The State of Black Tie: Your Observations - Page 67

Originally Posted by EriQ009 

The President wore the same ensemble to his first inaugural ball, if I'm not mistaken. I'm certain the choice of a notch-lapel jacket instead of a tailcoat was a deliberate one. As with all things political, no small measure of calculation is involved. In this instance, his counsel must have been that a jacket with a notch lapel would be more relatable to the average American. A proper tailcoat and white-tie attire, on the other hand, might make him appear elitist or out of touch. Unfortunate, because it would have been nice for the President to be properly attired at his own ball, even if his past brushes with white tie might have needed a little help.

Originally Posted by mafoofan 

If black tie is optional, I am wearing black tie. Not because of any complex social calculus, but because I like to make use of my tux. I could not care less if no one else wears one.

Originally Posted by musicmax 


No what's insufferably elitist is your belief that you know "the rules" but that everyone else is an unwashed rube who doesn't. See my actual data point below.
I didn't (specify a dress code) and they didn't (show up in khakis) and I don't (run in high social circles).

I live in North Carolina, got married in 2008, did thermographed invitations in Edwardian Script with no dress code but with the ceremony time announced as "half after six o'clock in the evening". The men who owned tuxes wore them, and the rest wore suits. Maybe one sportcoat - I'd have to check the pictures. A few guys did consult with our most "fashion-forward" friend as to whether tuxes would be appropriate, and she properly told them that the ceremony time and invitation typeface implied that evening wear was welcome.

We specifically omitted a dress code so as to not make the men who didn't own tuxes and didn't want to go to the expense of renting one feel like they were inadequate by having to opt out of "black tie optional".

Originally Posted by musicmax 


"Cocktail attire" is ridiculously ambiguous. I have a "cocktail attire" event next month at a local museum. I'm torn between wearing a Brioni tux or a Jack Daniels t-shirt & Canada Dry ballcap.

Originally Posted by msulinski 


That's pretty good that you were able to get people to wear a tuxedo to your wedding without explicitly stating so. I think you were only able to pull it off is because of your "fashion-forward" friend and that you do run in higher social circles than you admit/realize.

The comment about the Brioni tuxedo kind of confirms that for me. Most people I know don't own a tuxedo, would never consider wearing one to a wedding unless they were explicitly told to do so, have never heard of Brioni, and will never own a garment even approaching the price of someting from Brioni.

Originally Posted by mafoofan 

My view is that adults can make their own decisions and you don't have to worry about offending by stipulating black tie as a host. If they don't want to pay to rent a dinner suit and would rather not attend, it's up to them. Just don't be offended if they don't show up.

Originally Posted by musicmax 


No what's insufferably elitist is your belief that you know "the rules" but that everyone else is an unwashed rube who doesn't.

Originally Posted by musicmax 

Obama wore a peak-lapel tailcoat to the Al Smith Dinner, though a size or two large, with a turndown-collar shirt with black studs; Romney wore wing collar with black studs; Gary Johnson wore - oh wait, he wasn't invited. Screw Al Smith.

Originally Posted by mafoofan 

If black tie is optional, I am wearing black tie. Not because of any complex social calculus, but because I like to make use of my tux. I could not care less if no one else wears one.