or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by J. Cogburn

Vox wrote: Quote: I see no reason to think that people on the Internet know Poole better than Poole do themselves. The cuts that I posted are what Poole chooses to exemplify as their house style...that they might deviate that to a degree from this depending on client is besides the point. Any good tailor would. Moreover, the problem with this thead is the obstinency about recognizing the simple fact that London tailoring is typically shapely in a way that...
Think of it as a light grey suit - which is how it appears from a distance. It can go with pretty much anything.
Quote: yes those silhouettes by poole are very dramatic but only possible when on a dummy. I imagine their customers are mostly fat and old. Bill Field here in DC (he of Field English Custom Tailors) was trained by his father who was in turn a cutter at Poole. So Bill's style is Poole's style ... at least, so he says. Last time I was in his shop (a couple of weeks ago), he was wearing a double-breasted coat he made for himself, a coat that he told...
Quote: The fact is, I find the notion that changing any part of a suit makes it "contemporary" to be perfectly absurd. I also reject the idea that sticking to classic rules means everyone has to dress alike. To the contrary, buttoning at the waist means high-waisted men wear high-waisted jackets and low-waisted men wear low-waisted jackets. That's the whole point. The Agents in The Matrix wore the same suit of the same cut, even though they had different...
I say "middle of the road" because, as I understand it, Poole's shoulders and chest are a bit structured but not too structured. As my local cutter put it, Poole is about half-way between A&S and Huntsman on most dimensions and as much a standard for traditional British-style suit as one might want. Wrong Vox?
Quote: By citing Poole as your boundary examplar for modesy of shape, you encompassed nearly everything ever posted on StyleForvm. Quite an feat! You've obviously dwelt here longer than I, so if you could spell out what that means exactly, that would be great. I'm pretty sure, however, that you didn't mean that in a good way - for me or for SF. Regardless, I'm not sure I meant to suggest that Poole was the best exemplar of modest shape. I meant...
I've dropped by unannounced three times now. No problem.
It seems as if half of you think that no silhouette can be too strong for tasteful dress. The other half don't believe in tasteful dress (at least, as I defined it in my OP) at all. Is that fair?
Foo wrote: Quote: Try visiting the midwest. Even 99% of suit-wearing Chicago is clothed in Jos. A. Bank--and very few men in Chicago wear suits. I sometimes attend conferences in Chicago where I run into 300 or so relatively important local businessmen, investors, and whatnot. THESE guys are amazingly well dress relative to Foo's crowd. Last time I hit one of those conferences, about a third of the guys had bow ties on for Christ's sake. Lots of...
Manton wrote: Quote: Americans are used to the sack, though it is quite rare these days. I think it depends upon where you are. In DC, J. Press suits are pretty common. And they seem to have a hold on a number of Ivy League grads I know.
New Posts  All Forums: