interesting WSJ article about dressing up(or not)

[TheWraith]

There is much truth in what foo, Cary Grant and ChiliPalmer have to say in this thread.

Like most others here, I'm saddened by the degradation in style and diminishing values we set for ourselves in dressing well. It's due to numerous reasons, of course, but it's sad nonetheless.

 

[Superfluous]

Yeah, it's pretty sad in general. If I'm wearing any sort of sport coat or suit, people ask me why I'm dressed up. I go to a nice dinner with a friend while my girlfriend is with her mom for the night and the hostess asks us if we're on a date... I can't dress nicely without being gay?

What's with people?

 

[bigchris1313]

At places like the Edison, a swing-era-themed boÃ

te in downtown Los Angeles, "cocktail attire" is unspoken but abided. "We're counter to the casual Hollywood vibe," said Edison principal Barbara Jacobs.

While not altogether inaccurate, this made me chuckle. The Edison has--or perhaps had--quite the reputation for having a stringent dress code, but its rigidity appears to have dwindled as of recent. The first and last time I went about 9 months ago, the bouncers made a big deal about the dress code at the door--and then promptly let in gentlemen wearing graphic T-shirts, provided that they "kept their hoodies on."

 

[bringusingoodale]

I suspect that if the majority of gentlemen start dressing like MC'ers, I am and many on here would dress in jeans and t-shirts to stand out.

Just sayin'

 

[GoldenTribe]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I'm sad to be too young to experience the way things were as you describe. It certainly does sound more gentile. These days, the internet is the only place one can learn about these things. I can link everything I know about men's clothing to Styleforum, AskAndy, or the London Lounge. The trouble is that hobbyism is no better a driver of style than dress codes. Too much of what happens here is pastiche and cartoon. Oh well.

I believe you meant "genteel" (as gentiles are to Jews what infidels are to Muslims).

 

[Cary Grant]

Palmer - my point is that today in many even very large communities, even if you WANT to dress well, you have to expend exponentially more energy to find even a suit that remotely fits. If you at least had the will 50 years ago it was a much easier process.

 

[Cuttingboard]

Originally Posted by Tony Romo

Yeah, it's pretty sad in general. If I'm wearing any sort of sport coat or suit, people ask me why I'm dressed up. I go to a nice dinner with a friend while my girlfriend is with her mom for the night and the hostess asks us if we're on a date... I can't dress nicely without being gay?

What's with people?

Agree!!!

 

[ChiliPalmer]

Originally Posted by Cary Grant

Palmer - my point is that today in many even very large communities, even if you WANT to dress well, you have to expend exponentially more energy to find even a suit that remotely fits. If you at least had the will 50 years ago it was a much easier process.
No argument here. My point is that there is a reason for that. If it were profitable to run a haberdashery or sell conservative tailored clothes, more people would do it. This is one of the fundamental tenets of a market economy. Societal norms change. Here, I would agree with the rest of you that they've changed for the worse. But they've changed. And market participants either change with them or go out of business. Look at Wilkes Bashford. Bankrupt. Louis Boston. Not even close to being what it once was. It's far more profitable to target the "bare minimum" crowd. Like the saying goes, sell to the classes, live with the masses. Sell to the masses, live with the classes. I don't like it any more than you men.

 

[JLibourel]

This hardly seems like new news. Last month for my birthday I went to dinner with my wife, her son, her brother and his wife at one of the best restaurants in the city of almost a half-million where we live. I was the only man in the restaurant in coat and tie. My brother-in-law, to his credit, was at least wearing a blazer.

This topic has been hashed over a lot in the fora. It was a favorite on AAAC (at least in the pre-Cruiser era). I really think it boils down to a lack of personal dignity on the part of the men who won't dress decently and a lack of respect for others. To my mind, "slobwear" greatly detracts from the fine dining experience, especially if I have to see some shorts-wearing oaf's repulsive, hairy legs...and ugly feet if he's in sandals.

I don't buy this argument that decent ready-to-wear suits and jackets are unavailable. I'll have to say that when I am in a place like South Coast Plaza, I always have to wonder who buys all the suits and jackets offered for sale, so rarely do I see a decently turned out man. Admittedly, SCP is one of the finest shopping sites in the USA, but Nordstrom's stores are all but ubiquitous in my part of the country. Not top-drawer, I know, but a man can be pretty well kitted out at Nordstrom's. It has sometimes been observed on this forum that if most American men bought the bulk of their clothing even at JAB, it would be a vastly better place, sartorially. I would concur.

 

[poorsod]

Wasn't there an article recently about how young men were going back to dressing up to differentiate themselves from their parents?

 

[ChiliPalmer]

Originally Posted by JLibourel

I really think it boils down to a lack of personal dignity on the part of the men who won't dress decently and a lack of respect for others.
It's a confluence of factors and this is certainly one of them. I think another has to do with physical appearance. The rise of the service economy and the sedentary lifestyle that accompanies it coupled with the ubiquity and popularity of processed food has made a significant portion of the population overweight, if not outright obese. Street clothes are far more accomodating of those extra pounds than even the most loosely cut suits.

 

[JLibourel]

Originally Posted by ChiliPalmer

It's a confluence of factors and this is certainly one of them. I think another has to do with physical appearance.

The rise of the service economy and the sedentary lifestyle that accompanies it coupled with the ubiquity and popularity of processed food has made a significant portion of the population overweight, if not outright obese.

Street clothes are far more accomodating of those extra pounds than even the most loosely cut suits.


Good point! I hadn't really thought of that. However, a lot of people I see poorly dressed when they shouldn't be are definitely not fatties.

 

[Gus]

In the "old days" all the affluent, men of leisure or capatins of industry wore good clothing because it reflected their success. As a result, even in the depression or when you look at desperate, impoverished guys in WWI or WWII they would wear a suit to "look their best". But things have changed and leaders of industry enjoy wearing nerdy khakis and polo shirts, or tech gear from North Face. The recent photo of Obama having lunch with the elite of the tech world and only the president has on a tie and jacket speaks volumes. The others are in the Steve Jobs uniform of t shirts and jeans.

Now I love great jeans and T shirts, but I also love a great jacket, tailored pants and a shirt that was made for me.

I agree that most people don't have a clue how to dress well. They haven't had any mentors to show them. It isn't a matter of bad taste or no taste, you just need a good role model.

 

[TimelesStyle]

Originally Posted by GoldenTribe

I believe you meant "genteel" (as gentiles are to Jews what infidels are to Muslims).

No, they're not.

 

[JLibourel]

^I don't know about this business of "role models." Gary Cooper was one of the best dressed men in Old Hollywood. Saw a photo of his son the other day, and he looked like holy hell! Manton in The Suit comments that neither of Ronald Reagan's sons dresses nearly as well as his father.

I think men dress well, especially when they are not under the constraint of business necessity, because they want to themselves, not because their fathers or other "role models" did so.