Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Claghorn, May 21, 2014.
You're very kind sir
One day soon i hope mate
Looks good, Choc!
Is that a houndstooth PS with a houndstooth shirt?
How come you're wearing one of my shirts?! Nice stuff, the cokour of the trousers is absolutely perfect here!
Merry Xmas Braddock. awsm
I kind of imagine T&T as a genial elder statesman sitting quietly in his Florida bungalow, surrounded by classic bespoke Henry Poole, A&S, Huntsman etc that will, alas, never be worn again, his passion for fine craftsmenship channelled into on-line menswear critique.
That's a really interesting assertion. Makes sense to me too- women's fashion is much bigger biz with a higher and faster turnover of merchandize demanding constant renewal. MC as a subset of menswear is the polar opposite, the focus, as u say, on extreme precision, and permissible innovation in the suit over the last 3-4 decades is imperceptible to all but a few hobbyists like ourselves- gorges moving up and down by a few centimetres, lapels expanding and shrinking. We're a reactionary lot.
looking good there ht. Do u in fact sing?
Did u sleep in that? Impeccable otherwise of course.
Womenswear has had long tradition of innovation. Menswear historically tends to evolved extremely slowly, and is marked by irreversible step changes. On the other hand, shapes, styles, and even garments, in womenswear are put aside and picked up again on regular basis and experimented upon. There is essentially no reactionary movement in womenswear because the "baseline" is so fluid as to be non-existent. I feel that men can learn from women, and vice versa, at least insofar has how to approach dressing.
None meant by me either.
Not seriously for some time, and not very well ever. I love opera and had delusions of grandeur in college, but wasn't gifted with a particularly lovely or powerful voice. Still love the art and the genre, though, and I pick my way though some Schubert, Schumann, and Beethoven song cycles now and again (a far cry from Wagner!).
Well, clothes are nothing without the person and the place.
One of the fundamental misunderstandings that I find in CM, is that there are suits and sportsjacket that can be considered "pre-step change" and those that should be considered "post step change." To criticize one for not being the other does not really make for an interesting or enlightening discussion. I think that it's a useful exercise to distinguish one from the other, and criticize them only in context.
There has been a fundamental change in the way men dress in the past half century or so. No amount of wailing will reverse this. We will inevitably go to a different paradigm, but it will most assuredly not be the paradigm 80 years ago.
I don't have a full picture unfortunately, they all turned out awful. From valentines day:
pants are a bit rumpled from trying to take the picture
I would suggest lacing your shoes differently. As is, they are laced like tennis shoes
Separate names with a comma.