“Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.”
-- Mark Twain (attrib.)
Today’s meditation – extending a series that examines clichés and maxims of importance – concerns Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who lost both his position as head of the International Monetary Fund and his presumptive inside track to the French presidency, over a much-disputed sexual encounter with a New York hotel housekeeper on May 15, 2011.
That day’s events – combed microscopically in a trans-Atlantic media frenzy and forever irreconcilable for the inconsistencies and diminished credibility on all sides – supported competing claims and theories of criminal assault, opportunistic maneuvering and politically-motivated conspiracy.
What was not at issue, in the background, was DSK’s propensity to pursue the pleasures of the flesh down unconventional paths -- a personal history behind his two recent days in the custody of French authorities (here), giving evidence regarding a ring of highly-sponsored sex parties in the northern city of Lille.
On the sensitive question of the negotiable virtue of the participating ladies, prostitution not being illegal in France, DSK’s lawyer offered the piquant challenge, “to distinguish a naked prostitute from any other naked woman."
Here’s a theme worth considering for application in the business, professional and political worlds, where states of dress convey broad symbolic meaning.
For context, consider the metaphoric richness of the vocabulary of corporate governance and finance: “full disclosure” and “transparency,” and “covered options,” and the beguilingly oxymoronic “naked shorts.”
Or more broadly, consider:
- The continued influence and prosperity of Savile Row’s bespoke tailoring, its nuances of fabrics and buttonholes signifying the structure and power of hierarchy among London’s masters of the universe.
- The overwhelming rejection by the young professionals in my company in Paris of the chance to go “business casual” – retaining instead the formal-looking black “costume” – and the status-conferring ability to distinguish themselves on the Metro from lower-level clerks and functionaries.
- The dynamic effects of political dress codes, from Republican aspirant Rick Santorum’s sweater vests to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent failure to get the “white shirt” memo at the G-20 finance ministers’ meeting (here).
Did DSK have a duty of inquiry? To, as it were, “look beneath the covers”? And if so, does it extend to other situations, where an interest worn on a sleeve may be difficult to discern if there are no sleeves covering all that exposed skin?
The commercialization of the parties in Lille may, in other words, have been explicit, or more subtle.
But no less so than, say, the financial escort services provided to the board of scandal-ridden Olympus by its on-call roster of Tokyo banks.
Or the client-readiness of Moody’s and S&P to answer the come-hither whistles of the peddlers of toxic mortgage debt, looking to tart up their products in tassels and ribbons so as to transmute “X” ratings to “AAA.”
Or, come to it, the corporate executives aggressively cashing ethically challenged compensation packages that would in DSK’s model give alternative meaning to the illicitly pleasurable restraints of “golden handcuffs.”
While other comparisons no doubt occur, across scenes from bedroom to boardroom, the salient observation may be the one variously attributed to either Winston Churchill or George Bernard Shaw, answering the equivocal rejection of his proposition of a one-night stand for either a million or a mere five pounds:
“Madam, we’ve established what you are. Now we are merely haggling about the price.”
Thanks for joining this dialog. Please share with friends and colleagues. Comments are welcome, and subscription sign-up is easy and free, both at the Main page.
Comments