GQ Forum member's opinion on SF

[acidboy]

Re: stylish without being fashionable Posted: Jul 25, 2006 7:10 PM in response to: dancingbymyself0 I'm gonna play devil advocate here. I think being stylish for the most part goes hand in hand with being trendy. Having your own style doesn't really mean you're stylish. It depends on the style that you have. For example, guys on styleforum.net who wear bespoke suit, custom-made shirt, slacks, and oxford shoes everyday, do they have their own style? Yes, the classic style. Do they dress well? Certainly. But are they stylish? I think not. The term "stylish" means being a little bit fashion forward but still have your own style, being creative and having fun on how you dress which also reflects your own personality.

From GQ forum: stylish without being fashionable http://forums.men.style.com/thread.j...7509&tstart=30

 

[acidboy]

of course, we should take it with a grain of salt. here's another thread:

What to wear ties with?
http://forums.men.style.com/thread.j...7583&tstart=45

Okay, so it's bovious that one could wear a tie with a dress shirt or a suit/blazer....etc. What else? I've seen a lot of "punk looks" (I guess) with odd articles of clothing. Also, what about the polo with a tie? I know its really old school prep... basically what do you guys think are appropriate shirts to wear with ties? Anything unusual that looks really cool? Thx

as a belt

Check out dolce's S/S 07 show for some ideas. There're some outfits where ties are paired with short sleeved button downs+shorts as well. Looks kind of nice imo.

I quite like polo with a tie... one of my friends did that sometime ago and I thought it looked nice... but maybe it was also his attitude... I dunno he can look cool just wearing his pajamas at home

I have grunge looking blazer with shawl collar. Can I wear skinny tie with that or is there som rules against ties and shawl collars?

A tie as a belt. I use to do that in the late 1980's.

I wore a very conservatively cut pair of trousers and a similarly conservative silk rep tie. Gentle twisting through the belt loops, a square knot in the front, then wrap and tuck the loose ends under. I liked wearing this with a loose polo placket shirt in crisp white cotton and white canvas runners.

If you do it right, it's a quitely subverse look. (That was the appeal for me.)

do a tie as the strap/handle for your man bag. or just tie it on there

if it goes ofcourse

 

[luk-cha]

it is a bit like the old question what came first the chicken or the egg!

i have been thinking about this for a while too! can you be stylish and not fashionable or fashionable and not stylish???? or can you be a combination of both because if you are a so called "fashion whore" you have no style because you are follow the trend such as a uniform at school or work and if you look at the general joe public they have neither style or fashion so what is the main difference between the two?????????????????

 

[Alias]

The marsupial probably didn't even bother to read the streetwear subforum.

 

[Teacher]

I'm surprised that anyone even posts over there any more. Needless to say, I shall not join their ranks. And they probably won't miss me, either.

 

[kronik]

Comically, I started my clothes forum habit over there which actually led me to SF/AAAC.. I rarely go back. Most of the advice/conversation is for 28" waisted people with too much money to blow.

 

[tiger02]

I'm just gonna throw this out there--the guy's got a point. How many members are here to make sure that they're always safe when they go to work, that they have the highest quality stuff, that they don't break any rules? I would guess the answer ranges between 'a lot' and 'most.' While there is nothing wrong with any of those qualities, just participating in a board with style in the name doesn't make you stylish.

Tom

 

[summej2]

Originally Posted by kronik

Comically, I started my clothes forum habit over there which actually led me to SF/AAAC.. I rarely go back. Most of the advice/conversation is for 28" waisted people with too much money to blow.

Hmmm.... 28" waisted people with too much money to blow.... Maybe they should send all of those "unstylish" purchases they foolishly made at Barneys and Wilkes Bashford my way to make room for something more trendy...

 

[Teacher]

Originally Posted by tiger02

I'm just gonna throw this out there--the guy's got a point. How many members are here to make sure that they're always safe when they go to work, that they have the highest quality stuff, that they don't break any rules? I would guess the answer ranges between 'a lot' and 'most.' While there is nothing wrong with any of those qualities, just participating in a board with style in the name doesn't make you stylish.

Tom

Just because one doesn't takes that many risks doesn't necessarily preclude one from being stylish, either, which is his point. He's saying that trend and style are synonymous, which most of us here would disagree with.

When I read his post, the image that immediately came to mind is that he looks like some skinny, messy-haired dude with too-short/too-tight clothing and a shirt/tie/coat( ? ) combination that doesn't quite go together (shirt untucked, of course)...in other words, like a goofball who's going to cringe at pictures of himself in ten years. That's the fickle nature of trend. One who -- at least according to our view -- is stylish is one who may not necessarily be timeless, but at least doesn't look out of place at any given point. It's the guy in the '70's who opted to avoid the 4.5" lapels in loud plaids in favor of 3-3.5" worsteds in colors or patterns that, if not quite, at least didn't scream LOOK AT ME RIGHT NOW!. There are oh so many pictures my father would just looooooove to destroy because he was trendy in 1970. (They sure give me a good chuckle though!)

 

[ragdoll]

I suspect that GQ has a much younger membership. It is a phase you have to go through to get to...here.

 

[Get Smart]

Originally Posted by tiger02

I'm just gonna throw this out there--the guy's got a point. How many members are here to make sure that they're always safe when they go to work, that they have the highest quality stuff, that they don't break any rules? I would guess the answer ranges between 'a lot' and 'most.' While there is nothing wrong with any of those qualities, just participating in a board with style in the name doesn't make you stylish.

Tom

I think you're correct. It seems a lot of posters follow a groupthink of what brands to wear, and while there's nothing wrong with that, it begs the question of if they really know how to dress outside of a paint-by-numbers routine of brand A shirts, brand B shoes, brand C suits etc. How often do we read about people changing the way they dress because they're moving to a different city and want to "blend in"....surely that can't be indicative of someone who has his own style? Or asking if a certain feature will be "out of style" in a year. I would think a stylist wouldn't care about the transitory nature of fashion and wear it regardless of trend.

It's def a touchy issue that I'm sure will rub many people the wrong way. And the GQ forum has its fair share of fashion victims and is more like "fashion forum 101" with a lot of uninformed participants.

 

[MysticAura]

Hahaha I started out at men.style.com but realized that alot of people were simply too immature for me (e.g. always looking at designer brands, talking about 1000+ suits and how you can only buy 1000+ suits or else they would only last you a year)

Ridiculous stuff like that that doesn't help the average person trying to dress well.

 

[tiger02]

Originally Posted by Get Smart

I think you're correct. It seems a lot of posters follow a groupthink of what brands to wear, and while there's nothing wrong with that, it begs the question of if they really know how to dress outside of a paint-by-numbers routine of brand A shirts, brand B shoes, brand C suits etc. How often do we read about people changing the way they dress because they're moving to a different city and want to "blend in"....surely that can't be indicative of someone who has his own style? Or asking if a certain feature will be "out of style" in a year. I would think a stylist wouldn't care about the transitory nature of fashion and wear it regardless of trend.

It's def a touchy issue that I'm sure will rub many people the wrong way. And the GQ forum has its fair share of fashion victims and is more like "fashion forum 101" with a lot of uninformed participants.
Right. And again, there's nothing wrong with wanting to dress correctly for work. The recent "what do you wear on Saturday" thread really opened my eyes. Cutoff shorts and a tank top? Wow. I expected more answers along the lines of yours, JLibourel, Label King: more flashiness, more comfort, but still dressed *well.* Maybe that would be an answer to the summer doldrums that some are feeling: try something new, go more self consciously 'stylish' on the weekends, come back and discuss here. Would make for some interesting threads.

Tom

 

[GQgeek]

Originally Posted by Get Smart

I think you're correct. It seems a lot of posters follow a groupthink of what brands to wear, and while there's nothing wrong with that, it begs the question of if they really know how to dress outside of a paint-by-numbers routine of brand A shirts, brand B shoes, brand C suits etc. How often do we read about people changing the way they dress because they're moving to a different city and want to "blend in"....surely that can't be indicative of someone who has his own style? Or asking if a certain feature will be "out of style" in a year. I would think a stylist wouldn't care about the transitory nature of fashion and wear it regardless of trend.

It's def a touchy issue that I'm sure will rub many people the wrong way. And the GQ forum has its fair share of fashion victims and is more like "fashion forum 101" with a lot of uninformed participants.

I don't think it's groupthink. The forum has collectively determined over the years what the best brands are. People naturally migrate to those brands as they update and overhaul their wardrobes. Best doesn't necessarily equate with best quality, but also best value for your dollar, or best within a certain price limit, etc.

If we were talking about shoes, I'd agree that we're all a bunch of EG and JL whores. However, before I looked at hundreds of pictures of Aportnoy and Sysdoc's shoes, I was never as much a fan. I required a bit of education, which the forum provided. At one point (years ago, before I came here) I actually bought Kenneth Coles. Ferragamos were the natural next step because they were widely available, pretty good quality, and a reasonable price. In the past year and a half however, I've come to learn of all the things that are wrong with them aesthetically. Leaving aside the regular line and inferior Studio line, I was looking at a pair of Tramezza wholecuts in the store the other day and quite honestly, the first thing that came to mind was that I would have prefered had the welt been cut a bit closer to the upper. Sometimes it takes another person to point those types of things out, but it doesn't mean it's groupthink.

 

[Get Smart]

Originally Posted by tiger02

Right. And again, there's nothing wrong with wanting to dress correctly for work.

Tom

good point, because the majority of geezers here are talking work gear when discussing shoes/suits/etc which exists in its own world of style with some clear ceilings and boundaries that you shouldn't cross. For those who don't have to wear a white collar uniform, I think dressing becomes more of a true expression of style since those contraints don't apply and you can unleash your inner sartorial beast. Look at how many guys want to wear frock coats in that one thread about wearing anything you want....assuming they were serious, the replies show some serious pent up sartorial frustration going on here!

back to the GQ forum, it's a tragic place, altho it has moments of hilarity and there are a few posters who would do better migrating *here* as they seem to have a real interest in style.