They did define it, and its opposite, over several posts when relevant for the specific point. For example (emphasis mine):
> (…) many outfits in the past looked great because they conferred distinctive shapes — a boxier shirt, fuller pants, short shorts, etc. (…)
> (…) the man in the white t-shirt and fuller legged pants looks better than the man in the blue polo because the higher rise pants lends better proportions.
> (…) I think McQueen looks better here because the t-shirt on the right is just too long. (…)
> (…) their trousers often drape well because they are cut from heavier wool fabrics. (…)
There are more, but I think those get the point across.
latexr|6 months ago
> (…) many outfits in the past looked great because they conferred distinctive shapes — a boxier shirt, fuller pants, short shorts, etc. (…)
> (…) the man in the white t-shirt and fuller legged pants looks better than the man in the blue polo because the higher rise pants lends better proportions.
> (…) I think McQueen looks better here because the t-shirt on the right is just too long. (…)
> (…) their trousers often drape well because they are cut from heavier wool fabrics. (…)
There are more, but I think those get the point across.
arduanika|6 months ago
Do you think that we're unique among crafts, in having taste?