or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Australian Members - Page 2039

post #30571 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebrownman View Post

^^ get in touch with HC, Geoffrey Firmin and Marbles now that you're in Canberra. Met up with them late last year when I was visiting C City. All top guys.


Too kind TBM. I second Jason's suggestion - taken to PM's

post #30572 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli2012 View Post

What are your thoughts on peak lapels for conservative business dress? Obviously not as peaked as these; but do they call on to much attention or give you just enough attention (in Australia)? I've never had a peak lapel suit but I own one peak lapel navy odd jacket/sportcoat which I pair with boring old grey trousers and the odd occasion a pair of brown.

Also anyone know the difference between oddjacket and sportscoat or are they used individually?

Nice shoes wishiwas and great cardigan pairing HC!

Also got a pair of Gazelles at Chadstone....shoulda come home and interwebzed it but I was too caught up in the moment.

EDIT:

Come at me bro's nearly at the age when wearing ascot's or the open-neck-tie is viable......you can guess what that age is though....

post #30573 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by TehBunny View Post

What are your thoughts on peak lapels for conservative business dress? Obviously not as peaked as these; but do they call on to much attention or give you just enough attention (in Australia)? I've never had a peak lapel suit but I own one peak lapel navy odd jacket/sportcoat which I pair with boring old grey trousers and the odd occasion a pair of brown.
Also anyone know the difference between oddjacket and sportscoat or are they used individually?
Nice shoes wishiwas and great cardigan pairing HC!
Also got a pair of Gazelles at Chadstone....shoulda come home and interwebzed it but I was too caught up in the moment.

I have a couple of peak lapel sports coats and picked up my first peaked suit a couple of months ago. I love it but suspect the vast majority don't even notice (or if they do, it is subliminal). If the suit would have been conservative notched then I believe it still is when peaked.
post #30574 of 54986
Anyone buying a 2008 Grange tomorrow?
post #30575 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey Firmin View Post

Anyone buying a 2008 Grange tomorrow?

Nah, it's five years old. If you're going to spend that much money, you should buy the current model.
post #30576 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxh View Post

Firman: Finally a bit of a reply I just knocked off while watching the roast tonight.

Any disagreement is to advance the understanding and exploration, not to prove you wrong.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Below the fold is a more detailed explanation of Horney's theory from WIKI, couched in terms of neuroses though.


Reply from firmin
Interesting choice of reading material. Personally I look at the questions you raised, at a surface/social level from Bourdieu in terms of cultural, social and symbolic power or using APS speech " tailoring the message to suit the needs of the audience."

First for me what is one attempting to achieve in dressing well is not being a kabuki actor, or flanuer, or face ( reading Mod a Very British Style at present). Dress codes and here I mean the personal, not professionla or age appropriate. Are reflective of who and what I am as a person,how i percieve myself as a middle aged male and how i present myself to the world. And how I wish others to percieve me.


I would say I can distinguish between costume (kabuki etc.) and perhaps dressing uniquely. Although it’s a difficult area. A bit like pornography and erotica – I can tell the difference when I see it.
Clearly clothing in most cases anyway, has a sender and receiver, and perhaps a lot of noise, before meaning can be deciphered. Or as many can easily accept, clothing is loaded with meaning, history, prejudice, subtlety, depending on sender and receiver. Sometimes its easy to see someone who is being ironic, sometimes its hard to tell. Sometimes the sender intended an ironic message but often he just looks like a dick. In these days of post post modernism in (mens) clothes its hard, even impossible, to be ironic if you are over 50. Perhaps even over 40.

An interesting object is the recent rise of the cardigan. Now I’ve always liked a cardigan and one of my favourite objects is a heavy grey woollen cardigan Ms fxh hand knitted for me years ago. Many years ago. Shawl collar, just the right shade of grey, big soccer ball buttons, nice waist band. Sadly – it was slim and fitting (in an erotic way – I like to think) tight then and now is just too small and tight.

Cardigans used to have an old man Fletcher Jones vibe. Then they became ironic. Then (now) they are a desirable fashion item amongst the “young blokes” who are well dressed. No irony. Just nicely fitting cardigans in a variety of thicknesses. Hell you can even wear one under a jacket, even a suit, and be considered well dressed.

But can you do it over 45 yo and still be hip or does it mark you out as old man? Old man I think.

Clothing and how it is combined is a form of signifier which is both reflective of personality ( the look ), power and status within society. Ergo I would probablly not dress the same as going to the see Bell Shakespear or the Brumbies, two socially different situatyions but in todays world socially blured.

My problem these days is that the semiotics of male clothing (signs/signifiers/ etc) are confused. To my mind the semiotics relies to a large extent on a shared meaning of objects. Possibly true to an extent when Saussure, Lacan, Foucault et al were holding sway, but not applicable in this post nihilist world where ignorance of history and the past is a badge of honour rather than an obstacle to be overcome. To many (most?) the meaning of ties, jackets, dinner suits, morning suits, even wearing shirts inside trousers is lost. Not even in the vacuous unconscious spaces that must be empty within modern brains do we see much attempt at filling the spaces with knowledge as opposed to opinions.

There was a time when jeans at a wedding might well have been transgressive – even fashionable – see Andy Wharhol – but now its just further confirmation of primarily laziness but mostly ignorance, avoidance and lack of curiosity.

I’m not sure where I am going here, but basically I see that the shared meaning of signs and signifiers is lost and no easy straightforward assumptions can be made about conforming or transgressing. “Lord forgive them for they know not What they do” is the cry we must utter. Not because they are innocent but because they are wilfully ignorant. A different order of culpability.


Aside from the professional disposition, eg where I am on the corporate hierarchy. The way we dress can inspire trust,envy or hositlity and intimidate those that we are addressing. Suits are a wonderful way of expressing power in the work place and therefore achieving symbolic power in the corporate hierarchy. That is my observation here in Canberra, but when working as a rural academic years ago in the arts it was very black, a cultural creative post punk Iook and it was also political as it differentated you form the squattocracy at opening nights at cultural events.

Getting back down to earth. It suddenly struck me years ago when I was in my rural and regional empire that covered a great deal of the state. Dressing in a suit was something to foster resentment and irrational push back on many occasions. Unknowing resentment. Those that did wear suits wore them in the most shabby, insolent teenager level of maturity way. (mind you in was the same off duty – I wore leather jackets, black jeans, levis, and fitted clothes a decent casual chukkas and boots – others wore just the same clothes they wore at work only dirtier and sloppier – if that was possible) It struck me that sport coats were the answer. A bit of a dress down approach to dress up. Sport coats don’t have the UK “country/sport” connotation here that they do have in UK (and perhaps USA).

To me the whole RM Williams outfit of white moleskins, RM brown ‘lastic sided boots, checked shirt and gun check sport coat has too strong a connection with the squattocracy and private school jackaroos and hooray henrys. Having grown up in the country and not being part of the ascendency has given me a suspicion of a lot of that way of dressing – even though objectively to an extent I can admit it has a modern appropriate Australianness and maybe has lost its older meaning.

Black in Victoria, at least, has always symbolised Melbourne, or more precisely inner city, cashed up (if pretending otherwise) . artistic, middle class, café society Melbourne. Black also is strongly associated with the arts and artistic. Black also has connotations of the puritan and religious. Black also has meanings related to power and state control, Nazi uniforms, police states etc, Spanish Inquisition. Black is complicated. And despite popular belief hard to wear well. I used to wear it a lot – haven’t worn it in any form for years. I’m thinking of trying again – it’s a good Melbourne thing and has a nice complicated mish mash of meaning. I’d like to try a mix of texture – thick wale cord trousers, black leather jackets, black suede boots, - hard to pick a shirt that works.

I wonder a lot about age appropriate dressing, particularlly in terms of casual attire. I know I can wear a pea coat in winter because its warm but I would not ( persoanl taste and no politics here) wear a M65 field jacket in a casual situation. To me such a garment is not the look of who I am at my age. Maybe a Barbour but never been keen on them and they carry too much bagage in terms of signification for my taste.

I suspect Barbour doesn’t carry much baggage here except for readers of English Country magazines. M65s for me are too directly linked to Vietnam – but again wilful ignorance, and age I guess, will triumph here with most not acknowledging the harmful rifts in society amplified by that war. I’m not sure I could wear a real M65. Beside that fact they are too heavy.

Second being well dressed is socially about class, status and power. Good clothing and the abiltiy to dress well is a sign of power and money in todays society. Power equalls money therefore the line between self image and disposable income is clealry stated in how we dress.

I’m not sure anymore – the worlds wealthiest, and powerful, men dress in pretty ordinary jeans, polo necked black sweaters and crappy jackets and mainstreet sneakers. (and thats the well dressed ones) Good clothing and the ability to dress well is not a sign of power and money any more . It’s just a sign you care and have made an effort to understand history a bit. Two good suits and a few leather shoes that fit cost less than a pair of desirable jeans and sneakers and stupid baseball hat and celebrity sunglasses and hoody. It adds up to nothing in terms of weekly income.

We like to look the part for the soical role we play wheather it is work or casual, we project ourselves firstly by our appearence before we open our mouths. Being well attired is back in fashion, not that fashion has anythign to do with taste.Just look at the Goodweekend with its full page ads for DJ's and suits and racing. Deconstructing those implies a subtext that blowing your cash at the races is a symbolic of your ability to drop money on said suit and then trot off to the races and blow your cash in style, but being in said suit and with babe on arm you will be a winner.

I do think good dressing – whatever that is – is back in fashion. Visiting Tokyo recently confirmed it even more.

Thirdly, taste and the abilty to project via one's clothing a personal style that demonstrates one understands what good taste and is all about. Not too flash, but a subtle well thought out ensemble which clearly states this is who I am. I have learnt how to walk the talk mind you its taken me time to achieve this but I know how to carry and project myself to the world. Taste takes time, money and exposure to the culture, noir film was one of my main inspirations in life. As I stated earlier I do come from a cultural creative background and the detached observer in me likes to look and watch the games that people play while also being on the stage with the other actors.


Don’t we all?

I agree with the above para except that statement that it takes money.

Not compared too almost anything else men do – dressing well doesn’t take money. But it does take time and effort. Too much effort – I just managed to snag 6 pairs of high rise good quality chinos – they aren’t available anymore – it takes time and connections. Its harder than it needs to be. In Australia.

The suit was the great democratisation of men’s clothing and fashion. Despite the attempts of marketers to somehow imply that its exclusive and at the same time available to everyman (surely the aim of all successful marketing) I’d maintain the suit is still the ultimate in the democratisation of male style and not likely to alter in that ability for many years.

fxh no roast to cook as its only midweek and working freelance i have time to ruminate and compose a response to your response of my response to your initial question.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)



I would say I can distinguish between costume (kabuki etc.) and perhaps dressing uniquely. Although it’s a difficult area. A bit like pornography and erotica – I can tell the difference when I see it.

I have to say it’s the way that the actor carries himself on stage or social event he is on you put a Clive Palmer in a Savile Row suit and you will still have Clive Palmer. For the more socially accomplished individual its not just a bespoke suit but a statement of who and what I am, and for me this is key to what people wear and why. I wear this because I can afford this, I have the money and taste to dress this way and my dressing this way demonstrates my cultural capital in the eyes of those who know the signifiers, ( power, prestige, wealth) I am articulating through my suit.

Clearly clothing in most cases anyway, has a sender and receiver, and perhaps a lot of noise, before meaning can be deciphered. Or as many can easily accept, clothing is loaded with meaning, history, prejudice, subtlety, depending on sender and receiver. Sometimes its easy to see someone who is being ironic, sometimes its hard to tell. Sometimes the sender intended an ironic message but often he just looks like a dick. In these days of post post modernism in (mens) clothes its hard, even impossible, to be ironic if you are over 50. Perhaps even over 40.

I have to wonder about ironic dress over 40 more so over 50. Its not something I would do or have even considered to be honest. Maybe it’s a Melbourne thing for ironic dressing is not what I see or have encountered here in Canberra in the past eight years, but then again there is Joe Hockey. He is being ironic in those suits yes? Oh the other thing Po Mo is dead see the AFR Review 20/8/11 and its also regarded as dead amongst academics in art and cultural sectors as well.

An interesting object is the recent rise of the cardigan. Now I’ve always liked a cardigan and one of my favourite objects is a heavy grey woollen cardigan Ms fxh hand knitted for me years ago. Many years ago. Shawl collar, just the right shade of grey, big soccer ball buttons, nice waist band. Sadly – it was slim and fitting (in an erotic way – I like to think) tight then and now is just too small and tight. (Sigh I know this feeling)
Cardigans used to have an old man Fletcher Jones vibe. Then they became ironic. Then (now) they are a desirable fashion item amongst the “young blokes” who are well dressed. No irony. Just nicely fitting cardigans in a variety of thicknesses. Hell you can even wear one under a jacket, even a suit, and be considered well dressed.
But can you do it over 45 yo and still be hip or does it mark you out as old man? Old man I think.

Nothing wrong with wearing a cardigan if it keeps you warm in the cold. Not my fashion to wear one with a suit but to each their own and it does look good if done the right way and at the right age. I don’t think I am an old man ( one of my mates in his 80’s keeps referring to me as ‘young man’ or is he being ironic?) at least I hope I don’t look like one. I try to wear what I consider age appropriate clothing which is chosen to suit the social setting I am engaged in and my displays my personal taste and style.

My problem these days is that the semiotics of male clothing (signs/signifiers/ etc) are confused. To my mind the semiotics relies to a large extent on a shared meaning of objects. Possibly true to an extent when Saussure, Lacan, Foucault et al were holding sway, but not applicable in this post nihilist world where ignorance of history and the past is a badge of honour rather than an obstacle to be overcome. To many (most?) the meaning of ties, jackets, dinner suits, morning suits, even wearing shirts inside trousers is lost. Not even in the vacuous unconscious spaces that must be empty within modern brains do we see much attempt at filling the spaces with knowledge as opposed to opinions.

Roland Bathes and his theory of mythology eg applied semiotics still rules in my book. He stated in a article on fashion (well worth reading Written Clothing 1967) “We might be tempted to include within this basic shifter all Fashion terms of clearly technological origin (a seam, a cut), and to consider them as so many translators from the real to the spoken; but this would ignore the fact that the value of a word is not found in its origin but in its place in the language system; once these terms pass into a descriptive structure, they are simultaneously detached from their origin (what has been, at some point, sewn, cut) and their goal (to contribute to an assemblage, to stand out in an ensemble); in them the creative act is not perceptible, they no longer belong to the technological structure and we cannot consider them as shifters. There remains a third translation, one which allows the transition from the iconic structure to the spoken structure, from the representation of the garment to its description”. This also brings us to knowledge structures and how we apply them for if theory does not lead to praxis then its just slavery.

There was a time when jeans at a wedding might well have been transgressive – even fashionable – see Andy Wharhol ( Robert Redford) – but now its just further confirmation of primarily laziness but mostly ignorance, avoidance and lack of curiosity.
I’m not sure where I am going here, but basically I see that the shared meaning of signs and signifiers is lost and no easy straightforward assumptions can be made about conforming or transgressing. “Lord forgive them for they know not What they do” is the cry we must utter. Not because they are innocent but because they are wilfully ignorant. A different order of culpability.

I have to disagree here as I said before I don’t think shared meaning of signs and signifers are lost. This forum is one place where they are discussed and applied eg ‘the Rules”. I think there exerting a greater presence seeing that we are moving from a literate to post literate (visual) society.

Getting back down to earth. It suddenly struck me years ago when I was in my rural and regional empire that covered a great deal of the state. Dressing in a suit was something to foster resentment and irrational push back on many occasions. Unknowing resentment. Those that did wear suits wore them in the most shabby, insolent teenager level of maturity way. (mind you in was the same off duty – I wore leather jackets, black jeans, levis, and fitted clothes a decent casual chukkas and boots – others wore just the same clothes they wore at work only dirtier and sloppier – if that was possible) It struck me that sport coats were the answer. A bit of a dress down approach to dress up. Sport coats don’t have the UK “country/sport” connotation here that they do have in UK (and perhaps USA).
To me the whole RM Williams outfit of white moleskins, RM brown ‘lastic sided boots, checked shirt and gun check sport coat has too strong a connection with the squattocracy and private school jackaroos and hooray henrys. Having grown up in the country and not being part of the ascendency has given me a suspicion of a lot of that way of dressing – even though objectively to an extent I can admit it has a modern appropriate Australianness and maybe has lost its older meaning.

Here we come across both the Melbourne Sydney cultural divide and the Rural City divide. Growing up as I did in the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney the country was something we learnt about at primary school, remember those atlas’s which had coloured illustrations of farmers, loggers ect. (Well we had them in my public school in the 60’s). In NSW because of the Easter Show and the country comes to the city that look is clearly rural and a rural power show if that. ‘I am a landed gentleman I have achieved a particular status and position in society I know my local Country Party member and my wife is active in the CWA my children attend a private boarding school’. (ok only an example but you get my drift) That look you describe is for me clearly a uniform for the squatoracy to state who they are and where their from and to distinguish themselves from the city dwellers. The rural prole look to me is one of wide brimmed hat plain shirt or chambray undone to second button for men, beat up mole skins, and RM boot which look like that they have had the shit knocked out of them and always a tan. Consider CW Bean and how he fashioned the ANAZAC myth one of the key signifiers is the difference and greater virtue of the bush over the city.

Black in Victoria, at least, has always symbolised Melbourne, or more precisely inner city, cashed up (if pretending otherwise) . artistic, middle class, café society Melbourne. Black also is strongly associated with the arts and artistic. Black also has connotations of the puritan and religious. Black also has meanings related to power and state control, Nazi uniforms, police states etc, Spanish Inquisition. Black is complicated. And despite popular belief hard to wear well. I used to wear it a lot – haven’t worn it in any form for years. I’m thinking of trying again – it’s a good Melbourne thing and has a nice complicated mish mash of meaning. I’d like to try a mix of texture – thick wale cord trousers, black leather jackets, black suede boots, - hard to pick a shirt that works.

Black in a post punk context in Sydney never had any of those religious or fascist overtones. Skinheads only wore blue jeans. Black in is/was a very inner city look, indeed a standard urbane trope. I think that black in the early 80’s in Sydney was an inner city reaction and rejection of a conservative suburban ethos and Black was its own zeitgeist and attitude. That was until those fuckers in advertising and design took to it. I don’t think I could wear black corduroy. I wear a lot of corduroy mainly in earth tones, must be going soft in my middle age.

I suspect Barbour doesn’t carry much baggage here except for readers of English Country magazines. M65s for me are too directly linked to Vietnam – but again wilful ignorance, and age I guess, will triumph here with most not acknowledging the harmful rifts in society amplified by that war. I’m not sure I could wear a real M65. Beside that fact they are too heavy.

Recently I was up in the Southern Highlands picked up some very nice pinots and shiraz while there. On the dayI noticed quite a number of Barbour’s being worn. Maybe because I know what they are so I have the visual knowledge to acknowledge what I see. ‘oh that’s the third Barbour today’. The US actor Sam Waterston wore one occasionally in Law & Order so I think aside from SF they have a broader reach.
I agree with you about the M65 for me its too loaded with signification to wear that’s why a Pea Coat which had both military and commercial marine uses is easier to wear. Mind you I had a great 1940 RAAF Africa campaign cotton uniform, think safari, jacket which I wore a lot in the late 80’s huge pockets could carry anything and it would hold its shape. But I was much younger then. Mind you in 1984 I would still wear camouflage jackets but it was an ex East German military.


I do think good dressing – whatever that is – is back in fashion. Visiting Tokyo recently confirmed it even more.

Too true but unless you have some very good op shops on tap to sourced to fill your CBD needs it costs money. And for most of us its going online to get the things we need. I can’t buy pleated trousers and sadly cant afford bespoke or even MTM at present so its ‘Books Brothers’.(sung in falsetto voice ala Flo & Eddie cira Billy the Mountain.

I agree with the above para except that statement that it takes money.

Sorry but dressing well does take money. Either you’ve paid the mortgage off or are just a DINK, do people still use that term.

Not compared too almost anything else men do – dressing well doesn’t take money. But it does take time and effort. Too much effort – I just managed to snag 6 pairs of high rise good quality chinos – they aren’t available anymore – it takes time and connections. Its harder than it needs to be. In Australia.

Taste is something that is cultivated and I agree it takes time and effort and exposure to culture and images of men who dress well. For me it was film noir and Bond.

The suit was the great democratisation of men’s clothing and fashion. Despite the attempts of marketers to somehow imply that its exclusive and at the same time available to everyman (surely the aim of all successful marketing) I’d maintain the suit is still the ultimate in the democratisation of male style and not likely to alter in that ability for many years.

Again disagree think of the DJ’s ad I mentioned. The ad clearly signifies that if you buy and wear this suit it will set you apart from the other punters and you will walk away from the track with enough cash to make Tom Waterhouse cry and get laid by the babe on your arm, but only if you buy this suit from DJ’s.














post #30577 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superfudge View Post

Hi guys

 

I recently went to Brice's in Sydney to get some shoes resoled. The work was pretty decent (replaced the leather soles, restitched and added some steel toe caps) and the turnaround was great, but I'm a bit disappointed by the attention to detail. The edge dressing has been really sloppily applied, the upper has paint up to a cm from the sole, and there are also a few nicks in the upper from what I assumed was the stitching machine. Is this par for the course, or did I get unlucky? They were not an expensive pair, but I don't feel super confident about going back with a favourite.

Never had anything resoled, but I've always had good work from Brice's. You may have been unlucky.

post #30578 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by California Dreamer View Post

Nah, it's five years old. If you're going to spend that much money, you should buy the current model.

lol.
post #30579 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by boff View Post

I have a couple of peak lapel sports coats and picked up my first peaked suit a couple of months ago. I love it but suspect the vast majority don't even notice (or if they do, it is subliminal). If the suit would have been conservative notched then I believe it still is when peaked.
Yeah, have always though when put onto a suit it would scream out but from your case it doesn't seem to be the case.
post #30580 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by TehBunny View Post

Yeah, have always though when put onto a suit it would scream out but from your case it doesn't seem to be the case.

A couple of examples. As ever, it is all a matter of personal taste. I realised that I was assuming you were thinking SB.

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 100

Of course if we're talking DB........ Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
post #30581 of 54986
Quote:
The suit was the great democratisation of men’s clothing and fashion. Despite the attempts of marketers to somehow imply that its exclusive and at the same time available to everyman (surely the aim of all successful marketing) I’d maintain the suit is still the ultimate in the democratisation of male style and not likely to alter in that ability for many years.

Again disagree think of the DJ’s ad I mentioned. The ad clearly signifies that if you buy and wear this suit it will set you apart from the other punters and you will walk away from the track with enough cash to make Tom Waterhouse cry and get laid by the babe on your arm, but only if you buy this suit from DJ’s.
On this point I think you are both right.

