Re: [bomp] Question for NYC Bompers - Hat stores??

["BlackMonk" <BlackMonk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Blair Buscareno" <blairb@mac.com>
To: <bomp@xnet2.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2006 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: [bomp] Question for NYC Bompers - Hat stores??


>
> Immortal Porpoises wrote:
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Blair Buscareno" <blairb@mac.com>
>> To: <bomp@xnet2.com>
>> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 6:24 AM
>> Subject: Re: [bomp] Question for NYC Bompers - Hat stores??
>>
>>
>>
>>> Immortal Porpoises wrote:
>>>
>>>> Uniforms are not cool, by virtue of being uniforms.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>     I disagree.  I think it's quite possible for a uniform to be cool.
>>> It would depend on the design and the purpose.
>>>
>>
>> Can you suggest any?
>
> I can see a band creating a uniform - or a number of different uniforms
> - for itself that looked damn cool.
>
> It can also be argued that many bands have already done so.
>

There are two routes you could take here: There's the Beatles' route of 
having matching suits or the Monks' route of coming up with something off 
the wall. Both bands looked cool and neither would have worked if only one 
member of the band did it.

If we follow the idea that uniforms aren't cool because they're uniforms, 
then we end up with an inconvenient question. When we have a choice between 
a solo artist doing whatever he wants or a band in which every member's 
individual desires are to some extent sacrificed to the band, an entity 
greater than any individual member, why is the band cooler than the 
individual 9 times out of 10? 

===> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe bomp" to majordomo@xnet2.com <===