So it has been one of those weeks so far, where my inexperience about things at USC have tripped up my good intentions and led to some excruciatingly embarrassing screwups. Yesterday, I was supposed to be at a big two hour lunch meeting at the Annenberg Center for Communication where we (lots of the great and the good of the Los Angeles “learned” folk -plus me-) brainstormed about Science and Creativity. I get invited to take part in these things and I want to contribute, and it’s an honour, etc…… but I screwed up and did not make it, for reasons I described earlier. (Who knew there was both an Annenberg Center for Communications and an Annenberg School for Communications?)
Sent apology email offering public self-evisceration.
I’d been invited at beginning of the semester to serve on the Board of Trustees Student Affairs Committee as a Faculty Observer. This is indeed a great honour (I was told) but had no good idea of what it was. Anyway, “student affairs” was enough to get me interested in wanting to help. Well, last month I missed the first meeting because once I agreed to serve, I was told on the phone that I’d get followup information about where the meeting was and when. Then I’d put it in all my various beeping and vibrating devices to remind me. It never came, so no beeps or buzzes. Turned out the information was in the orginal invitation letter. Ok, I’ll take half the blame for that one. But only half.
Sent apology email offering public self-evisceration.
So the next meeting was all lined up for today, and I wanted to make sure that nothing screwed up. I even avoided two major landmines: (1) The invitation calls the building where the meeting was held by its official name, a name that hardly anybody uses. (2) Managed not to spill my morning coffee that I drink on the bus down the front of my shirt, which can happen because of the driving skills of all concerned (not just the bus driver). Anyway, in my office I have my emergency jacket for use in transforming myself from reasonably well-dressed faculty member to slightly-more-formally dressed faculty member on those occasions when one goes to the fancier committees or lunches, etc. I decided not to put on a tie, however, since it was the “Student Affairs” committee, and surely we’ll be a little less formal, to put the students at ease?
Nope. Wrong. It was really funny actually, once I rallied. I had no idea that this actually was a Board of Trustees meeting! So they were there in strength (not all 50, and since someone will ask – not Spielberg). So was the University President. And believe me, especially in a private university, your Trustees and your President and all the folks from his office are serious about being well-dressed at their meetings. It went from 10:30am to 12:45pm, and it was serious, serious business ending with a splendid lunch… and did I mention that everyone really really well-dressed, except me?
The good news is that I don’t wear very casual clothes to work anyway (only on occasion), so with the jacket my usual plain shirt and trousers were fine (I always wear solid colours which some people find formal anyway), but it is still amazing how awkward one can feel when everybody in the room is unexpectedly wearing a tie and not you! Of course, you’re all going to to say that you’re all free thinkers and that I’m shallow, and that this would not have bothered you, in fact you would have enjoyed it and I agree with you (except the shallow part). The point is that word “unexpectedly”. If you enter a room with a “Devil may care” or “Take the path less chosen” or “What do I care what other people think?” attitude -and I do so just as much as the next guy (ho ho ho)- then you can damned well walk naked into a room of clothed people and not bat an eyelid. But if you unexpectedly step into a room with people you’ve never met and find yourself called upon to be the one that does not fit, I claim that no matter who you are, there will be a moment – no matter how small- where you’re a bit hot under the collar. I don’t know why that is…. probably something at the foundations of how we evolved out there on the plains. Group dynamics, cooperations and conventions of various sorts run deep in our psyche. Or not. Discuss.
(Question for you: Is it better to turn up to something and be unexpectedly overdressed, or underdressed? Any stories to share? I can’t decide which I prefer in those situations…. maybe the former, but then I’m often accused of overdressing, and not always kindly. I know…..shallow of me to ask, and you think that I should be blogging about important things…..but you know what? I don’t care if you think that!)
