There please Yes, yes very good, like this ! Gull… What are you doing? I am experimenting What are you experimenting exactly ?
Because it’s not… very clear. I am extending the experience of Bushman Bouche… Man ?
No, I don’t know him.
* Bouche means mouth I know they dare to create a fake Nez Man
* Nez means nose But “Bouche”man… No ! Dunno him. … Bushman is a psylochology searcher. And he is not already a superhero, as far as I know In 1984, he sets up an experiment to measure the influence of the authority uniform upon ordinary people A first accomplice is standing in a car park near a meter, pretending to look for coins in his pockets. A second accomplice, near the first one, stop the passers-by saying : “This person is parked near a meter. He doesn’t have money ! Give him a 5 cent coin !” What ? That is stupid ! That’s the point.
Several situations are tested. In the first one, the one who orders the passers-by is dressed like a homeless “This person is parked near a meter. He doesn’t have money ! Give him a 5 cent coin !” Second situation. The second accomplice is dressed in a suit, type 4. “This person is parked near a meter. He doesn’t have money ! Give him a 5 cent coin !” Third situation. The second accomplice wears the fireman uniform. “This person is parked near a meter. He doesn’t have money ! Give him a 5 cent coin !” You know, it freaks out the red glasses and all the stuff.
It’s a little… hippie terrorist. It is not really common to see a fireman coming with that weird outfit * growl * What now ? Ok ok, I got it . Super Bouche Man didn’t wear neither glasses nor hood. Ok, got it. So continue. What are the results ? 44% of the passers-by submit to the request when the second accomplice is dressed as a homeless 50% when the second accomplice is dressed as a manager 82% when the second accompliced is dressed as a fireman Those who give the money do it quickly, most of the time without any question 82% ? Waouh ! And why a fireman on duty would get some money to pay a meter ? It is here that the experiment is relevant ! In front of the uniform that personifies the authority, we stop wondering the legitimacy of the injonctions We bow to the authority without any further thinkings even if the situation is absurd Even if the fireman doesn’t have to command and so we are not forced to obey. It will be ok. I give you thank for your help. Chill out now, the water temperature is excellent. * plouf * * plouf * And what did you ask them ? To help me finding a 5 cent coin that I lost under the pebbles Ah alright… Fine, very fine And… Do you want me to help you ? * breathe * – The submission to the suit – So if I got it all, it is one more time the outfit that influences people and not the… * weird scream * What is happening ? You are wearing the tie Indeed, I thought that fits with my comments What ? I thought we would talk about the firemen ! No, not at all, no, that was just an appetizer It is perfectly understandable that the classical firefighter uniform inspires confidence and respect Yes, firemen are so cool ! What we are actually insterested in are those uniforms that we don’t think about, but that influence us depending on the authority level we grant it Yep, I remember the lesson the last time The outfit makes the man
* French expression “l’habit ne fait pas le moine” hijacked : “l’habit fait le moine” * Exactly
* French expression “l’habit ne fait pas le moine” hijacked : “l’habit fait le moine” * To resume Pierre Bourdieu, “The body is in the social world but the social world is in the body” What we wear, clothes and accessories suggests a social allegiance, a caracter, a profession, some responsabilities, which can inspire confidence or fear The clothing aspect is a part of the authority figure, in proportions that are underestimated… Hop hop, minute ! I can see where you’re going dude You will tell us that wearing a suit is enough to make us a leader Indeed There it is ! I was right. But we don’t care, Gull. It doesn’t change our behaviour all you are saying, we are still above that, isn’t it ? Ah… Really ? So it needs a little experiment – The one…
– Of Super Bouche Man ! Hero of the outfit psychology !
* bouche means mouth * * loud breathe * The one of the psychology searchers, Guéguin and Pasqual An individual must buy a croissant, but when he has to pay, he realizes that he misses 8 cents Ah, how stupid ! There is then two possibilities. Either he asks nicely with a big smile in that way I am so confused, but I miss 8 cents, could you forgive me for it please ? Or he asks the same thing, but without sweetness nor courtesy Oh shit, I miss 8 cents, do you give it to me anyway ? Roughly speaking, the experiment determines if it is better to be polite or a big asshole when we ask something Not only.
The results in that condition: normal outfit, are not surprising. The bakers are nice with the polite man, 93% of acceptance And when our individual is rude, the bakers give up only to 40% Okay… And that’s all ? Seriously, did we really need an experiment to prove that ? Don’t be hurry Technician, the experiment has been renewed in other conditions I am so confused, but I miss 8 cents, could you forgive me for it please ? Oh shit, I miss 8 cents, do you give it to me anyway ? As you can see with that individual poorly dressed, there is no changes concerning the courtesy, the baker accept to 93% However when the individual is rude, the tolerance is lesser. Only 20% of the bakers agree to the rude man. Basically, the rudeness goes a lot better if we are dressed normally, isn’t it ? For instance, the hobo, he is not… Homeless Yes sorry, the homeless is not allowed to be rude contrary to a normal guy That’s it, but I am not finished. Redo again the experiment, but, this time, our individual will have a very good looking appearance, in suit, type 4 I am so confused, but I miss 8 cents, could you forgive me for it please ? Oh shit, I miss 8 cents, do you give it to me anyway ? I don’t know why, but the rude guy in a suit pisses me off, a little bit more than the others When the individual in a suit is rude, the bakers accept this time up to 75% Twice more than the normal one, and four times more than the poor dressed one That’s shitty The courtesy is often efficient to break the social cleavages, so that everyone respects the others no matter the outfit But the acceptance of the rudeness, of the disrespect, is reserved for the privileged ones who don’t have more legitimacy than their outfit That is stupid. Why do we have to do whatever they want ? If the bakers submit to the high status whims, it is because their outfit is an authority figure What was perceived as a rude request of the very poor individual, of the classical one becomes an order of the well dressed one The situation of the experiment is the purchase of a croissant but it works the same way in every contexts Wait, you say the outfit, suit and tie, demonstrates authority like the fireman When it is that kind of injonction, yes. No, because when we talk about authority suit, I think mostly about uniforms, you know, militar, general chief, policeman, … But the suit is a uniform, Technician A uniform ? Wearing by a certain category, the suit has become the ultimate civil uniform Except for some big events, like the wedding, wearing the suit, it is to be incorporated in a professional setting The tie was originally the étoffe, a croatian regiment clothe under Louis XIV hence the name * Croate means Croatian *
* Cravate means tie * Today, the tie reminds the wearer he must fit his corporation criteria or his job It is not nothing if some employees come to hate this tie which strangle them symbolically It becomes sometimes a true weight When we feel bad at work, wearing a suit is a true torture Just as much as the employees in uniform at the bottom of the social ladder Because like them, the suit is a mold What is it ? 5 cent coins ! Happiness Although there is a certain freedom in the choice of the costume, you can notice there is a true suit dress code in the business world Dress code that must fit particular criterias and that coincides generally with the collective subconscient Collective subconscient, do you explain to me ? Take for example the colour of the suit jacket, The darker the jacket is, the more it connotes the idea of importance or power With a few exceptions, you will always see the Heads of State wearing a black or dark blue jacket, or dark grey These colours are also used in responsibility jobs of big companies But you will notice that in the business world, the grey is privileged, with sometimes a few fancies like stripes As for the shirt, the white corresponds to the power In the business and financial world, it will often be the light blue skirt, except the big bosses who will reclaim the white It doesn’t work your thing ! I know plenty who aren’t like that ! Of course, but when you want to fit a certain image, these codes works perfectly, influencing our view Yep… I am not convinced. So let me prove it Without thinking and answering in good faith If I told you that one of these suit is wearing by a bank advisor, which one would you choose ? The gray suit Or the one with the blue skirt And if I told you one of them is the leader of the 3 others, which one would it be in your opinion ? Okay, I admit, we are attempted to choose the one with the black jacket and the white shirt But what about the brown ? Who would it be ? Who is wearing this suit today ? You already know the answer. Let your mind speak. Humm… I imagine an academic or an intellectual maybe, or a doctor or an archeologist, is that it ? Well done Yes The brown is the ultimate retro colour Very appreciated by the intellectuals Dark colour for the jacket, white shirt and sober tie, here it is our power outfit And if we do exactly the opposite, let’s imagine our leaders would dress with very light colours That was the case in the past, Technician The lexicon of power was built from that In the Antiquity, for instance, in Athena or in Roma, the power exercise was practiced dressed in white Becoming a candidate, it was whitewashing, showing no vices The adjective white, in the sense of brilliant, purity, in Latin, was candidatus so the word candidate in english Candidate means white ? Yes, being candidate in the presidential elections is proving purity And that’s why I am candidate.
