Sartorial Word Association -

I'm going to say a word and I'd like you to say what ever first comes into your mind...

My reason for this is to find out the mood of the forum in some way on the subject of classic American tailoring (As ever with me).

Uniquely this is the place where (if you'll play along) I might finally get the internet zeitgeist view of the old Ivy League Style from those who know about clothes but have no axe to grind.

So...

Here comes the word...

'TRAD' -

??????????

All contributions welcome.

Larry.

OK, Russell, I'll play. Not one word but a short phrase:
Started well, ended badly. Needs to get back to its roots.

Originally Posted by Larry Lean

Click to expand...

'TRAD'

Dusty.




new word-

Fad

It's that 'old man' image that it's picked up isn't it?
Funny when you think that the look started out as a youthful college-aged style...

I wonder, had we not had the internet 'Trad' phenomenon over the past 2-ish years, would people be thinking that the old Ivy League style was a preppy 'J. Crew'-ish style instead?

You probably would still not be taking it seriously, but you'd be discounting it for being youthful and lightweight instead of discounting it as so many people do now for being 'old man' and dusty.

Just thinking out loud here...

Interesting stuff.

The 'Fad' comment is interesting too. An interest in this old style is maybe a bit of a flash-in-the-pan for many do you think?
Certainly could be for some...

Thanks for the comments. Keep 'em comming.

LL.

My immediate initial reaction to the word "Trad" is:

Originally Posted by odoreater

Click to expand...

My immediate initial reaction to the word "Trad" is:

I'm really cool with that. I'm expecting a bit of a rough ride with this one .
Want to say why Trad makes you want to vomit?

'Cos whatever it is is the image problem that this style has got to overcome if it doesn't want to wind up as something to laugh at in the history books.

Already it's looking a little funny (to say the least) on the MBs...

somewhat bland and sexless. i don't think it's a fad though.

fuddy-duddy.
brooks brothers.
tweed sports coat.

Originally Posted by Lamo

Click to expand...

somewhat bland and sexless. i don't think it's a fad though.

Although the Ivy League style can be fitted and slimline, is it the lack of a clearly defined waist (compared to English/Italian cuts) that gives it the dowdy reputation?
The silhouette is certainly not as 'sexy' as certain other European cuts to my eye.
Yet cut well an Ivy League jacket can have shape and (Shock! Horror!!) actually fit the wearer.
I think maybe we just see too many bad examples or hear from too many people who are keen to say that it is an anti-fit style.

I'm endlessly interested in all this - Thanks for humouring me!

Originally Posted by amerikajinda

Click to expand...

fuddy-duddy.
brooks brothers.
tweed sports coat.

And the joke is that Brooks are now busting a gut to not look like the old (loved by some) Brooks! And the result is a bit of a mess that nobody really likes...

Tweed is just a fabric - You can do whatever you like with it. It needn't be 'old man'. It's another thing that's got a bad name for itself I think!

... But all you say is what I was expecting. THIS is the image problem.
Well summed up - Thanks.

Originally Posted by Larry Lean

Click to expand...

I'm really cool with that. I'm expecting a bit of a rough ride with this one

.
Want to say why Trad makes you want to vomit?

'Cos whatever it is is the image problem that this style has got to overcome if it doesn't want to wind up as something to laugh at in the history books.

Already it's looking a little funny (to say the least) on the MBs...

I don't think it's the look necessarily that makes me want to vomit, rather than what it represents. I think that look represents privilege and exclusion. Even though anybody can technically wear "trad" nowadays, I think the look represents private prepatory and secondary schools and the ivy league. I think it represents a class of people that were so rich and pampered as children that they think that even in adulthood they do not have to grow up, and therefore continue to wear the same clothes they wore when they were 12 (with pictures of crabs and ships on their pants to boot). I also think it represents a particular racial and religious group as well.

As someone who went to public elementary, middle and high schools and catholic college and law school, and someone who had to work hard for every little bit of success in my life with none of the privileges and "head starts" that this look represents, it's just not a look I can get on board with. I wouldn't want anyone to think, upon looking at me, that my parents sent me to a private prepatory school or that I could afford to go to an ivy league college or law school.

Originally Posted by Larry Lean

Click to expand...

Although the Ivy League style can be fitted and slimline, is it the lack of a clearly defined waist (compared to English/Italian cuts) that gives it the dowdy reputation?
The silhouette is certainly not as 'sexy' as certain other European cuts to my eye.
Yet cut well an Ivy League jacket can have shape and (Shock! Horror!!) actually fit the wearer.
I think maybe we just see too many bad examples or hear from too many people who are keen to say that it is an anti-fit style.

I'm endlessly interested in all this - Thanks for humouring me!

well, i was more or less referring to the penchant for bowties and penny loafers. But yes, the silhouette is especially unattractive.

Originally Posted by odoreater

Click to expand...

I don't think it's the look necessarily that makes me want to vomit, rather than what it represents. I think that look represents privilege and exclusion. Even though anybody can technically wear "trad" nowadays, I think the look represents private prepatory and secondary schools and the ivy league. I think it represents a class of people that were so rich and pampered as children that they think that even in adulthood they do not have to grow up, and therefore continue to wear the same clothes they wore when they were 12 (with pictures of crabs and ships on their pants to boot). I also think it represents a particular racial and religious group as well.

As someone who went to public elementary, middle and high schools and catholic college and law school, and someone who had to work hard for every little bit of success in my life with none of the privileges and "head starts" that this look represents, it's just not a look I can get on board with. I wouldn't want anyone to think, upon looking at me, that my parents sent me to a private prepatory school or that I could afford to go to an ivy league college or law school.

I honestly think that's the most valuable contribution so far - Many thanks.

I say that because the re-launch of the Ivy League style (via the mind-set of Ralph Lauren's marketing) as 'Trad' has been so class-heavy and (to me also) so unattractive that all you say hits home hard to me.

Yet 'Trad' or the Ivy League Style in the 50's/'60's was an 'Everyman' style.
Pre-WWII it was worn by an elite minority, true. Post Ralph it's been seen as an elite fantasy style also. But back when the style was worn MOST, say '55-'65, it was worn by anyone who wanted it. Ivy at all price points & all levels of quality. Very egalitarian.
But unless you know that history & just see the way 'Trad' has been presented by a certain vocal minority on a certain clothing forum lately then you are bound to think as you do. Who wouldn't?
'Ivy' is the American home-grown style that has been perverted to such an extent on the MBs that it is now genuinely hated by many out there...
And it's been ruined by so-called 'experts' on the style who didn't know it's history in the first place and had no interest in other voices who knew more than they did.

Funny old world, eh?

The question is how to reclaim it from the ignorant snobs...
No easy answers to that one.

As it stands, the 'Trad' forum has eaten itself. Now all you'll mainly see there is confusion and those eager to join a club of some sort not quite knowing what the definition of the club is because it's founders could never define it.

Messy.

And that's where the style stands today on the MBs.

The creek it's up is obvious. Getting a paddle to it is the way forward.

LL.

Originally Posted by Lamo

Click to expand...

well, i was more or less referring to the penchant for bowties and penny loafers. But yes, the silhouette is especially unattractive.

Yup. It's a different aesthetic to English & Italian tailoring.
Bow ties and embroidered crab pants (etc) drag it into parody & pastiche when done heavy handedly by those desperate to 'look the part'.
(List of names held back).

But it is America's contribution to the history of tailoring and done well it is a valid style I think.

Shame to write it off just because of a few neo-conservative whack-jobs.

(IMVHO)

So...

How do you get America's contribution to world tailoring history back?

How do make it 'just clothes' again?