sartorial insouciance
in reading an article from Slate via my pulse app this morning, i came across a phrase that i have decided to make my newly desired descriptive term for myself; that is to say, i hope to be able to engender in the minds of others an image which is adequately surmised in these two words: sartorial insouciance. i mean, i know some other guy wrote it, and by no means do i wish to discredit his linguistic merit; nor am i trying to take credit for that which is most certainly not mine to take; but anyone out there that knows me has to admit, even if you have no clue what the words mean, that that sounds like me. “kamarr? that guy reeks of sartorial insouciance! did you see the tie he was wearing today? or the ragged hem on his pants? only kamarr, man; only kamarr.” yes, i have noble ambitions to live a life devoted to Christ, with my wife and children at the forefront of what it means to me to serve, but if there is one personal area that i pray God will grant me to be self-indulgent, it most certainly would be my vestiture.