This is a few days old now, and perhaps it was posted here already. The article bothered me for several reasons - primarily because of the attempt to define Timberlake as some kind of sartorial standard-bearer and direct descendant of Cary Grant. I found that strange considering Timberlake is described as essentially a blank slate for fashion designers to fill in, while Grant developed his own sense of style over the course of many years. But maybe its just me . . .
Don't people here try to define others as "sartorial standards" all of the time? What's the difference between that and what you described?...the fact that you don't agree with it? It sounds like hypocrisy to me.