my visit to Napoli & Mina @ Napoli Su Misura

[Cantabrigian]



Some have been saying that the NSM shoulder line lifts off or levels off beyond the wearer's acromion, due to a lack of wadding or padding, causing the upturned, ski-jump Type N Shoulder shape. This truly baffles me. Not to be pedantic, but gravity tends to prevent exactly that sort of thing from happening. Unless a jacket is cut or structured by a tailor to do otherwise, it will fall with the drop-off of the wearer's own shoulders. This is not a matter of tailoring expertise. It's an understanding of two basic things: (1) the principle that cloth, like other things, falls with gravity unless physically propped up, and (2) the fact that other unpadded shoulders fall-off beyond the acromion, instead of staying suspended in mid-air. Such unpadded shoulders are represented by the Type R Shoulder illustrated above.

I assume this is my explanation that you're mistaking - whether because it's your nature or because you don't care / understand what I wrote.

It's not the absence of padding that raises the jacket's shoulder near the shoulder seam. It's the presence of padding.

As I illustrated with the photos of jackets on a hanger, all jackets have this sort of padding.

It's only noticeable on the NSM jacket because there is no padding elsewhere to smooth the transition from shoulder to sleevehead.

One potential explanation for the Type N Shoulder: the armscye is cut with a diameter that extends too high above the natural shoulder, and since it is structured, it lifts the jacket off the natural shoulder. This happens in RTW a lot.

It seems like gravity would offer a stronger objection to this theory than to any other that has been presented.

 

[whnay.]

I bought my wife a nice camera for Xmas so now I don't have any excuses for not posting pics. I'll take a few pics this weekend of some of my stuff - by and large they have very similar shoulder profiles but there is some variation.

 

[Cantabrigian]

I'll note, for the record, that I don't like the look of the bump at the end of NSM shoulders.

But I do like the way the jackets feel / move. There's an undeniable lightness which certainly lends some - marginal - ease of movement. It wouldn't be hard to have a smoother shoulder line, but it wouldn't feel the same.

I wouldn't get everything from NSM, but especially for summer or more casual jackets, I'd definitely keep them in the rotation.

 

[TheFoo]



I assume this is my explanation that you're mistaking - whether because it's your nature or because you don't care / understand what I wrote.

Spoiler

It's not the absence of padding that raises the jacket's shoulder near the shoulder seam. It's the presence of padding.

As I illustrated with the photos of jackets on a hanger, all jackets have this sort of padding.

It's only noticeable on the NSM jacket because there is no padding elsewhere to smooth the transition from shoulder to sleevehead.

No, it's because your explanation makes zero sense. You keep mentioning the "presence of padding" (or wadding) at the shoulder near the armscye causing the shoulder line to upturn. However, the only reason you insert wadding there in an otherwise unpadded shoulder is to mitigate against collapse. If there is so much that it causes the shoulder line to curve upward, you have used too much wadding. Hence, if wadding is truly to blame, NSM simply uses too much and should correct the mistake.

Then you say that NSM feels lighter and gives you marginally improved ease of movement. But again, it makes zero sense that the upturn in the shoulders has anything to do with that. If you are right, that wadding is what creates the upturn, it would stand to reason that less wadding would make the jacket feel lighter, not more of it. In other words, your claimed cause of the upturn would in no way make the jacket feel the way you describe--it feels that way in spite of it.

I understand one of your key suppositions is that non-NSM jackets use padding elsewhere in the shoulder to "smooth the transition from shoulder to sleevehead." Again, this is patently false. Mine have no such padding. The shoulder is completely unpadded except for a little bit of wadding at the scye. The same is true of Mariano's own jackets and the Solito jackets I've examined in person. I have no idea how your photos of jackets on hangers are supposed to show otherwise.

Surely, you will write-off everything I've just said as tedious or dismissive or argumentative, but whatever. I think you are mired in wishful thinking.

 

[TheFoo]

Put another away: if wadding near the scye is what causes the NSM shoulders to turn upward, and the only purpose of wadding in a natural shoulder is to prevent collapse, why the heck would the tailor use so much as to cause the upturn? It's a mistake, no matter how you cut it.

 

[TheFoo]



It seems like gravity would offer a stronger objection to this theory than to any other that has been presented.

No. The armscye is reinforced by canvas, stitching, and its arched shape. It will not collapse under gravity. So, if you cut it high enough, it will rise above your shoulder. I've seen this happen on others and have firsthand experience. Oxxford messed up my order for unpadded shoulders and "fixed" the error by simply removing the padding from the jackets already made. Hence, the scye is too big and high on those jackets, forcing the shoulders to upturn a little bit toward the scye. Very much like what you see in NSM jackets.

 

[patrickBOOTH]

^I've experienced that with RTW in the past. You see it a lot on men in RTW in the wild.

 

[Cantabrigian]



No, it's because your explanation makes zero sense. You keep mentioning the "presence of padding" (or wadding) at the shoulder near the armscye causing the shoulder line to upturn. However, the only reason you insert wadding there in an otherwise unpadded shoulder is to mitigate against collapse. If there is so much that it causes the shoulder line to curve upward, you have used too much wadding. Hence, if wadding is truly to blame, NSM simply uses too much and should correct the mistake.

What I'm talking about - and this is the reason I was careful not to use the generic term of 'padding' for what's operating here - is meant to help the sleeve hang well.

The purpose of this stuff is not to affect the shoulder line. It does however interfere with the shoulder line since, of necesity, it has to be stitched into the shoulder seam. So there is a small area of this stuff that ends up on top of the shoulder (for the same reason that you have seam allowances - you need something to hold a stitch).

If you removed that stuff, the sleeves - and this would be most obvious from a profile view of the wearer - would display the sort of collapsing sleeve that you see in the worse Mariano examples that Dopey posted.


At this point, it might be best for you to see one of these jackets in person rather than theorizing about the readily observable properties of a simple physical object.

Or, alternately, you can continue issue rants based on the premise that I'm a brainwashed moron.

I'm pretty sure I know which one you'll choose and that will have the side benefit of keeping you the center of attention.

 

[Galen]

Looks really nice MrChris!

Would be interesting to see better pictures of it, possibly with a better camera and natural light?

 

[TheFoo]



What I'm talking about - and this is the reason I was careful not to use the generic term of 'padding' for what's operating here - is meant to help the sleeve hang well.

The purpose of this stuff is not to affect the shoulder line. It does however interfere with the shoulder line since, of necesity, it has to be stitched into the shoulder seam. So there is a small area of this stuff that ends up on top of the shoulder (for the same reason that you have seam allowances - you need something to hold a stitch).

If you removed that stuff, the sleeves - and this would be most obvious from a profile view of the wearer - would display the sort of collapsing sleeve that you see in the worse Mariano examples that Dopey posted.

So, you're working on the premise that Mariano's own Rubinacci jackets are an error? That, in and of itself, strikes me as preposterous. Dopey doesn't like the "collapsing sleeve," but it is an identifying characteristic of Rubinacci jackets and other Neapolitan tailors. Solito, for example. The degree of collapse is different on different people, but it is always there. Iammatt's jackets (that Dopey posted) also exhibit drop-off, though less pronounced. It's on all my jackets, and it was on yours when I saw it years ago. If you don't like that style of tailoring, that's fine, but it is not a mistake.

This raises the question: why would anyone want to use a traveling tailor catering specifically to foreigners called "Napoli Su Misura" if he doesn't like one of the most identifying features of classic Neapolitan jackets? Baffling. Even more baffling is attempting to defend the deviation of the newcomer versus the practice of existing standards. It's like saying Coke tastes bad because it doesn't taste like the supermarket brand cola you bought at a discount.

Anyway, I don't believe the wadding is to blame. The upturn in many examples is far too pronounced and begins far too short of the scye for that.

At this point, it might be best for you to see one of these jackets in person rather than theorizing about the readily observable properties of a simple physical object.

Or, alternately, you can continue issue rants based on the premise that I'm a brainwashed moron.

I'm pretty sure I know which one you'll choose and that will have the side benefit of keeping you the center of attention.

Ha. Give me a ******* break. I'm not arguing against myself here.

First of all, I've seen two NSM jackets in person: Manton's and Edmorel's. Neither exhibit the upturn that is obvious on many other examples.

Second, if you don't like people on the internet talking about stuff they aren't seeing in person, maybe the internet isn't right for you.

 

[unbelragazzo]



This raises the question: why would anyone want to use a traveling tailor catering specifically to foreigners called "Napoli Su Misura" if he doesn't like one of the most identifying features of classic Neapolitan jackets? Baffling. Even more baffling is attempting to defend the deviation of the newcomer versus the practice of existing standards. It's like saying Coke tastes bad because it doesn't taste like the supermarket brand cola you bought at a discount.

I'm not going to enter back into the shoulder line debate because it's exhausting, and because for now I have nothing to add to what I said before. But I take issue with this paragraph, for three reasons:

1) By your own admission, "Neapolitan style" is an amorphous designation - the Rubi shoulder line you identify is sometimes present, but then the Solito shoulder line seems to look more like NsM. I'd argue that the most defining characteristic of Neapolitan tailoring is soft/light construction, which NsM most definitely has.

2) It is possible that people are working with NsM because they like the style independent of whether or not it is characteristic of Naples.

3) Nobody is making much money making bespoke clothing for Neapolitan customers right now. Certainly not Rubinacci. If by "foreigners" you mean non-Italians, NsM has Italian customers. And Rubinacci has plenty of non-Italian customers. I don't think this should really matter at all, but since it apparently does, I guess it's worth mentioning.

 

[TheFoo]

1. "Neapolitan tailoring" is certainly somewhat amorphous, as there are different ways of doing things. However, that doesn't mean anything goes, including mistakes. As for "soft/light construction" being a defining characteristic--I think that is fair to say. However, anybody can gut the innards out of jacket and use light canvas. The real question is whether you can do it with finesse. My problem with the NSM jacket shoulders is that they are not done well, not that they aren't soft or light.

2. Maybe some. But I don't think there is any denying that NSM's business model is based on feeding the pre-existing foreign taste for Neapolitan tailoring. They are not prime movers. The name of the business itself is telling. How would you view a newly-established tailoring business in London that calls itself "Savile Row Bespoke" and caters heavily to outsiders who cannot make it to London? It doesn't mean anything bad about the product, but it does undermine its position as a standardbearer of Savile Row tailoring.

3. Yes, Rubinacci's clients are global. But the business is more than 80 years old. It has been a fundamental part of the Neapolitan tailoring scene for a very long time. Its house style has endured many decades intact. So, the reason many of its clients are foreign is different from the reason why NSM's are. I don't think that's a controversial point to make. The reason it matters is because tailoring styles are developed over time and by custom. The deviating eccentricities of a less firmly rooted newcomer should not be confused for reflecting legitimate form, whether they are good or bad.

 

[unbelragazzo]



1. "Neapolitan tailoring" is certainly somewhat amorphous, as there are different ways of doing things. However, that doesn't mean anything goes, including mistakes. As for "soft/light construction" being a defining characteristic feature, I think that is fair to say. However, anybody can gut the innards out of jacket and use light canvas. The real question is whether you can do it with finesse. My problem with the NSM jacket shoulders is that they are not done well, not that they aren't soft or light.

In the part I quoted, your problem with NSM shoulders was that they weren't Neapolitan, as in, why would anybody want a Neapolitan jacket without a Rubinacci-style shoulder, which is different.

2. Maybe some. But I don't think there is any denying that NSM's business model is based on feeding the pre-existing foreign taste for Neapolitan tailoring. They are not prime movers. The name of the business itself is telling. How would you view a newly-established tailoring business in London that called itself "Savile Row Bespoke" and catered heavily to outsiders who cannot make it to London? It doesn't mean anything bad about the product, but it does undermine its position as standardbearer of Savile Row tailoring.

I mean...Mina has spent her entire life living in Naples and most of it working within the Neapolitan clothing industry. She's proud of that heritage and named her company after the city that that fostered it. It's not as if she is going to create a company based in Naples, using Neapolitan tailors, after working there her whole career and call it "London House." Oh wait...

3. Yes, Rubinacci's clients are global. But the business is more than 80 years old. It has been a fundamental part of the Neapolitan tailoring scene for a very long time. The reason many of its clients are foreign is different than the reason why NSM's are. I don't think that's a controversial point to make. The reason it matters is because tailoring styles are developed over time and by custom. The deviating eccentricities of a newcomer that is not as firmly rooted should not be confused for reflecting legitimate form, whether they are good or bad.

OK, fine...but now that we have established that all the well-known tailors in Naples (many of whom Mina worked with before starting her own company) are producing clothing for people who don't live in, and didn't grow up in, Naples, there's a lot less to argue about.

 

[TheFoo]



In the part I quoted, your problem with NSM shoulders was that they weren't Neapolitan, as in, why would anybody want a Neapolitan jacket without a Rubinacci-style shoulder, which is different.

That, if you recall, was in response to Cantabrigian's suggestion that the NSM shoulder is correct, whereas Rubinacci's is a mistake. Yes, I think it is a preposterous position to take. If one should serve as a reference for correctness, it is not NSM. That is only sensible, as one far predates the other and has consistently made the same sort of thing all that time.

I mean...Mina has spent her entire life living in Naples and most of it working within the Neapolitan clothing industry. She's proud of that heritage and named her company after the city that that fostered it. It's not as if she is going to create a company based in Naples, using Neapolitan tailors, after working there her whole career and call it "London House." Oh wait...

It belies all credulity that a tailoring company calling itself "Napoli Su Misura" isn't trying to leverage the pre-existing reputation of Neapolitan tailoring. I'm only assuming they are competent and named themselves thoughtfully.

"Neapolitan tailoring" far predates NSM. Anything that defined it was invented a long time ago. Rubinacci has been around ever since Neapolitan tailoring was anything worth mentioning. Foreign tailors, bespoke clients, and other authorities on men's clothing often refer to Rubinacci as a primary example of Neapolitan tailoring. Of the tailors in Naples, they are undoubtedly the most famed. These are all facts. If you are trying to argue that NSM is as valid a reference for "Neapolitan tailoring," when the only meaningful sense of "Neapolitan tailoring" is defined by tradition and past practice, I think you are bound to fail. After all, when it comes to tailoring styles--age, custom, reputation, history, etc. are absolutely defining.

OK, fine...but now that we have established that all the well-known tailors in Naples (many of whom Mina worked with before starting her own company) are producing clothing for people who don't live in, and didn't grow up in, Naples, there's a lot less to argue about.

There is a huge difference between winning foreign clients because you have established yourself as a top Neapolitan tailor and winning foreign clients because you associate yourself with Neapolitan tailoring. Just because two businesses wind-up with the same proportion of foreign clients doesn't mean their products are of equal or comparable character.

 

[Cantabrigian]

Foofy, you fall prey to false choices far too easily.

My premise is not at all that LH is somehow mistaken. (I'm not actually interested in the explanation but I'll ask rhetorically how you arrived at that conclusion.)

You can admire Naplesteez and be a fan of Rubinacci and think that Mariano's shoulders don't look so good. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that's a somewhat common opinion since his jackets were rather clearly made for a younger man.


I'm - quite obviously - not immune to speculation and theorizing. But, as I rather explicitly stated, we've reached the point where the only way I can explain my thinking more concretely is for you to see they physical object I'm discussing.

Next time you're in London, (Nay's second marriage?) I'll buy you a cup of tea and I'll make sure the waiter is nice to you.