If your wardrobe is too large, you end up looking worse.

[DocHolliday]

I think you're viewing this in too black-and-white a fashion. There are different reasons to like and own a garment -- how it fits, how it looks, how it makes you feel. But the first prerequisite ought to be that you like it. You and I both have clothes we don't really like, that we don't really need, and that we probably won't keep. Yet we keep them. I can only think that eliminating those items would benefit us both.

 

[gdl203]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

You'd rather look worse sometimes than the same all the time?
Evidently I do.

 

[srivats]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

A good question. I've tended to be candid about it in a joking, good-natured way. But I'm also finding I'm wearing the same pairs over and over, partly out of preference and partly out of a desire to break them in. I imagine the conspicuousness of the wardrobe's size is lessened if the shoes look well worn. It's when you wear an endless parade of barely creased shoes that people really take notice.


Barely creased shoes actually would be worse. My shoes are actually pretty well worn and have a good patina from use. People, especially those around you (say at work) however, over time, do notice when you wear a different shoe each day of the work week. My coworkers are are not too curious anymore, but once in a while someone does comment (in a positive way) which makes me uneasy.

I actually think that newer (or multiple) clothes are easier to wear than newer (or multiple pairs) of shoes. Unless you have a really enormous clothes rotation, people do not comment (ie unless it is too quirky or too out-of-place for wherever you are at). Agree or Disagree?

 

[radicaldog]

Originally Posted by Viktri

You have to explain your conclusion because I don't see how it follows from the premise; how is fitting a square peg into a round hole making a better sense of how they may be worn best. Why not have the appropriate jacket for the appropriate event?

Because one of the premises (expressed in my earlier formulation of this argument, which was ignored) was that with four blazers (two for winter, two for summer) you would have a jacket that would be appropriate for any occasion where a blazer is called for.

 

[dadengcrew]

I'm of the opinion that you should be very familiar with everything in your wadrobe. Too big of one hinders that.

 

[radicaldog]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

If anonymity and modesty are the values of social presence that you rank the highest, why bother with trying to dress well at all? I do not pose this question facetiously. Most men dress anonymously, not by choice, but by inevitable statistical inclination. The form that this takes in modern life is shabby, casual, cheap dressing. It is an excellent way to fit in and and not make waves among strangers.

Because if one has an interest in clothing and style it would be inauthentic to repress it in order to fit in. And we know that there can be no style, let alone elegance, without authenticity.

But really, the point about wardrobe size is not so much about fitting in as it is about avoiding tacky excess, or rampant consumerism, or conspicuous consumption, or whatever you want to call it.

 

[TheFoo]

So far, all I've gathered is that Greg likes to wear lots of stuff that is ugly instead of less stuff that isn't ugly. Can someone please sum up the past several pages of this thread in a few bullet-pointed sentences?

 

[radicaldog]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

If you are thinking about how to get to the "worn in" look, you will never wear it in a convincing way.

How's that for an evil observation?

But who needs to thing about the worn-in look in 'how to' terms? All you need to think is that it's OK if your clothes are actually worn in. Then you may also want to think about why that's OK, which is basically what some of us are doing in this thread. I don't see much of a problem with that.

 

[voxsartoria]

Originally Posted by radicaldog

But who needs to thing about the worn-in look in 'how to' terms? All you need to think is that it's OK if your clothes are actually worn in. Then you may also want to think about why that's OK, which is basically what some of us are doing in this thread. I don't see much of a problem with that.

Less than one year old, an pretty new on the flanks; fifteen years old and very worn in in the center.

Without going into why you might like or dislike either suit, and since the middle, somewhat ancient suit was worn in without any thought given to it: how does your theory hold up?

The one on the left is clickable if you want to see wrinkles and bagginess closeups.

- B

 

[Mr. Moo]

Bill honestly how many times and in how many threads are you going to post your outfit today? Four threads? Five? There should be an over/under on you posting pictures of yourself every day.

 

[voxsartoria]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moo

Bill honestly how many times and in how many threads are you going to post your outfit today? Four threads? Five? There should be an over/under on you posting pictures of yourself every day.

- B

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moo

Bill honestly how many times and in how many threads are you going to post your outfit today? Four threads? Five? There should be an over/under on you posting pictures of yourself every day.

You're just jealous that he has long pants. Also, his thighs are less unattractive than yours.

 

[voxsartoria]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

You're just jealous that he has long pants. Also, his thighs are less unattractive than yours.

I also feel more comfortable putting myself in the line of fire rather than picking candidates out of WAYWRN or other threads.

Sometimes, celebrities photos might work, but they lack a certain verisimlitude. They seem better considered on their own.

- B

 

[Mr. Moo]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

You're just jealous that he has long pants. Also, his thighs are less unattractive than yours.
Pffft, at least I have thighs. Do you need the glue remover now or later? You know, to remove you from Bill's penis.

 

[radicaldog]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Less than one year old, an pretty new on the flanks; fifteen years old and very worn in in the center. Without going into why you might like or dislike either suit, and since the middle, somewhat ancient suit was worn in without any thought given to it: how does your theory hold up? The one on the left is clickable if you want to see wrinkles and bagginess closeups.
I suppose we have at least three issues here: (i) photography (because it's impossible to tell that your blue suit is old and a bit worn), (ii) how often you have your clothes pressed, steamed, and brushed, and (iii) --wait for this--how many clothes you have! For these and other reasons neither of your suits looks like the excellent specimen you unearthed earlier in this thread, which is all my theory is about: