or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by unbelragazzo

Sure, there's always bounds of what's normal, what's inconspicuous, and what's acceptable. The Apparel Arts era wasn't without its own norms, which also varied across professions. But looking through AA, you can't help but be struck by the wide range of suiting they propose. This surely claimed some fashion victims, as the cartoon suggests. But what today would elicit a comment of "looking very GQ!"? Wearing a tie? Surely wearing a pocket square. The bounds are much...
Yea, that's why I said diversity just within coat-and-tie. I don't really agree with you about those looks being wearable now. At least not for as many people. It's ok if you're Nick Foulkes but he can wear almost literally whatever he wants. These days most guys in suit-requiring jobs have very little latitude in what they're allowed to wear. Plenty of what used to be totally acceptable - brown suits, PoW or windowpane suits, DB suits, suits with boots - is now either not...
You mean pre-WW1 or pre-WW2? The interwar period was maybe the height of diversity in coat-and-tie. Although 1830s-40s prob gives it a run for its money.
Not sure I agree that post-war coat-and-tie fashion was more diverse than pre-war. Obv there's more non-coat-and-tie, if that's what you mean.
Definitely 42 I would say. I also have a 6 in the Merino and usually wear a 42...sometimes R, sometimes L, very occasionally 44 or 40. I have a 42 in the Mackintosh Monkton and I'd say it's a tad tight.
Yep, the navy fresco will be restocked. Dunno about the others.
Here's the link to Kyle's preorder post one more time: http://www.styleforum.net/t/358758/no-man-walks-alone-official-affiliate-thread/16755#post_7590093
I think Kyle said until Mon Jan 5.
Great boot. Is that C&J?
New Posts  All Forums: