or, How To Hurt Strangers' Eyes By Wearing Four Patterns Simultaneously A couple of wiseacres (they know who they are) blasted the last OBTC lesson by saying: That the hankie was solid white, and thus not truly OBTC; and That the suit was too subdued. A lighter color and a bold stripe would be more in keeping with the true spirit of OBTC. Lest any of the rest of you jackals think I don't listen to criticism, however insipid and unjust, I present the following lesson. Moritmer Levitt says (or said; he's quite dead) always to wear "two plains and a fancy." Others say that two elements can take a pattern. A small number say three. Flusser alone says, try for four! Well I'm here to say: DON'T! The suit is blue, but much lighter than navy; postman's blue is one term for it. Would you wear Cliff Claven's signature color? No effing way. A while back there was a spirited debate on Ask Andy whether any stripe properly deserves the distinction "gangster stripe." I think this should put that debate to rest once and for all. Deniers: YOU LOSE! Really, this might be better termed a "prison stripe", but I will leave semantic debates to the master practioners on this board. The vest only makes it worse. Vests were CBD in the '40s and for maybe the first third of the '50s. Since then, no. The shirt is a busy, Jermyn Street riot of color, pattern and weave. In and of itself, it's loud enough, but pair it with an 80s YELLOW POWER TIE and you've got magic, baby! The coup de grace: a pocket square. But not just any square, a silk square (gay), in the least conservative fold (the puff), and with a bold medallion/paisly pattern. All in all, this is guaranteed to give innocent passersby vertigo at a single glance. Your colleagues who have to look at you all day risk blindness.