performing on stage in a woman’s dress. It is the very definition of anti-fashion, one of the key aspects of the Grunge trend’s radical rejection of institutional conventions.
As if to reinforce the message that it is not about taste, the actual dress worn by Cobain is plain, white, and of a style befitting a milkmaid. The success of this iconic affront to Haute Couture sparked a wave of similar gestures that defied common sense. Highlights of the style transcend the matter of taste. The best examples embody penetrating insight into human psychology so profound that they might even make Freud stare!
I admit I have an eye for fashion. It is subjective, and I will go so far as to admit the possibility that no one else sees what I see. At the same time, I know what I see, and the difference may come down to a willingness to express it —to talk about it. Following the Cobain plate, as if for contrast, was a truly exceptional instance of the best grunge style. The original fashion photo reproduced in the plate is itself exceptional. I would devote further commentary to it, were it not for my intention to focus on a specific detail —the main feature of the fashion ensemble represented.
The model is wearing a pair of acid-wash denim cutoffs rolled artlessly to the level of the woman’s crotch. From the crotch, a loop of white string dangles. It resembles a bow-tie tennis shoe knot. It suggests the pull-string attached to a woman’s menstrual Tampax for the convenient pulling-out of the blood-soaked sponge for disposal. This, seen on a New York side street, for context. The irony is that amidst the traffic, noise, and confusion of midtown Manhattan, a bit of string dangling from a girl’s "camel toe" is the focus of attention. While it may not be the fashion designer’s intention, it has that effect anyway —and I doubt the designer would dismiss it.
Fashion is nothing if it is not eye-catching. This instance of Freudian "augenblick" is possibly erroneous, but no child can be completely shielded from intimate observation of the mother’s naked body — with the possible exception of orphans — and sooner or later, all find out what they seek to know about the opposite sex. This discussion turns, therefore, on sociologist Tim Dant’s citation of sociologist Gabrielle vom Bruck’s 1997 study of Yemeni genderification of domestic space, and for reasons explainable by Freud’s 1927 theory of sexuality.