Considering a sartorial personality change? - Page 2

I didn't mean this pejoratively nor did I mean to be obliquely critical. I've just noticed from your own posts and your blog your tendency to chose from within a relatively narrow range of options, for example, blue shirts, patterned/tweed coats, your recent discussion of pairing down your pocket square collection, etc. You expressed your preference to use only specific tailors or clothing lines (e.g., Rubinacci, Marinelli, J. Press for reppe ties, etc.) All I meant to say is that I've noticed from your posts a certain focused quality or tendency in terms of defining your personal style. I'm tend to be a lot more heterodox; I have bits and pieces here an there that are more fashion forward, things that are more trad. I suppose I have a collector's tendency, and enjoy variation and diversity in my wardrobe... Just a difference in personality, I suppose.

I am in the midst of a change right now. In the past I had tended to wear very bold ties and shirts with subtle suits. I basically wore a slightly toned-down version of the Etro look. Upon joining this site and finding The Sartorialist, I became exposed to a more elegant style of dress and it gradually grew on me to the point that I was not happy with how I was dressing at the time.

I've since taken it upon myself to overhaul my wardrobe to a more elegant, but still fun and slightly over-the-top look. I tend more towards suits in bold but still classic patterns (POW checks, glen plaids, houndstooths, chalk stripes, etc), and the same for shirts. My ties tend to be more subtly patterned and make greater use of texture (knits, wools). I still wear a lot of bright colours and mix them fairly liberally, but I feel that a brighter, bolder style of dress reflects my personality quite well. Also, since I work in a luxury menswear store, I have a lot of freedom in terms of how I dress at work. CBD rules do not apply to me.

Overall this has been a fairly slow and expensive process, but I think the results so far have been worth it. I am much happier with my sartorial personality.

I have thought about wearing ties all the time, at least in the winter when I am generally wearing sweaters or jackets casually. As it stands now, I wear a suit to work, but I also work from home at least a few days a week and I dress casually for that. If I do this I will get a lot of questions from friends and neighbors who are not used to seeing me in a tie on my home days. Just a thought I had the other day.

I don't know if I quite agree with this. I think it's often about how your put together clothing ensembles that reflect who you are, even if you're combing Uniqlo with Attolini. I think one's sartorial identity is to some extent evolving, albeit at different rates for different people at different stages in their lives... I think the "artistry" comes together in linking together the bits and pieces of your wardrobe -- the pieces themselves don't really have too much of a personality of their own until they're worn...

I'm not really sure if you're being facetious or serious here. But neither statement makes any sense to me.

I think we're saying the same thing here. What I'm saying is that, if you get all your suits made by Kilgour and all your shirts made by T&A (replace by any tailor you'd like), then your "sartorial personality" will reflect very heavily the taste of these specific houses. There's a reason mafoofan and iammatt look like brothers from another mother - a big part of their "sartorial personality" lies in the taste of Mariano Rubinacci, their common tailor.

I know were responding to gdl203, but I think how "effortful" or difficult this is is contingent on one's personality. For example, I pick my clothes to reflect my mood or the occasion; a more sombre shirt and tie for dinner out in the evening, a brighter shirt if I'm feeling upbeat, etc. I also don't think wearing a range of different types of clothes (e.g., wearing different coloured striped shirts as opposed to only blue shirts made by Matuozzo and BB MTM) necessarily means that it's a "change of style" day-to-day; it might simply reflect different aspects of an individual's style.

Moofan, I can undertand and identify with this perfectly.

And you are the very heart of levity?

You miss my point. The point was about narrowing down your sources to a small number - which has an important influence on personal style. Whether it's a man who gets all his suits at MR or Kilgour, or another one who dresses only in Thom Browne - the effect is the same, their sartorial taste tends to converge with the taste of that specific tailor.