Non-Rule "Rules"

[CrAz3D]

For me, something should be notable. There should be contrast, color, design...something. For example, I'll wear a neutral gray suit + bland shirt...+ a brightly colored tie (bllue & orange, for example). Another example is a "safe" suit + shirt + tie ...+ vest (vest being the "something extra").

Nothing I sport is outside the realm of acceptable, but it's definitely less than usual. Be noticed.

 

[DocHolliday]

That is the opposite of my ideal. I don't want to be the guy who always has a gimmick.

 

[TheFoo]



That is the opposite of my ideal. I don't want to be the guy who always has a gimmick.

I want to be the guy who never has a gimmick.

 

[Liquidus]



For me, something should be notable. There should be contrast, color, design...something. For example, I'll wear a neutral gray suit + bland shirt...+ a brightly colored tie (bllue & orange, for example). Another example is a "safe" suit + shirt + tie ...+ vest (vest being the "something extra").

Nothing I sport is outside the realm of acceptable, but it's definitely less than usual. Be noticed.

Do we have a bat-signal for Vox?

 

[dieworkwear]



For me, something should be notable. There should be contrast, color, design...something. For example, I'll wear a neutral gray suit + bland shirt...+ a brightly colored tie (bllue & orange, for example). Another example is a "safe" suit + shirt + tie ...+ vest (vest being the "something extra").

Nothing I sport is outside the realm of acceptable, but it's definitely less than usual. Be noticed.

Although the most elegant dressers are often seen wearing something more interesting than what many would call "safe combinations," this sentiment, stated in this way, is the cause of 99.999% of bad outfits in real life and on WAYWT.

 

[unbelragazzo]



Although the most elegant dressers are often seen wearing something more interesting than what many would call "safe combinations," this sentiment, stated in this way, is the cause of 99.999% of bad outfits in real life and on WAYWT.

I'm piling on and agreeing with everybody here, and just put up a similar post in the whnay thread, but emphasizing that while we agree here, there are tons of people with the same theory as craz3d. I remember a thread a couple of months ago that was titled something like, "when you have one really loud element, tone everything down around it", and I was the only one disagreeing.

 

[unbelragazzo]



Two things: (1) from personal experience, both with clothing and other things, I strongly believe you generally get what you pay for, and (2) I make no assumptions about anyone's financial wherewithal. Thus, yes, the optimal solution is often to get a better tailor. Now, if someone tells me that's not feasible, it's one thing. As a community, I think we should try to address everyone's situation regardless of their means. But I also think there should be no illusion that you can easily spend much less to get as much as what another spends much more to obtain. To dress well, you need to have an eye for detail and nuance--so, telling yourself "oh it's all the same," which happens a lot when people don't want to believe nicer things tend to cost more, is something to be avoided.

To add to what Manton added to this, there are a number of factors that determine how nice the things you end up with are. How much money you have is a big one. Your ability to discern elegant from garish is another. Where you live and therefore what you have access to counts as well. Certainly there are some levels that can only be achieved by spending lots of money. But you can also spend lots of money without any discernment and end up with something terrible. If you develop good taste, then you can make the most of the money you do spend, and determine what more costly items might be worth to you. It's a good idea to try and do this as much as possible before you go spending lots of money, whether for you lots of money means tens of thousands on bespoke clothing or four digits spent on high-end brands on eBay.

 

[dieworkwear]



I'm piling on and agreeing with everybody here, and just put up a similar post in the whnay thread, but emphasizing that while we agree here, there are tons of people with the same theory as craz3d. I remember a thread a couple of months ago that was titled something like, "when you have one really loud element, tone everything down around it", and I was the only one disagreeing.

Having not read that thread, that seems like a different sentiment to me than what Crazed expressed. A butcher stripe shirt can be loud, and it's probably wise to not wear it with a loud plaid jacket and loud paisley tie. But to wear something loud to assert your personality and individuality more often than not leads to bad results.

 

[dieworkwear]



To add to what Manton added to this, there are a number of factors that determine how nice the things you end up with are. How much money you have is a big one. Your ability to discern elegant from garish is another. Where you live and therefore what you have access to counts as well. Certainly there are some levels that can only be achieved by spending lots of money. But you can also spend lots of money without any discernment and end up with something terrible. If you develop good taste, then you can make the most of the money you do spend, and determine what more costly items might be worth to you. It's a good idea to try and do this as much as possible before you go spending lots of money, whether for you lots of money means tens of thousands on bespoke clothing or four digits spent on high-end brands on eBay.

To quote Frazier, who I think hit this just right

But even studied carelessness cannot make a man well-dressed if he lacks, in Max Beerbohm's words, "physical distinction, a sense of beauty, and either cash or credit." Moreover, if age cannot wither, neither, for that matter, can custom-tailoring stale the man who has those attributes.

It is scarcely a coincidence that not only are most "best-dressed" men more than forty years of age, but also that they rarely, if ever, wear ready-made clothes. For in addition to good looks and clothes sense, they have by and large, enough money to afford the invaluable collaboration of superb tailors like Bernard Weatherill and H. Harris in New York and E. Tautz in London; of such American shirtmakers as Dudley G. Eldridge, Brooks Brothers, and Sulka's, and Turnbull & Asser of London; of bootmakers like Lobb of St. James's Street in London (which is, incidentally, one of the most beautiful shops in the world) and the Boston Bootmakers of Boston; of tiemakers like Dudley G. Eldridge, Sulka's, and Brooks Brothers in this country and Turnbull & Asser abroad; and, equally important, of barbers as skilled as, say, the celebrated Vincent Battaglia of the Plaza Hotel. "Best-dressed" men are, almost without exception, committed to nothing but the best (though not necessarily the most expensive), and even their shoes must be polished (and, frequently, boned) to perfection—just as was the case in Regency London when the death of one Lieutenant-Colonel Kelly of the First Foot Guards sent all the dandies racing to hire his valet, who was rumored to have a secret formula that had imparted the incomparable sheen to his late master's footwear. When, incidentally, the valet let it be known that he expected a salary of two hundred pounds a year, Brummell told him, "If you will make it guineas, I shall be happy to attend upon you." As things were to turn out, there was a certain ominousness about this anecdote, for it reveals Brummell at the critical moment when he was beginning to lose one of the three ingredients that combine to make a man well-dressed—in this case, his credit with his tailor, Schweitzer & Davidson of Cork Street, Piccadilly. When, a bit later on, he began to lose his trim figure as well, he was no longer the glass of fashion mirroring the most elegant of all eras.

 

[ColdEyedPugilist]

Off the top of my head:

1) Colour and texture must harmonise (not necessarily match, mind you... simply harmonise)
2) Dark red or burgundy > bright red
3) At least one major anchor: suit, tie or shirt
4) At least 2 patterns where possible (the more formal the occasion, the less this applies)
5) Black shoes with dark red ties
6) No black shoes where the colours on the upper half are not bold enough to bring about a visual balance
7) Severe 'pops' of colour are to be avoided
8) No cartoon ANYTHING!!!
9) No polo tees with suit pants!!!
10) Coherence, coherence, coherence (nod to Vox)

That's it for now.

 

[ELG]

You can't wear a watch with a black leather band if your shoes are brown.
Vice Versa.
If your watch has a gold bezel, your cuff links must be gold.
Silver bezel = silver links.
The above rule also applies to tie clips.

If your suspenders have black leather runners, your shoes must be black.

 

[hendrix]



Having not read that thread, that seems like a different sentiment to me than what Crazed expressed. A butcher stripe shirt can be loud, and it's probably wise to not wear it with a loud plaid jacket and loud paisley tie. But to wear something loud to assert your personality and individuality more often than not leads to bad results.

My rule is that if something is gonna be loud it damn better be interesting.
Things like butcher stripe I find to be loud, yet boring, and doesn't express any personality at all.
Also, it has to not be ugly.

Things being incoherent is not a big deal to me. It's ok to get things wrong.

 

[Fuuma]



Coats like the above have an almost uncanny way of washing everything out.

The problem with grey jackets is that, let's face it, they mostly look good with black jeans and this becomes an SW&D look that I like but that goes very much against what people in MC are attempting so it is a distraction and pretty useless in their wardrobe, they shoulda get some brown thing I'd never wear instead.

 

[in stitches]



I want to be the guy who never has a gimmick.

if i was less lazy, i could find pics that seemingly refute this statement.

 

[unbelragazzo]



Having not read that thread, that seems like a different sentiment to me than what Crazed expressed. A butcher stripe shirt can be loud, and it's probably wise to not wear it with a loud plaid jacket and loud paisley tie. But to wear something loud to assert your personality and individuality more often than not leads to bad results.

I still disagree. This the difficulty of having items that are loud. If you wear them with other sedate things, you are effectively only wearing the loud thing. It shouts down everything else, and you don't have an outfit anymore. It's better with other things that also grab attention but complement each other such that the entire thing fits together as a whole. That's difficult to do. And you'll need a huge wardrobe of loud items in order to put together outfits this way. So, yes, putting loud items together is likely to lead to disaster. But putting a loud item together with other boring things guarantees it. For example: you'll often see well-dressed Brits in a conservative solid suit, with a loud striped shirt. But then the tie will also be vibrant and complement the shirt in some way, so it's not just the shirt grabbing attention.