Savile Rogues: London's Rakish tailors

[TRINI]

Good article:

http://moreintelligentlife.com/conte...rakish-tailors

 

[TheFoo]

BESPOKE-SPEAK:

Braces, aka suspenders: Not any more; too “Wall Street”. Only acceptable if hessian, on farmers’ work trousers.

Buttonholes: Should be slightly ragged at the back—little imperfections are the stamps of bespoke.

Cuffs: The first two buttons (there should be four) must be made of horn, and must work. How you find out is up to you.

Back: A hard thing to get right. If it hunches or strains, the suit is not a good one.

Collar: If the collar stands away from the neck, best to stand away from the man.

Fly: (NB: never “flies”) Buttons are no longer amusingly archaic. They are simply silly.

Linings: A bonus of bespoke is being able to choose your lining. But be careful with colour: the line between stylish and foolish is very narrow.

Pleats: Not now. But they’ll come back.

Pockets: Slant pockets are falling into favour again, though still considered suspiciously racy among the world’s more conservative diplomatic corps.

Shoulders: On a good suit, you shouldn’t really notice them.

Turn-ups: Only on rustics.

Vents: One is dull. Two is flamboyant. None is incorrect. You can’t win.

What a whole bunch of pretentious stupid.

 

[TRINI]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

What a whole bunch of pretentious stupid.

Not that I agree with it but it's in line with the focus of the article...

 

[Film Noir Buff]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

What a whole bunch of pretentious stupid.
Well, they are tailors so I don't see how this can be pretentious. In any case, these are guidelines for people currently seeking styling advice not a contradiction for those who wear what they like or have already made up their minds. Good find Triniboy, I am going to post this over at Devil's Island.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by Film Noir Buff

Well, they are tailors so I don't see how this can be pretentious. In any case, these are guidelines for people currently seeking styling advice not a contradiction for those who wear what they like or have already made up their minds.

The part of the article I quoted was not attributed to the tailors' opinions.

Anyways, regardless of who came up with it, the advice is pretentious because of its attitude and value judgments: one should stay away from men with poor-fitting collars and only farmers should wear braces. It's stupid because it's vague, opaque, and unsupported: ragged buttonholes are hallmarks of bespoke, buttons are 'silly', and my favorite, "on a good suit, you shouldn't really notice [shoulders]." Instead of 'pretentious stupid', I could have said 'devoid of substantive content'. These 'guidelines' might be useful for someone who just wants to do what a glossy magazine tells them to do, but they could not possibly help someone earnestly seeking advice.

 

[ohm]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

The part of the article I quoted was not attributed to the tailors' opinions.

Anyways, regardless of who came up with it, the advice is pretentious because of its attitude and value judgments: one should stay away from men with poor-fitting collars and only farmers should wear braces. It's stupid because it's vague, opaque, and unsupported: ragged buttonholes are hallmarks of bespoke, buttons are 'silly', and my favorite, "on a good suit, you shouldn't really notice [shoulders]." Instead of 'pretentious stupid', I could have said 'devoid of substantive content'. These 'guidelines' might be useful for someone who just wants to do what a glossy magazine tells them to do, but they could not possibly help someone earnestly seeking advice.

Braces is for farmer.

 

[yachtie]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

The part of the article I quoted was not attributed to the tailors' opinions. Anyways, regardless of who came up with it, the advice is pretentious because of its attitude and value judgments: one should stay away from men with poor-fitting collars and only farmers should wear braces. It's stupid because it's vague, opaque, and unsupported: ragged buttonholes are hallmarks of bespoke, buttons are 'silly', and my favorite, "on a good suit, you shouldn't really notice [shoulders]." Instead of 'pretentious stupid', I could have said 'devoid of substantive content'. These 'guidelines' might be useful for someone who just wants to do what a glossy magazine tells them to do, but they could not possibly help someone earnestly seeking advice.
+1. Let 'em have it. I wouldn't take it as serious advice ( seems like something taken more from a "stylist's" view).

 

[yachtie]

Originally Posted by ohm

Braces is for farmer.

