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

No effs given... correctly

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Cantabrigian, May 24, 2013.

  1. Monkeyface

    Monkeyface Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,885
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    I understand, but imagine for one second that you don't know who TTO is (sorry for using you as an example TTO!). You've never heard of him, nor have you ever seen a picture of him. Can you really say that he is extremely comfortable in his outfit from just this picture? That his outfit works because he's so unconcerned? If so, how can you see it from such a limited shot? Surely there must be more to it than just being unconcerned? The expert use of colors, patterns and textures for example.
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2013
    1 person likes this.
  2. in stitches

    in stitches Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    68,895
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Charm City
    certainly a confined shot like that limits things, i was talking about full fits. which in my opinion, gives the fullest expression of all parts of the fit. close ups helps to show the colors and patterns that are not always picked up in a full fit, but the best way to get the whole picture, is with a full fit, and that is when i think you can usually tell how comfortable a person is in their get up.

    and yes, obviously the items have to work for it to look good. that is pretty much a given. but the same items, on a person who was not 100% comfortable in wearing that, would show in my opinion, and detract from the fit.
     
  3. Monkeyface

    Monkeyface Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,885
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Fair enough, it seems like we agree on this matter! I enjoyed the discussion though, it has certainly made me think about the importance of comfortableness.
     
  4. Makoto Chan

    Makoto Chan Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    624
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Count me among those who have never been a fan of TTO's garish outfits. I suspect that he receives so much praise because he is friendly in the WAYWRN community? He seems to enjoy himself and that is just fine with me.

    Anyway, this topic is so subtle... maybe the difference in some cases between "NEffG" correctly and incorrectly can only be read in person. But that makes for a poor thread.

    In general, I think doing peacocky NeffG well might be all about intentionality and getting the details right. "I don't give a fuck what people think of me; I have an idea about how I'll dress and I'll just do it and I'll look great" can be easily spoiled by, "Well I don't know what I have that will look good with that, I'll just put on this and I don't give a fuck how it turns out."
     
  5. in stitches

    in stitches Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    68,895
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Charm City
    

    :fistbump: i think people often really agree and just need some hashing out to get to it. i enjoyed the discussion as well.
     
    1 person likes this.
  6. YRR92

    YRR92 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,345
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    Italics are correct, bold is dead wrong. The patterns work together because the colors divide them up -- we don't see the pattern contrast between shirt and tie as much because the colors match. Also, the blue/white patterns are relatively less stark than the black/white patterns -- so when you put the picture in black and white, putting them on a equal footing, the shirt and tie become overwhelming. I'd be willing to bet that your solid tie 'shop would look better in black and white than the striped tie does -- even though it looks worse in color.

    The red overcheck just keeps it from being matchy -- it would look precious with a blue.
     
  7. Frankie22

    Frankie22 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,354
    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2012
    Location:
    Boston
    The gingham against the POW works as the check scale offsets small vs large. The tie ruins the look because the stripes scale is to close to the POW check. A solid tie = would have rocked it.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2013
  8. YRR92

    YRR92 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,345
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    I kind of agree with you about the scales -- it's certainly a factor in why the checks work together, though I dislike them in B&W. The tie and the suit don't bother me. The patterns are so different that, even though the scales are similar, they don't clash.

    The solid blue tie in Monkeyface's example is pretty bad -- makes the square look like hell. A solid dark red tie? Perhaps an improvement. Certainly, it would make it more like something I'd wear, since I shy away from four patterns.
     
  9. chogall

    chogall Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,564
    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2011
    Are we back to the analyze-someone's-look-biz? Or this is still no eff given threak?

    ps, the only no eff given part in any of TTO's outfits/style is his sorry, sorrow, poker, whatever-you-call-it face.
     
  10. YRR92

    YRR92 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,345
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    This, I think, is crucial -- the effs TTO's not giving are about SF orthodoxy, not about how things look. Aesthetically, this is the result of many effs given.
     
    1 person likes this.
  11. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,307
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    
    Putting together an interesting outfit is definitely something that can be learned, and also be taught. To wear ti well, is something else altogether. This is one of the reasons I have always been against a set of rules that apply to everyone. I was watching Gianluca Migliarotti's O'Mast, and I really liked the way one of the tailors described his craft - it was to see the person as the person sees himself, and then create that for them, i.e. to help them realize their personal style. By comfort, I mean psychological comfort, in all of its complexity. I don't think that there are "Zero fucks given" outfits, per se. Incidientally, this is very different from "Fuck you", which is a reaction against something. "Zero fucks given" implies that the individual doesn't care an iota about approval or disapproval. Whether zero fucks have been given depends entirely on the context. Steve Jobs Black turtleneck was zero fucks given. Tom Wolfe, from what I've read about him, is much more in the "Fuck you" mode, though I will defer to those who know him. I much prefer zero fucks given to Fuck you. The first shows confidence.
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,307
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    I would say that Tirailleur1 seems to be in a "zero fucks given" mode. Let's go back a full decade: "Steez" = style with ease.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2013
  13. FlyingMonkey

    FlyingMonkey Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,575
    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Location:
    Ontario
    

    Which is what I said way back on page 3, in a post that seems to have been too long for the SF attention span! Or maybe just rubbish...
     
  14. Pingson

    Pingson Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,191
    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Location:
    under the northern lights
    OK, so you intrigued me enough to go back to page one and read your earlier post. Was well worth the effort I must say, great read. :slayer:
     
  15. Cantabrigian

    Cantabrigian Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,741
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Location:
    London
    

    I'm not so sure about a solid tie.

    I think it might be the tie that makes this. The texture echoes, for me, the visual texture of the suit while the colors obviously relate to the shirt.
     
    1 person likes this.
  16. Cantabrigian

    Cantabrigian Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,741
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Location:
    London
    

    The title is a red herring.

    Please keep that information to yourself.
     
  17. Holdfast

    Holdfast Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,562
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2013
    1 person likes this.
  18. Monkeyface

    Monkeyface Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,885
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Indeed, I completely agree with you when you put it this way. FU is a reaction to your environment, so externally based, while no fucks given is internally based, it has nothing to do with your environment at all. A small, but important difference. Peacock outfits are different altogether, as they're aimed at inciting a certain reaction of others, whether that's positive or negative matters less, as long as people react to you. At least those are definitions I use myself.

    As a general remark, I'm really enjoying the discussion that has arisen in this tread. It certainly makes for interesting reading material!
     
  19. Monkeyface

    Monkeyface Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,885
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    For the people wondering about a solid dark red tie:
    [​IMG]

    In B&W:
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2013
  20. SkinnyGoomba

    SkinnyGoomba Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,589
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Princeton, NJ
    That doesn't work.
     
    2 people like this.

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by