1. Welcome to the new Styleforum!

    We hope you’re as excited as we are to hang out in the new place. There are more new features that we’ll announce in the near future, but for now we hope you’ll enjoy the new site.

    We are currently fine-tuning the forum for your browsing pleasure, so bear with any lingering dust as we work to make Styleforum even more awesome than it was.

    Oh, and don’t forget to head over to the Styleforum Journal, because we’re giving away two pairs of Carmina shoes to celebrate our move!

    Please address any questions about using the new forum to support@styleforum.net

    Cheers,

    The Styleforum Team

    Dismiss Notice

How We Used to Dress

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by comrade, Jul 14, 2013.

  1. poorsod

    poorsod Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,057
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Because I believe Unbel is an Econ prof.
     
  2. unbelragazzo

    unbelragazzo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,355
    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    It was stupid of me to get involved in this discussion. We agree (I think) on the facts that SR prices, prices of luxury goods generally, and top 1% incomes have all risen much faster than the CPI since 1930, which are the only things that have any relevance to this thread. The discussion over the definition of "cheap" is off topic and boring. Sorry for the detour.
     
  3. archetypal_yuppie

    archetypal_yuppie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,877
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Unbelragazzo, are you an economics professor? If so, how do you make all these detours to clothing/shoe manufacturers? I guess teaching does afford a lot of time off.
     
  4. unbelragazzo

    unbelragazzo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,355
    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Yes - but I try to keep my academic life somewhat separate from the clothing stuff I'm now doing. So as not to derail the thread any further, just PM me with ubr-specific questions.
     
  5. archetypal_yuppie

    archetypal_yuppie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,877
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    I used to dress in abercrombie (HS), then polo/lacoste/sevens (college), then brooks brothers, then La Rukico, then crocket & jones, then edward green/G&G, then a little bespoke, then paul stuart & corneliani, then loro piana and cruciani. Thread back on track.
     
  6. David Copeland

    David Copeland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    900
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2013
    Location:
    Originally from Newport Beach - Now living in West
    Very good.

    I was wondering what you background has been - but . . .

    [​IMG]

    I had a hard time getting past your photo.

    (Perhaps you could experiment with another choice) LOL
     
  7. CrimsonSox

    CrimsonSox Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    396
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    Here's an interesting way to see the difference in dress today compared to years past. It's a color image from Indiana University's Cushman photography collection, taken of a London crowd watching a street performer in 1961. Thanks to bmulford for originally posting the link to the Cushman collection (click photos to enlarge):

    [​IMG]

    Here's a crowd in London today:

    [​IMG]

    The contrast is even more striking, looking at a photo from London in 1914:

    [​IMG]

    Dress became more casual after World War 1. Think of the switch from stiff, starched collars to soft collars; fitted frock coats to draped lounge suits; tailcoats to tuxedos. It became more casual still after World War 2, and then again in the late 1960s. I often wish I could go back and browse the shops from times past.

    The Cushman collection has some beautiful photos. Here's a wedding from 1942. For more, see: http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/cushman/index.jsp:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2013
  8. JLibourel

    JLibourel Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,602
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Getting back to the matter of pants and pantsuits on women, I can recall not too many years back when Esther Williams arrived at a charity event at the Los Angeles Country Club. The old "Million Dollar Mermaid" was barred admission to the event because she was wearing a fashionable pantsuit. The rules of the club strictly forbade women in pants, and so she was sent packing. People were furious about this, and there was quite a public outcry over it. Of course, I was totally in favor of the Country Club--"Nice to see some people maintaining traditional standards," thought I. I wonder if they still have that policy in force.

    Update: Just looked into this matter more. I said above "not too many years back"--turns out it was 1991! This happens to you as you get old. She was also the Guest of Honor at the charitable event!

    I also see that she just croaked in June at age 91. Seems like everyone is living into their 90s these days, a most daunting prospect!
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2013
  9. comrade

    comrade Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,874
    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Location:
    Menlo Park, CA
    

    Bookster- The British Royal family? Celebs?. Not likely. Bookster was a middle market OTR and MTM operation
    which catered to those in the UK and elsewhere who wanted affordable "Country Clothes" I thought the stuff looked
    like a stiff and poorly cut version of a venerable style. Compare Hackett, and Pakeman Catto for similar better designed
    traditional British clothing. And for the high end aficionado of that style, there is Holland & Holland and its' ilk:

    http://www.hollandandholland.com/product_single.php?i=308&m=mens
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2013
  10. archetypal_yuppie

    archetypal_yuppie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,877
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    
    Do people think that the photo is of me? Ha. It's someone's mugshot that I think is funny. It's better in a bigger size.
     
  11. msulinski

    msulinski Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,139
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Location:
    NYC
    Quote:I figured it isn't a photo of you. It is hideous however, and makes me want to wretch every time I see it.
     
  12. Claghorn

    Claghorn Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,005
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Location:
    Texas.
    Now that idfnl has changed his, a_y now has the most aesthetically offensive avatar on the forum.
     
    1 person likes this.
  13. archetypal_yuppie

    archetypal_yuppie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,877
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    

    I've come to think my choice of avatar has had an impact on how I've been perceived on the forum. People make visual associations with the avatars and apply them to their perception of the person.

    I thought about changing it, but that is way too difficult and time consuming, so I embraced it.
     
  14. David Copeland

    David Copeland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    900
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2013
    Location:
    Originally from Newport Beach - Now living in West
    +
     
  15. binge

    binge Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,210
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2008
    Location:
    San Francisco
  16. comrade

    comrade Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,874
    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Location:
    Menlo Park, CA
    

    Late 40s early 50s?
    No Ivy influence yet.
     
  17. JLibourel

    JLibourel Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,602
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    

    That's "retch," you scurvy wretch! (Sorry, I just couldn't resist that!)
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by