or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › If you do not own the following things, you are not well dressed
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

If you do not own the following things, you are not well dressed - Page 17

post #241 of 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzl View Post

talking about awesome loafers. these are to die for..., hands down. . .
the loafer is the type of shoe, where you can see the biggest difference from bespoke to RTW, if you can...
I found the photos of my Foster & S. loafers recently. Will post them over the weekend.
post #242 of 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post

Mind you, young padawan, I didn't say Manolo's list was "useless and asinine" -- quite the contrary, I think it's well-chosen but presumes the wearer would actually be in situations he would wear that clothing. Owning this stuff doesn't make you well-dressed if you don't have occasion to wear it.

Well, we'll never know what you really said, because you deleted it. I tried to resuscitate your post with all my DH might, but it was beyond my power. Perhaps if all the DHs gather in a circle and chant your name over a dead cat and burn an RJcat square with a flame lit by a Parisian gas lamp, we'll be able to bring it back from the dead.

Of course, simply owning the things and not wearing them (or wearing them well, for that matter) is insufficient. I think we all knew that. As for occasions: well, you don't need much of one to wear an odd jacket or a suit. I do much of the time. Ask Dopey. He wanders around Amsterdam Avenue in a tweed suit and a pith helmet.

And actually, that raises a good point. What I abhor most of all is treating all this stuff as a sort of costume. Something to play dress-up in. I wear my tailored things most any time I step out of my home. At the very least, I'll have on my pents and a nice bespoke shirt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post

I may be Patient Zero for acquiring oddball items, they keep me from answering Camus' fundamental question of existence.
The DB "more advanced" comment is an inside (Inner Circle?) joke from before your time. I take no position on whether one needs one to be well-dressed. If I were still ordering suits, an A&S DB made in the old way (SB-size buttons, nonfunctioning cuffs) in a light grey flannel would be one of the next items on my list. Who knows, maybe we could be light grey DB suit twins (fraternal).

Nothing is wrong with oddball items. But there is good oddball and bad oddball. Then there is all oddball, which is always bad oddball.
post #243 of 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post

Mind you, young padawan, I didn't say Manolo's list was "useless and asinine" -- quite the contrary, I think it's well-chosen but presumes the wearer would actually be in situations he would wear that clothing. Owning this stuff doesn't make you well-dressed if you don't have occasion to wear it.
I may be Patient Zero for acquiring oddball items, they keep me from answering Camus' fundamental question of existence.
The DB "more advanced" comment is an inside (Inner Circle?) joke from before your time. I take no position on whether one needs one to be well-dressed. If I were still ordering suits, an A&S DB made in the old way (SB-size buttons, nonfunctioning cuffs) in a light grey flannel would be one of the next items on my list. Who knows, maybe we could be light grey DB suit twins (fraternal).

Here, I just made an attempt to keep all these discussions separate so let's deport our musins here, they derail the more practical thread and I would say most don't care.

http://www.styleforum.net/t/310030/philsophy-of-mc-style/0_100
post #244 of 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzl View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post

..

oh hai. griesvelt, cheers
Oh hai. Fucking Schwechat security made me get rid of my duty-free Zweigelt right before I got on the plane last month. My favorite red, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post

Is putting a DB suit in the "'more advanced'" section a subtle attempt at trolling?
Something is wrong when no one gets my "more advanced forum" joke.
Quote:
Why did you feel the need to point out something completely obvious?
See my original post in this threq. Wait, you can't, hahaha.
Quote:
Quote:
Also, sp00 is better dressed than maf00fan,
So, so wrong.
I live for controversy. We thrive on inconsistency, vermin living off the gradient. Also, how does one shut up a barking spaniel?
Quote:
Quote:
In any event, I would argue that to be well-dressed, you need both clothes that fit and a sense of style, and some of us have both and some of us don't.
Sure, of course, they should all fit. However, someone could have NO sense of style, but own everything on this list, and wear nothing but, and be better dressed than 90% of the men out there.
Well, that's setting a pretty low fucking bar, isn't it? No snark, totally serious.
post #245 of 643
Thread Starter 
ok, 95%

oh, and I got your joke.
post #246 of 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

Here, I just made an attempt to keep all these discussions separate so let's deport our musins here, they derail the more practical thread and I would say most don't care.
http://www.styleforum.net/t/310030/philsophy-of-mc-style/0_100
Talk of Heidegger makes me sad for reasons I explained in the White Shirt thread but won't repeat in the new one since to be OT once is a tragedy, but twice is careless.
post #247 of 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

Talk of Heidegger makes me sad for reasons I explained in this thread but won't repeat in the new one since to be OT once is a tragedy, but twice is careless.

Yeah I saw that, interesting anecdote as he may have been one of the last ancient Heideggerians. Dreyfus did meet him but at a much later date (Heidegger died in '76 I think).
post #248 of 643
now this is taking off like a true StyleForvm threak.
post #249 of 643
RJ, while you're here, why don't you make yourself useful: http://www.styleforum.net/t/309955/sartorial-london-the-official-thread .
post #250 of 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

They are awesome. They are a variant on Alden's Leisure Hand Sewn, which Alden makes in both calf and shell. I have a pair in brown calf from Alden and the Brooks Brothers in Shell. Brooks Brothers' shell version is unlined whereas Alden's is lined (I think). I could not find Alden's in shell in a narrow width, which is why I got the BB model but all else being equal, I would prefer it anyway. Like Foo, I have trouble fitting into loafers, especially because I usually need an orthotic but I had these modified so they fit and the orthotic corrections were built in. I have had both pairs resoled, possibly more than once.

i will mull it over. i think i may age 20 years just by putting them on though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Well, we'll never know what you really said, because you deleted it.


its still here, look a tad harder.
post #251 of 643
Thread Starter 
Strauss attended lectures by Heideggar and considered him one of the two most brilliant men of the century.
post #252 of 643
I think I'm in the minority of loafer fans. I even like them with (casual) suits. There are so many awful versions though, that I understand the hate. Chukkas, chelseas or monks are all probably better alternatives for the loafer spot on the List. but, for warm weather, I like loafers.

post #253 of 643
Thread Starter 
I never wear my loafers with suits.
post #254 of 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post

Too substantial for a summer outfit, can also be rather overmuch for a coat without a tie.

I disagree for a medium brown wingtip...like this one:



I wear them with practically everything.
post #255 of 643
Did RJs post ask for a Foo vs. Spoo fit battle?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › If you do not own the following things, you are not well dressed