or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › HOF: What Are You Wearing Right Now - Part IV (starting May 2014)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HOF: What Are You Wearing Right Now - Part IV (starting May 2014) - Page 1214

post #18196 of 43842

You know what? You're right. What are we doing here? We've been talking about this for hours. Fuck...

post #18197 of 43842
Alright @edmorel I'm nowhere near my laptop so I am going to post my opinion.with typos and grammatical errors

I think the issue I have with what is considered "classic" menswear within the walls of sf is that it is a little misleading. Of course alot of who we consider the old guard contributed to building a foundation that many on this forum have followed. But many of their contributions in terms of rules stem from opinions, preferences and idiosyncrasies from said posters (no white shirt, hate for yellow and red ties, one shoe, etc)
You don't even need to venture far to see this. Fnb posters consider vox foo and Manton the epitome of igentry- the ideology that came and dismantled and crumbled "classic" menswear. So even in their own minds they have a very different idea of what classic menswear is.

What I'm trying to say( and what I have been saying for years in this forum) is that the idea of classic menswear as we see it doesn't really exist. What we have are standards that we keep editing for the times and that is fine with me.

As long as you are well within those standards (which nick clearly is) then I think it is fine to participate in the dsiccsion of what we consider CM

Now as for the excellence part. That's really a subjective thing. Some people know how to edit the standards better than others.
post #18198 of 43842
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post


Not "calling you out" nor do I care about the current argument going on but I want to respond to your post due to the fact that I feel I owe a debt of gratitude to the people you mentioned (vox/manton/foo) along with people like whnay,iammatt, rjman, AHarris, docholiday, TCHouston, whoopee and a bunch other that have long disappeared.

I understand the thought process behind "its my style, so it can't be wrong" but classic menswear is not a free for all. Whether you want to call them rules, guidelines, framework, historical context etc, there is right and wrong in dressing classically. What the guys that I mentioned did, was show a correct way of dressing. You didn't have to dress like them to get accolades nor were accolades the point. The point was to show classic proportions/color balancing etc and applying it to your style. Many people learned from them and became much better dressers due to the many conversations that were had about cut, fabric, texture etc. Vox in particular was a great resource as he was one that wore bespoke from Italy, England along with new and vintage ready to wear from everywhere. And that's not even mentioning all the helpful PM's that he would send or respond to about dress questions.

The problem with the "there are no rules" approach is that it excuses everything as personal choice. Sneakers with a DB suit? Sprezzatura! A tie that falls 6 inches short of your pants waist? Stylish Individuality! Cargo dress pants? Modern Luxury! etc, etc. There is no problem with dressing however you want, the Earth will still spin on its axis. But when a forum is called Classic Menswear there should be some standard, otherwise there is no learning, there is no advancement, there is no excellence.

The people that you mentioned as being good dressers now would still, for the most part, have gotten accolades in the 'ole days. But most of my learning came from criticism's of my cuts/fits/proportions. You can hate Vox for his "I'm richer than God" approach. You can hate Manton for his "I know everything" approach. And you can hate Whnay/Foo for their "we're not fully grown" approach. But to say that this thread is better when some of the best teachers are no longer here is rather incorrect.

I agree that there is value to knowing the historical context of tailored clothing.  I disagree that this is "right" or "wrong" way to do dress classically.  I do think that it can be done better, or done worse.  And I think that at this time, classical tailored clothing should be seen as a "jumping off point".  This doesn't mean the things are a free-for-all.  Just like for clothing inspired by military clothing, or by workwear, or by punk or by grunge, "modern" interpretations of classic tailored clothing can be done well or poorly.  Just because something is not rigid and unchanging does not mean that it's "everything goes."  This is a false dichotomy.

post #18199 of 43842
What fok said. And ed, i meant no disrespect to vox, manton, or foo. I learned a lot from them, too, but i dont think it's a bad thing to branch away from what theyve taught. Just different.
post #18200 of 43842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tirailleur1 View Post

