Mod to Suedehead

[Mr Knightley]



Mr Knightley - I'm sure your comment,  "That's why many skinheads hardly wore them" raised a few eyebrows. Indeed, many people still associate skinheads with 'boots and braces' but we all know it was much more than that. Interestingly I was involved in a discussion only last week-end about the wearing of braces. Someone expressed surprised when I stated that more often than not braces were not openly on show, but more usually covered by a sleeveless pull-over or jacket (or cardigan as seen above). So the question is, were braces worn as a skinhead display "I do, therefore I am" or for functional purposes i.e. to get the jeans or trousers to hang right?

I have an opinion - just wondered what others thought.......

I was being mildly controversial I know.

There were many different interpretations of skinhead style, of course, and Soul Stylists goes as far as saying that only the close cropped hair really brought them all together.

Among my Essex mates braces were never popular, although they were worn with the more casual clothes like jeans or sta-prest. Anything more formal had a self-supporting waist.

The idea was that braces were part of a certain look. If trousers fitted correctly then they didn't need any support. As I said braces tended to upset the line by pulling things up too much IMHO.

 

[Mr Knightley]

I have been reading the thread when I can but not contributed much of late.

One thing that has interested me is the recent focus on how best to replicate 'the look' today. How many of the originals try to faithfully reproduce the look of 1969 and if you don't, how far do you go in using it as a yardstick or benchmark? I have delved into this before, I know but there are new posters now.

For me, it has always been there in the back of my mind even in the darkest days of the early 70s. On the face of it today, with the internet and all the current interest in the 60s style, it should be relatively easy to get close to the correct look but I often feel we get the proportions and other subtle aspects wrong. The pic of the two guys in sta-prest and braces reminded me just how subtle a style it was. The muted colours, the slim but not tight fit of the clothes, the correct stance, the hair that has no obvious dressing – all that sort of thing.

 

[Man-of-Mystery]



Spotted that yesterday. I would love one, but the UK site only specifies small and medium, and slim fit at that. I'll make enquiries when I am next at the Levi shop in Glasgow.

I tried one on today. Superb (except for the fact it has no leather collar). It's a small fit, so if you take L ask for an XL.

 

[Man-of-Mystery]



Mr Knightley - I'm sure your comment,  "That's why many skinheads hardly wore them" raised a few eyebrows. Indeed, many people still associate skinheads with 'boots and braces' but we all know it was much more than that. Interestingly I was involved in a discussion only last week-end about the wearing of braces. Someone expressed surprised when I stated that more often than not braces were not openly on show, but more usually covered by a sleeveless pull-over or jacket (or cardigan as seen above). So the question is, were braces worn as a skinhead display "I do, therefore I am" or for functional purposes i.e. to get the jeans or trousers to hang right?

I have an opinion - just wondered what others thought.......

I've often said on this thread that mods (before skinheads came along) and skinheads (at first) wore them to get trousers to hang right.

 

[Man-of-Mystery]



Found a photo that could interest MOM for the book (unknown credits) I am not sure it has been posted before. Mods 1967, sheepskin irruption ?

I'm wondering about the provenance of that photo.

 

[Clouseau]

Sorry MOM, can't tell you more. But the quality of the cliché is superb, and it may have been taken by a pro-photographer.

 

[loempiavreter]

South east london

1969

1968

I think anyone looking like a hippy round my Dad's family's way (ok, not Carnaby Street or The King's Road, but South East London) would have been looked at like they came down from outer space, laughed at or beaten up, from what they tell me! I think the psychedelic thing is a bit of a blown out of proportion myth. I love that footage of the short haired Mods looking irritated in the Ally Pally in 1967: "did you come here to have a good time?" "Yeah...and we 'aven't!"

Loved the quote so I put it in here too

 

[elwood]

Look forward to that pic, Ed.

Rangers' link fascinating - great pic on p.3.

As for your Rangers to MUFC journey ... might have been MCFC! ;-) There's been big connections between Gers and City for years (often via Ulster from what I've seen). Been to many away games from 70s onwards when there's been large contingent of Rangers fans following City. Most memorable and surreal (and drunken) was journey back to Manchester on last train from Blackpool with a large crew with several crates of brown ale and endless renditions of (I think, memory particularly impaired) "The Sash My Father Wore" and "The Red Hand of Ulster" or similar titles.

