When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

LA STAMPA

Ties Undone: Time To Tighten Sartorial Standards Of The Modern Man?

More politicians and businessmen shed their neckties. And now the backlash


David Cameron and Gordon Brown show off the somber look

MILAN - So it's come to this. In these ever fluid times, the necktie has become the sartorial last stand for those who see a society unraveling in the disintegration of dress codes.

It is happening right now in Germany where a Christian Democrat member of Parliament, Jens Koeppen, wrote a letter to his colleagues requesting that all agree to wear a tie at work to bring back ‘the dignity" of the Bundestag. Anyone who declines would forfeit the right to speak up in Parliament. Andrej Hunk, a fellow MP, said he did not even own a tie, protesting against mandatory use of a "19th century fashion accessory."

The debate promises to be heated, seeing as we have indeed pushed the limits of what is acceptable style. Even here in Italy, our mix of casual wear can border on sloppy. "The Senate pages were so much more elegant in their blue suits," complained former Senator Mario D'Urso, who tried to make it obligatory to change into official outfits before entering Parliament as a sign of respect for the institution.

In Italy, at least, some rules still apply: A jacket without a tie is allowed in the Lower House while a jacket and tie is required in the Senate. And that holds for everyone, from politicians to journalists to cameramen. If you don't have a tie, one will be provided.

The struggle between the sartorial traditionalists and the progressives dates back some time now. In 2007 the general manager and artistic director of Milan's La Scala Theater Stephane Lissner had instructions stamped on the back of each ticket: men were requested to wear a dark suit to openings, and at least a jacket and tie to all other shows; For the women outfits fitting of the "decorum" of the famed concert hall were required (a rather loose requirement which proved problematic when an outrageous feather-like outfit appeared and the perpetrator was allowed to stay).

But the march of the ‘tie-less' has continued unabated. Take the example of Sergio Marchione — CEO of Fiat — who shocked the Chinese with his casual sweater (The Chinese meanwhile have become more formal than ever since adopting the Western look decades ago). Esquire magazine selected President Barack Obama among the years's most elegant men and showed him dressed in an immaculate dark suit but with his shirt open at the neck. Tony Blair, once divine looking in a red tie, has since taken it off, triggering an earthquake inside and outside the Labour Party. His successor, Gordon Brown, also gave up on the tie and lost support. David Cameron is now copying Blair, and like his predecessors, shorn the tie but he still can't shed that air of Oxford snobbishness.

Still, the traditionalists are holding strong. There is Nicolas Sarkozy, who in addition to his Italian wife likes to show off his Italian ties. He prefers those designed by Maurizio Marinella but when he got married to Signora Bruni he wore a Luca Roda, which can be worn by members of both the right and left like Junichiro Koizumi, the three-time prime minister of Japan. Joaquín Navarro Valls, the spokesman for two Popes, Italian Finance Minister Giulio Tremonti, businessman Luca Cordero di Montezemolo, shoe magnate Diego Della Valle: all tie men.

Support for the German dress-code stickler Koeppen can also be found in a "trend report" issued by Future Concept Lab in Milan. "It is called extra rules," the sociologist Paolo Ferrarini explains. "It is the spontaneous attachment to a system of rules, decided on at that moment, out of need. The ritual is important: it is the application of order to chaos, and respecting roles." But when Koeppen tries to actually impose this order around the necks of his colleagues, he may only add to the chaos.

Read the original article in Italian

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Geopolitics

Utter Pessimism, What Israelis And Palestinians Share In Common

Right now, according to a joint survey of Israelis and Palestinians, hopes for a peaceful solution of coexistence simply don't exist. The recent spate of violence is confirmation of the deepest kind of pessimism on both sides for any solution other than domination of the other.

An old Palestinian protester waves Palestinian flag while he confronts the Israeli soldiers during the demonstration against Israeli settlements in the village of Beit Dajan near the West Bank city of Nablus.

A Palestinian protester confronts Israeli soldiers during the demonstration against Israeli settlements in the West Bank village of Beit Dajan on Jan. 6.

Pierre Haski

-Analysis-

PARIS — Just before the latest outbreak of violence between Israelis and Palestinians, a survey of public opinion among the two peoples provided a key to understanding the current situation unfolding before our eyes.

It was a joint study, entitled "Palestinian-Israeli Pulse", carried out by two research centers, one Israeli, the other Palestinian, which for years have been regularly asking the same questions to both sides.

The result is disastrous: not only is the support for the two-state solution — Israel and Palestine side by side — at its lowest point in two decades, but there is now a significant share of opinion on both sides that favors a "non-democratic" solution, i.e., a single state controlled by either the Israelis or Palestinians.

This captures the absolute sense of pessimism commonly felt regarding the chances of the two-state option ever being realized, which currently appears to be our grim reality today. But the results are also an expression of the growing acceptance on both sides that it is inconceivable for either state to live without dominating the other — and therefore impossible to live in peace.

Keep reading...Show less

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

The latest