In the twenty-first century, the steady spread of glob-
alization, of branded culture, is once again providing fer-
tile ground for the emergence of the contemporary
dandy. The figure of the dandy presents a sartorial and
behavioral precedent that allows for the celebration of
beauty in material culture while cultivating an aura of su-
periority to it, and the early twenty-first century has seen
a resurgence of interest in the traditional purveyors of
material status. London’s Savile Row is increasingly pop-
ulated by filmmakers, recording artists, visual artists, and
designers, joining the existing ranks of the traditional
British gentleman who is these tailors’ staple client. At
the same time, brands such as Burberry, Aquascutum, and
Pringle, who have traded for decades on their status as
suppliers of quality and standing, have seen their cus-
tomer profile alter to include an international audience
in search of distinction as well as a more specific sartor-
ial subculture closer to home—the Terrace Casual.
The early 1980s Casual project was vehemently pa-
triotic. Forays into Europe in the early 1980s showed
Britain’s football fans in stark contrast to their Italian and
French counterparts whose immaculate dress prompted
a revolution in British working-class style that saw the
football fan become the principle consumer of mostly Eu-
ropean luxury sporting brands. Today’s Terrace Casual
springs from similar terrain. What separates him from
his forebears is that the garments he favors are princi-
pally British, the upper-class sporting pursuits which with
they are associated redolent of the masculine camaraderie
and corporeal engagement of club life favored by Brum-
mell and his circle. As with Brummell, the Terrace Ca-
sual style is engaged in the positioning of traditional
upper-class “country” style in the urban environment, co-
opting it for the pursuit of leisure rather than the man-
agement of rural estates. While adopting the trappings
of aristocracy disrupts perceived social status, it acts as a
celebration rather than rejection of all the mores and
moralities that these garments imply.
Oscar Wilde once said, “One should either be a work
of art, or wear a work of art,” and Hoxton style is the ul-
timate expression of the “music/fashion/art” triumvirate
that characterizes British street style in the twenty-first
century. As Christopher Breward writes, “D’Aurevilly’s
dandy incorporated a spirit of aggressively bohemian in-
dividualism that first inspired Charles Baudelaire and
then Joris-Karl Huysmans in their poetic celebrations of
a sublime artificiality ....It is possible to see this trajec-
tory leading forward through the decadent work of Wal-
ter Pater and Oscar Wilde to inform ....twentieth
century notions of existential ‘cool’” (Breward 2003 p. 3).
While Wilde’s bohemian decadence runs like a seam
through the Bloomsbury set; the glam-rock outrage and
rebelliousness of Jimi Hendrix, Mick Jagger, and David
Bowie; the performativity of Leigh Bowery and Boy
George; and the embodiment of life as art in Quentin
Crisp, it is the Hoxton Dandy, as epitomized by the singer
Jarvis Cocker, who presents an equally subversive con-
temporary figure. Originality is as crucial for the Hox-
ton Dandy as it was for Brummell and Hoxton Square,
once a bleak, principally industrial quarter of East Lon-
don, now at the heart of a trajectory of British bohemi-
anism that began in Soho in Brummell’s time. Hoxton
has quickly become a hub of new media/graphic/furniture/
fashion design style that embraces its gritty urban history
of manufacturing. Artisan clothing has often drawn upon
dress types more usually associated with the workingman
in order to emphasize the masculinity of artistic pursuit,
the physical labor involved in its production. This is no
less true of the Hoxton style, which is rooted in a flam-
boyant urban camouflage—a mix of military iconogra-
phy, “peasant” staples, and industrial work wear, made
from high-performance fabrics whose functionality al-
ways far outweighs their purpose.
In his time, the modernity of Brummell’s mono-
chromatic style marked him out in opposition to more
decadent European fashion and made him a hero to writ-
ers such as Baudelaire. Modernism in the twentieth cen-
tury continued to struggle to establish itself as a positive
choice in British design culture, yet the periods of flirta-
tion with clean lines and somber formality were intense
and passionate, a momentary reprieve from the ludic sen-
sibilities British designers more commonly entertained.
The early British Modernists of the 1950s sought to em-
ulate the socially mobile elements of American society.
Stylistically, they drew inspiration from the sleek, sharp,
and minimal suit favored by the avant-garde musicians of
the East Coast jazz movement. Philosophically, early
mods saw themselves as “citizens of the world” (Polhe-
mus 1994 p. 51), a world in which it only mattered where
you were going, not from where you came. In 2003 clean
lines and muted colors once more afforded relief from
the riot and parody of postmodernism that had domi-
nated British fashion since the emergence of Vivienne
Westwood and, latterly, John Galliano. The Neo-Mod-
ernist style draws, as it did in Brummell’s day, on estab-
lished sartorial traditions but subverts them through
materials (denim for suits, shirting fabrics for linings),
form (tighter, sharper, and leaner than the norm) and,
ultimately, function.
Brummell was, in fact, almost puritanical in his ap-
proach to style. Max Beerbohm wrote in the mid-twentieth
century of “‘the utter simplicity of [Brummell’s] attire’
and ‘his fine scorn for accessories,’ ” which has led con-
temporary commentators such as Walden to note that
“Brummell’s idea of sartorial elegance, never showy, be-
came increasingly conservative and restrained” (Walden,
p. 28). Aesthetically, British gentlemanly style is the clos-
est to Brummellian dandyism. As in previous centuries,
the gentleman is defined by class and by his relationship
to property (rural and urban). This easy, natural associa-
tion reflects the apparent effortlessness of dress, manners,
and social standing. Gentlemanly dress is loaded with ex-
pressive, but never ostentatious, clues; as Brummell sug-
gested, “If [the common man] should turn . . . to look at
DANDYISM
345
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CLOTHING AND FASHION
69134-ECF-D_333-390.qxd 8/16/2004 2:35 PM Page 345