The CM Graveyard: First Sartoria Partenopea... next J. Crew?

[Aquafortis]

A lot of what you consider to be extreme is just the most forward facing part of the market. And that part of the market's aesthetic then just gets toned down for mass consumption. Raf Simons and Hedi Slimane's boyish silhouettes are what kicked off the slim fit trend. And even Savile Row tailors right now are making slimmer suits than they did 30 years ago.

Similarly, Raf (again) and Demna's gigantic, oversized silhouettes are swinging things towards the other direction.

This stuff still affects classic tailoring. But once you leave tailoring, these trends are inescapable unless you only wear super basic things (e.g. Levi's 501s and a Hanes t-shirt). Even Brooks Brothers, the most vanilla of casualwear brands, has slimmer silhouettes now because of what happened on the runway. And in ten or twenty years time, mainstream stores will fill out again, silhouette wise, because of what's happening today with Balenciaga.

The whole Hawaiian shirt trend in classic tailoring right now goes back to Saint Laurent's runway shows a few years ago. I don't think any of this stuff exists in a vacuum. It's more like communities that are situated at different points in the fashion cycle.

Good points. I guess that in light of historical context of social trends in dress, caricature-like emulation and imagery is not really extreme - and didn't say it was extreme, just twisted and artificial. I also don't think I implied that any of this exists in a vacuum - it certainly is all related in the broader context.

The Hawaiian shirt thing is plain out silly and makes me laugh. What I do find extreme, are the directions that designers go to try and come up with something "new" for the sake of being different. Really, what if any, is the commentary or narrative underlying the Hawaiian shirt with tailoring look?

 

[dieworkwear]

Good points. I guess that in light of historical context of social trends in dress, caricature-like emulation and imagery is not really extreme - and didn't say it was extreme, just twisted and artificial. I also don't think I implied that any of this exists in a vacuum - it certainly is all related in the broader context.

The Hawaiian shirt thing is plain out silly and makes me laugh. What I do find extreme, are the directions that designers go to try and come up with something "new" for the sake of being different. Really, what if any, is the commentary or narrative underlying the Hawaiian shirt with tailoring look?

I don't really care if people wearing Hawaiian shirts or not. I wear them with casualwear. But the general point is that the stuff people make fun of today, they'll likely be wearing tomorrow. And new things come because the people who originally made fun of those things are now wearing them.

Why did skinny silhouettes come back into fashion? Because the tail end of the market was wearing baggy clothes. Why are baggy clothes coming back into fashion? Because the tail end of the market is now wearing slim fit clothes. People wear things to say "I'm like these people, and not like these people." For fashion first adopters, they move on when late-adopters start wearing what they're wearing

There's very little objectivity in this stuff. It's about social signals, language, and social identities. An excerpt from a Georg Simmel essay in 1904 on why people wear what they do, which I think still holds today:

"Fashion is the imitation of a given example and satisfies the demand for social adaption; it leads the individual upon the road which all travel, it furnishes a general condition, which resolves the conduct of every individual into a mere example. At the same time it satisfies in no less degree the need of differentiation, the tendency towards dissimilarity, the desire for change and contrast, on the one hand by a constant change of contents, which gives to the fashion of today an individual stamp as opposed to that of yesterday and to-morrow, on the other hand because fashions differ for different classes—the fashions of the upper stratum of society are never identical with those of the lower; in fact, they are abandoned by the former as soon as the latter prepares to appropriate them."

 

[clee1982]

I actually don't know other brand that try to "replicate' TB's suit, yes main stream is skinnier and shorter, but TB is more block like for lack of better word, TB's suit still looks distinctive if you ask me

 

[crazn]

I actually don't know other brand that try to "replicate' TB's suit, yes main stream is skinnier and shorter, but TB is more block like for lack of better word, TB's suit still looks distinctive if you ask me

I thought TB suits looked cool but odd. But his casual sportswear stuff was really nice. though expletive-inducing expensive.

 

[Riva]

I don't really care if people wearing Hawaiian shirts or not. I wear them with casualwear. But the general point is that the stuff people make fun of today, they'll likely be wearing tomorrow. And new things come because the people who originally made fun of those things are now wearing them.

Again depends on the region. For instance in my case why would I wear cheap printed Hawaiian shirts when I'm already wearing "more sartorially" approved unique hot wax handpainted batik shirts? These batik shirts has never been out of style for decades since they are basically paintings and they evolve with time.

 

[am55]

I don't really care if people wearing Hawaiian shirts or not. I wear them with casualwear. But the general point is that the stuff people make fun of today, they'll likely be wearing tomorrow. And new things come because the people who originally made fun of those things are now wearing them.

Why did skinny silhouettes come back into fashion? Because the tail end of the market was wearing baggy clothes. Why are baggy clothes coming back into fashion? Because the tail end of the market is now wearing slim fit clothes. People wear things to say "I'm like these people, and not like these people." For fashion first adopters, they move on when late-adopters start wearing what they're wearing

There's very little objectivity in this stuff. It's about social signals, language, and social identities. An excerpt from a Georg Simmel essay in 1904 on why people wear what they do, which I think still holds today:

"Fashion is the imitation of a given example and satisfies the demand for social adaption; it leads the individual upon the road which all travel, it furnishes a general condition, which resolves the conduct of every individual into a mere example. At the same time it satisfies in no less degree the need of differentiation, the tendency towards dissimilarity, the desire for change and contrast, on the one hand by a constant change of contents, which gives to the fashion of today an individual stamp as opposed to that of yesterday and to-morrow, on the other hand because fashions differ for different classes—the fashions of the upper stratum of society are never identical with those of the lower; in fact, they are abandoned by the former as soon as the latter prepares to appropriate them."

I upvoted your posts and think you are mostly right, and certainly statistically right, however there are definite groups that are very impervious to change. I remember reading an interview of Prince Philip's tailor where he conceded that he had slimmed up the trousers "a bit" in recent decades; but Prince Philip started off in a wide trouser era anyway.

Here is a prime example (and yes, there is definitely a strong political association):

Young Jacob Rees-Mogg:

Recent:

I like that photo because the flare shows just how much space was left by the tailor - this cut is actually very comfortable to sit in buttoned, and with a bit of shaping of the canvas you can avoid looking like him most of the time.

And of course his chum BoJo has not changed much either (well, he has increased in bulk, but the cut and choice of clothing is steady). Dying breed, though. Even David Cameron switched to slimmer fitting stuff.

Not denying your points, merely highlighting an exception that could pretend to "classicism" through endurance.

 

[clee1982]

don't disagree, just thought someone said TB looks generic earlier, I'll be surprised if that's the case, if anything Canali and Boglioli would look more generic (so would Dior if you try to find some asian brand that copy the slim look and slim down 2 more size...)

 

[sebastian mcfox]

The Hawaiian shirt thing is plain out silly and makes me laugh. What I do find extreme, are the directions that designers go to try and come up with something "new" for the sake of being different. Really, what if any, is the commentary or narrative underlying the Hawaiian shirt with tailoring look?

It's consistent with the ongoing trend of casualising and personalising tailoring

 

[am55]

Again depends on the region. For instance in my case why would I wear cheap printed Hawaiian shirts when I'm already wearing "more sartorially" approved unique hot wax handpainted batik shirts? These batik shirts has never been out of style for decades since they are basically paintings and they evolve with time.

The original Hawaiian shirts in muted colours (as opposed to fluorescent coconut trees) are quite nice, reminiscent of batik. They remind me of jazz players (e.g. Marcus Miller jumped to mind for some reason). I don't wear them personally but might eventually be persuaded. Polos don't cut it in tropical heat.

 

[Aquafortis]

The original Hawaiian shirts in muted colours (as opposed to fluorescent coconut trees) are quite nice, reminiscent of batik. They remind me of jazz players (e.g. Marcus Miller jumped to mind for some reason). I don't wear them personally but might eventually be persuaded. Polos don't cut it in tropical heat.

I totally understand. I have family in Hawaii and have lived there.

 

[dieworkwear]

I upvoted your posts and think you are mostly right, and certainly statistically right, however there are definite groups that are very impervious to change. I remember reading an interview of Prince Philip's tailor where he conceded that he had slimmed up the trousers "a bit" in recent decades; but Prince Philip started off in a wide trouser era anyway.

Here is a prime example (and yes, there is definitely a strong political association):

Young Jacob Rees-Mogg:

Recent:

I like that photo because the flare shows just how much space was left by the tailor - this cut is actually very comfortable to sit in buttoned, and with a bit of shaping of the canvas you can avoid looking like him most of the time.

And of course his chum BoJo has not changed much either (well, he has increased in bulk, but the cut and choice of clothing is steady). Dying breed, though. Even David Cameron switched to slimmer fitting stuff.

Not denying your points, merely highlighting an exception that could pretend to "classicism" through endurance.

Jacob Rees-Mogg seems like the worst example since he always looks terrible and goofy.

 

[Riva]

The original Hawaiian shirts in muted colours (as opposed to fluorescent coconut trees) are quite nice, reminiscent of batik. They remind me of jazz players (e.g. Marcus Miller jumped to mind for some reason). I don't wear them personally but might eventually be persuaded. Polos don't cut it in tropical heat.

Japanese yukata style patterns are also nicer than the usual bright colors. If it's small patterns it'll even work under an unstructured jacket without looking too casual.

 

[Riva]

It's consistent with the ongoing trend of casualising and personalising tailoring

Or some people's way of starting a trend of more casual shirts without going the usual streetwear.

 

[am55]

Jacob Rees-Mogg seems like the worst example since he always looks terrible and goofy.

He looks like what he is: ready to inherit the country once May has exhausted her usefulness. The look is only silly out of context. Plenty like him around Westminster. Fewer in the City since it became yankville under Thatcher.

 

[dieworkwear]

He looks like what he is: ready to inherit the country once May has exhausted her usefulness. The look is only silly out of context. Plenty like him around Westminster. Fewer in the City since it became yankville under Thatcher.

His clothes are genuinely bad. I'm not saying this because I find his politics repulsive. There's no world where this man is stylish. Even in a purely classical tailoring sense, the cut of his suits is ... not good.

Spoiler

When you ask bae if your outfit looks good: