Pairing oxford shoes with chinos

[smittycl]

Fair point. The gold buttons do add a bit to the whole look with a tie.

Full disclosure: I don't usually wear anything more than knitwear with my peacoat, but I wouldn't hesitate to throw it over a jacket and tie if needed. I'd probably want a longer coat for warmth in that case, though.

I have two wool/cash pea coats that are long enough to wear over tailoring. A grey Canali and a brown Sartorial Partenopea. I will wear them over tailoring occasionally when commuting to work on cool but not cold days. They are styled a little sleeker that chunky pea coats so it seems to work.

My Billy Reid is too short for that and isn’t cut for it anyway.

 

[Nobilis Animus]

I have two wool/cash pea coats that are long enough to wear over tailoring. A grey Canali and a brown Sartorial Partenopea. I will wear them over tailoring occasionally when commuting to work on cool but not cold days. They are styled a little sleeker that chunky pea coats so it seems to work.

My Billy Reid is too short for that and isn’t cut for it anyway.

Yeah, the appeal of peacoats for me (besides the obvious ones of durability, etc.) is that they're much easier to handle when commuting because of the length. The old ones are also basically indestructible, so I can throw mine around on seats and use it for a cushion or something without worry.

 

[smittycl]

Yeah, the appeal of peacoats for me (besides the obvious ones of durability, etc.) is that they're much easier to handle when commuting because of the length. The old ones are also basically indestructible, so I can throw mine around on seats and use it for a cushion or something without worry.

I like the handwarmer pockets too.

 

[emptym]

Hmmm, I'm going to dip my toes in the water again to try and understand how the discussion has developed...

Has anyone, after the 935 posts so far, changed their opinion?

I've compared this thread to the ones in which DWFII argued that handwelted was superior to GYW. Over the years since, HW shoes became much more popular than they were: Vass, Meermin, Meccariello, Bonafe, various Chinese makers, St. Crispin, etc. And some forum members who were so strident against the idea that HW > GYW have switched to buying HW. I think that may happen here.

Branch out further, and what would happen to the state of men's dress overall if young guys today weren't doing some experimenting?...

I don't think he's against experimenting, just failed experiments.

67 pages deep and it all comes down to the doggie not knowing what "IMO" stands for?...

Great point.

 

[ValidusLA]

I've compared this thread to the ones in which DWFII argued that handwelted was superior to GYW. Over the years since, HW shoes became much more popular than they were: Vass, St. Crispin, Meermin, Meccariello, Bonafe, various Chinese makers, etc. And some of those were so strident against the idea that HW > GYW had switched to buying HW. I think that may happen here.

I don't think he's against experimenting, just failed experiments.

Great point.

Most of DWFII shoe stuff was in my lurker days or before, but I've gone back and read a good amount of his stuff.

The pushback on the HW vs GW is so weird. Like...nevermind the fact most bespoke shoes are done HW.

It's a perfect example of people defending their own ego/purchases rather than learning.

 

[EUtroll]

nice use of oxfords without a suit. #breakingtherules!

That is one of his less than successful looks tbf and honestly, the oxfords don't work here. At least not as good as some suede boots or loafers

I guess I'm not sold on the overall outfit either, but Simon's fairly sleek oxfords look fine to me in this context. In trying to put my finger on what's driving that reaction, I think it's down to two points: (1) The cashmere jacket is relatively smart; whereas you'd probably want to avoid shoes like this with a more casual jacket, like tweed or corduroy. (2) The trousers are also relatively smart. For me, oxfords seem to look more at home in these combos with trousers made from fabrics that could be made up into a "business-like" suit -- things like flannels, or fresco trousers in the summer -- even when you're pairing odd trousers with a sport coat. The outfit reads dressier as a whole, so oxfords seem to fit in better.

I think the overall outfit is smart enough that I'd actually worry about the chukkas looking too clunky. Loafers would work for me here, as would relatively sleeker derbies -- e.g., a split-toe in the direction of an EG Dover.

Haha, christ, I missed the oxfords in Simon's picture My point was more that I think that the bridge coat, at least in a Northern European context, is both grounded in tradition and that it can look good with more formal attire (and being practical!).

I hardly ever wear oxfords, but I think there is a fine line where, for some outfits like the generic Huntsman look, the choice of oxford or loafer takes the look in completely different directions, professional or leisure, and both being perfectly fine.

But I find it quite interesting these days that many retailers seem to focus more on oxfords than derbies, e.g. look at the offerings of Skoaktiebolaget, there is such an offer of oxfords (including casual once) but relatively few derbies in comparison. Is this really driven by consumer demand with the focus of more casual attire?

 

[radicaldog]

Honestly, take two pairs of shoes on the same middle-of-the-way last and in the same leather (dark brown calf, let's say) and on single soles:

- Plain toecap derby.

- Full brogue oxford.

I really think the level of formality is pretty much interchangeable.

My sense is that DWW picked an odd way to tackle his point. I agree with him that those who think oxfords are nearly always preferable because one should always try to smarten things up are completely misguided. But I don't agree that the oxford/derby divide is really where the action is.

 

[Northants bloke]

Hugo Boss textured chinos today. I often wear them with chukkas but today with Cheaney Sidney unlined brogues. I also have the same shoes in navy but only wear navy shoes with brown grey or olive - My 'rule'. I am also wearing a grey oxford shirt with a knitted tie (the tie is dress code) and brown patterned sports jacket. I hope you like it.

Now that the laces are wearing out, should I get more pale laces to match the stitching and the soles or mid brown to match the leather? Not easy to match.

 

[acapaca]

I can't clearly tell the style of those shoes, but they look like oxfords.

Are you posting this to say that it looks good? Or are you saying looks bad and someone from the Golden Age, who's widely considered a style icon, once dressed poorly?

If the second, yes, I agree that some people, including style icons, have dressed poorly. If your follow-up is "well how do you separate the good from the bad when looking at history," I would say "consume more photos and just develop an eye for what you think is good."

I think many of the style icons from the past dressed well. Just because there are a few counter-examples doesn't negate the whole of the era.

I posted that pic because I think it looks incoherent, and thus not good. I think the shoes are actually two-eyelet derbies, but if they are oxfords it's even worse. That looks to me like a dress shirt with a spread collar and a French placket. I'm just not feeling any coherence at all, nor anything particularly impressive in an insouciant sort of way.

Perhaps it's an outfit he didn't really put together with real intention, and a photo he wasn't posing for. But I wonder if that's not part of the point too. Meaning, how representative a sample do you think this body of photographic evidence really is of how that population dressed, day in and day out, at that time? You say to "consume more photos" to develop your eye. I see lots of photos taken from movies or special occasions, album or magazine covers, often shot by famous photographers. It stands to reason, to me anyway, that there's a better-than-zero chance that these guys didn't dress like that all the time. Would you agree?

Hasn't stopped us, though, from looking at some passerby shot of office drones on the street on their way to lunch and bemoaning what the scene says about the state of decorum in this day and age. I suspect there's a fair chance that those guys own some other clothes in their closet, probably closer to your liking, that they'd put on for a social event or special occasion.

 

[Nobilis Animus]

I posted that pic because I think it looks incoherent, and thus not good. I think the shoes are actually two-eyelet derbies, but if they are oxfords it's even worse. That looks to me like a dress shirt with a spread collar and a French placket. I'm just not feeling any coherence at all, nor anything particularly impressive in an insouciant sort of way.

Perhaps it's an outfit he didn't really put together with real intention, and a photo he wasn't posing for. But I wonder if that's not part of the point too. Meaning, how representative a sample do you think this body of photographic evidence really is of how that population dressed, day in and day out, at that time? You say to "consume more photos" to develop your eye. I see lots of photos taken from movies or special occasions, album or magazine covers, often shot by famous photographers. It stands to reason, to me anyway, that there's a better-than-zero chance that these guys didn't dress like that all the time. Would you agree?

Hasn't stopped us, though, from looking at some passerby shot of office drones on the street on their way to lunch and bemoaning what the scene says about the state of decorum in this day and age. I suspect there's a fair chance that those guys own some other clothes in their closet, probably closer to your liking, that they'd put on for a social event or special occasion.

Cray Grant, the unofficial god of the iGentry, once stated:

'I guess to a certain extent I did eventually become the characters I was playing. I played at being someone I wanted to be until I became that person, or he became me.'

Quote:

He professed that the real Cary Grant was more like his scruffy, unshaven fisherman in Father Goose than the "well-tailored charmer" of Charade. - McCann, Graham (1997)

 

[Nobilis Animus]

I posted that pic because I think it looks incoherent, and thus not good. I think the shoes are actually two-eyelet derbies, but if they are oxfords it's even worse. That looks to me like a dress shirt with a spread collar and a French placket. I'm just not feeling any coherence at all, nor anything particularly impressive in an insouciant sort of way.

Perhaps it's an outfit he didn't really put together with real intention, and a photo he wasn't posing for. But I wonder if that's not part of the point too. Meaning, how representative a sample do you think this body of photographic evidence really is of how that population dressed, day in and day out, at that time? You say to "consume more photos" to develop your eye. I see lots of photos taken from movies or special occasions, album or magazine covers, often shot by famous photographers. It stands to reason, to me anyway, that there's a better-than-zero chance that these guys didn't dress like that all the time. Would you agree?

Hasn't stopped us, though, from looking at some passerby shot of office drones on the street on their way to lunch and bemoaning what the scene says about the state of decorum in this day and age. I suspect there's a fair chance that those guys own some other clothes in their closet, probably closer to your liking, that they'd put on for a social event or special occasion.

Regarding the dangers of selectively reviewing the evidence, once more, I note that the latest installment on the blog has confused Louis Vauxcelles with a group of journalists. Presumably this error was induced not only through consulting the Wikipedia page on the subject, but also neglecting to read to the end of the 'source.'

Somewhere a French artist is angrily munching his croissant.

 

[RSS]

I awoke this morning after a nightmare. A rabidly tenacious little dog named Chi-chi was shredding shoes in my closet. It kept repeating "damn clodhopping orthotic derby".

Yesterday I tried a pair of Peal oxford brogues in a dark brown suede while sporting odd trousers and a coat. I've probably had them since the 90's and they appeared unused ... so it was time to wear them. They looked okay. I wouldn't say it was an ideal combination but given my age I better wear the darn things before it's too late. I will say my doctor at UW Med liked the shoes.

Sometimes I look at my wardrobe and think "Had I not bought all this 'stuff' (forgive me Miranda), I could have retired five years earlier."

 

[Nobilis Animus]

I awoke this morning after a nightmare. A rabidly tenacious little dog named Chi-chi was shredding shoes in my closet. It kept repeating "damn clodhopping orthotic derby".

Yesterday I tried a pair of Peal oxford brogues in a dark suede paired with odd trousers and a sport coat. I've probably had them since the 90's and they appeared unworn ... so it was time to wear them. They looked okay. I wouldn't say it was an ideal combination but given my age I better wear the darn things before it's too late. I will say my doctor at UW Med liked the shoes.

Sometimes I look at my wardrobe and think "Had I not bought all this 'stuff' (forgive me Miranda), I could have retired five years earlier."

At least he left you the oxfords - what sort of retirement would it be if entirely unshod?

 

[bicycleradical]

At least he left you the oxfords - what sort of retirement would it be if entirely unshod?

Possibly one full of toxoplasmosis.

 

[db123456]

Honestly, take two pairs of shoes on the same middle-of-the-way last and in the same leather (dark brown calf, let's say) and on single soles:

- Plain toecap derby.

- Full brogue oxford.

I really think the level of formality is pretty much interchangeable.

My sense is that DWW picked an odd way to tackle his point. I agree with him that those who think oxfords are nearly always preferable because one should always try to smarten things up are completely misguided. But I don't agree that the oxford/derby divide is really where the action is.

This is interesting -- it flags one of the questions that occurs to me when this topic pops up periodically: "Assuming DWW is right that oxfords don't (usually) go with odd jackets, what's the point of full brogue oxfords?" Personally, I wouldn't wear them with a suit. But maybe that's just because, if I'm wearing a suit, I really mean to be "dressed up," so cap toes feel right. If full brogue oxfords don't work with an odd jacket either then it's hard to see when they're useful.

(Sort of relatedly, I've never been much of a fan of cap toe derbies either. Not sure why, just an idiosyncratic preference I think.)