Christmas Mass
Dressing up is an artifact of the rise of the middle class. Hundreds of years ago there were only two main classes, lower and upper. Upper class maintained status via two main things, money and associations. The former of these manifested itself in many ways as you could not just walk around showing your bank statement to everyone, you had to spend money to prove you had it. This led to expensive houses and expensive clothing with overweight owners. Visibly the differences between upper and middle class were great for exactly these reasons.
Enter the rise of the middle class. Suddenly there was a class that was neither very poor nor very rich. While the lowest class could not afford any expensive clothing, the newly born middle class would afford at least some, though not necessarily in the numbers of the upper class. Because of this there was now the concept of casual dress and fancy dress that was unique to the middle class. They wore their casual clothing on everyday occasions and for fancier occasions they dressed up as an imitation of the upper class.
Today the middle class rules our country and the concept of casual, and fancy clothing still exists (and has even expanded e.g. semi-casual). This concept, as I've stated, goes back hundreds of years and served no purpose other than to attempt to prove people were part of the "upper class". Fancy cloths are not more comfortable (quite the opposite), they do not make you smarter or faster, they do not take less time to put on or improve your ability to socialize. They're simply another mechanism we use to prove our worth, relative to those around us.
Of course, dressing up has become much more of a tradition than it once was, and people do not typically do it as a proof of monetary worth. In fact, even the true upper class of the day, movie stars and people like Bill Gates, have casual, semi-casual, and fancy clothing. Despite this revolution in thought, if you go to an occasion that "demands" dressing up and you go in casual clothing, you will be invariably looked down upon. The reasons for dressing up have changed, but the reaction to anything but conformance is the same: social rejection. People are shallow.
Enter the rise of the middle class. Suddenly there was a class that was neither very poor nor very rich. While the lowest class could not afford any expensive clothing, the newly born middle class would afford at least some, though not necessarily in the numbers of the upper class. Because of this there was now the concept of casual dress and fancy dress that was unique to the middle class. They wore their casual clothing on everyday occasions and for fancier occasions they dressed up as an imitation of the upper class.
Today the middle class rules our country and the concept of casual, and fancy clothing still exists (and has even expanded e.g. semi-casual). This concept, as I've stated, goes back hundreds of years and served no purpose other than to attempt to prove people were part of the "upper class". Fancy cloths are not more comfortable (quite the opposite), they do not make you smarter or faster, they do not take less time to put on or improve your ability to socialize. They're simply another mechanism we use to prove our worth, relative to those around us.
Of course, dressing up has become much more of a tradition than it once was, and people do not typically do it as a proof of monetary worth. In fact, even the true upper class of the day, movie stars and people like Bill Gates, have casual, semi-casual, and fancy clothing. Despite this revolution in thought, if you go to an occasion that "demands" dressing up and you go in casual clothing, you will be invariably looked down upon. The reasons for dressing up have changed, but the reaction to anything but conformance is the same: social rejection. People are shallow.