Official Wedding Attire Question/Answer/Picture Thread

[marcodalondra]



Actually... extensive collections of well cited sources.  Obviously, in the late 20th, and early 21st centuries, all trends, fashions, and styles, become globalized much more readily.  I am not sure what the practices of the 19th century have to do with the points I made about the 20th century.  My point about Italian-American culture was not t do with clothing, and I would certainly not accept that it is frozen in time.  For another example, let us consider French-Canadian culture, as opposed to French.  It is twice as old, but the point remains.

And, again, nothing has been bastardised, when one culture says "Black Tie is appropriate at these times" while another says "Black Tie is appropriate at these other times" - both cutlures are wearing the same dress codes, at different times.  We are not talking about wearing wing collar shirts with Lounge Suits, or black satin bow ties with sport coats, or dinner jackets with blue jeans.  We are talking about wearing the exact same set of dress codes, with slight variation as to what is worn on each occasion.  There are always been, and will always be, people trying to make changes, and improvements to things as they are.  There were outlandish, plaid, dinner jackets in the 1950's, and four in hand ties with dinner jackets in the the first decade of this century, and several other disasters in between.  People dressing badly is hardly a new phenomenon.

By your logic, we would might as well say that only the suit silhouettes worn regularly in Europe, in 1935, are valid.  Your argument that European cultural norms must be observed everywhere simply holds no water.  It is, ironically, the most stereotypically American thing on this board.  (With respect to the majority of Americans, of very respectful nature, and balanced opinions - I only cite the generally assumption of American xenphobia, held by many).

Perhaps I should just accept your arguments, because you are a self proclaimed authority, and go around telling my Indian neighbours that they dress incorrectly for their weddings, and insist that they wear European attire.

19th into 20th century is the period to consider as the gentlemen that influenced that fashion lived across the two century.

The argument as degenerated but again my main point is location and where the traditions originated, but considering all that, I am arguing that in a formal church ceremony, no matter the time, it would be better in 2014 to wear a three piece suit rather then a black tie rig. You were the one stating that protocol should dictate to wear morning wear into the evening to the the guy asking for opinion,

Again, fromNewbie to expert within the same thread. I am still waiting for your thanks for pointing you out in the right direction of colour palette for your wedding tie (early in this thread)...

 

[MrDaniels]

Marco in his ramblings seems to forget one fact: The tuxedo began in America. That is why it is acceptable in America. It is part of our culture. Just as one will never see a British man get married in Black Tie because all British weddings are in the daytime. Just as you will never see a conservative Jew get married in a morning suit, because traditional Jewish weddings happen after sundown. There are many cultures and many countries.

Just because one is clearly obsessed and gets rattled into ramblings on this topic is no reason to inflict one's crazed notions onto innocent newbies who just want to look sharp at their wedding.

 

[unbelragazzo]



Marco in his ramblings seems to forget one fact: The tuxedo began in America. That is why it is acceptable in America. It is part of our culture. Just as one will never see a British man get married in Black Tie because all British weddings are in the daytime. Just as you will never see a conservative Jew get married in a morning suit, because traditional Jewish weddings happen after sundown. There are many cultures and many countries.

There is so much fail here...

 

[marcodalondra]



Marco in his ramblings seems to forget one fact: The tuxedo began in America. That is why it is acceptable in America. It is part of our culture. Just as one will never see a British man get married in Black Tie because all British weddings are in the daytime. Just as you will never see a conservative Jew get married in a morning suit, because traditional Jewish weddings happen after sundown. There are many cultures and many countries.

Just because one is clearly obsessed and gets rattled into ramblings on this topic is no reason to inflict one's crazed notions onto innocent newbies who just want to look sharp at their wedding.

Thanks God I am rambling and what did you just do?

As Unbel said, so much wrong.... You may say that it was established faster in America or that you gave it the name Tuxedo (it is still mainly know as dinner suit this side of the pond), but trying to tell Henry Poole that the it began in America...

 

[ImTheGroom]

19th into 20th century is the period to consider as the gentlemen that influenced that fashion lived across the two century.

The argument as degenerated but again my main point is location and where the traditions originated, but considering all that, I am arguing that in a formal church ceremony, no matter the time, it would be better in 2014 to wear a three piece suit rather then a black tie rig. You were the one stating that protocol should dictate to wear morning wear into the evening to the the guy asking for opinion,

Again, fromNewbie to expert within the same thread. I am still waiting for your thanks for pointing you out in the right direction of colour palette for your wedding tie (early in this thread)...

I was stating that, if one is to wear formalwear, with no opportunity to change from day, into evening attire, then, yes, the accepted practice is to wear morning dress into the evening (as it is a day event, that extends into the evening). The American perspective on this is different. This information is readily available; it is not housed in a secret vault, accessible only to a select few, as you seem to believe. You also seem to make the (fairly common) assumption that, before posting on this message board, people went about their day in pyjamas, having been too confused to wear clothing. I grew up wearing appropriate clothes, to appropriate occasions, as did many people, never having had the "benefit" of your input. And, yes, people do go from less informed, to more informed, over time; it is generally how one learns to eat, walk, read, write, et cetera.

The dress codes we are discussing were codified in the early 20th century, and they did evolve differently, with slightly different traditions, on each side of the Atlantic. As @MrDaniels points out, there is great debate over whether the Tuxedo was first worn in England, or America, and a strong case that Americans normalized it. Again, you continue to offer the same arguments that have been logically rebutted, and, when you become frustrated with the fact that a discussion has not led to everyone agreeing with you, you resort to personal attacks. This tactic is very telling of the strength of your position.

I thanked those whose advice I considered valid, and valuable.

 

[MrDaniels]



There is so much fail here...

Oh please! Tell someone on a budget again how they can't possibly rent formal wear and that all of the groomsmen should purchase matching suits! Or once again suggest a silk shirt to a guy who as said that he had a tendency to sweat like you did last week. You are so helpful.

 

[unbelragazzo]



Oh please! Tell someone on a budget again how they can't possibly rent formal wear and that all of the groomsmen should purchase matching suits! Or once again suggest a silk shirt to a guy who as said that he had a tendency to sweat like you did last week. You are so helpful.

I don't think I have ever recommended purchasing matching suits. The silk shirt idea was because there was a requirement of ivory. Anyway all the idiotic things I've ever posted still won't make your history of the tuxedo correct.

 

[unbelragazzo]

 

[MrDaniels]



I don't think I have ever recommended purchasing matching suits. The silk shirt idea was because there was a requirement of ivory. Anyway all the idiotic things I've ever posted still won't make your history of the tuxedo correct.

I think it take a very brave man to admit that the things he posts are idiotic. I am proud of you!

I may not have chosen my words well, but the short formal jacket took off on this side of the pond far faster than it did in Europe and it is also used here far more often for weddings.

But nothing you or I have ever posted even comes close to Marco's insane ramblings. He is almost making you look like a reasonable fellow. Well, ALMOST.

 

[ImTheGroom]

This is an oral history, and as such, will become distorted over time. It is also not a first hand source. That is not to say that the information is wrong, and certainly not to say that all of it is wrong, but there is likely some distortion of the original version. That original version is an account of one series of events, but does not preclude other, simultaneous, or previous, histories of the dinner suit/Tuxedo. There are data to support that tailors in the US were wearing Dress Sacks, in the 1870's, which were likely early forms of the Dinner Suit. All of which further supports the obvious conclusion that the garment evolved in parallel, on both sides of the Atlantic.

 

[marcodalondra]



I thanked those whose advice I considered valid, and valuable.

Considering that you completely diverted from your initial researched choice of dark weird colour palette into exactly what I first suggested and then when I pointed this out previously in response to your wrong assumption you immediately disappeared from the discussion, I think the advice was very valuable to you

We all learn and become informed, but as many have said before me there is no one more dangerous as a preacher then the converted, and having stumbled across some pictures of you in what I believe were home setting (you posted a link to a fundrising page I believe) and then reading and understanding that your research in what to wear at your wedding has now raised your interested so much in formal wear that you seek to wear it at every possible occasions, even the ones where you will probably be the only one and stand out, may confirm this exact statement.

 

[Veremund]



... go around telling my Indian neighbours that they dress incorrectly for their weddings, and insist that they wear European attire.

Indians aren't european descendants. You and I are.

 

[Veremund]



There is so much fail here...

+1

 

[marcodalondra]



Indians aren't european descendants. You and I are.

And they may have their own traditions with attached dress code for their cultural unique event, which one should adhere to if attending (I have been invited to Arabs, African and Indu wedding where they prefer you to wear their traditional clothing and will source it for you).

 

[unbelragazzo]



I think it take a very brave man to admit that the things he posts are idiotic. I am proud of you!

I may not have chosen my words well, but the short formal jacket took off on this side of the pond far faster than it did in Europe and it is also used here far more often for weddings.

But nothing you or I have ever posted even comes close to Marco's insane ramblings. He is almost making you look like a reasonable fellow. Well, ALMOST.

I don't know why you make personal attacks against me every time I disagree with you. I don't recall having ever said anything insulting towards you, and if I did I apologize. Yet whenever you disagree with me about something you attribute my opinion to the elitism and patrician upbringing you assume I have, even though you've never met me and know nothing about my life. And now you sarcastically praise my modesty and call me unreasonable in the same post, for what reason I do not know. I have no beef with you, and I don't understand why you are trying to start one with me.

Back to your post...I don't think the tuxedo "started" in the US. Even if it did, that is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for it to be more acceptable here for any given occasion. The Oxford comma (when trying to diffuse a tense situation on the Internet, ALWAYS bring up the Oxford comma) is less common in British English, despite its name. Jeans were an American invention, but they are more appropriate to wear to a pub in London than would be a tailcoat, which was invented in England. I think you get my point.