Individualization Of Clothing Is The Liberation Of Freedom.

Clothing is the symbol of the new regime in the classical society. It is the means of "unity of thought" and the establishment of national identity of the new regime.

But on the contrary, the more modern people think, why clothes must be prescribed as etiquette? Do citizens have no right to choose their own clothes? It can be seen from the classical to the present, there are quite a lot of stories about the conflict between power and right, and the race between the nation and the nation.

In Chinese classical society,

It has always been an important ritual.

"The book of Rites" says: "the measurement of power, the examination of articles, the revision of the law, the easy service of colors, the special emblem, the different equipment, the other clothes, and the proceeds from the popular revolt."

Clothing is the symbol of the new regime in the classical society. It is the means of "unity of thought" and the establishment of national identity of the new regime.

But in modern times, the more people think, why clothes must be prescribed as etiquette?

There is no freedom to choose. It can be seen from the classical to the present, there are quite a lot of stories about the conflict between power and right in the clothes.

After the founding of the Republic of China,

Imperceptibly changed.

But how does the dress change and which direction does it change? What is the official attitude towards clothes? There are obvious struggles and debates.

First of all, whether the new regime should be easy to serve and how to serve easily? The answer of the new government is to go Manchu.

In order to go Manchus, Sun Zhongshan issued a braid order, which became the biggest change in costume costumes.

This change can be compared with the mandatory braid of the early Qing Dynasty, but it is a declaration of the change of state power.

However, is it against the concept of freedom to force a braid?

Sun Zhongshan said, "there are many scissors, and there are many plaits in the remote areas. There are many people who still have pigtails.

Anyone who has not gone to the scissors will be cut off to three days, twenty days, and those who do not obey the law.

Apart from the other decrees of the interim government, it is quite arbitrary in this regard.

What the government wants to do is to stipulate what is prescribed by law and then say "law enforcement". Hayek commented on the road to slavery, saying that this is not necessarily the rule of law.

Law enforcement and enforcement according to law are not necessarily the rule of law, but may be absolutism wrapped by law.

Meanwhile, after the haircut, the Chinese did not return to the state of hair before the plait.

This shows again.

The decline in the face of free choice.

Confucius once said, "no Guanzhong, hair is left, too." it can be seen that without hair and hair, it seems to be a symbol of Chinese civilization in Confucius's view.

However, the hairpin has a tradition of thousand years, and it basically disappeared after the unification of the Qing Dynasty.

End without return.

Why does the government not advocate hairdressing? It seems to me that it lacks courage.

If we say that the braided order just mentioned, the reason why we dare to practice autocracy and ignore citizens' right to freedom of choice lies in the declaration of the national regime and the declaration of Manchu nationality. Then, the new government will not dare to advocate the hair again.

Dare to cut pigtail in the way of forcing westernization, and dare not return to the Ming Dynasty in a forced way. This shows that it is the bottom line of the government's small compulsion and great compliance to show that it is time rather than restoring ancient ways and respecting the collective will of the public.

Secondly, what new clothes should be established after changing the old system? The Republic of China was established. The official first established two official gowns of a and B, one is western style, the other is fabric.

Second, the official costume of the late Qing Dynasty was simplified and the fabric was silk.

There are only two styles, except the traditional "Chinese dress".

China's clothing has suffered setbacks again.

In addition to the tradition of religion and drama, Chinese people have gradually simplified and westernized their lives.

Over the past few years, the Beiyang government's ritual system, the ritual establishment of the central level, has also been established.

System work.

In a series of papers collected by the ritual Museum, an article analyzed the different psychology of the society on clothes at that time - mud and dirt, jealous and timely.

The ancient psychology of mud is to restore the ancients. This is the suggestion of some intellectuals that they should find the origin of Chinese nationality from clothes, and the psychology of time and tide, that is, advocating Western-style clothes, indicating that they are in sync with the world.

It means breaking up with the old regime.

Although the original intention of the author is to create new clothes on the basis of Manchu costumes, his analysis undoubtedly shows several concepts, behind which are several traditional or even several power conflicts, and there are still some differences between different ideological games.

It is worth noting that the author of this article also points out: "Western-style clothes are tight, and there is a kind of vigorous and uplift atmosphere. Everyone is strutting, vigorous and vigorous. All countries are rich and strong, and our sleeves are broad and muddy, and there is a sluggish atmosphere."

Clothing is not only related to freedom, but also to prosperity and strength. Although this is a bit of a drag, it is a social psychology of free choice.

Another article of the ritual Pavilion, entitled "formulation of crown dress and debate", reads: "when the Republic of China was founded, ten had more than a year to live.

The system of crown clothing, or partial or incomplete, or not, can not be seen.

Those who are free should not be self disciplined.

This passage is very interesting. It reminds us of the changes of the Ministry of rites, the Ministry of justice and the Dali temple.

In the late Qing Dynasty, the Ministry of justice changed from the Republic of China to the Ministry of justice. The Dali Temple evolved into the Dali court and later Supreme Court. However, the ritual Department almost disappeared.

As a rule of freedom beyond the law, the force of ritual is becoming smaller and smaller, and the scope of freedom has been widened.

The author of this article refers to those who love freedom, those who love freedom, do not like to be restrained by new ceremonial dress and other ceremonial rules, which makes "statutes and etiquette unprepared".

Therefore, this rather conservative article points out that the essence of clothes in modern society is "letting go", that is, freedom.

It seems that the ideal state of clothes is this: first,

(and costume) belongs to the category of free choice.

The so-called "national uniform" is the clothes worn by citizens at that time, and their opinions should be respected.

This is a derivative of freedom of expression and an extension of personal freedom.

Second, the classical ritual and service system, including the so-called classical system of the establishment of new dynasties and easy to serve and reform, have lost the soil of life and belong to exhibits in museums.

But it is for this reason that we should see them in museums and Museum activities, looking for the origin and origin of lifestyle.

Therefore, we do not need to be so sarcastic about Yuan Shikai's wearing ancient dynasty clothes to worship heaven.

Third, with the controversy between European and American styles, Manchu winds and Cathaysian antiquity in clothing, the result is undoubtedly the win of Europe and the United States and the wind of Manchu.

This is the result of free choice, but we should not attach too much ideological content.

If we say that during the period of the Republic of China, this kind of ideological attachment to clothes is not necessary today. Is it necessary for other kinds of ideological attachment?

In general, dressing is becoming more and more free.

The victory of clothes is the victory of freedom.