Adornment must be general because it serves the individual

Evidence

It is the greatest mistake to think that, because it always functions as the adornment of an individual, adornment must be an individual work of art. Quite the contrary: because it is to serve the individual, it may not itself be of an individual nature as little as the piece of furniture on which we sit, or the eating utensil which we manipulate, may be individual works of art. — Georg Simmel, The Sociology of Georg Simmel, 8275

Categorization

• XREF: Inverts the modern ‘wearable art’ and bespoke-craft assumption; parallels the ADDENDUM ‘immodesty’ theme where adornment functions as class-indexed generality.