It wore off after a while and I enjoyed the whole thing immensely. But it was sort of funny at the same time, since you could initially see people giving a sort of glance over and perhaps trying to recall when was the last time they every seen anyone (male) not wearing a tie during the meetings at the highest level of the university, in the president’s rather nice suite of meeting/dining rooms.
About the meeting itself I will not tell you anything in detail. That would not be appropriate. But it was great to be part of it since the President, his staff and the Trustees really listen to the students an their concerns. It is simply amazing to me, having come from a university culture in the UK where at many of the institutions the students are largely thought of as an annoyance that spoils the nice quiet landscaped campus for part of the year. (I’m going to get beaten up for that remark). Student representatives of the Undergraduate Senate and the Graduate and Professional Student Senate make presentations (amazingly professional-looking ones! No, they were not science majors…..sigh) right alongside the presentations from members of the President’s staff, and the people from Department of Public Safety, etc. And then we all have a great lunch and talk some more, and to which even more students (these change each meeting) are invited, and again are listened to carefully.
These guys really care about their students. I like that, and it is good to take part in it.
-cvj
November 1st, 2005 at 6:47 pm
Re: overdressing vs. underdressing, I’d say I prefer overdressing. If you relax enough, you can look like a jazz musician, or something, while it takes real chutzpah to seem formal in jeans and a t-shirt. Also, when overdressed, you can stick your tie in your pocket and undo your shirt collar.
November 1st, 2005 at 6:58 pm
I vote for over-dressing. But then I am vain. (Go visit Dr. B’s site for some seriously gorgeous boots by the way!)
I am not going to beat you up about the remark regarding attitudes to students (since there is truth in your comment, and besides, you would probably win), but “landscaped campus”?
November 1st, 2005 at 7:15 pm
I guess USC must be doing a really good job of making the unwashed masses think that the university really cares about their concerns (not that this is ever really true — you’re impression about schools in the UK is almost always closer to the truth of how university administrators, at both public and private US unversities, feel). Not that this is necessarily wrong since it would be a bad idea to try and make everyone happy at the same time, but it helps people swallow the dictates that come from on high if they are sugar-coated with appearance of “We worked as hard as we posssibly could to meet everybody’s needs…”
November 1st, 2005 at 7:20 pm
agm….I actually think you’re just plain wrong about this one. I think they really care. I’ve worked here long enough to know.
Also, we’ve not dramatically succeeded in raising academic standards, applications and enrollment by not giving a hoot about the students’ welfare.
-cvj
November 1st, 2005 at 8:02 pm
Clifford, you are in LA and at the home of one of the world’s most productive multi-media training grounds. The standards and protocols of dress, from “black tie and tails” formal to “business” formal to “professional attire” and so forth are almost too well documented in that town. The multiplicity of the red carpet treatment of celebrity by their very own hypocritically damned fashion police is shown day and night on no less than 12 cable channels. This allows you a degree of freedom of form and function in attire that you don’t really have in too many other cities in the world (a black t-shirt worn w/ a $6000 tux is considered tres chic afterall). In LA it isn’t about overdressing as much as it is about the labels on those threads. I suspect that several of those finely dressed trustees in that meeting were well attuned to the creators of their fashions as well as those of the others.
November 1st, 2005 at 8:20 pm
OK, time to do my dissenting duty: being overdressed is worse. Makes you look clueless AND insecure, like somebody desperate to fit in. Underdressed conveys the opposite message: “who cares, I don’t need to put on a show for you people, I’m secure in my bare skin even (and it’s a beautiful skin, of course; wanna see?)”.
As an aside, it’s great to see somebody on this purportedly leftist blog praising the superiority of a private provider of services (in the case at hand, higher education) which has to act on the market’s terms (make your customers happy or they’ll take their money elsewhere) over socialized ones (which can treat the customers, i.e. the students, as they damn please since the money is dragged out of the tax payer’s pockets whether they agree or not). An applause to you, Clifford!
Now please do not offer public evisceration to Mark, Sean et.al. for this faux pas too. They just might take you up on it.
