Sneakers With Tailoring: Yes, No, Maybe?

[mak1277]

IMO, if you're into fountain pens, you should practice writing because the point of having fountain pens is presumably the experience of writing and the improvement of penmanship.

You don’t think it’s a little self-congratulatory of you to tell other people they’re enjoying their hobby wrong?

 

[dieworkwear]

You don’t think it’s a little self-congratulatory of you to tell other people they’re enjoying their hobby wrong?

You can characterize the motivations in this way, but I think there are better and worse ways to dress and write. And that many of the things that used to be associated with these endeavors have broken off and become their own insular worlds. With few exceptions, I don't think people collected shoes before simply because there wasn't a consumer-orientated world that broke down every technical detail, and thus motivated people to collect shoes as objects. The same is true of fountain pens.

When people learn about technical details, it creates a mystery and need for experience. This tension is then only alleviated through buying and experiencing that object. After which, the object becomes demystified and the person moves on. I think that's why you see so many areas of online hobbyism have become something like baseball card collecting. People learn about Norwegian welts or vac filling systems, and then want to buy an example of that object to experience it.

But if these things aren't connected to the greater pursuit of dressing and writing well (for clothes and pens), is that not a real loss? Is it really worth pursuing just collecting these items as objects? That seems to fall into a relativism that no one seriously believes.

 

[JFWR]

You can characterize the motivations in this way, but I think there are better and worse ways to dress and write. And that many of the things that used to be associated with these endeavors have broken off and become their own insular worlds. With few exceptions, I don't think people collected shoes before simply because there wasn't a consumer-orientated world that broke down every technical detail, and thus motivated people to collect shoes as objects. The same is true of fountain pens.

When people learn about technical details, it creates a mystery and need for experience. This tension is then only alleviated through buying and experiencing that object. After which, the object becomes demystified and the person moves on. I think that's why you see so many areas of online hobbyism have become something like baseball card collecting. People learn about Norwegian welts of vac filling systems, and then want to buy an example of that object to experience it.

But if these things aren't connected to the greater pursuit of dressing and writing well (for clothes and pens), is that not a real loss? Is it really worth pursuing just collecting these items as objects? That seems to fall into a relativism that no one seriously believes.

I will actually agree with you here. I don't think shoes, or pens, or books should be collected strictly for their value as objects. They are all meant to be used. I can understand rare exemptions to this rule, but generally I buy things to use them.

 

[acapaca]

Upthread we heard an opinion that tan chukkas with grey trousers was nothing if not tasteful, as I understand it. Fine. Are these looks meant to be less tasteful?

If the contention is that those looks are not tasteful...well, I think you are going to have to do more work than 'it wasn't in the old AA books' to be convincing.

If the contention is that the wearer doesn't really know what he's doing, or that his ear just can't hear the discordance in the words his outfit is speaking, then you are going to need to explain how and why such an expert keeps getting it so wrong.

If you cannot, or will not, observe that the world around you doesn't seem to agree with you -- and I'm not talking about just 'normal' people, I'm talking about opinion leaders -- then, I will say it again, the iconoclast is you.

 

[radicaldog]

My contention is that the observations here are sometimes wildly wrong. Or at the very least, that they don't exist outside of some very narrow niche. I think you might agree that a normative discussion that only applies to very limited scenarios is itself of limited value?

If it's limited value we're after here, as in some sort of esoteric academic exercise, then fine. But that's not what I perceive as the primary usefulness of this forum.

This gets at something important. Years ago someone made a provocative post which touched on this issue. It went something like this: "It's as if I came to this forum looking for some advice about how to improve my fitness and muscle tone at the gym in order to look better, but around here the ideal body is that of an extreme bodybuilder who will look ridiculous or conspicuously out of place in most settings, and certainly not attractive." The iGents predictably lost it, but that poster had a point. And the pictures he used were hilarious--the ones of bodybuilders, that is.

Having said that, I don't think DWW, say, is after the fashion equivalent of extreme bodybuilding. It's a matter of threading the needle so that one dresses much better than the norm without looking ridiculous. And that will occasionally require some arcana, or academic considerations if you like. The idea is that the arcana will be lost on random people on the street, but you will look good to them, and this overall positive effect will be achieved (partly) because of the arcana.

 

[RJman]

Upthread we heard an opinion that tan chukkas with grey trousers was nothing if not tasteful, as I understand it. Fine. Are these looks meant to be less tasteful?

View attachment 1675208

View attachment 1675209

View attachment 1675210

If the contention is that those looks are not tasteful...well, I think you are going to have to do more work than 'it wasn't in the old AA books' to be convincing.

If the contention is that the wearer doesn't really know what he's doing, or that his ear just can't hear the discordance in the words his outfit is speaking, then you are going to need to explain how and why such an expert keeps getting it so wrong.

If you cannot, or will not, observe that the world around you doesn't seem to agree with you -- and I'm not talking about just 'normal' people, I'm talking about opinion leaders -- then, I will say it again, the iconoclast is you.

I’ll let Chris Hanson deal with the rest of this thread and just tell derek that my first couple fountain pens made my handwriting even worse…

 

[mak1277]

You can characterize the motivations in this way, but I think there are better and worse ways to dress and write. And that many of the things that used to be associated with these endeavors have broken off and become their own insular worlds. With few exceptions, I don't think people collected shoes before simply because there wasn't a consumer-orientated world that broke down every technical detail, and thus motivated people to collect shoes as objects. The same is true of fountain pens.

When people learn about technical details, it creates a mystery and need for experience. This tension is then only alleviated through buying and experiencing that object. After which, the object becomes demystified and the person moves on. I think that's why you see so many areas of online hobbyism have become something like baseball card collecting. People learn about Norwegian welts or vac filling systems, and then want to buy an example of that object to experience it.

But if these things aren't connected to the greater pursuit of dressing and writing well (for clothes and pens), is that not a real loss? Is it really worth pursuing just collecting these items as objects? That seems to fall into a relativism that no one seriously believes.

I don’t disagree with what you’ve written.

But the original comment I quoted comes dangerously close to the idea of “if you don’t do [x] the same way I do that means I’m better than you”. And that is something I find fairly loathsome.

 

[dieworkwear]

Upthread we heard an opinion that tan chukkas with grey trousers was nothing if not tasteful, as I understand it. Fine. Are these looks meant to be less tasteful?

View attachment 1675208

View attachment 1675209

View attachment 1675210

If the contention is that those looks are not tasteful...well, I think you are going to have to do more work than 'it wasn't in the old AA books' to be convincing.

If the contention is that the wearer doesn't really know what he's doing, or that his ear just can't hear the discordance in the words his outfit is speaking, then you are going to need to explain how and why such an expert keeps getting it so wrong.

If you cannot, or will not, observe that the world around you doesn't seem to agree with you -- and I'm not talking about just 'normal' people, I'm talking about opinion leaders -- then, I will say it again, the iconoclast is you.

I find it hard to believe you're discussing things in good faith when you post things like this. The last photo is an image that I posted as an example of a good outfit. You can see the post here:

Pairing oxford shoes with chinos

I like strands. They can be worn with a suit. Especially the darker ones. But to call them “formal” is a bit of a stretch but the one you highlighted above, the walnut strands. Those are one of AE most popular shoes, for better or worse.But they are a much more casual shoe. I just posted two...

www.styleforum.net

You then turn around and post the same photo and ask: "are we to believe that this is not a good outfit?" I literally posted that as an example of a good outfit, and not what I'm discussing when I say bad combinations.

I have long detailed out what I'm trying to say in this discussion. I get the impression that many people understand the nuance. You seemingly purposefully miss it because you've emotionally invested yourself in hating my point of view.

I don't think Yukio's outfit has any relationship to your blue suede oxfords or J. Fitzpatrick shoes.

 

[Waldo Jeffers]

Do 18 year old girls know the difference between oxfords and derbies?

 

[JFWR]

Women badly dressed men like:

Women well dressed men like:

 

[TheChihuahua]

He said 99%. That's far closer to 'all' than it is to 'most'. And it's how everyone understands it.

But sure, if he wants to post some pictures from here of things that 'women' find pleasing, along with some explanations, that would be great. Otherwise, it's just another example of what seems to be a particular crusade of his to point out how poorly it is that many (most? 99% of?) men on this board dress (in, of course, his opinion).

I’m starting to think @emptym might be one of @dieworkwear’s troll accounts. He is a little deeper than the DWW accounts that just pop in with one liners, but he also is 100% supportive of ridiculous idea DWW is pushing and defends him at every chance.
It’s a very elaborate and deep troll account, but it might be?

 

[JFWR]

Do 18 year old girls know the difference between oxfords and derbies?

They did after I spent 2 hours explaining the difference. Duh.

 

[Waldo Jeffers]

They did after I spent 2 hours explaining the difference. Duh.

“You’re beautiful, my dear, but you see we could never be together because you can’t comprehend how I’m flouting convention by wearing oxfords with chinos right now.”

 

[JFWR]

“You’re beautiful, my dear, but you see we could never be together because you can’t comprehend how I’m flouting convention by wearing oxfords with chinos right now.”

That is a scary accurate depiction of how I speak with girls. :/

 

[JFWR]

What kind of suit can I pair these sneakers with?