or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Tie Dimple Debate
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Tie Dimple Debate - Page 3

post #31 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Film_Noir_Buff
The Duke of Windsor had custom made ties and very rarely wore them without a dimple for a spot of difference.
FNB, for the record, here's the quote about the Duke of Windsor from Manton's book:

"Most men contrive their knots so that there is a small dimple in the center of the tie just below the knot, which helps the front blade drape properly. Others believe that dimples smack of too much artifice and follow the duke in favoring a soft, dimpleless rounded knot, which is actually harder to tie." (Italics mine.)
post #32 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by iammatt
While people may or may not prefer the way that Alden's tie is tied (I am on the fence myself)
The way Alden has tied his tie in that picture is deliberate and requires a bit of effort and practice. It's not as simple as it looks. For a historical reference, see the duke of Windsor's second volume of memoirs, especially pp. 153 and 212. The second picture is particularly nice. It was one of the things that inspired me to rethink my affection for dimples, and return to my youth, as it were, when I was not so obsessive about dimples.
post #33 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger
FNB, for the record, here's the quote about the Duke of Windsor from Manton's book:

"Most men contrive their knots so that there is a small dimple in the center of the tie just below the knot, which helps the front blade drape properly. Others believe that dimples smack of too much artifice and follow the duke in favoring a soft, dimpleless rounded knot, which is actually harder to tie." (Italics mine.)

If one wants to talk about normative behavior with tie knots they should begin with this premise. Most men do not know how to tie a tie with a dimple and look sloppy without one. Maybe some have learned to dimple well and have chosen to eschew the dimple as a statement. I have one well dressed friend who does this. He happens to know what he is doing, so yes, it looks natural on his person. Advice that the dimple is contrived seems very self serving to me. On the one hand, if you do not know how to tie a dimple, then this is irresponsible bravado in my opinion. If you do know how to dimple your tie, then it hardly needs be said to you that you can choose not to dimple.

A dimple is no more of a contrivance than tying your shoelaces. Maybe some prefer to follow the carefree lead of the Old Dodger's Bum illustrations and leave their laces undone, in true liberated cavalier esprit.

Also, there aren't a lot of photos Ive seen with the Duke in "dimplelessness" until his last years of life. He looked good without a Dimple (his dimpleless ties are very carefully arranged) but I doubt if he believed a dimple was an artifice. Also, he was an original. OK, maybe that's the lead we're speaking about but I think of the Duke as fully dimpled.

This example of a non-dimpled tie is not good because it draws your attention to it too much, as if something is wrong or missing. Hardly the pleasing effect the DUke achieved when he did it from time to time.
post #34 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton
The way Alden has tied his tie in that picture is deliberate and requires a bit of effort and practice. It's not as simple as it looks. For a historical reference, see the duke of Windsor's second volume of memoirs, especially pp. 153 and 212. The second picture is particularly nice. It was one of the things that inspired me to rethink my affection for dimples, and return to my youth, as it were, when I was not so obsessive about dimples.
I am sure that you are correct. The picture had the same effect on me of rethinking how important a dimple is. My only bone to pick with the knot is that for a non-dimpled knot, I think that the knot should be a touch wider at the bottom. I like one that is almost cylindrical rather than cone shaped.
post #35 of 89
Roger, I think you took m@t's comment way too personally.
post #36 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by iammatt
My only bone to pick with the knot is that for a non-dimpled knot, I think that the knot should be a touch wider at the bottom. I like one that is almost cylindrical rather than cone shaped.
You mean more like this?



This picture also made me rethink my opposition to double-soled blucher wholecuts with lounge suits. Note also the link cuff. Maybe Kabbaz can use this shot in one of his mailers.
post #37 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Film_Noir_Buff
Advice that the dimple is contrived seems very self serving to me. On the one hand, if you do not know how to tie a dimple, then this is irresponsible bravado in my opinion. ...
A dimple is no more of a contrivance than tying your shoelaces.
To say, as Manton did, that "Most men contrive their knots so that there is a small dimple...." (Italics mine), is hardly the same thing as characterizing the dimple as a contrivance in the negative sense you seem to be suggesting here--artificial, odd, or scheming, or whatever it is you are suggesting. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, to contrive means: "to form or create in an artistic or ingenious manner." You also are overlooking the style in which The Suit was written--that of Macchiavelli in The Prince. Adherence to this style (the reasons for which have been amply provided elsewhere) accounts for vocabulary and sentences like the one quoted. The sentence, taken literally, simply says that most men try to create artistically-pleasing knots with a dimple, and how that can be seen as self-serving escapes me completely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Film_Noir_Buff
This example of a non-dimpled tie is not good because it draws your attention to it too much, as if something is wrong or missing. Hardly the pleasing effect the DUke achieved when he did it from time to time.
Couldn't it just as easily be said that the dimple in a tie might draw others' attention to it in a way that could cause them to miss the more important aspects of the tie?
post #38 of 89
Although I usually dimple, I think it depends what kind of knot you do that'll make it look fine without. The one that gentleman is sporting looks quite dashing, as does the rest of his outfit.
post #39 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovan
Roger, I think you took m@t's comment way too personally.
It's not my person that is being attacked. I feel badly for someone else, or, perhaps more accurately, some guilt for having exposed that person to comments like m@t's.
post #40 of 89
I realize that. However, it's just a forum. EDIT: Can someone just ban this "flyers" gent and get it over with?
post #41 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton
You mean more like this? This picture also made me rethink my opposition to double-soled blucher wholecuts with lounge suits. Note also the link cuff. Maybe Kabbaz can use this shot in one of his mailers.
Yes, exactly like that. Really it is hard for me to get past the pugs, but the whole getup is extraordinary.
post #42 of 89
Aww c'mon. You know pugs are cute. :3
post #43 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovan
Aww c'mon. You know pugs are cute. :3


We have an eight year old. He is the best natured, cutest animal in existence.
post #44 of 89
Quote:
I tie my tie and look to see if I am pleased with it. If I like it and it has a dimple... fine. If I like it and it does not... also fine. If I do not like the way it looks, I retie.

