Editing Dandy (section)

==Dandy sociology==
[[File:Murat2.jpg|thumb|upright|right|The Dandy King: [[Joachim Murat]], the French [[King of Naples]].]]
Regarding the existence and the political and cultural functions of the dandy in a society, in the essay ''[[The Rebel (book)|L'Homme révolté]]'' (1951), [[Albert Camus]] said that:

<blockquote>The dandy creates his own unity by aesthetic means. But it is an aesthetic of negation. ''To live and die before a mirror'': that, according to Baudelaire, was the dandy's slogan. It is indeed a coherent slogan. The dandy is, by occupation, always in opposition [to society]. He can only exist by defiance … The dandy, therefore, is always compelled to astonish. Singularity is his vocation, excess his way to perfection. Perpetually incomplete, always on the fringe of things, he compels others to create him, while denying their values. He plays at life because he is unable to live [life].<ref>{{cite book|first=Albert|last=Camus|author-link=Albert Camus|title=[[The Rebel (book)|The Rebel: An Essay on Man in Revolt]]|date=2012|publisher=Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group|isbn=9780307827838|page=51|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=t_3yQrhdxwUC&pg=PA51|access-date=11 October 2014|chapter=II Metaphysical Rebellion}}</ref></blockquote>

Further addressing that vein of male [[narcissism]], in the book ''[[Simulacra and Simulation]]'' (1981),  [[Jean Baudrillard]] said that dandyism is "an aesthetic form of nihilism" that is centred upon [[Self|the Self]] as the centre of the world.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.egs.edu/faculty/jean-baudrillard/articles/simulacra-and-simulations-xviii-on-nihilism/ |title=Simulacra and Simulations – XVIII: On Nihilism |publisher=Egs.edu |access-date=16 February 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130419220351/http://www.egs.edu/faculty/jean-baudrillard/articles/simulacra-and-simulations-xviii-on-nihilism/ |archive-date=19 April 2013 }}</ref>

Elizabeth Amann's ''Dandyism in the Age of Revolution: The Art of the Cut'' (2015) quotes, "Dandyism has always been a cross-cultural phenomenon".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Amann |first=Elizabeth |title=Dandyism in the age of Revolution: the art of the cut |date=2015 |publisher=The University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-18725-9 |location=Chicago London}}</ref> Male self-fashioning carries socio-political implications beyond its superficiality and opulent external. Through the analysis of clothing, aesthetics, and societal norms, Amann examines how dandyism emerged as a means of asserting identity, power, and autonomy in the midst of revolutionary change. Male self-fashioning, in particular, was wielded as a resistance expression in denial of itself due to the influence of the French Revolution on British discussions of masculinity. British prime minister [[William Pitt the Younger|William Pitt]] proposed an unusual measure: the [[Duty on Hair Powder Act 1795]], which aimed to levy a tax on affluent consumers of hair powder to raise money for the war. Critics of the act expressed fear regarding the association between wearing hair powder and "a tendency to produce a famine,” and those who did so would “run the further risque of being knocked on the head”.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ditchfield |first1=G. M. |last2=Hayton |first2=David |last3=Jones |first3=Clyve |date=October 1994 |title=''British Parliamentary Lists, 1660–1800: A Register'' |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-0206.1994.tb00312.x |journal=Parliamentary History |volume=13 |issue=3 |pages=388 |doi=10.1111/j.1750-0206.1994.tb00312.x |issn=0264-2824|url-access=subscription }}</ref> In August 1975, journalists and new reports complained that "the papers had misled the poor and encouraged them to consider powdered heads their enemies," “calculated to excite riots.” <ref>{{Citation |title=St James's Hall |date=2001 |work=Oxford Music Online |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.24320 |access-date=2024-05-13 |publisher=Oxford University Press|doi=10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.24320 |url-access=subscription }}</ref> With the new legislation, the powdered look became a marker of class in English society and a much more exclusive one, polarizing those who used the products and those who did not. Those who feared making class boundaries too visible considered the distinctions to be deep and significant and therefore wished to protect them by making them less evident, by allowing a self-fashioning that created an illusion of mobility in a highly [[stratified society]].

In the early discussion of the tax, the ''London Packet'' posed the question, “Is an actor, who in his own private character uniformly appears in a scratch wig, or wears his hair without powder, liable to pay the tax imposed by the new act, for any of the parts which he is necessitated to dress with powder on the stage?” This seemingly trivial inquiry unveils a profound aspect of the legislation: By paying the tax, citizens were essentially purchasing the right to craft a persona, akin to an actor who took on a stage role. Exaggerated self-fashioning was no longer an oppositional strategy and instead became the prevailing norm. To protest the tax and the war against France was to embrace a new aesthetic of invisibility, wherein individuals favored natural attire and simplicity in order to blend into the social fabric rather than stand out.

=== Dandyism and capitalism ===
Dandyism is intricately linked with modern [[capitalism]], embodying both a product of and a critique against it. According to Elisa Glick, the dandy's attention to their appearance and their engagement "consumption and display of luxury goods" can be read as an expression of capitalist [[commodification]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Glick |first=Elisa |date=2001 |title=The Dialectics of Dandyism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1354399 |journal=Cultural Critique |volume=48 |issue=48 |pages=129–163 |doi=10.1353/cul.2001.0035 |jstor=1354399 |issn=0882-4371|url-access=subscription }}</ref> However, interestingly, this meticulous attention to personal appearance can also be seen as an assertion of individuality and thus a revolt against capitalism's emphasis on mass production and [[utilitarianism]].

Underscoring this somewhat paradoxical nature, philosopher [[Thorsten Botz-Bornstein]] describes the dandy as "an anarchist who does not claim [[anarchy]]."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Botz-Bornstein |first=Thorsten |date=1995 |title=Rule-Following in Dandyism: 'Style' as an Overcoming of 'Rule' and 'Structure' |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3734540 |journal=The Modern Language Review |volume=90 |issue=2 |pages=285–295 |doi=10.2307/3734540 |jstor=3734540 |issn=0026-7937|url-access=subscription }}</ref> He argues that this simultaneous abiding by and also ignorance of capitalist [[social pressure]]s speaks to what he calls a “playful attitude towards life’s conventions." Not only does the dandy play with traditional conceptions of gender, but also with the socioeconomic norms of the society they inhabit; he agrees the importance that dandyism places on uniquely personal style directly opposes capitalism's call for conformity.

Thomas Spence Smith highlights the function of style in maintaining social boundaries and individual status, particularly as traditional social structures have decrystallized in modernity. He notes that "style becomes a crucial element in maintaining social boundaries and individual status."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Smith |first=Thomas Spence |date=1974 |title=Aestheticism and Social Structure: Style and Social Network in the Dandy Life |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2094317 |journal=American Sociological Review |volume=39 |issue=5 |pages=725–743 |doi=10.2307/2094317 |jstor=2094317 |issn=0003-1224|url-access=subscription }}</ref> This process "creates a market for new social models, with the dandy as a prime example of how individuals navigate and resist the pressures of a capitalist society." Here, another paradoxical relation between dandyism and capitalism emerges: dandyism's emphasis on individuality and on forming an idiomatic sense of style can be read as a sort of marketing or commodification of the self.