November 1st, 2005 at 10:29 pm
You forgot to mention a very important factor that enters into a Theorist’s sartorial choices. With your propensity to write on blackboards which suit is most compatible with chalk (or magic marker)dust? Are most boards you write on, black or white? Remember this IS a black or white question.
November 1st, 2005 at 10:40 pm
I don’t know about Clifford, but I wear so much black that I asked for a white board in my office when I came to Syracuse.
November 1st, 2005 at 11:05 pm
I go for overdressing. It saves work. When you are massively superlazy, it pays to put on a jacket and tie, or a dinner jacket, or if it is an international crowd, striped pants. Yes, it takes work to haul the thing out of the closet and put it on, but it pays off with unearned credence and respect. (As a man, I may think I have it bad, but dressing up is even more of a pain for women, especially if they try and make it look easy. Casual means sweat blood).
As noted by others. You can always take off your jacket and tie.
Why does it work? It’s applied anthropology. Clothing is a major status indicator dating from way when. People expect their leaders, their shamans, their healers, their bumpkins, their enforcers to dress a certain way. The clothes vary from culture to culture, but the automatic reaction is real and deeply ingrained.
As an engineer, I originally considered dressing up to be rather silly. Aside from an occasional grounding strap, or rubber soled shoes, the non-people side of the job rarely imposed any serious dress requirements. As for the people side of the job, I learned that it often saved a lot of time and recriminations if I overdressed. A good suit can cost as much as a new Powerbook, but it can be worth every penny. Think of it as one of the tools of the trade, just like those O’Reilly guides or a copy of Mathematica.
Since a lot of readers of this web site are physicists, it might be interesting to consider what a proper physicist should wear, or rather, what people expect a physicist to wear. Charles Dickens picked up and developed one scientific archetype with his soft edged Boffin. Albert Einstein brought Boffin to life. His barber goes unsung. The Manhattan Project gang was rather dapper, what with all those European refugees. What is the archetype today? If Tom Tierney were commissioned to produce a book of paper dolls of modern scientists, what clothes would they wear (or more properly, have crimped on)?
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:19 am
I say wear something a little crazy any chance you can when you have a captive audience, they’ll remeber you.
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:11 am
Hmmmm…..I find that I have never won a tie for special meetings. In fact, 90% of the time I’m in bluejeans. I did notice during our faculty meeting today that I was the only one in bluejeans. Our current lab director, Jonathan Dorfan, wore bluejeans everyday until he became director. Now he’s in khakis, white shirt, and sweater if it is chilly outside. Nice clothes do give a first impression, but do not substitute for substance.
November 2nd, 2005 at 6:59 am
I would go for being underdressed, but I am still young … So I didn’t have to do anything very official yet.
The most official thing I did, was the presentation of the project I did during this summer, an that I did in bright pink. But everybody was very causially dressed there. So I didn’t really feel uncomfortable in it.
I think you need to like what you wear. That is most important. If you don’t like wearing a tie, don’t do it! (I would never do it!!!, except forced to.)
Helge
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:49 am
I’m in a strange situation where my preferred style of dressing would give off a misguided impression (that I’m in Econ, Business, Elementary Ed or a similar non – tech field). Finding the proper balance between my aesthetic preferences and maintaining some sort of professionally appropriate (?) image just adds another dimension of complexity to my world. To give a specific example, I may wear a solid jacket over a long dress in Summer. Now that it’s getting colder everyone wears jeans and sweaters. Luckily, I don’t seem to lose credibility points with my colleagues based on sartorial choices. When it comes to professional events I stay away from donning anything with floral patterns.
November 11th, 2005 at 11:38 am
[...] It is all about the role of the academic blogger, etc. They invited me along, and it is being held in the neighbourhood (Annenberg Center for Communication…yes, I found it this time)..it looked interesting, so why not go? So I am here. I’ll tell you more as time permits. [...]