Because I am… Pure
* applausing crowd * * applausing crowd * Okay. Anyway. I don’t really see the politicals dressing entirely in white. I am pure… Ah ok… In the 20th century, new expressions appeared about the clothing, confirming the white as power symbol White collar in reference to the men’s shirts in the business world Reversely, in reference to blue work, the working class were named blue collar And all these naming accidents across history have shaped our current vision The more we see someone dressed in a way the more our brain will conclude that this outfit is the norm for that kind of person We build these stereotypes by habits, by induction The popular culture increases these norms diffusing codes in mass scale. But, I don’t understand. How can we be influenced by all of that ? Where does it come from ? I mean… Why, when you show me pictures, do I tend to say, not knowing why, “this one is a bank advisor”, “that one is a leader”, “this other one is an academic” ? If we all share the same prejudices, the same stereotypes, where do they come from ? If we check the last decades, we can notice that the suit holds a very important place Especially the black suit The suit wraps mysteries, secrets It feeds from an aura born from our collective imagination The businessman is not just a simple employee. He incarnates the guide, the one who knows, the one in the secrecy There is sometimes only one step to embody visceral fear If I asked you to imagine mysterious men who would secretely lead the world as in crazy plot theories I am sure you would imagine them all in black suits, not brown, not grey, not white No. Black. Gull, you are not up to date The illuminati plotters are reptilian aliens, they don’t wear suits, everybody knows it ! * growl * The suit becomes paradoxically the ultimate action outfit The intrepide knight swapped his armor for a suit Yep, but careful, this one is a tuxedo Mr I-know-all. You have to be precise A thousand excuse Add to all of that an essential ingredient, the black suit is a power symbol But an anonymous power The suit, ultimate civilian outfit, is a master-key. It is not a coincidence if activists like Anonymous have chosen the black suit as one of their symbol representing the anonymous power of the folk in response of the anonymous power of the tie men And don’t forget the ultimate sociocultural indicator, the advertisment. Main contributor of any kind of stereotypes. The suit becomes the modern man representative outfit I had enough Back to the basics That’s what I want A simple life The way man was meant to live That’s what I wanted I thought I would never go back What the fuck ? Wait… The guy, he gave up everything, he has a wonderful view, a wonderful shack, he is calm, quiet, and bam ! A car comes ! Back to work ? That is nonsense ! Back into the mold, yes The car, the recall to order The little soldier puts on his outfit again The suit, losing this freedom space he built This advertisement is to be compared with some war films. The soldier left the uniform, he lives a retired peaceful life, when his commander calls him under the flag Prompting him to put on his outfit again to do his duty Yes but, that wasn’t the commander who came after him It is a fucking car ! The submission has many forms Our clothes wrap us of narratives, more or less fulfilling stories When the collective mind is so much impregnated by the dark suit mythology, it becomes the very symbol of power And so, when our baker agrees to the rude request of the man in suit, it is because she is full of these stories Yes, but not only To this is added the principles of distinction and symbolical violence, developped by the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu We stand out by taste, judgment, mode, social class, profession, affirming our difference Wearing the suit is both a form of belonging, an affirmed and assumed difference compared to those who don’t wear it A way to say, I am not from the same world. There is symbolical violence of the dominant over the dominated, exerting by a serie of symbols Like wearing clothes or accessories An employee in uniform face to a man in a suit will be symbolically dominated crushed by the weight of the symbols and will more easily accept his requirements. Like our baker And don’t forget that those who wear the suit must also distinguish themselves There is a hierarchy which is found in suit quality or in an accessory which represents meritocratic ornament Which means ? Remember Jacques Séguéla, defending Nicolas Sarkozy, who used and abused of this symbolical violence At the begining of his mandate, Nicolas Sarkozy has been accused of “bling bling”, of his ostentatious side with his taste for luxuary watches for instance. Has the time changed ? Or is it a communication mistake in your opinion ? No it is a journalisitc mistake. How blame a president to have a Rolex ? A Rolex ? Seriously, everybody has a Rolex. If at 50, you don’t have a Rolex, you have really missed your life We are often chocked by the last sentence. Yet what is previously said is just as revealing How blame a president to have a Rolex ? A Rolex ? The man of power must legitimacy wear accessories which symbolize the power The Rolex is reserved for the elite, the essential accessory which distinguishes from the other, to rise above them So, what do you propose ? Where we go with that ? Good question At first, we must have consciousness that every details matter What we wear determines the human relationships Being conscious about that is already a start Then we have to break these codes Let’s avoid as much as possible wearing the uniform, rewarding or not Let’s build for us a collective mind less stereotyped And for the most active of us, let’s break the clothing codes in a fun way In what way ? Let’s take an example In 2011, Improve Everywhere took over a big store in a fun way dressed like the employees In beige pants and blue shirt By this way, they managed to highlight the importance of the distinction in the sale logical Who is saler, who is customer, who is dominated, who is dominant, who plays a role They did something very simple, very sympathetic I would tell And yet, the managers of this store instantly called the police The police ? Is it not too much ? Why would not the customers wear a blue shirt and beige trowsers ? Because they break the utility of the uniform, they break the distinctions An employee in that kind of store cannot look like a customer. The clothes make the man. The culture jamming has understood this well in its uses And sometimes, in its criticism. It is in the heart of the social hacking Check out the works of the Yes Men for instance A suit and tie, a serious look, and they become businessmen,journalists, big corporation representatives Without forgetting their genius of course I love these guys Oh ! They find me a Rolex Gull, you are a monster Maybe, but at least, I succeed my life Yeurk It is perfectly legitimate the boss asks his employees to wear a clean and decent outfit But it is absurd that it leads to the uniformity of the clothes and the impossibility for the employee to choose outside the established cannons The clothes are a second skin offered to the other’s view and which tell a lot about what we are However wearing a depreciated uniform or a suit, the individual is disguised, transvestited, bared from the freedom to appear as he wants to The social codes regarding clothes are much more constraining than we think We have certainly made progress considering the past. But there is still a long way to go and the minds are not yet ready In the mean time, we have to take in mind that we are guided by stereotypes that insignificant details, like the outfit, the fabric, the colours, accessories and other finery contribute to conditioning our relations, affix distinctions of tastes, of genders, of classes We believe that we are dressed with fabric, but in fact we are dressed with symbols If not, a subconscient mind which is renewed according the usages If it is not possible to extract us from these conditionings, we can at least be aware of it taking it into account, being able to take a step back and maybe someday, we will have the courage to wear an outfit to our size an outfit according to our own codes, vector of our own symbols And becoming a hipster ! Héhéhé These looks are indeed a sign of the consciousness of the sartorial jail But the modes of the counter-mode are just an endless serie of ephemere sartorial jails Their only use is to consume more and more So to alienate in a unflatering and empty role, the role of “con-sommateur”
* con means asshole * Anyway, it is still a prison which seems to be freedom, is that it ? Except in this case, the wallet is exploited, ok I understand Anyway ! I interrupted you in your epical prose. Keep going. and maybe someday, we will have the courage to wear an outfit to our size an outfit according to our own codes, vector of our own symbols But you Gull ? What do your clothes symbolize ? The shreds of my past This suit reminds me where I come from That day when I decided to give up the tie. Since then, Gull never wore the tie again… Since then, Gull never wore the tie again…
Neither for a car. We are the best kept secret in the universe Our mission is to monitor extraterrestrial activity on Earth We are your best… …last… …and only… …line of defense. We work in secret… …we exist in shadow. And we dress in black !