What anyone thinks looks good is not merely a reflection of primal impulse. It's fundamentally a matter of what you know and understand. Naturally, when we understand something differently, we also view it differently. What might have been beautiful becomes hideous, and vice versa. So, if you took time to learn the established canon of classic menswear, I think you'd understand what you see at Pitti differently--and it would be a more rewarding experience, as you could mine real lessons and inspiration. Things to build on and learn from, not merely outfits to mimmic.
This, I am sure we all agree with. Some good points.
I can see some possible animosity towards some members who claim to wear a particular style of clothing, and are doing so without having considered thoughts from those past and present.
A good book on classic style won't tell you what to wear every day. That's not the point. I do not dress the way Flusser and Boyer tell me to. Rather, I read them and realized there are principles and ideas and concepts to apply. The point is to learn the language of classic menswear so that when you use elements of it, you can do so to better effect.
This is a completely different tack from what you wrote a few pages back. 'Principles, ideas and concepts' of clothing I can accept, 'rules', I cannot. These books no doubt heighten ones understanding of the breadth of clothing out there. They help explain why and how people wear a certain type of clothing, and more importantly, how this vein of clothing developed over time, but they certainly aren't intended to dictate what one should wear, or how they are to wear it.
If I am not mistaken, I think you would agree.
With all that said, I don't see how Nicholas deserves what was said to him.