or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by J. Cogburn

It wasn't a DB, so no, you were not a Goober. But given the aggregation of sartorial oddities associated with that outfit, you may well have been Goober's cousin - Gomer. Can't know for sure unless you would be so kind as to post a photo.
OK, unless Manton's going to jump in here, the balance of the argument is with those who give the midnight blue a thumbs up for business wear. Now ... what about a 30% mohair fabric to give it a little sheen for the night club. Is that a sartorial bridge too far? Or is the suit still wearable for business?
By the way, those are some big-a**ed pant cuffs you've got there Foo. How many inches are we talking about?
Quote: I understand what you're saying, but I think it's pretty easy to tell when a guy knows what he's doing. Conversely, it's pretty easy to tell when a guy doesn't know what he's doing. These days, the gulf between the two is so wide that those collar buttons are even tinier than they were before, if you take my meaning. If Vox, say, walked into your office wearing a DB with a BD and a bowtie, I imagine the fit of his suit, the quality of his shoes, and his...
Quote: In this day and age, I can't imagine anyone wearing a stylish, well-fitting DB would be mistaken for a goober from anywhere, regardless of the shirt collar. The simple fact that that the suit fit correctly would put the wearer a notch above 99 percent of the population. Agreed Doc. But being better-dressed than 99% of the population is not a particularly high standard these days, now is it? Quote: If a guy's clothes fit correctly...
If you are a "winter" in the old Color Me Beautiful lexicon - or a "clear" in the new iteration of the same - then you are a guy who'll look great in high-contrast color combos. Dark hair and swarthy, olive-toned skin .... or dark hair with very light skin. Hell, black hair with whatever skin will probably do it. If you are an African-American, then the darker your skin, the better high-contrast combos will look on you. So that's what Will is saying. Midnight blue is...
Quote: The double-breasted in the 1st half of the century was, as Foo points out, the more casual lounge suit. Foo said nothing of the kind. Lucky for him ... the claim is flatly wrong. Quote: Who gives a fuck? You're right. We should be taking group pictures of each other's shoes while standing in a circle. Or yacking about whether the olive $150 Joseph A. Banks suit Gomer just bought is OK for his cousin's wedding. Me, I...
Foo's DB flannel is (perhaps) an exception. The DB is dressy but the flannel is less formal than the worsted alternative. Hence, we're sending mixed sartorial messages. The BD can thus be used to highlight the casual side of that sartorial equation and within the realm of correctness in that particular context. On the other hand, maybe it's crap like that that cost Foo the title of best dressed man in the world. Who's to say?
The thousand we might want to poll don't have to wear a suit to have an opinion about whether suit A is "dressier" than suit B. Just like I don't have to grow facial hair to have an opinion about whether a short-cropped beard is more "dapper" than a clean-shaven face. Of course one may wear what one likes. That goes without saying. But if the question is asked about whether this goes with that, it implicitly assumes that there is a right and wrong about such things and...
The DB evolved from the frock coat, which historically was more formal than the single-breasted lounge jacket that helped pushed the frock coat off the market once and for all. A DB dinner jacket is less formal than a SB model for reasons that are unclear to me, but all seem to agree on the point. Poll 1,000 people and you will find that most believe that the DB is dressier than a SB (that is, one is more "dressed-up" in a DB than a SB). That's all I said. Don't...
New Posts  All Forums: