Talk:Cool (aesthetic)/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

One more source

KEEP YOUR COOL, BUT NOT TOO COOL

We’ll be the first to remind you it’s not easy being a black man in America; it never has been. If we seem hard on our brothers, it is only because we know how hard they will have to work to regain control of their destinies.

Over time, we admit, we have had to adapt in unique ways to survive, to maintain our sanity, and to excel in areas that were open to us. One important way that black men have tried to maintain their dignity and to keep control of their anger is by being “cool.” Even successful black athletes have had to work at being cool in provocative situations as a way of saving their jobs—or even their lives.

For better or worse, we invented “cool.” Being cool, incidentally, is a male thing. For black men, being cool has been a way of projecting strength and manhood in a society that stereotyped us as trouble. It has never really caught on with women, many of whom don’t quite understand its roots or its value. Men tend to. That’s why it has intrigued males all over the world.

Coolness is very attractive as a cultural force. Let’s never forget that black men have made major contributions to American culture as a whole—in music, in fashion, in literature, in oratory, in science and medicine, in sports, in dance, and yes, even in comedy. In fact, no group of people has had the impact on the culture of the whole world that African Americans have had, and much of that impact has been for the good. The path from victims to victors by Bill Cosby and Dr. Alvin Poussaintk

It's a bit over the top, but Bill Cosby is 'hardly an "Afro-centric" type of guy. He's moderate/conservative in most of his views on black culture (In fact, I'm shocked that he even knows this...) futurebird 04:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Blackwoman cool

Anybody find it curious -- I know I do -- that cool is commonly discussed as a black male thing? That Pouissant does so doesn't surprise me. He's a chauvinist from way back. And AA culture is notoriously sexist. And white folks commonly write of "cool pose" virtually the only way they know how -- as a reactionary phenomenon. Only Thompson really seems to get it.

But few people write of blackwoman cool. Honestly, I don't see a difference. I was in a West African restaurant not too long ago and ran into a very dear, old friend and lover -- his people from Ghana and Nigeria. We both were enormously pleased to see each other again, but when we first exchanged greetings, we barely cracked a smile. As a matter of fact, an outsider would never have guessed our bond was so deep. I thought about it later in the context of "cool" and found it remarkable how similar we were in a situation where others might have loudly greeted one another demonstratively with laughter, smiles and hugs.

That's just a tiny example, but I know I exhibit cool. I always have. Black women around me always have. And as a product of the Black Pride era, certainly people in my age cohort learned cool in their political activism -- if nowhere else. The fact is it's been decades since so many of us have been outta white folks kitchens and rearing their children for them. We've been "free" for a very long time to be who we really are, to express ourselves, regardless of how outsiders might perceive us. Because of the struggles of The Venerated who came before us, we don't have to play the cheerful houseservant anymore.

But I don't read anything about cool among black women -- perhaps because whites don't find it so threatening a phenomenon among women. But when compared to our male counterparts, we don't get all goofy and spastic, either. You won't catch us bouncing up and down the street on the balls of our feet, bodies outta control, arms flailing, heads bobbing when we walk -- the way so many white folks do. That's just the flat-out truth. That's an aesthetic of movement and comportment that I internalized so long ago, I can't recall when. I sometimes find myself unconsciously gawking/shaking my head in disapproval (or laughing/amused) at how the others move. It's weird/alien, unseemly, undignified. Unnatural. And such a waste of energy!

CJ, futurebird, what's your take on this? Where are the acknowledgements of the cool aesthetic among African American women? deeceevoice 09:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Deecee, I honestly don't know! It could be that parent culture has always had distinctive gender roles, or it could be that the gender roles only began after exposure to western culture's gender roles...but took on their own form in AA culture. Or it could be that there are two forms of cool and one is being ignored. The only thing I suspect is there there is a difference in the way it is expressed. Did Thompson say anything about this? futurebird 12:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

In my readings, Thompson characterizes cool as a feminine property, but does not limit its possession or expression to women. It seems to me that Western sociological studies targeting African-American men have focused solely on cool among A-A men to the exclusion of the phenomenon in A-A women -- hence the myth of cool being a blackman thing (that and the machismo of black, male culture). Of course black women also have had to wear "the mask," as Fanon referred to it, as a means of coping with our centuries of oppression.

Beyond that, however, there is what I call the "Topsy" issue -- the problem of people who think A-A culture sprang up out of whole cloth in the New World and then all of a sudden just "grew like Topsy" -- with no roots, no predecessor culture whatsoever. This, of course, is a fallacy. Once placed in an Afrocentric context, it is clear A-A culture is grounded in Africa; there is a continuity of culture from Africa's shores to those of the New World that is striking and undeniable. The contentions of Cosby and others that African-Americans "invented" cool certainly do not hold up to scrutiny; it was something we brought with us from our African past. However, A-A understanding of it is limited; it's seen pretty much solely in the context of the "cool pose" and comportment and not as the philosophical and cultural aesthetic that it is in Africa, one that crosses gender lines and pervades ptraditional African societies. deeceevoice (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Jewish-American cool

This section is really bad. The only part that talks about cool has no sources, the rest is some kind of rebuttal to the section with sources. I think we should ax the whole thing possibly moving relevant sections to the article on cultural appropriation unless it's all just original research, in which case it should be deleted. What do others think? AMaybe I'm missing something, or maybe someone could supply better sources, but right now this section is in very poor condition. Please speak up I want feedback before I remove it. futurebird 03:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This is just something User: Urthogie simply made up way back when. There's nothing in Jewish culture that has anything to do with cool. There is absolutely no substantiation for the use of the term "cool irony" in the Jewish tradition, as I indicated in my edit notes. Irony, yes; cool irony? WTF? It's bogus, completely contrived. Don't believe me? Try Googling "cool irony Jewish humor." The only thing in all of cyberspace you come up with is this article. Lenny Bruce's so-called "cool" was straight from the black jazz scene and the bohemian crowd, who followed the black jazz scene. Bruce copied (some) black jazz musicians right down to their heroin addiction. I think I made that abundantly clear in my additions to the section. I added that information, along with the "fact" tags preparatory to obliterating it. I think we should leave it for a couple of weeks and give people the chance to respond. Then wipe it out. Jews have always had a fascination with African American culture, have always copied us. That's what Bruce -- and his mentor Lord Byron (a white guy from Cali) -- did. It was a "fad" and not integral to Jewish culture. Telling is the fact that after the beatnik scene was no more, Jewish comedy went right back to being spastic, neurotic -- and decidedly very uncool. In point of fact, Bruce was the exception. Jewish comedy pretty much never changed. And that's all they can point to -- a couple of comedians. And Mort Sahl wasn't cool. I remember his comedy. He was simply low-key/intellectual. That isn't the same as cool -- and he's not known for being referred to as "cool." He just isn't. (Besides, anybody who cozied up to the Reagans and supported Al Haig for president couldn't possibly be cool! ;) And anyone/group who tries so desperately to be cool just isn't.)deeceevoice 04:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hell, every time I see that garbage, my lip just curls into a sneer. They had no compunction about edit warring with us over this article. No more being nice. I'm taking this crap out. They can't claim a marketing movement about how it's "cool to be a Jew" has anything really to do with cool. People can say it's "cool to be a teacher." That doesn't mean we should include "teacher cool" in the article. And if they insist on it, then it can go in the marketing section, which is where I put it earlier. deeceevoice 11:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Section headings

This article needs another section heading between the "overview" and the geographic sections. If I can think of an appopriate section title, I will insert one today. If anyone has any ideas, please let me know. It simply does not seem appropriate to have this general overview and then go into the geographic subheadings. Any thoughts? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 20:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Cool timeline image nominated for deletion

People paying attention to this article might be interested - see Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_December_23#Image:Cool_Timeline2.png. I have no idea what to vote, myself. Dreamyshade (talk) 05:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Any reason for the cleanup and POV tags to remain?

They've been there for five and four months, respectively, and lots of work has been done on the article since then. The article isn't finished, but I don't have an objection to their removal. deeceevoice (talk) 11:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the POV and clean-up tags. Lots of additions/changes have been made to the article since they were affixed, and I can see no reason for them to remain. deeceevoice (talk) 14:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Timeline of Cool

Regarding that chart purportedly illustrating the history of cool... you mean nothing cool ever came out of Asia? Also, ever since the 1990s the only cool thing in the whole wide world is hip hop and dance/techno music? Does anyone have a good reason why that chart shouldn't be taken out? Squidvillanueva (talk) 22:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Since no one is offering any reason for that chart, I think it should go away. I'd do it myself if not for the fact that this article is semi-protected and apparently I'm not cool enough to gain access into this little club. Squidvillanueva (talk) 00:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Possible error(because this page is currently locked)

...rebels and underdogs, such as slaves, prisoners, bikers and political dissents, etc...

Shouldn't "dissents" be "dissenters" or "dissidents"? 69.111.189.55 (talk) 19:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted - the reference to Abraham Lincoln

When I first read the passage, it was just plain weird. I deleted it, thinking it vandalism. Upon finding the reference, I reconsidered the deletion, but decided to let it stand. The article is, after all, about cool as an aesthetic -- not cool in the traditional English-language usage, which is what the Lincoln quote is. It simply doesn't belong -- which is why it sticks out like a sore thumb. deeceevoice (talk) 12:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "coolhunt" :
  • ''Coolhunting With Aristotle Welcome to the hunt.'' by Nick Southgate, Cogent
  • .
  • ...
• "art" :
  • Robert Farris Thompson, ''African Art in Motion'', New York, 1979
  • African Art in Motion, 1979, New York, p. 43
• "Cool Politics" :
  • [http://social.chass.ncsu.edu/jouvert/v2i1/Clarke.htm Cool Politics: Styles of Honour in Malcolm X and Miles Davis]
  • ''[http://social.chass.ncsu.edu/jouvert/v2i1/Clarke.htm Cool Politics: Styles of Honour in Malcolm X and Miles Davis]'' by George Elliott Clarke
• "Aesthetic" :
  • ''[http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0001-9933(197323)7%3A1%3C40%3AAAOTC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5 An Aesthetic of the Cool]'' Robert Farris Thompson African Arts, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Autumn, 1973), pp. 40-43+64-67+89-91
  • Thompson, Robert Farris. "An Aesthetic of the Cool." ''African Arts'', Vol. 7, No. 1 (Autumn, 1973).

DumZiBoT (talk) 19:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Dreigroschenoper.JPG

The image Image:Dreigroschenoper.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Removed. (Don't know why it was allowed to remain for so long.) deeceevoice (talk) 15:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Definitions

So much talk, as we say, like a cat walking around a hot mash, i.e. so much beating around the bush. "Cool" means "free of fear, free of worries" (about an inherent deficiency or failure).

Someone acts/is cool means she/he acts without a worry that her/his actions/appearance are deficient in relation to her/his own goals.

Something is cool means there is no fear that it contains an inherent defect or deficiency regarding its assumed and/or relevant purpose.

"It's cool" means "don't worry that it might fail (its purpose) (due to an inherent deficiency)."

There's so much more about "cool"? Perhaps, but only context-dependent. This is the essence.

-- Zrin 62.178.201.205 (talk) 00:28, 26 November 2008 (UTC)--

---

The Pick-Up Artists community teaches cool as a state of being in order to achieve more social value and thereby gain it's general benefits. According to the taught psychology of a "normal, healthy, cool person" therein (inner game), Cool is a Yin / Yang balance between being unaffected by outside (of oneself) stimuli and opposite this, giving others positive emotions by various means. The unaffected Yin branching into: Emotional Unreactiveness, Being Nonjudgmental, a lack of neediness, an Effortlessness, Detachedness, Ubiquitous attitude of Comfortability, Independence, Unconditionality and No Obligations, immunity from the human condition (refusal to get caught up in any emotional drama or crisis). The yang is bases around putting out positive emotions. It is a very general and generic way to describe how people feel you're amazing. It usually means giving instead of taking. Adding value to other's lives and thereby positive emotions - having potential value to offer others. This can mean telling good stories, giving deserved compliments, or otherly being rich or wealthy, having immense social status or fame, having excellent connections, being beautiful and attractive, having tremendous skill in some desired field, being deliciously mysterious, being fearless, seeing the optimistic side to things, seeing challenges instead of problems, seeing the good in others and showing that to other people, having people feel you bring out the best them, being open and real all of the time - dancing like no one is looking as they say, playing your role - taking risks, having resolve, making moves when the feel is right, or generally just being any other ideal and desired social trait you could name. The proper balance of these two faculties offers the perfect equation of what any truly cool person behaves as. Coolness is that you have so much amazingness and good feeling traits about you but yet you don't need to show it off, and so you just live it.

---

Cool is a trifecta among disassociation from the outside world, relaxation and what others would observe as social comfort, and lastly being the ideal as far as what a person should behave as. Ideal meaning probably Succinct, skillful, effortless, generally chill, and thereby (probably due to all of these) blatantly above average. Cool is being the only person slackly walking while every else is running and screaming as something explodes behind you. Cool is being the guy who'll bend the rules when the genuine popular opinion is that they don't make sense. Being cool is being nice to people when you don't need anything from them. Being cool is following your principles regardless of opposition. Being cool can often in it's naturally occurring way within nature mean holding high social worth (beauty, wealth, connections) and thereby being blaze(blah-zay) about life, thereby even when you don't have high social worth if you act blaze you're still cool. Being cool is effortlessly trusting your ability to have things turn out the way you want them to, or not caring whether they do or don't.

---

Aside from definitions, Coolness is often put on as an affectation by people who want to be seen as something by others. Don't try to be cool, be comfortable, centered in yourself, in your desires, in your own opinions - and only those, and the rest takes care of itself. Coolness is being the ideal. The ideal to my mind is just being genuine, authentic, real and totatally comfortable with it. Coolness varies because of the ideal of each person varies but usually it has to do with being the most valuable and the most free. We can be that in our own way, and that is very cool.

---

Cool is the behavior you naturally exhibit when you've become accustomed to knowing and living the motto "Nothing is a big deal, and everything is going to turn out all right", such behavior usually results automatically from holding psychological trust in your ability to work your way out of troublesome situations, whether simply from being philosophically wise (and/or careless)enough to live the belief that to some degree nothing matters and then truly living that motto in and of itself, or alternatively actually having the actual physical capability of making problems go away (being strong and/or skilled and/or armed enough to fend off attackers, having relevant valuable resources to shortcut your route past problems, having powerful connections to allow you to bypass otherwise standard obstacles, or having your needs met to such a degree that you don't feel you need anything from the outside world anymore. To be Blasé if you will. '''For the most part to be cool in it's most authetic form, is to be Blasé.''' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.140.129 (talk) 20:14, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

---

DETERMINING COOLNESS

Cool Quiz:

Do you like it or not? Cool means you approve (Cool people often bend overly strict rules)

Is it relaxed or not? Cool things are relaxed and move with comfort/confidence (Cool people move well under Pressure - example: Barack Obama)

Is it interesting to you or not? Cool things catch your interest with their/it's talents/capabilities (cool stuff gives you a thrill)

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.140.129 (talk) 20:39, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

isaycool.com

This is a website that enables visitors to vote on 1000s of subjects. Cool, uncool or 'don't care'. Subjects range from Paris Hilton, Beyonce, King Canute, Aristotle, consumer goods, religions, emotions and whatever else users choose to upload. This is a commercial site as it is serving google adwords. Would it be suitable to post details of this site on the wiki cool page, or anywhere else on the site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foisterbuilding (talk • contribs) 14:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

No, it most certainly would not. That would not be an appropriate link. Please read WP:ELNO. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with RepubJacob. Not useful. deeceevoice (talk) 00:29, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Removed from the article under European postwar cool

This new cool rejected all kinds of overt sentimentality, which included publicly agonizing over the lot of the poor, or being sympathetic toward social activism. Indeed, the antagonism between street-cool and social activism became a cliché of certain movies and novels of the time - from On the Waterfront and the Blackboard Jungle all the way to West Side Story, which is based on Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet", where the stereotypical big-hearted teacher/priest/social worker tries to inculcate social responsibility into street-wise cool kids, whose response may be paraphased as "only suckers care".

Stay loose, boy! Breeze it, buzz it, easy does it. Turn off the juice, boy! Go man, go, But not like a yo-yo schoolboy. Just play it cool, boy. Real cool! (West Side Story, "Cool")

Rationale: This info refers to the U.S. It's potentially useful, but needs to be set within the context of U.S. pop culture cool. deeceevoice (talk) 15:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Origin

'Coolness' originates from South Africa in the 1700's. South African's are known for theyre coolness, for example, 'Shandy' is soo sarcastic but doesnt even show it, doesnt even smile a little. this is what people call 'Cool'. This also applies to Ms. Bullet, we see this is the way her hair is soo nice and white and grey at the same time, and her accent is like 'AWWSTIN'. i mean yeah baby. So therefore 'cool' is now wide spread due to the diversity of south africans and modern transport but in the 1700's, it only existed there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolchristmas (talk • contribs) 21:08, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Absurd, not sourced (impossible) and an utter waste of time. *x* deeceevoice (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Early British use of "cool" as an expression of approbation, 1868

"May i venture to suggest ....that I might see her here?" "Cool!", said Mr Bruff. With that one word of comment on the reply that I had made to him, he took another turn up and down the room. "in plain English", he said, "my house is to be turned into a trap to catch Rachel, .....If you were any one else...I should refuse. As things are, I firmly believe Rachel will thank me....Consider me your accomplice. Rachel shall be asked to spend the day here; and you shall receive due notice of it".

Mr Bruff, expresses reservations only to discount them, and agree enthusiastically to the plan. "Cool" may be used in the equally modern sense of chill,/ slowdown,.but seems more likely to be approval in the light of Mr Bruff's agreement.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Eirahadaj (talk • contribs) 14:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Changing use of the word "cool".

i think there is need for a section about the word "cool" in a dictionary sense which includes the meaning: "cool" - an aesthetic, an attitude. "cool" - temperature. etc Perhaps the abraham lincoln material mentioned as deleted a few posts before this would be appropriate there, and also the shakespeare references. And my reference to The Moonstone written in 1868. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eirahadaj (talk • contribs) 14:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Violent cool?

This article on cool is lacking a discussion of the kind of cool that glorifies killing--the kind of cool that a pop-culture ninja, samurai, superhero, or supervillain has. For example, Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven, Neo in The Matrix, and The Bride in Kill Bill possess this kind of cool. A ninja's or samurai's cool is not just about being unperturbed. It's also about violent symbolism and the power of death, which are not mentioned in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halberdo (talk • contribs) 11:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Afrocentric????

i think this sloppy excuse for an article is very afrocentric and needs to be evend out. what do you think??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.206.127.145 (talk) 19:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I've never perceived "coolness" as being exclusively ethnic. I've always associated it with action heroes primarily, and secondarily with people who remain calm under pressure. Halberdo (talk) 23:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

The article may seem "afrocentric" because cool finds its earliest known expression as an African concept and is more highly refined there and more profound than similar phenomena in non-African cultures. And it is African cool, filtered through the African-American experience, that has become a universal, pop-culture phenomenon. The facts are the facts, and individual "perceptions" or beliefs held by those unfamiliar with the documented history of American and world popular culture are just that -- perceptions and beliefs/opinions. They are unreliable/not necessarily accurate (in fact, quite the contrary), and certainly not encyclopedic. If you have information that contradicts that presented in the article, then you are welcome/encouraged to present it. Otherwise, read and learn. deeceevoice (talk) 05:54, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I actually don't see too strong a bias toward Black versions of cool on second reading. It is reasonably even-handed between versions of coolness between different cultures.

A more important problem is that a whole lot of this article is not factual, just subjective opinions of the cited authors. Many parts of this article are of the form "author X claims Y" where the claim of Y is a thesis statement or opinion, not an established fact.Halberdo (talk) 07:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

a product of the zeitgeist

In the lead this isn't quite making sense to me, how about rewording to ' an aspect of the zeitgeist', as produced implies a start point. L∴V 01:54, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

History of American Cool

WOW! All this time and no one actually mentions Peter Stearn's book called American Cool: The History of Emotions. There is actually an ENTIRE scholarly book written about the phenomena of being cool in American history. C'mon, what kind of editors do we have here??

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.10.166 (talk) 01:11, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

New anon. message

AN AESTHETICALLY PLEASING ATTITUDE OR AN ATTITUDE TOWARD THE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING? The only reference to 'aesthetics' on the page is to this http://books.google.com/books?id=8ZPffirg2mEC&pg=PA371&lpg=PA371&dq=%22aesthetic+of+the+cool%22&source=bl&ots=cM3TR8nFwy&sig=y80vmSl_bid4HJArnIGkw1jWSwc&hl=en&ei=0aDQSsOAG5L44AapwpGhAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CCMQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=%22aesthetic%20of%20the%20cool%22&f=false notice that it says terms the attitude "an aesthetic of the cool", implying that the attitude is aesthetic in the sense of being about something. the other alternative is that the 'of' means that the attitude is aesthetic in the sense of *being* cool, right? it makes more sense to say that 'of' means about rather than 'being'... and the start of the next paragraph begins "Manifest within this philosophy of cool". Now again, it makes sense, to say that the author isn't talking about his philosophy of 'cool' just explained by him but that the attitude is a philosophy of cool. See? So unless I hear a reason why I am wrong about these two points, which are slightly ambiguous but suggest my edit more, then I'll change it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.97.141 (talk) 15:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

This message of yours makes no sense, and you have not made a good case for changing the lede, which has been set and agreed upon for quite some time. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I fail to see how this relates to changes you have attempted, 86.150.97.141. Wikipedia isn't restricted to copying sources, it actually has to restate them. Even if a source does not specifically say "aesthetic," it may say something that would prompt us to include the word "aesthetic." Ian.thomson (talk) 00:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

OK it is not clear what you can't follow about my message. reread the book sections: it makes clear reference to an attitude that is the 'aesthetic of the cool'. now i propose that means an attitude that is a conception of the beauty of cool things. see OED definition of 'aesthetic'http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aesthetic - noun 2. what definition of 'aesthetic' do you suppose is meant in 'aesthetic of the cool'?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.8.190 (talk) 08:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC) Edited because the wrong link was used.

This is an encyclopedia not a dictionary.. - 4twenty42o (talk) 08:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

If a message is not understood, it is not always the fault of the recipient. Expounding upon the OED is not a replacement for scholarly research, which is what this article summerizes. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

what's your point: i'm not saying that the dictionary entry for 'cool' be in the introduction? whatever you are writing, if you want to be accurate a dictionary has final authority on what a term means, not whatever you say it means! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.54.18 (talk) 05:56, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

A dictionary has limited space to cover the subject. It is mostly concerned with spelling and grammar, not what the subject actually is. Dictionaries only cover what a subject is just enough to identify it, encyclopedias (such as Wikipedia) are intended to discuss the subject more in depth. So the OED has no authority over us except in spelling. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you kindly go away? Your edits are not helpful, and your insistence upon changing the article to say what you think it should say is now bordering on vandalism. There is a consensus against you. Live with it and find something else to do with your time. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Not bordering any more. It is blatant vandalism and POV pushing. The lead has been agreed on, the wording (as is) is fine and you are not welcome to make changes without a consensus, no matter how minor. Please cease with the silliness and contribute or go away. - 4twenty42o (talk) 17:03, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

a consensus of two obsessive idiots! that can't give valid reasons. it's sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.54.18 (talk) 23:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

No valid reasons are needed for poorly voiced objections. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

In Brazilian Portuguese cool is called "legal", add?

In Brazilian Portuguese cool is called "legal", add? 99.155.152.129 (talk) 03:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC) Example [1], also see http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Portuguese/Contents/Slang_(Brazil) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.155.154.65 (talk) 00:12, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

ethnocentrism is unacceptable in Wikipedia

Why do we have to just let this tyrant of an editor impose his ethnocentric views on the population????

This article is RIDICULOUSLY ethnocentric and we who are concerned about maintaining the quality of Wikipedia surely must be able to do something about it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Iggly (talk • contribs) 00:07, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Do you have anything constructive to say? Kinda hard to see how it's ethnocentric when it covers Africa and the African diaspora, East Asia, Europe, The Middle East, and America. I recommend not making a personal attack (especially without identifying who you have a problem with), and providing us with some examples indicating specific problems with the article. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:12, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Cryptofreak001, 29 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Cool (sociological approach): Cool, or to be “Cool,” is a state of being. Within the context of social interactions the word “cool,” is often used as an abstract term to denote the degree to which one, the subject occupying the point of reference to which the term is being applied, maintains a copasetic state, despite undergoing social pressure to divulge ones self to a state of conformity. The paradox that often reveals its self in the context of the word cool, is that social entities that often perceive themselves as “cool” are often to the contrary, not cool. "Cool," as a subject of discourse, can occupy multiple differential definitions, largely due to the many roles that social entities occupy.

Many might disagree with this post-modern definition of the word “cool.” However, one must note the common social preference that draws one to project the term to a point of reference, or another subject.

Ex: Jane sees Mauro, a “single” good looking man, running upright with the utmost confidence. Five minutes later Jane sees John, a single “average” looking guy, jogging; while struggling to maintain a breath of fresh air. Depending on Janes’ preferences for particular social entities, such as males that portray a more robust social image, it is likely that Jane would bequeath her subjective preference for the word “cool” to that individual who most likely suits her introspective definition of the word cool. Mauro, could be that individual, especially since he is single.