Bit off topic I know, but wondered if you or roytonboy came across similar in Manchester?

 

[cerneabbas]

Mr Knightley. Your post was interesting to me because it matches some of my thoughts about "the look" today, i am sometimes a bit disapointed that this doesnt get discusssed more on this thread.I do not want to try and dress exactly as i did when i was 13,but i do want to dress with some of the style that was about then.As i see it there are some people on here who want to replicate what was worn then ( nothing wrong with that ) but that is not for me.For a start we were wearing a lot of styles that were for much older men,raincoats,crombies, brogues,trilbies, and because we were young it felt sophisticated,i was going to school dressed much more smartly than the teachers ( not too hard really ) they had no idea of style and we felt that we did.When raincoats were being talked about a few pages back,someone ( kingstonian ? ) said that they felt a bit like Victor Mildrew wearing one now,that wouldnt have been the case wearing a raincoat as a teenager.I am not too bothered about getting older,but i am aware of it and i try to dress suitably,i cannot imagine myself wearing Doc Martens,braces,denim jacket,a trilby or sta prest. I do wear brogues,weejuns,monkey boots,button down shirts a harrington type jacket, not all at the same time,i would like a crombie but maybe in herringbone,i would wear prince of wales check trousers but not cut too slim or as short as back in the day.I would not have worn a blazer back then ( i had to wear one to school ) but i probably would wear one now if i could find a decent one.I am still not too sure about older blokes wearing jeans, its down to the individual but they seem like clothes for youngsters to me.I suppose what i am trying to do is take some of the original style and "update" or "twist" it to suit a 55 year old man without looking ridiculous.I hope that this makes sense and i am only saying what i am trying to do and i dont mean to criticise anyone else for how they dress or what "image" they want.

 

[elwood]



They might be good repro, but that's a jeans-style sta-press. I like the brooks brothers ones the best too. They seem to have most if not all the details right, if you compare it to a picture like this one:

That really is an excellent pic. Reminds me that I had very similar style trousers in that period 69 - 70 that came from M&S. Fit and material were very close to Sta-Prest from what I recall, though clearly not considered as fashionable as the proper Levi's with the tab. Think my point is that it was a popular look at the time and other manufacturers were producing me too versions. Wore mine with desert boots and lambs wool V-neck pullover (also M&S) - wasn't bad for 11/ 12 year olds.

 

[Clouseau]

Mr Knightley. Your post was interesting to me because it matches some of my thoughts about "the look" today, i am sometimes a bit disapointed that this doesnt get discusssed more on this thread.I do not want to try and dress exactly as i did when i was 13,but i do want to dress with some of the style that was about then.As i see it there are some people on here who want to replicate what was worn then ( nothing wrong with that ) but that is not for me.For a start we were wearing a lot of styles that were for much older men,raincoats,crombies, brogues,trilbies, and because we were young it felt sophisticated,i was going to school dressed much more smartly than the teachers ( not too hard really ) they had no idea of style and we felt that we did.When raincoats were being talked about a few pages back,someone ( kingstonian ? ) said that they felt a bit like Victor Mildrew wearing one now,that wouldnt have been the case wearing a raincoat as a teenager.I am not too bothered about getting older,but i am aware of it and i try to dress suitably,i cannot imagine myself wearing Doc Martens,braces,denim jacket,a trilby or sta prest. I do wear brogues,weejuns,monkey boots,button down shirts a harrington type jacket, not all at the same time,i would like a crombie but maybe in herringbone,i would wear prince of wales check trousers but not cut too slim or as short as back in the day.I would not have worn a blazer back then ( i had to wear one to school ) but i probably would wear one now if i could find a decent one.I am still not too sure about older blokes wearing jeans, its down to the individual but they seem like clothes for youngsters to me.I suppose what i am trying to do is take some of the original style and "update" or "twist" it to suit a 55 year old man without looking ridiculous.I hope that this makes sense and i am only saying what i am trying to do and i dont mean to criticise anyone else for how they dress or what "image" they want.

Cerneabbas, i think you can find a lot of different people on this thread. Among them some purists: a few Originals, and actual skinheads who are on "vintage" clothing, and as you say try to replicate (but not only) what was worn by the Originals, and for who it is a real way of life. And you have other people like you, and me, growing older (i am almost 49), but who modestly maintain some elements of the style and try, as you say, to update or twist it. I'm with you on this!

 

[Gsvs5]

I have been reading the thread when I can but not contributed much of late.

One thing that has interested me is the recent focus on how best to replicate 'the look' today. How many of the originals try to faithfully reproduce the look of 1969 and if you don't, how far do you go in using it as a yardstick or benchmark? I have delved into this before, I know but there are new posters now.

For me, it has always been there in the back of my mind even in the darkest days of the early 70s. On the face of it today, with the internet and all the current interest in the 60s style, it should be relatively easy to get close to the correct look but I often feel we get the proportions and other subtle aspects wrong. The pic of the two guys in sta-prest and braces reminded me just how subtle a style it was. The muted colours, the slim but not tight fit of the clothes, the correct stance, the hair that has no obvious dressing – all that sort of thing.

Of course at 55 + we are kidding ourselves to believe that we could/would carry on with the original look without appearing as caricatures.I hope I am beyond that.You are right about the subtleties Mr Knightley.That is probably one of the most important and lasting things to have stuck with me and influences my choices today.Anyone can buy a pr of decent Brogues,but how many really consider the shape of the last,thickness of sole,number of eyelets,quality of leather etc.etc? Jeans are another story if you expect to be able to just go in and grab a decent pr off the shelf to look great on your middle aged ass.The industry caters to the Youth market and that me lower and lower rise and skinnier fit each season.Dressing well takes effort.

I would hazzard a guess that most men in middle age get their clothes picked out by their Wives and make do with the most convenient options available within budget.We all come in different shapes and sizes,and you don't have to look far to see how little the majority of older men care about how they dress.People on this Forum are the exception.Well heeled cosmopolitan City dwellers are also not reflective of the rest of suburbia.I've mentioned before on here about colour and the drab interpretation of the style by 2nd and 3rd generations.I would argue that the two guys in the sta press photo were anything but muted by comparison to todays followers.

Here's an older self confessed Mod (He was a Saturday boy in a Newcastle Tailors) about the same era as Victor Meldrew


Kingstonian maybe right,but he could also be way off.It's all down to the individual,his sense of style and attitude.

 

[ek77]

another fb find...
didnt saw these ones from 1970 on here before...
at least two ma1 flight jackets in the pix...

 

[ek77]

another one from the same photographer..

Youth In England In The Seventies. 01 Mai 1970

 

[Watermelon man]

I wasn't having a dig, mate. There's just a lot more alternatives that are closer (even if most aren't very good).
I usually wear originals or tailored ones so can't really comment on who does the best ones these days - I've not tried any of them.
Sadly, I sold 20-odd pairs of originals ones to a mate last year as they were never gonna fit me again. Was a couple of pairs of Levis in there as well. Much more pressing things to do with my time than sell on ebay and they went to a good home.
Damn that middle age!

Yes... I have a pair of old Sta-Prest-like trousers (actually not 'originals' as the fabric would have decayed by now if they were 100% cotton treated in the 1964 manner). Too small for my oversized waist now, however, although I live in hope that I might loose weight again one day... They are razor-sharp, unlike any of the modern repros. Also narrowly-tapered at the ankle (7").

The Brooks Bros Plain Front 'Advantage' Chinos (especially if you get the narrower ones -- not the 'Clark' fit) are pretty close, but they don't hold a crease particularly well. The worst in that respect that I've encountered recently are Farah Vintage 'FaraPress'. Absolute rubbish -- it staggers me that they can describe them as anything with 'press' in the name.

Returning to my original point, however. The current so-called 511 Levis Sta Prest are not bad. Here I believe that '511' is being used as a marketing ploy to signify that they are slim (not skinny) trousers. They are not traditional 5-pocket jeans. They are not cut like 511 jeans (although the waist is similarly low, in keeping with modern trends).

Different colours, different cut, especially at the back and the waist, but they are made of cloth that unlike any of the other modern repros, holds its crease. They are not like the 'Sta Prest' jeans that Levis have made in recent years.

If they were made like the 'originals' (whatever that means in our context -- presumably not the 1964 vintage), I have no doubt that they would be in the Levi's 'Vintage' range and cost upwards of £175.