or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Meet Justin Timberlake, the new Cary Grant
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Meet Justin Timberlake, the new Cary Grant - Page 3

post #31 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by bemaverick View Post

Wow Cary Grant lived in a completely different era from Timberlake. So the comparison, style-wise would be plain wrong in my opinion.


 A Cary Grant wannabee is more like it. lol8[1].gif

post #32 of 47
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2007-04-08/features/0704040449_1_vest-three-piece-suit-wear

Meh. That advice might work sometimes, just as Justin Timberlake's style works sometimes. Even using Cary Grant as a style icon back in the heyday of classic clothing - borrowing heavily from someone's style is never a great idea.
post #33 of 47
post #34 of 47
Thread Starter 
Not to flog a dead horse, but I expanded on this idea somewhat on my blog after seeing yet another NYTimes article on a famous person that has somehow become an "authority" on men's style, despite the fact that the article makes it very clear that said celebrity does not even dress himself. In this case, its Carmelo Anthony, whom I assure you was not singled out based on my dislike of the Knickerbockers.

I'm not sure where the most of the blame should be directed for this strange trend - although GQ seems to be a leading culprit. Allowing a man who has his entire outfit pre-selected and air-mailed to him to dispense style advice to the masses strikes me as . . . misguided? I'm not sure what the word is.

http://uptowndandy.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-rise-of-blank-slates.html
post #35 of 47
I like the term "blank slate" - it describes the process quite well but has further connotations. It seems to me there is a divergence in more formal Classic Menswear. In one camp you have the old-school approach which has been well documented in Manton's book. This is the blue/grey suit, blue shirt, neat patterned tie + tasteful pocket square approach. On SF, it is accepted as orthodox. This manner of dressing evolves but at a very slow pace. Someone dressing by the "rules" would not look out of place in a 1930s photo or a 2013 boardroom.

On the other hand, you have the fashion designers who have co-opted classic CM and merged it with their fashion-oriented RTW approach to marketing clothes. They use the same model as in women's fashion and apply it to men. Tie widths, lapel widths, pant pleats, snugness of fit, colours all vary over time. This form of mens clothing evolves much more rapidly. Look at GQ covers ovr a 10 year period and the changes are alomost startling.

GQ and Esquire focus almost exclusively on the the latter. The editors pick "stylish" examples of men who conform to their esrthetic. This form of dressing is not really about building a wardrobe that stands the test of time and allows for mixing and matching. Rather, it is based on "looks" that adhere to the designers current colection.

So while i understand why the magzines act the way they do it is a polar opposite to my own view of CM. Asking the model to provide advice on style does seem silly though when they are simply aping the underlying designer's vision. Better to ask the dsigner or the stylist why they chose a particular item or outfit Finally, in thei form of dressing, having the model appear doll-like or costumey is almost inevitable because that is exactly what it is..
post #36 of 47
No dimple in the shoulder of the chambray suit...flawless. A true visionary. Now all we need to do is get a scrap of the cloth from which this suit was cut and burn it...if it's polyester-free, he is indeed our savior.
post #37 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaymanS View Post

No dimple in the shoulder of the chambray suit...flawless. A true visionary. Now all we need to do is get a scrap of the cloth from which this suit was cut and burn it...if it's polyester-free, he is indeed our savior.

If he had 20 of those suits AND they met your criteria I would agree
post #38 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by bertie View Post

I like the term "blank slate" - it describes the process quite well but has further connotations. It seems to me there is a divergence in more formal Classic Menswear. In one camp you have the old-school approach which has been well documented in Manton's book. This is the blue/grey suit, blue shirt, neat patterned tie + tasteful pocket square approach. On SF, it is accepted as orthodox. This manner of dressing evolves but at a very slow pace. Someone dressing by the "rules" would not look out of place in a 1930s photo or a 2013 boardroom.

On the other hand, you have the fashion designers who have co-opted classic CM and merged it with their fashion-oriented RTW approach to marketing clothes. They use the same model as in women's fashion and apply it to men. Tie widths, lapel widths, pant pleats, snugness of fit, colours all vary over time. This form of mens clothing evolves much more rapidly. Look at GQ covers ovr a 10 year period and the changes are alomost startling.

GQ and Esquire focus almost exclusively on the the latter. The editors pick "stylish" examples of men who conform to their esrthetic. This form of dressing is not really about building a wardrobe that stands the test of time and allows for mixing and matching. Rather, it is based on "looks" that adhere to the designers current colection.

So while i understand why the magzines act the way they do it is a polar opposite to my own view of CM. Asking the model to provide advice on style does seem silly though when they are simply aping the underlying designer's vision. Better to ask the dsigner or the stylist why they chose a particular item or outfit Finally, in thei form of dressing, having the model appear doll-like or costumey is almost inevitable because that is exactly what it is..

You must be on crack if you think CM stated the same from 1930s. Rules have not changed much but the cut and style are vastly different.

Why cling onto igent's nonexistent ideological idea of perpetual classics menswear?
post #39 of 47
Quote:

Very nice and sensible article, especially for GQ. He certainly knew what he was talking about, thanks for posting this.

post #40 of 47

You do have to give the guy a little credit for doing this if nothing else....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhwbxEfy7fg

post #41 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post

You must be on crack if you think CM stated the same from 1930s. Rules have not changed much but the cut and style are vastly different.

Why cling onto igent's nonexistent ideological idea of perpetual classics menswear?

Don't think I said they did not change only that the evolution was slower than that of designer fashions. Not sure I understand the last sentence.
post #42 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post


Why cling onto igent's nonexistent ideological idea of perpetual classics menswear?

Because we voluntarily subscribe to a certain sartorial tradition, and thus awareness of its history and evolution is important. Traditions change, of course, but not as rapidly as trends. The evolution of classic menswear is more studied than the wild and frenetic changes of the fashion forward.

 

Aesthetics dictate, either directly or indirectly, the choice of our clothing. They are subjective. Certain aesthetic directions change more rapidly than others; adhering to a tradition provides a buffer against the fickle shifting of fashion and ensures that when we look back at pictures of ourselves twenty years from now we don't think "what the fuck was I wearing?"

post #43 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claghorn View Post

Because we voluntarily subscribe to a certain sartorial tradition, and thus awareness of its history and evolution is important. Traditions change, of course, but not as rapidly as trends. The evolution of classic menswear is more studied than the wild and frenetic changes of the fashion forward.

 

Aesthetics dictate, either directly or indirectly, the choice of our clothing. They are subjective. Certain aesthetic directions change more rapidly than others; adhering to a tradition provides a buffer against the fickle shifting of fashion and ensures that when we look back at pictures of ourselves twenty years from now we don't think "what the fuck was I wearing?"

One man's "tradition" is another man's "trend." These types of wordy rationalizations are stupid and used much too often here. I think "what the fuck was he wearing" at least once everytime that I look into WAYWRN. Other men may think that those outfits look fantastic. Who's right? Who's wrong? Who cares?...not this guycool.gif

post #44 of 47

Well, trends and traditions are apples and oranges, as you can have trends within tradition. But to say one man's trend is another's tradition is, well, wrong, unless you want to expand the scope of the trend to the point that it loses relevancy to the discussion (in which case, yes, a century old tradition can represent a trend in a millennium of clothing).

 

Regardless, there is clearly a tradition within context behind menswear. Without it, there really isn't much point besides what you are required to wear for whatever field you work. As this is a menswear forum, we can assume that people here are at least marginally interested in that tradition and therefore should be praised, criticized, and advised with respect to it.

 

And while you certainly have "what the fuck moments" in WAYWRN, they are fewer and of a lesser extent than those in the SW&D WAYWT (again, apples and oranges since most there don't care what they think of what they wore twenty years from now), and those moments usually arise from either poorly executed fits or fits which deviate overly from the tradition.

post #45 of 47
Thread Starter 
Many thanks for the comments regarding the "blank slates." On a somewhat related note, have any of you been watching the NBA playoffs? The NBA catwalk is threatening to relegate the actual games to a sideshow. I've become intrigued by this not so recent phenoment, but you've really got to see it to believe it:

http://uptowndandy.blogspot.com/2013/05/miami-vice-stylin-profilin-on-nba.html
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Meet Justin Timberlake, the new Cary Grant