Pairing oxford shoes with chinos

[dieworkwear]

It's not that the sportcoat itself is costume, or out of place or unnatural. It's the notion that if you throw oxfords on with it, you are now 'out of costume'.

I just can't help but feel that there's at least a subtle incongruity here. You can take the casual suit and put loafers and a knit with it, or you can change those out for oxfords and a tie. But you can't take a blazer with a shirt and tie and pair oxfords with it. So you can 'dress up' the casual suit but not the blazer (or other sportcoat on the sharper side). Why would one be different from the other?

I feel like I'm repeating myself, but historically, oxfords were just worn with suits. There are some small exceptions. Some dandies, such as Tom Wolfe, wore casual oxfords with sport coats (he made white oxfords his "thing" and wore them with everything, including when he wasn't in a suit). There are also many examples of men wearing things such as spectator oxfords with sport coats for sporting activities or vacation. But these are not the sort of oxfords people are talking about here.

Historically, men wore all types of shoes with suits -- oxfords, derbies, loafers, boots, etc. With a sport coat, they mostly wore casual shoes.

I posted a bunch of examples in this thread, using old photos and Apparel Arts illustrations. People said that this was not, in fact, a social norm. I asked people to post counter-examples, but received none.

Again, it's fine to say you don't want to dress like these people or you feel these norms are antiquated. This has nothing to do with dressing for the office according to 1960s norms, but understanding that look. If you like that look, I've laid out what I think are some guidelines to help recreate it. Most men don't live a British gentleman or even an American elite lifestyle where such norms will be meaningful in a social setting. But they make take private pleasure in dressing in ways they've admired on other men. This is not about applying a 1960s business rule to modern business, but applying a 1960s (or 30s through '80s) aesthetic to modern life in a way that will look natural today.

I have no interest in historic business culture. I only have an interest in historic classic men's style. If someone shares that interest, then there are some guidelines on how to recreate those looks.

 

[TheChihuahua]

It's not that the sportcoat itself is costume, or out of place or unnatural. It's the notion that if you throw oxfords on with it, you are now 'out of costume'.

I just can't help but feel that there's at least a subtle incongruity here. You can take the casual suit and put loafers and a knit with it, or you can change those out for oxfords and a tie. But you can't take a blazer with a shirt and tie and pair oxfords with it. So you can 'dress up' the casual suit but not the blazer (or other sportcoat on the sharper side). Why would one be different from the other?

it makes no sense.

by the “rules” derbies don’t really belong in an urban professional environment. By the “rules” and all these sports coat pictures, the sports coat look is for recreational or social occasions but not really a professional look.

I think the rule people should follow is to keep the derbies and casual loafers out of the professional setting. Go ahead and go with the sports coat and dress trousers, but make sure you wear proper work shoes in the form of oxfords or dressier loafers or the rare dressy derby.

 

[TheChihuahua]

I feel like I'm repeating myself, but historically, oxfords were just worn with suits. .

that’s just false.
I don’t have a collection of old photos like gentleman’s gazette to try to push an agenda, but a simple google search:

additionally, derbies were not really considered appropriate for professional settings. You could wear a blazer and dress pants (more blazer than sports coat, like double breasted or traditional blue blazer), but you should not have been wearing derbies. Derbies were a country/weekend shoe.

 

[TheChihuahua]

Look at this guy breaking up fictional igent rules!! Brown wingtip oxfords with a sports coat and tie??? Picasso!

 

[dieworkwear]

that’s just false.
I don’t have a collection of old photos like gentleman’s gazette to try to push an agenda, but a simple google search:

View attachment 1625318 View attachment 1625317

additionally, derbies were not really considered appropriate for professional settings. You could wear a blazer and dress pants (more blazer than sports coat, like double breasted or traditional blue blazer), but you should not have been wearing derbies. Derbies were a country/weekend shoe.
View attachment 1625319

I had to block you for a while because your posts became too shrill and annoying.

I can't tell what are the shoes in the first photo. The second photo shows spectator oxfords. I agree those were historically worn in casual settings, but they're not the type of shoes discussed here.

The Apparel Arts image you tried to "correct" me on is not showing oxfords. Those are derbies. You can see the facings in the photo.

