• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • We would like to welcome House of Huntington as an official Affiliate Vendor. Shop past season Drake's, Nigel Cabourn, Private White V.C. and other menswear luxury brands at exceptional prices below retail. Please visit the Houise of Huntington thread and welcome them to the forum.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Pairing oxford shoes with chinos

Is it acceptable to pair oxfords with chinos?

  • Yes, anytime, anywhere.

    Votes: 45 27.3%
  • Whenever you've got that "chino + oxfords" feeling.

    Votes: 29 17.6%
  • In a pinch (other pants at the cleaners, traveling, Halloween costume...)

    Votes: 36 21.8%
  • No, except maaaybe in a life or death situation.

    Votes: 55 33.3%

  • Total voters
    165

TheChihuahua

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2020
Messages
937
Reaction score
923
To be clear, I don't "look down" on these people. I look down on people based on their character, which has nothing to do with their dress.

I'm purely talking about aesthetics. If we can't say that some aesthetics are better than others, then there would be no discussion on this board. People would just post their photos, and regardless of how they're dressed, everyone claps. This would be a disservice to the people participating -- and the people spending their money on clothes. If you spend thousands of dollars on a wardrobe and look bad for it, was that money well spent?

There's a lot of room between "accept everything" and "look down on people." You can also say that there are better versions of a look (here being classic menswear), and discuss how to achieve that aesthetic.

I've posted many types of outfits in this thread, which stretch across a range of CM expressions.

Here are some very traditional outfits. This doesn't look like the 1940s to me. These outfits include formal suits, casual suits, and sport coats. They can be used for a variety of expressions, even if they're all very traditional.


View attachment 1670955 View attachment 1670956 View attachment 1670963 View attachment 1670964 View attachment 1670965



Here are some outfits that are not super traditional. Meaning, you will not see anyone dressed like this from the "Golden Age." They are contemporary versions of traditional outfits. Yet, they still have some connection to the past. (In the first photo, I'm focusing on Jeffery, the man on the left. In fact, the man on the right is very traditionally dressed, and his attire is a perfect foil for what I mean by Jeffery's contemporary take on CM.)


View attachment 1670958 View attachment 1670959 View attachment 1670961 View attachment 1670962 View attachment 1670979



By contrast, these are also not recreations of the past. But they are also not informed by anything. They are aesthetically bad.


View attachment 1670973 View attachment 1670977 View attachment 1670975 View attachment 1670969 View attachment 1670978 View attachment 1670976
View attachment 1670972



So yes, I'm happy that tailors and factory workers have jobs. But as people who are spending money on this stuff, we can also encourage people to buy better things, wear things in better ways, and develop a better sense of aesthetics. Otherwise, this forum would just be a consumer's bacchanalia, everyone encouraging each other to buy crazier and crazier things, wear stranger and stranger outfits.

Fair enough.

but I guess I take issue with the idea that the top two pictures are good and the bottom two are bad.
Especially when the reason for the distinction is due to the top two being based on a connection to the past or being informed.
(and note: I’m not endorsing either group or giving my preference.)

good
Informed
Based on a connection to the

5DB4FC2A-9479-4C20-BDAB-20578F6B6B12.jpeg
01112F3F-7D9D-4B2E-BEBC-A2E18228B5D1.jpeg


Bad (for whatever reason)
9176E48D-D6F1-465B-877F-4036EE2D6843.jpeg
7DE382B0-55B5-4EEC-B31B-B66BF254050E.jpeg


now I’m not saying I dislike the top 2 photos. They are fine.

but one is a guy in a blue blazer with olive chinos, a white t-shirt, and new balance sneakers. That isn’t connected to the past or informed. That’s just a combination that you happen to think works.

the other is a black v-neck t-shirt with a light suit and keds (is that what they are called?) and no socks. Again, how is that connected to the past or informed? It’s not. You just like it.

and I’m not saying either is bad. But to say those are somehow educated or informed styles, but the other two are not…
Well that seems like you are forming an opinion based on your own preference and trying to justify what makes it better.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
Fair enough.

but I guess I take issue with the idea that the top two pictures are good and the bottom two are bad.
Especially when the reason for the distinction is due to the top two being based on a connection to the past or being informed.
(and note: I’m not endorsing either group or giving my preference.)

good
Informed
Based on a connection to the

View attachment 1670984 View attachment 1670985

Bad (for whatever reason)
View attachment 1670986 View attachment 1670987

now I’m not saying I dislike the top 2 photos. They are fine.

but one is a guy in a blue blazer with olive chinos, a white t-shirt, and new balance sneakers. That isn’t connected to the past or informed. That’s just a combination that you happen to think works.

the other is a black v-neck t-shirt with a light suit and keds (is that what they are called?) and no socks. Again, how is that connected to the past or informed? It’s not. You just like it.

and I’m not saying either is bad. But to say those are somehow educated or informed styles, but the other two are not…
Well that seems like you are forming an opinion based on your own preference and trying to justify what makes it better.

None of those are outfits I would personally wear. But yes, I think the first two are better than the second two.

I've tried to give reasons for why one aesthetic works and another doesn't. But ultimately, I'm not judging these things based on rules, but by taste. I try to give reasons for my judgment. But it's ultimately about taste.

As it has been said here many times, there is no real debating taste. If someone disagrees with me that the last set of photos is bad, and they want to look like those people, there's no reason to listen to my opinions. We simply have different tastes.
 

TheChihuahua

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2020
Messages
937
Reaction score
923
None of those are outfits I would personally wear. But yes, I think the first two are better than the second two.

I've tried to give reasons for why one aesthetic works and another doesn't. But ultimately, I'm not judging these things based on rules, but by taste. I try to give reasons for my judgment. But it's ultimately about taste.

As it has been said here many times, there is no real debating taste. If someone disagrees with me that the last set of photos is bad, and they want to look like those people, there's no reason to listen to my opinions. We simply have different tastes.

if it’s taste, then fair enough. And I’m not necessarily disagreeing.

I think the friction comes when taste is substituted or justified with terms like “better connection to history” or “more informed” or “better trained eye”…

I might prefer the two photos that you also prefer. But not due to either of those having some sort of better connection to history or being less distracting from a golden era point of view.

also, I would say that olive chinos with a white t-shirt and new balance shoes and a blazer is just as much “chaos” as what Tom Ford or gaziano and girling or Justin Fitzpatrick or the Vegas tailors are doing. They are all pushing boundaries. They are all being chaotic.

you just aesthetically like one form of chaos better. And that’s fine.

glad to hear you are back to wearing suits again. I hope you are wearing some nice oxfords with those suits.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
if it’s taste, then fair enough. And I’m not necessarily disagreeing.

I think the friction comes when taste is substituted or justified with terms like “better connection to history” or “more informed” or “better trained eye”…

I might prefer the two photos that you also prefer. But not due to either of those having some sort of better connection to history or being less distracting from a golden era point of view.

also, I would say that olive chinos with a white t-shirt and new balance shoes and a blazer is just as much “chaos” as what Tom Ford or gaziano and girling or Justin Fitzpatrick or the Vegas tailors are doing. They are all pushing boundaries. They are all being chaotic.

you just aesthetically like one form of chaos better. And that’s fine.

glad to hear you are back to wearing suits again. I hope you are wearing some nice oxfords with those suits.

Those are not chinos; those are fatigues. I like that look because it's one of the more progressive examples I can think of when you asked me for progressive examples. It's not even a CM look. It's an SWD look. I think of it as being connected to a particular Japanese fashion scene made up of "Beams guys."

The photo of George isn't really that progressive. He's wearing a linen suit. If the suit were in a more traditional linen color, such as tan, that outfit would feel very natural to me. The most unusual thing about it is not the lack of socks or the use of sneakers. T-shirts have been worn with tailoring for a while, and often done in good taste. Many of the more traditional-minded members on this board, such as Vox and WIll, often wear t-shirts with tailoring.

The most unusual thing about that outfit is that George is wearing a grey linen suit. I've thought about commissioning something similar after seeing that photo. But if I do, I would probably wear it with much more traditional choices in shirts and shoes. Simply because I enjoy a more traditional aesthetic.

I can only say that people who are new to tailored clothing often like the last set of photos. I do think that people who are more seasoned at this end up moving away from that aesthetic. The slim peacoats with ties and tie bars; the flamboyant Vegas suits that are incoherently put together. The cargo pants with dress shoes. Often, this comes from people who believe dressing up is dressing well. I think they clumsily use the language of dress and force elements into a look.

This "shoe culture" thing is totally new. Meaning, people buying shoes in jeweled-toned colors, such as blue, green, purple, and red. Or they buy strange versions of traditional dress shoes, such as oxfords. Nearly all of J. Fitzpatrick's shoes look odd to me -- directed at the shoe enthusiast, and not someone who's interested in dressing better. It's the shoe counterpart to the watch world.

Barring Jeffery and George's looks, I would not post any of the photos in the second set on this side of the board. This side of the board used to be much more rooted in the first set of photos. That doesn't mean that everyone posted such high-quality outfits. But there was a stronger consensus around what looks "good."

I still really dislike the use of oxfords with fun socks and chinos. I don't think any of the outfits in the last set would be regularly posted on this side of the board -- they would mostly get criticized (rightly). But the Allen Edmonds photo I posted of someone wearing tan oxfords with strange socks and chinos -- that is very common. So are the photos of people buying strange shoes. I think this has been a very bad development on this side of the board.

Anyway, this is sincerely my last post in this thread. Goodnight to all.
 
Last edited:

ValidusLA

Distinguished Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
5,922
I still really dislike the use of oxfords with fun socks and chinos. I don't think any of the outfits in the last set would be regularly posted on this side of the board -- they would mostly get criticized (rightly). But the Allen Edmonds photo I posted of someone wearing tan oxfords with strange socks and chinos -- that is very common. So are the photos of people buying strange shoes. I think this has been a very bad development on this side of the board.

I agree with this, I think. Do you have thoughts as to why this development has come about?

Like overall if we look around CM, there is far more discussion of EG/CJ/GG/SC/Vass/Alden (or other shoes I would generally consider to be in good taste) than is to be found of J Fitzpatrick or like...Corthay.

So why the sudden pivot to "expressive" shoes? Is it because they are easy to visualize as a singular object, divorced from the rest of the body should someone wish?

Obviously there has to be some truth to the point of them gaining in popularity, as makers are making them in seemingly increasing amounts.

Allen Edmonds is 10 years away from being Johnston Murphy and 15 away from being Cole Haan at this point. They may move there quicker based off the looks they are promoting.

Even more interesting to me, why is AE moving that way? As fewer men dress in CM, those who remain are more likely to pony up for Alden or a British shoe? That would be my wholly uneducated guess, but AE now feels almost completely divorced from 2015 AE to me.
 

radicaldog

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
3,239
Reaction score
981
I generally don't mix SWD with CM, no

This is where one starts running the risk of being costumey.

If there's anything that sits between the casual styling of SWD and the classic rooting of CM, it's this weird space where people are buying blue and purple dress shoes like sneakerheads.

See, maybe I'm misunderstanding, but that can't be right: the Beams look with fatigues, t-shirt, and blazer, for example, clearly sits between SWD and CM, and mixes them (successfully in my book: the colour combinations are still classic, as are most of the lines, but some of the garments are very casual, etc.).

Sorry if that's a bit flippant, I've been meaning to collect some thoughts on this very issue and start a thread about it. More later.
 
Last edited:

radicaldog

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
3,239
Reaction score
981
So why the sudden pivot to "expressive" shoes? Is it because they are easy to visualize as a singular object, divorced from the rest of the body should someone wish?

Because people think, more or less correctly, that in terms of social acceptability and conformity they can get away with dress shoes and a boring business casual outfit, and so put all their repressed peacockery in those shoes, ending up with technicolor abominations.
 

ValidusLA

Distinguished Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
5,922
Because people think, more or less correctly, that in terms of social acceptability and conformity they can get away with dress shoes and a boring business casual outfit, and so put all their repressed peacockery in those shoes, ending up with technicolor abominations.

Interesting. So its like a .. "I'm afraid to express myself except for this part I can hide under my desk, and since its the only thing I have to turn it to 11." kind of thing?

I guess I could buy that.

I also sure some of it is pure #shoesofinstagram type stuff.
 
Last edited:

Mercurio

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2015
Messages
1,636
Reaction score
6,180
I'm purely talking about aesthetics. If we can't say that some aesthetics are better than others, then there would be no discussion on this board.
As we are not talking any more about “pairing Oxford shoes with chinos” but about aesthetics, I recall a post that I wrote a few years ago in a Spanish forum related to classic menswear, called “Rincón de Caballeros” or “Gentlemen Corner”. It is about the subject of proportions, that I believe is a main issue in relation not only with clothing, but everything we assume is aesthetical.

My interest in the proportions issue, understood as the “relationships between the parts and the whole or between various things related to each other” comes for many years. Initially as part of my professional training as an architect, but beyond that, because it has allowed me to delve into “the mysterious formula that governs art, nature, and science”, as the subtitle of Prisa Hemenway's book, “The Secret Code” (Original title: Divine Proportion, Phi in Art, Nature and Science), to understand how it is present in everything that surrounds us.

Link to the mentioned post. As it is written in Spanish, I just mention here the main arguments. In that composition I bring up and try to explain the Golden Ratio and how it relates to Phi in the human body, as shown in the Vitruvian Man, by Leonardo da Vinci:



Related to our discussion, I cited a very illustrative article (this time in English), titled “Back to the Basics: Proportionality”, which gives a reasoned approach to what @dieworkwear has tried to say along this thread:

“This may be the most important piece of the puzzle when it comes to the appearance of a suit. A suit can fit the wearer perfectly but if it does not have pleasing proportions then it fails at its main goal: to make the wearer presentable and attractive to the eye.”

I invite all to read it and comment it afterwards, if you like.

 
Last edited:

acapaca

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2017
Messages
1,072
Reaction score
1,174
Objects. Shoes as objects, jackets as objects, grenadine ties. If we're committed to this conceit of dress as language, then I suppose the objects are words. How to describe concepts without words? How to form grammar and syntax without choosing one object over another when the time is right? How can objects clash, or go together incoherently, if neither one represents anything at all?
 

TheChihuahua

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2020
Messages
937
Reaction score
923
This is where one starts running the risk of being costumey.



See, maybe I'm misunderstanding, but that can't be right: the Beams look with fatigues, t-shirt, and blazer, for example, clearly sits between SWD and CM, and mixes them (successfully in my book: the colour combinations are still classic, as are most of the lines, but some of the garments are very casual, etc.).

Sorry if that's a bit flippant, I've been meaning to collect some thoughts on this very issue and start a thread about it. More later.

that was my thought…

he seemed to criticize mixing CM with SWD, but then posted pictures he liked where it clearly occurs. Guy in army pants and a t shirt and sneakers with a blue blazer, for example. or a guy in a a suit with a black v-neck t-shirt and white canvass keds.


not that I dislike the look, but many of these positions justifying what looks pass and which don’t seem contradictory and a forced way to justify an aesthetic preference.
 

am55

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
4,949
Reaction score
4,658
There pass the careless people
That call their souls their own:
Here by the road I loiter,
How idle and alone.

Ah, past the plunge of plummet,
In seas I cannot sound,
My heart and soul and senses,
World without end, are drowned.

His folly has not fellow
Beneath the blue of day
That ends, sock'd or sockless
His chinos in that way.

There flowers no balm to sain him
From east of earth to west
That's lost for everlasting
The derbies of the rest.

Here by the labouring highway
With empty hands I stroll:
Sea-deep, till doomsday morning,
Lie lost my heart and soul.
 

JFWR

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Messages
6,065
Reaction score
10,017
Neat catalogue. Thanks for sharing it. Two things surprised me about it: the seven hole oxfords and the many different split toe derbies, at least a dozen.

I'm not sure I agree with this. A nice, old definition of beauty is that it's "harmony of contrast." Imo, blue shoes with a blue suit would be too much blue. Dark brown, burgundy, or black shoes provide some nice contrast, but not too much contrast, as light brown shoes would. There are probably other principles of beauty, such as symmetry, but not too much symmetry, or it'd seem perfect, and thus unnatural. So we have one breast pocket, maybe with a square, to break that up a bit. You've mentioned the principle of the inverted triangle producing a masculine look as another principle that I don't think is purely about history/tradition.

This is a great point. Imo, saying oxfords are the perfect shoe is like saying a hammer is the perfect tool. Having a variety of shoe styles would be ideal imo, like having a collection of different tools in a toolbox.

Yeah, the overabundance of Norwegian split toes was very strange. I didn't know that style was so in vogue in 1960.
 

Mirage-

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2021
Messages
605
Reaction score
632
I do think that oxfords with chinos look very odd, though I wouldn't be as dogmatic as DWW is.
Why not with chinos? Simply because oxfords are, or have been for a long while at least, very formal shoes, due to their sleekness. "Only with suits" seems too prescriptive a statement to have any validity in menswear, but the principle behind it makes sense (i.e. only with the more formal/sleek outfits). How much you are willing to push the boundary of what is appropriate with them, is probably largely down to culture, environmental factors, personal sensibility etc etc.
Indeed, I find they are perfectly fine with fairly formal separates, as shown as by Crompton or Boyer, usually in suede.
For the same reason though, I also dislike t-shirts with blazers as a combination that is too dissonant. Clearly, many others here disagree, including DWW himself curiously, if I recall correctly.
But I like (smart) polos and knitwear (possibly including knitted t-shirts). Henleys might perhaps work with a workwear-ish tailored look, thanks to the fact they can achieve some bit of the v-shape of the shirt. Printed t-shirts I absolutely hate with tailoring, but it's another thing some people try to push. The print is completely distracting from the harmony of the outfit imo, not unlike how DWW laments that weird-colored dress shoes destroy the balance of a tailored look and drag the eye downward.

On a side note, I've been spurred by this thread to visit AE's online shop (not being american, I never do) and am now losing
faith in humanity seeing this:

1631963377291.png


With raving reviews like this (I'm not hiding the name as it's very much public, and just a nick anyway). Although I guess we're veering in another topic completely so I'll leave it at that.

1631963498468.png
 

Northants bloke

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
566
Reaction score
1,160
Those are not chinos; those are fatigues. I like that look because it's one of the more progressive examples I can think of when you asked me for progressive examples. It's not even a CM look. It's an SWD look. I think of it as being connected to a particular Japanese fashion scene made up of "Beams guys."

The photo of George isn't really that progressive. He's wearing a linen suit. If the suit were in a more traditional linen color, such as tan, that outfit would feel very natural to me. The most unusual thing about it is not the lack of socks or the use of sneakers. T-shirts have been worn with tailoring for a while, and often done in good taste. Many of the more traditional-minded members on this board, such as Vox and WIll, often wear t-shirts with tailoring.

The most unusual thing about that outfit is that George is wearing a grey linen suit. I've thought about commissioning something similar after seeing that photo. But if I do, I would probably wear it with much more traditional choices in shirts and shoes. Simply because I enjoy a more traditional aesthetic.

I can only say that people who are new to tailored clothing often like the last set of photos. I do think that people who are more seasoned at this end up moving away from that aesthetic. The slim peacoats with ties and tie bars; the flamboyant Vegas suits that are incoherently put together. The cargo pants with dress shoes. Often, this comes from people who believe dressing up is dressing well. I think they clumsily use the language of dress and force elements into a look.

This "shoe culture" thing is totally new. Meaning, people buying shoes in jeweled-toned colors, such as blue, green, purple, and red. Or they buy strange versions of traditional dress shoes, such as oxfords. Nearly all of J. Fitzpatrick's shoes look odd to me -- directed at the shoe enthusiast, and not someone who's interested in dressing better. It's the shoe counterpart to the watch world.

Barring Jeffery and George's looks, I would not post any of the photos in the second set on this side of the board. This side of the board used to be much more rooted in the first set of photos. That doesn't mean that everyone posted such high-quality outfits. But there was a stronger consensus around what looks "good."

I still really dislike the use of oxfords with fun socks and chinos. I don't think any of the outfits in the last set would be regularly posted on this side of the board -- they would mostly get criticized (rightly). But the Allen Edmonds photo I posted of someone wearing tan oxfords with strange socks and chinos -- that is very common. So are the photos of people buying strange shoes. I think this has been a very bad development on this side of the board.

Anyway, this is sincerely my last post in this thread. Goodnight to all.

How do you define the difference between chinos and fatigues?
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 55 35.5%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 60 38.7%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 17 11.0%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 27 17.4%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 28 18.1%

Forum statistics

Threads
505,161
Messages
10,579,012
Members
223,882
Latest member
anykadaimeni
Top