Alright @edmorel I'm nowhere near my laptop so I am going to post my opinion.with typos and grammatical errors

I think the issue I have with what is considered "classic" menswear within the walls of sf is that it is a little misleading. Of course alot of who we consider the old guard contributed to building a foundation that many on this forum have followed. But many of their contributions in terms of rules stem from opinions, preferences and idiosyncrasies from said posters (no white shirt, hate for yellow and red ties, one shoe, etc)
You don't even need to venture far to see this. Fnb posters consider vox foo and Manton the epitome of igentry- the ideology that came and dismantled and crumbled "classic" menswear. So even in their own minds they have a very different idea of what classic menswear is.

What I'm trying to say( and what I have been saying for years in this forum) is that the idea of classic menswear as we see it doesn't really exist. What we have are standards that we keep editing for the times and that is fine with me.

As long as you are well within those standards (which nick clearly is) then I think it is fine to participate in the dsiccsion of what we consider CM

Now as for the excellence part. That's really a subjective thing. Some people know how to edit the standards better than others.

Tira said a few things that I hadn't thought of, and the few things that I said, he said better.

post #18201 of 43842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tirailleur1 View Post

Alright @edmorel I'm nowhere near my laptop so I am going to post my opinion.with typos and grammatical errors

I think the issue I have with what is considered "classic" menswear within the walls of sf is that it is a little misleading. Of course alot of who we consider the old guard contributed to building a foundation that many on this forum have followed. But many of their contributions in terms of rules stem from opinions, preferences and idiosyncrasies from said posters (no white shirt, hate for yellow and red ties, one shoe, etc)
You don't even need to venture far to see this. Fnb posters consider vox foo and Manton the epitome of igentry- the ideology that came and dismantled and crumbled "classic" menswear. So even in their own minds they have a very different idea of what classic menswear is.

What I'm trying to say( and what I have been saying for years in this forum) is that the idea of classic menswear as we see it doesn't really exist. What we have are standards that we keep editing for the times and that is fine with me.

As long as you are well within those standards (which nick clearly is) then I think it is fine to participate in the dsiccsion of what we consider CM

Now as for the excellence part. That's really a subjective thing. Some people know how to edit the standards better than others.

Well, I'll just reply this one time than go back to my little cave. The Foo one shoe thing, was never treated as a "rule". If anything, he got more shit for that than anything anyone else on this forum has ever gotten. The one shoe is actually more of an example of what you are advancing, Foo knows that a one shoe is not going to be appropriate for every outfit, yet he didn't care and went with it. Nothing wrong with that. The white shirt thing, that is actually very interesting. There is a historical context for white shirts (formalwear/"white collar" work etc). Within that context, a solid white shirt in a silky cotton does not make sense with a tweed jacket (country wear). Now can you wear a textured white shirt, or an oxford cloth with a sportcoat? Sure. Actually, you can wear whatever shirt you want but their point was, there is a logical reason why it was not done and once you knew that reason, you can find ways of doing it where it would work. Same thing with patch pockets. Once they became de riguer, they were showing up on DB suits, worsted suits etc. Well, patch pockets have historically been on the casual spectrum. When you take a worsted two piece suit and put patch pockets on it, you are going against the original intent of both the suit and the patch pockets. Is that wrong? Yes, to me it is.

At the end of the day, the suit/sportcoat have been unchanged for 50+ years. We can edit it to fit our times but there is a base, a foundation that needs to be understood. The Classic menswear that we discuss is not an "idea", its something that has existed for many decades. As you mention, we have standards and they have been edited over the years, but editing is different than saying something doesn't exist.
post #18202 of 43842
Quote:
Originally Posted by bienluienapris View Post

Today : Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)










I dont think it is exactly what you are going for but the look of this immediately reminds me of Roger Moore's Bond (minus the shoes) I thinks its the tan suit with brownish tie. Would love to see a full pic of everything sometime. Love it!
Edit: Is the tie green?
post #18203 of 43842
Whether or not there is right and wrong there are definitely things/guidines that lead ones to looking better.