While people may or may not prefer the way that Alden's tie is tied (I am on the fence myself), there is no doubting that the entire ensemble is truly pleasing. To me, one of the best things about it is how discreet yet natural the pocket square is. It is a gar cry from the flaming bright silks that many prefer when they are trying for elegance.

Completely agree .

Except about the pugs...

Owen Edwards, formerly of GQ (and thank God not The Style Guy), maintains that one should go with the first knot of the day and live with it- sartorial perfection is contrived and Astaire, Windsor, were never perfectly put together.
post #45 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger
To say, as Manton did, that "Most men contrive their knots so that there is a small dimple...." (Italics mine), is hardly the same thing as characterizing the dimple as a contrivance in the negative sense you seem to be suggesting here--artificial, odd, or scheming, or whatever it is you are suggesting. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, to contrive means: "to form or create in an artistic or ingenious manner."

I dont think i was suggesting anything. You introduced manton's quote into a conversation about tie dimples. I wasn't sure if you were introducing it as authority or because it was confusing you. I simply am not sure why you placed it here. However, I took it on its face value. I understand that it is a chronic theme with the book that the author's meaning needs to be explained and maybe you are correct that he meant it as "ingenious". To me, taken in the phrase's totality with what follows, I would find it hard to imagine that "ingenious" could replace "contrived".

But Im not suggesting anything, I was working off of what you placed here for me to consider. I suppose only the author can clear this up. Perhaps he would be so good?

I see that Steve B. above also thought the phrase used "contrived" in the common alternative sense. I think many people would see it that way. I also stand by my first and most important assertion that most men cannot dimple a tie, and to suggest that their lack of savoir faire has in fact been the height of style all along is an injustice to someone trying to learn how to dress well. What the Duke of Windsor did after 60+ years of experimenting with and obsessing over clothes and style is hardly authority for someone who doesnt know what a dimple is.

If the author wants to explain to me what he meant, that's his business. I certainly do not owe him a scientific analysis of what he meant. When I write, I write clearly, or at least I do my best. If people dont understand what I write, let me know and Ill clear it up. I hope I am not writing for people who can only follow an "expert".

I dont need to prove anything to anyone. That might sound awful at first read but in fact I think Im most in everyone's corner. If people dont like what I write, dont believe what I write, or dont like me personally, youre going to find as some did on another forum, you are wasting your time. I have no ego invested in this, and my track record in the community proves that. I say what I say, and I have no profit or end goal out of any of this beyond sharing my thoughts/experiences and observations. Certainly, I will never need anyone to say that I am the only voice of elegance.

In the occasional instance where what I wrote is misunderstood, I appreciate being able to clarify what I wrote. Which of course, Roger, you are permitting me to do.

Im also not trying to "make" anyone do anything. Maybe thats what separates me from "others" here most of all. I will wear what I will wear, Im giving a few observations and suggestions. Wear a dimple, wear none, or wear the tie around your head like a pirate.

People want to copy what I wear in real life. It doesnt flatter me. I havent much interest in dressing the world and it is often a time consumption for me to give advice and pick clothes for people, or talk about my clothes source. Which is why writing about it has been such a therapeutic outlet for me.


Quote:
You also are overlooking the style in which The Suit was written--that of Macchiavelli in The Prince. Adherence to this style (the reasons for which have been amply provided elsewhere) accounts for vocabulary and sentences like the one quoted. The sentence, taken literally, simply says that most men try to create artistically-pleasing knots with a dimple, and how that can be seen as self-serving escapes me completely.

I dunno what to tell you here. Im not overlooking the style, I just haven't the time to commit to unravel it in every circumstance. It comes down again to the target audience. If he was writing the book for someone like me, I suppose it's a light titter or maybe he is doing a variation of Old-Boy cigar smoking, table thumping. However, the average man is going to be very confused with the subtleties of meaning that haunt the book. I am constantly trying to write things which are useful for an intelligent but perhaps unitiated audience interested in style (as I once was), there isnt anyone Im trying to impress, including myself.

A paragraph like that says to me that a very small clubby audience was intended for that particular message. Maybe going forward, people should write books about style without the contrivance of copying the wit of long dead writers?


Quote:
Couldn't it just as easily be said that the dimple in a tie might draw others' attention to it in a way that could cause them to miss the more important aspects of the tie?

As to the dimple, No. But I see what youre saying. The way the tie is knotted by the DOW is quite pleasing, the way it is by the headless figure is not pleasing. It is not the dimple or absence of one which is distracting, it is the singularly clumsy example in the photo, which I find an improper focal point. Maybe the wearer does not want someone to concentrate on his face. If that is the case, he has achieved this effect with aplomb.

The occasional photo of the Duke in his later life wearing a more relaxed, dimpleless knot proves my point exactly, and i am thankful someone else took the time to post it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Tie Dimple Debate