In reading the example above, it is noticeable that the word “cool” can serve as an introspective point of reference; enabling one to position themselves in relation to that subject which occupies the state of coolness. This does not always require reciprocity, or recognition on behalf of both parties. In some cases this can serve solely as an introspective marker that mobilizes ones lack of coolness. In such cases, recognition on behalf of others of the use of the word cool often works to increase the degree of coolness; especially when one shares an “I-Thou” relationship with the subject.

In applying the word “cool” to objects which lack reciprocity, such as a toy, or a location, it is best to recall that in such matters the application of the word “cool” does not conform to the aforementioned definition. In such cases, the word “cool” seems to occupy a state of recognition on behalf of the individual. Therefore, recognition on behalf of other social entities acts to establish a mutual relation based on the context of the two individuals relations of the toy, or location.The in this case does not necessarily apply as an introspective point of reference to identify ones individual self.

Cryptofreak001 (talk) 06:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Other than one small part (I-Thou), this is entirely unsourced, and appears to be primarily original research. Wikipedia requires that all information appear in reliable sources before being included in articles--we cannot add our own analysis of topics. If the above information can be sourced in detail, it may be possible to add. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:46, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from GranolaB, 6 September 2011

The following sentence has been truncated since an earlier revision:

Original: "According to Dick Pountain and David Robins, concepts of cool have existed for centuries in several cultures."

Current: "According to Dick Pountain and David Robins,"

Please revert to the full sentence, or delete the sentence entirely.

GranolaB (talk) 23:56, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Done --Jnorton7558 (talk) 01:25, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Former image

this image, File:Fonz Pic.PNG, was the lead image in the article for about 2 months, then removed. it is of course somewhat UScentric, but the Fonz was a huge "cool" icon at that time. Maybe not the lead image, but later in the article? I dont want it to come and go without comment. (i came along in the middle of its tenancy and fixed it up a bit, as it had been placed without any context). So how about a lead image, or more images here, perhaps for a section on "cool" in the arts, or cultural appropriations of cool? here are some more: File:Thomas P. Stafford patting Snoopy.jpg, File:Joe cool.jpg (snoopy was a mission mascot for apollo 10 and was on other USAF insignia) File:Elvis Presley 68 Comeback Special.jpg, File:JohnColtraneWiki.jpg, File:Charlie Parker, Tommy Potter, Miles Davis, Duke Jordan, Max Roach (Gottlieb 06851).jpg, File:No. 5, 1948.jpg, File:Chet675.jpg, File:Ray Ban Original Wayfarer.jpg. Also, here is a possible reference to use: [2]. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 September 2012

Please update link to graphic (File:Cool Timeline2.png) to new SVG version (File:Timeline_of_cool.svg). Craig.adam (talk) 17:12, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Done; I see no reason to oppose. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The svg image links to an html file, not to a larger image. Is there any way to provide a larger image, since the small one is incomprehensible? Thank you. Madinpursuit (talk) 11:28, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Cool (aesthetic). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061003154021/http://www.japansociety.org/web_docs/grossnationalcool.pdf to http://www.japansociety.org/web_docs/grossnationalcool.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060930220032/http://www.high.org/uploadedFiles/overview/newsroom/LouvreAtlantaReleaseFINAL(2).pdf to http://www.high.org/uploadedFiles/overview/newsroom/LouvreAtlantaReleaseFINAL(2).pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:24, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2016

4 Definitons

should read

4 Definitions

Etienne.desclides (talk) 19:19, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

 Done thanks for pointing this out. Hut 8.5 19:32, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cool (aesthetic). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151021131326/http://www.jazz.com to http://www.jazz.com
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://metropolis.co.jp/tokyo/519/feature.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:47, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Cool can mean anything

If anybody can find anything cool for any reason how can there be a standard for cool? 2600:8800:5210:4E00:94F7:86B8:9F75:BF5 (talk) 15:08, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2016

In the overview section's third sentence ("One consistent aspect however, is that cool is wildly seen as positive and desirable."), change "wildly" to "widely". 75.44.76.175 (talk) 01:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done! DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 08:19, 13 December 2016 (UTC).