I belive the single most important factor is coherency. It's when people begin to stray from that that things start to fall apart imo.

There are a million ways to look great within the universe of "tailored menswear." Just to name a few vibes, Barims, Vox, EFV, Manton, Tira, Cleav, O/O, TTO, The Armoury Crew, Nick, Braddock, Spoo... These are guys that all dress really really well, but cover an extremely wide range of styles. The common thread is coherency.

All these guys keep the entirety of their fits, head to toe, in a coherent fashion. To use one of Eds examples, there is nothing wrong with a DB suit or sneakers, but they do not look good together because they are so far from coherent.

Bringing it back to what started this whole brouhaha, Nicks shoes. Like them or not, his more beat up shoes are much more coherent with his entire look than high polish shoes would have been. The same way Tiras loafers worked so well with his suit and tie. And on the flip side, most Manton fits would look wildly incoherent with shoes not shined and crisp.

You can wear pretty much whatever you want within some reason, but its only going to work if the entire picture is coherent.
post #18204 of 43842
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

Whether or not there is right and wrong there are definitely things/guidines that lead ones to looking better.

I belive the single most important factor is coherency. It's when people begin to stray from that that things start to fall apart imo.

There are a million ways to look great within the universe of "tailored menswear." Just to name a few vibes, Barims, Vox, EFV, Manton, Tira, Cleav, O/O, Big Beard (forget his SF handle), Nick, Braddock, Spoo... These are guys that all dress really really well, but cover an extremely wide range of styles. The common thread is coherency.

All these guys keep the entirety of their fits, head to toe, in a coherent fashion. To use one of Eds examples, there is nothing wrong with a DB suit or sneakers, but they do not look good together because they are so far from coherent.

Bringing it back to what started this whole brouhaha, Nicks shoes. Like them or not, his more beat up shoes are much more coherent with his entire look than high polish shoes would have been. The same way Tiras loafers worked so well with his suit and tie. And on the flip side, most Manton fits would look wildly incoherent with shoes not shined and crisp.

You can wear pretty much whatever you want within some reason, but its only going to work if the entire picture is coherent.

What? No sugarbutch in that list? I thought we were down, homie.
post #18205 of 43842
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarbutch View Post

What? No sugarbutch in that list? I thought we were down, homie.

As I noted, it wasn't an exhaustive list, homie.
post #18206 of 43842

Personally

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caustic Man View Post
 

You know what? You're right. What are we doing here? We've been talking about this for hours. Fuck...

 

You started it!

 

I enjoyed the last few pages....I hope those who have not been around too long take the time to read through it.

post #18207 of 43842
Thread Starter 
a) nobody suggested NickP mirror shine his shoes. Just to be clear

b) Ed, please don't go back into your cave

b.5) I have a worsted suit with patch pockets. I rarely reach for it these days

c) I'm a big proponent of coherence with varying levels of calculated chaos

d) classic menswear absolutely exists. But it is dynamic. Tira and I had a good discussion about this somewhere.
post #18208 of 43842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claghorn View Post

a) nobody suggested NickP mirror shine his shoes. Just to be clear

b) Ed, please don't go back into your cave

b.5) I have a worsted suit with patch pockets. I rarely reach for it these days

c) I'm a big proponent of coherence with varying levels of calculated chaos

d) classic menswear absolutely exists. But it is dynamic. Tira and I had a good discussion about this somewhere.

I said classic menswear as we see it in sf

post #18209 of 43842
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tirailleur1 View Post

I said classic menswear as we see it in sf
The majority see it as an evolving beast (I think). At least these days they do. So you're responding either to a minority or voices past.
post #18210 of 43842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleav View Post

Today, spring has sprung!


 

 

 

X-post from Stile Forum, amirite? 

 

[/English humour].

 

You may resume arguing...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › HOF: What Are You Wearing Right Now - Part IV (starting May 2014)