In a business context the suit is the great leveller. Whether you're wearing a shabby $200 Rembrandt or a $2,000 Canali, you are on equal footing in a room full of men in suits. Indeed, it's quite often hard to tell how senior or important someone is in Australia based on the cut of their suit; quite often an individual's net worth is inversely proportional to the worth of the cloth on his back. If you don't believe me try turning up to a business function in a sportscoat and slacks when everyone else is wearing a suit and see what kind of reactions you receive (this is a good experiment to do actually).

However, outside of the context where men usually (or are expected to) wear suits - among middle Australia of the non-white collar variety - I think a suit does mark you out as a "winner". This is what DJ's plays to when it suggests that wearing a shiny suit at the races will attract the money and babes like moths to a flame. I have a friend who used to frequent the race tracks religiously twice a week. He'd even drive out to Menangle to see a race, or God forbid go to the trotts or the dogs if there was nothing on within 6 hours' drive. He would go in his windcheater, shorts and blunnies to lay on a few bob, as would the other tragics that he saw every week at the track... The AJC and the department stores have turned racing into a fashion plate in an attempt to romanticise a cruel, crooked and irrelevant "sport" and for the most part it's worked spectacularly. Basically they gave people a reason to dress up in an increasingly casual world, and provided the pictorial guidelines of what to wear (interesting point GF about the post literate society), which the masses have responded to, money in hand.

PS Geoff and fxh - good stuff, I've enjoyed the discussion.
post #30582 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Paisley View Post

quite often an individual's net worth is inversely proportional to the worth of the cloth on his back. If you don't believe me try turning up to a business function in a sportscoat and slacks when everyone else is wearing a suit and see what kind of reactions you receive (this is a good experiment to do actually).

This is an interesting idea and I get your point but I think you also have to be older than say 40 (at least) to pull it off with the result you are thinking of.

Also, I have a feeling we Aus Members are often wearing more expensive (and/or stylish and well fitting) clothes than our bosses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Paisley View Post

Basically they gave people a reason to dress up in an increasingly casual world, and provided the pictorial guidelines of what to wear (interesting point GF about the post literate society), which the masses have responded to, money in hand.

PS Geoff and fxh - good stuff, I've enjoyed the discussion.

Reason to dress up in an increasing casual world - attend a Melbourne Member Meetup (those chaps are harsh if you are underdressed - esp that Gerry Nelson guy. And do not dare let fxh catch you without socks! I saw him do a spot check on poor Mr Kimber at the Henry Carter night).

I too have enjoyed skimming reading through your dialogue to fxh and GF.

GF - When fxh said he was watching The Roast I though he meant this - http://www.abc.net.au/tv/theroast/ (I prefer making actually roasts on the weekend, more time).
post #30583 of 54986
Speaking of peaks and large lapels...

post #30584 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pink Socks View Post


I too have enjoyed skimming reading through your dialogue to fxh and GF.

GF - When fxh said he was watching The Roast I though he meant this - http://www.abc.net.au/tv/theroast/ (I prefer making actually roasts on the weekend, more time).

Pink Socks

It just goes to show I don't watch enough ABC damn Foxtel.
post #30585 of 54986
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxh View Post

A quick swing by an opshop today - saw a pair of Benchgrade Brown Cheaneys in 10.5UK F, barely worn = $50. Modernish slim last & style. On leaving some woman was trying to ask cashier something about them. Neither seemed to have much clue.

These: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Gone boys. I dropped in today.

But I did get a brand new unworn Brooks Brothers Oxford Cloth Button down blue with very pale yellow broad candy stripes and a blue guarded broad stripe. My size. - Noice. The collar has more roll on it than Clive Palmer in the bath on the Princess of Tasmania on a stormy night. Hanging beside the Made in USA university blue stripe unstructured collar one I got on Japan for $5 aud.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members