or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › whnay.'s good taste thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

whnay.'s good taste thread - Page 319

post #4771 of 13299
I find silk with tweed works best with madder and other less overtly shiny finishes.
post #4772 of 13299
As someone who is currently living in the grips of 3 straight weeks of -40ish (with windchill) weather with no reprieve in sight, I feel reasonably comfortable in my opinions on this. A fedora is not a cold weather hat. It is useless in real cold, particularly with wind. As are homburgs, bowlers, and anything else of that nature. As Stitchy already said, the problem is that the ears and lower part of the head are left exposed with those kinds of hats. Similarly, the Ushanka does not cover the ears. Yesterday morning my ears would have received frostbite in approximately 30 seconds if left exposed. They need to be covered.

Ultimately there is no functional answer that fits with the "good taste" aspect of this thread. But having said that, the best approach is two pronged. First, you need a good scarf that will be bundled around your neck and lower face/head, which can be done in good taste. Second, a wool cap/beanie/toque is really the only logical way to go. You can go with a fur trapper hat, or something of that nature with ear flaps as well but style is not going to come into play. When it gets really cold, function trumps form every time.

Hope that helps.
post #4773 of 13299
Yeah... I think I'm just going to break down and buy a wool watch cap. Sigh.

Good news is it's not usually cold enough to need one in New York, it's just when we get these cold snaps for a week or so.
post #4774 of 13299
I can't wear hats, so I tell myself the suffering makes me more stylish.
post #4775 of 13299
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

I can't wear hats, so I tell myself the suffering makes me more stylish.

This is the approach that I have heretofore taken. But my walk home last night in the wind has changed my mind as to the value of said suffering.
post #4776 of 13299
Quote:
Originally Posted by aravenel View Post

The other problem with a Ushanka is that my primary overcoat is a double-breasted navy wool, which, combined with such a hat, I fear would veer far into costume-land frown.gif

i dont see the problem here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by denning View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
As someone who is currently living in the grips of 3 straight weeks of -40ish (with windchill) weather with no reprieve in sight, I feel reasonably comfortable in my opinions on this. A fedora is not a cold weather hat. It is useless in real cold, particularly with wind. As are homburgs, bowlers, and anything else of that nature. As Stitchy already said, the problem is that the ears and lower part of the head are left exposed with those kinds of hats.
Similarly, the Ushanka does not cover the ears. Yesterday morning my ears would have received frostbite in approximately 30 seconds if left exposed. They need to be covered. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Ultimately there is no functional answer that fits with the "good taste" aspect of this thread. But having said that, the best approach is two pronged. First, you need a good scarf that will be bundled around your neck and lower face/head, which can be done in good taste. Second, a wool cap/beanie/toque is really the only logical way to go. You can go with a fur trapper hat, or something of that nature with ear flaps as well but style is not going to come into play. When it gets really cold, function trumps form every time.
Hope that helps.

i knew a real cold weather guy would get it!

i meant the kind that can be untied up top and cover the ears if necessary. like so. smile.gif


Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

I can't wear hats, so I tell myself the suffering makes me more stylish.

good thing you live in NYC not siberia. or you would be stylishly dead. that would suck.
post #4777 of 13299
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

i dont see the problem here.

Basically, a double breasted navy overcoat is already fairly military looking--adding a hat that for most of the US has connotations of Russian military seems like a bit too much to me.
post #4778 of 13299
Huh, I haven't seen your specific overcoat, but I think a navy overcoat is such a well-established staple of menswear that it would be hard to imagine anything making it look costume.
post #4779 of 13299
This isn't mine, but mine is very similar to this. Perhaps I'm just being overly conscious about it.

I do love the coat though.

post #4780 of 13299
Nah, if it's just your typical Ulster, I think you're all good. It is perhaps the standard men's overcoat. Hat yourself away.
post #4781 of 13299
That's actually a Guards coat. I have one. It's more formal than an Ulster, which typically has patch pockets and is made from heavy tweed (I believe it originated from the countrysides of Ireland).

Not that it really matters. There are some archetypes for classic coats, but generally speaking, the field is very fluid.

Anyway, I wear my Guards coat sometimes in the city, but not really outside of that.
post #4782 of 13299
Caustic Man: I think the tie would work well with conservative worsted or woolen flannel. I don't think you need a wool tie with this jacket, though. The contrast of texture with a silk (a less shiny silk, to be sure) would be great. The hank is not to my taste, but leaving that aside, it would work better with a more conservative/city look. I wouldn't pair it with that tie under just about any circumstance, though.

To finish on a positive note, I like the color combination. Even in the same colors, if that hank were in a wool/silk blend (sorry, Stitchy) instead of that juicy silk, it would be good.
post #4783 of 13299
Ah, never been good with distinguishing overcoat types. Seems to me whether you're talking Ulster, guard, polo, etc., they all meld into each other. Depending on the details, it's often hard to say if a coat is one thing or another.

Here I guess you are definitely right, though. It does not have the Ulster lapels and collar, nor does it have the cuffed sleeves or patch pockets typical of Ulster overcoats. If this coat had the downward pointing lapels of an Ulster though, what would it be? An Ulster with atypical pockets and sleeves, or a guard's coat with a funny lapel?
post #4784 of 13299
Quote:
Originally Posted by aravenel View Post

Basically, a double breasted navy overcoat is already fairly military looking--adding a hat that for most of the US has connotations of Russian military seems like a bit too much to me.

well, everyone went all serious on me. i meant, i dont see the problem looking like a costume as opposed to freezing your ass off.

but now that i see the subsequent posts, of course i meant that i think in all seriousness it would not be a costume-y issue.

peepwall[1].gif
post #4785 of 13299
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Ah, never been good with distinguishing overcoat types. Seems to me whether you're talking Ulster, guard, polo, etc., they all meld into each other. Depending on the details, it's often hard to say if a coat is one thing or another.

Here I guess you are definitely right, though. It does not have the Ulster lapels and collar, nor does it have the cuffed sleeves or patch pockets typical of Ulster overcoats. If this coat had the downward pointing lapels of an Ulster though, what would it be? An Ulster with atypical pockets and sleeves, or a guard's coat with a funny lapel?

Yes, there are archetypes, but possibly only in theory (with few exceptions, maybe, like the Polo, which really does have a certain look). In practice though, many of these details get mish mashed together and formed into new coats, which we often don't know what to call.

It's been like that since each coat's invention. Count d'Orsay is said to have popularized the paletot when he was caught out in the rain one day. He spotted some sailor wearing a long, heavy waistcoat; befriended him; bought his coat; and then left him in the cold. The next day, when he went to Hyde Park, as many dandies did at the time, the other men swooned over his "innovation." They called him a genius, and then went to have similar coats made. Except they had them made in an unimaginable number of varieties. Today, I think we still have a working definition for a paletot, but that doesn't mean in practice there's one and only one design. Each thing can look quite different and still be considered a paletot. It's not like navy blazers, for example, which have a more "hard" definition.

If Costi's coat had an Ulster collar, I would personally still call it a Guards coat (maybe a Guards coat with an Ulster collar?). I think the material and welted pockets still doesn't make it rustic/ casual enough to be an Ulster.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › whnay.'s good taste thread