Why, to go with my brown suit, of course

 

[Film Noir Buff]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

The part of the article I quoted was not attributed to the tailors' opinions. Anyways, regardless of who came up with it, the advice is pretentious because of its attitude and value judgments: one should stay away from men with poor-fitting collars and only farmers should wear braces. It's stupid because it's vague, opaque, and unsupported: ragged buttonholes are hallmarks of bespoke, buttons are 'silly', and my favorite, "on a good suit, you shouldn't really notice [shoulders]." Instead of 'pretentious stupid', I could have said 'devoid of substantive content'. These 'guidelines' might be useful for someone who just wants to do what a glossy magazine tells them to do, but they could not possibly help someone earnestly seeking advice.
Oh, I assumed these were all answers gathered by asking the various tailors. probably because I wouldn't think someone writing for The Economist would have the knowledge to fill out a compendium like that. The English aren't afraid to intermingle style and class which might be what you're reacting to here. And while i do not find all of these platitudes wrong (nor necessarily all of them right), I think this is a matter of attitude. Style for the English seems to be as much about the poise of the person as the clothes which includes the right frame of mind. Americans seem to have issues over class attitude because they automatically assume that class bequeaths advantage. generally, the more they feel it excludes them, the more violent the reaction. I say this because they are usually OK with their own snobbery. Anyway, back to the issue. The English like this stuff because it's Brummellian; you know the father of it all? As in, "No no no my dear chap your lapels are atrocious". It's part of their culture and it is valuable insight into the history and hierarchy of the suit.

 

[voxsartoria]

I'm not sure that Mahon cut for the PoW for "over 20 years."


- B

 

[blackbowtie]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

The part of the article I quoted was not attributed to the tailors' opinions.

Anyways, regardless of who came up with it, the advice is pretentious because of its attitude and value judgments: one should stay away from men with poor-fitting collars and only farmers should wear braces. It's stupid because it's vague, opaque, and unsupported: ragged buttonholes are hallmarks of bespoke, buttons are 'silly', and my favorite, "on a good suit, you shouldn't really notice [shoulders]." Instead of 'pretentious stupid', I could have said 'devoid of substantive content'. These 'guidelines' might be useful for someone who just wants to do what a glossy magazine tells them to do, but they could not possibly help someone earnestly seeking advice.

It sounds a little bit tongue in cheek IMO. The remarks are somewhat amusing, if baseless.

 

[Film Noir Buff]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

I'm not sure that Mahon cut for the PoW for "over 20 years." - B
Dude, he's like the Chuck Norris of Savile Row

 

[blackbowtie]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

I'm not sure that Mahon cut for the PoW for "over 20 years."


- B

+1. Based on his blog, it sounds like he only did that for a while. IIRC, he only met the prince a couple of times.

 

[voxsartoria]

Originally Posted by blackbowtie

+1. Based on his blog, it sounds like he only did that for a while. IIRC, he only met the prince a couple of times.

I think that Mahon was at A&S for five years, starting out as undercutter for Halberry. I think that Halberry and Russell cut most of the Prince's stuff...and then Tom took over for awhile when one of those guys took ill...I forget which one.

It's still a fun read. I mean, there are a lot of tailors in London and it is always interesting to me to learn more about the off-Row tailors.

I'm especially curious about the City tailors.

- B

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by Film Noir Buff

. . . I wouldn't think someone writing for The Economist would have the knowledge to fill out a compendium like that.

I don't mean to be rude, but: what knowledge???

Originally Posted by Film Noir Buff

The English aren't afraid to intermingle style and class which might be what you're reacting to here. And while i do not find all of these platitudes wrong (nor necessarily all of them right), I think this is a matter of attitude. Style for the English seems to be as much about the poise of the person as the clothes which includes the right frame of mind.

To a degree, I suppose I'm reacting to the class-orientation of the advice, but I am more fundamentally reacting to its explanatory emptiness. Telling me that buttons look 'silly' doesn't mean anything; I am forced to apply my own notion of 'silly' or assume that I am simply being told not to show buttons. I don't know about you, but I think good advice is well-grounded and otherwise persuasive.

Originally Posted by Film Noir Buff

Americans seem to have issues over class attitude because they automatically assume that class bequeaths advantage. generally, the more they feel it excludes them, the more violent the reaction. I say this because they are usually OK with their own snobbery.

You're going too far with your inferences. For me, it is simply that class distinctions are not good grounds for normative value judgments without auxilary justification. Even if I accept 'farmers' as a class, it's not clear why it would be bad to look like one.

I don't like snobbery in any of its forms, regardless of who's being a snob.

Originally Posted by Film Noir Buff

Anyway, back to the issue. The English like this stuff because it's Brummellian; you know the father of it all? As in, "No no no my dear chap your lapels are atrocious". It's part of their culture and it is valuable insight into the history and hierarchy of the suit.

Insight into English history and culture is well and good, but I'm not sure how any of the advice given teached about the history of the suit.