There is a long history of men also wearing casual shoes to the office. In the film "That Touch of Mink" (1962) Cary Grant plays a corporate head. He wears tassel loafers to the office.

I enjoyed my convo with @acapaca, and he doesn't agree with me. But frankly, your comments are too abusive, shrill, and annoying. If you want to have a polite and sensible conversation about this, I'm happy to. But I'm not going to continue if it's just going to be a shrill back and forth argument.

 

[TheChihuahua]

I had to block you for a while because your posts became too shrill and annoying.

I can't tell what are the shoes in the first photo. The second photo shows spectator oxfords. I agree those were historically worn in casual settings, but they're not the type of shoes discussed here.

The Apparel Arts image you tried to "correct" me on is not showing oxfords. Those are derbies. You can see the facings in the photo.

There is a long history of men also wearing casual shoes to the office. In the film "That Touch of Mink" (1962) Cary Grant plays a corporate head. He wears tassel loafers to the office.

I enjoyed my convo with @acapaca, and he doesn't agree with me. But frankly, your comments are too abusive, shrill, and annoying. If you want to have a polite and sensible conversation about this, I'm happy to. But I'm not going to continue if it's just going to be a shrill back and forth argument.

are you kidding? This is not a derby. This is a classic wingtip Oxford.

this is a closed lace system.
You ask us to post pictures showing you are wrong, and when pictures are uncovered in a 5 minute search you then move the goalposts or just flat out play dumb? Unreal. Just own that you made up a rule because you happen to like the look of a more country/recreational golden era setting. But the rule isn’t real, as derbies were mainly a country shoe and people did wear blazers in the city.

 

[TheChihuahua]

Ha, oxfords with shorts! I love it! I guess we can move the new Allen Edmonds banner advertisement into the “classical menswear golden era” category!

 

[dieworkwear]

are you kidding? This is not a derby. This is a classic wingtip Oxford.

this is a closed lace system.
You ask us to post pictures showing you are wrong, and when pictures are uncovered in a 5 minute search you then move the goalposts or just flat out play dumb? Unreal. Just own that you made up a rule because you want everyone to dress like they are at a country recreational retreat



View attachment 1625322
View attachment 1625323 View attachment 1625324

I was referring to this photo

I personally don't like the outfit in the other drawing you posted -- the man in the three-button green sport coat, mustard-colored shirt, and white spotted tie. It's not a look I would consider to be classic or in "good taste." There were many lower-end tailoring companies that had ads showing people wearing questionable things. It's true that these were historically worn in the past, but I wouldn't consider them to be good outfits. They were basically worn by Fred Mertz types. (This sounds horribly classist, and I admit this is not a good way to frame aesthetics. But it's the only way I can describe that specific look that I think was special. It was not a Fred Merz look)

 

[TheChihuahua]

I was referring to this photo

View attachment 1625328
View attachment 1625327


I personally don't like the outfit in the other drawing you posted -- the man in the three-button green sport coat, mustard-colored shirt, and white spotted tie. It's not a look I would consider to be classic or in "good taste." There were many lower-end tailoring companies that had ads showing people wearing questionable things. It's true that these were historically worn in the past, but I wouldn't consider them to be good outfits. They were basically worn by Fred Mertz types. (This sounds horribly classist, and I admit this is not a good way to frame aesthetics. But the look I like is not that kind of vintage look).

that’s not a derby. It’s a whole cut Oxford. What you are calling the facing looks like the laces hanging down (at least to me anyway). The fact that we have to look that closely to analyze goes to show how flawed your made up rule is anyway.

also, you can’t just move goalposts around to support a rule you made up. You asked for pictures (and even provided some yourself), so I gave you one.
Now the argument is you do not like the look, so therefor it doesn’t count?

the issue wasn’t whether you like the look or not. You made a false claim, you asked for pictures showing you wrong, and when pictures are provided now it’s just a matter of you not liking the look?

im guessing you don’t admit you are wrong too often in real life. You probably just move goalposts or try to skirt the issue.

 

[dieworkwear]

that’s not a derby. It’s a whole cut Oxford. What you are calling the facing looks like the laces hanging down. The fact that you have to loony hat closely goes to show how flawed your made up rule is anyway.

also, you can’t just move goalposts around to support a rule you made up. You asked for pictures (and even provided some yourself), so I gave you one.
Now the argument is you do not like the look, so therefor it doesn’t count?

the issue wasn’t whether you like the look or not. You made a false claim, you asked for pictures showing you wrong, and when pictures are provided now it’s just a matter of you not liking the look?

im guessing you don’t admit you are wrong too often in real life. You probably just move goalposts or try to skirt the issue.

OK, well you win.

I don't think you're capable of having a level-headed, nonabusive argument. Very early on in this discussion, you got wrapped into some weird abusive argument with another member here, and somehow that spilled over to me. I tried having a respectful convo with you early on, but your comments have a way of purposefully antagonizing people (e.g. "looney hat" in this latest post). Eventually, that just gets me to say something I later regret. I'm fine with having a heated discussion, but your comments are abusive and shrill. I'm not interested in being shitted on day after day, so you win. Am putting you on block.

 

[Stylewords]

but make sure you wear proper work shoes in the form of oxfords or dressier loafers or the rare dressy derby.

Loafers are not proper work shoes.

 

[TheChihuahua]

Loafers are not proper work shoes.

i tend to agree. But I wouldn’t say that it’s against any rules.
Gordon Gekko wore loafers.

as I was searching through archives on the topic per DWW’s request, I found that in the 1950’s the shoes considered proper for work environments were oxfords or slip on shoes.

certainly not derbies though, as derbies were country shoes, town fair, polo matches, day at the old car racing track, whatever. But derbies at the work place was not proper. (Yeah, I’m going overboard, but why not… others are allowed to make up fake rules so I will too!). (Although we can all agree that most derbies look bad)

 

[Loathing]

Do you go to work in a frock coat, top hat, spats and a detachable collar?

I go to work in a worsted suit with black Oxfords or loafers, like every other man in my office, as it is the required dress code in London in my profession, as it has been since the 1950s.

 

[acapaca]

I feel like I'm repeating myself, but historically, oxfords were just worn with suits. There are some small exceptions.

Well, what I'm trying to do is get to the bottom of what it is you really believe, or admire, by seeing if you can reconcile some seemingly contradictory ideas. At first I thought your claim, of what was historically worn how, had to do with broad societal norms. But now it seems that you are claiming something more along the lines of 'historically well-dressed men wore oxfords just with suits'? Or even perhaps just some particular subset of 'well-dressed men'? So, not so much 'this is how men did it then' but rather 'this is how the men I admire did it'?

 

[dieworkwear]

Well, what I'm trying to do is get to the bottom of what it is you really believe, or admire, by seeing if you can reconcile some seemingly contradictory ideas. At first I thought your claim, of what was historically worn how, had to do with broad societal norms. But now it seems that you are claiming something more along the lines of 'historically well-dressed men wore oxfords just with suits'? Or even perhaps just some particular subset of 'well-dressed men'? So, not so much 'this is how men did it then' but rather 'this is how the men I admire did it'?

Maybe I can clarify:

1. Historically, dress norms were set at the top. Elites basically set the norms and others followed. The section of classic men's dress that I admire mostly comes from those social circles -- British elites, American Ivy grads, Italian industrialists, etc. It all sounds a bit sycophantic, I admit. I'm not necessarily trying to live like those people, but I admire their ways of dress.

2. When you look at the history of classic American style, it also followed in this direction. During the first half of the 20th century, few men had access to Brooks Brothers. They did not live near the stores and many of the goods were out of their financial reach. Yet the "Brooks Brothers look" spread through its association with that WASP New England class. As far as Los Angeles, small clothiers carried Brooks' inventions, such as the button-down collar shirt.

3. When I look at the history of men's dress, I'm mostly interested in those specific looks -- the 1930s through '80s, excluding the 70s, and only as the clothes were worn by these small subsections of people.

4. I am not trying to emulate their lifestyles. I wouldn't be able to anyway, as I don't have the financial means or social access. I don't have a country home. I don't participate in polo matches. I don't even have any interest in those activities. But I admire the looks from those periods and am happy to try to incorporate them in ways that I think look natural in a modern setting.