The Look goes on...

[Jimmy Balantyne]

Here's a younger one. Someone sent me this the other day. I'm not on Facebook. The guys in the front are well-known Arsenal boys at the time. The kid on the steps behind them- wasn't.

 

[Clouseau]

...yet

 

[Kingstonian]

“whether a (good) blouson can ever convey the same sense of style and occasion as a (good) suit. ”

The Harrington was originally an English garment that came back on our TV screens as something slightly exotic and foreign.

Ignoring the various youth cult associations, I suspect blousons were possibly cheap clothing for American working men -whereas in the UK tailored jackets were readily available and affordable for all.

Norman Rockwell paintings are a case in point. Look at the bloke in ‘Freedom of Speech’ and the people next to him.

File:"Freedom of Speech" - NARA - 513536.jpg - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

‘The blue-collar speaker wears a plaid shirt and suede jacket. He has dirty hands and a darker complexion than others in attendance.The other attendees are wearing white shirts, ties and jackets.’

 

[covskin]

Ignoring the various youth cult associations, I suspect blousons were possibly cheap clothing for American working men -whereas in the UK tailored jackets were readily available and inexpensive for all.

Norman Rockwell paintings are a case in point. Look at the bloke in ‘Freedom of Speech’ and the people next to him.

Looks like a US Navy deck jacket, the US Army did seem to have some fairly modern-looking short jackets in WW2 as well so maybe it was a returning serviceman thing that developed into something more civilian.

 

[cerneabbas]

As @cerneabbas said this could be a very good and necessary debate. I think it is, but I was not really commenting on the declining standards in menswear (and in many other things) in my post, although I may have hinted at that decline.

I was really posing the question – thinking of @Kingstonian 's original point – as to whether a (good) blouson can ever convey the same sense of style and occasion as a (good) suit. I was not thinking about the plain man who buys his suits and his onesies at Primark or Asda, drives a new £70K Range Rover but drives it in dirty trainers and a t-shirt.


Apart from work wear where is a suit necessary now ? when we were younger you had to wear a suit on a Saturday night to get into most dance halls etc but not now (in any case I finished with going to places like that years ago).
Funerals,weddings other formal occasions (most of which I make excuses not to attend anyway) and then ? I am struggling to find somewhere to wear a suit.

A suit that is a good fit and good material is going to look smart,so yes if you want to look smart you know that a suit is the thing to wear,but (imo) 'smart casual' is much harder to get right and 'smart casual' is going to be worn by most people much more than 'smart'.

I have to say that I don't like the term 'smart casual' much but its a description that is used quite a bit,so what does it mean ? I guess that its bang in between 'smart' (a suit) and your gardening clothes....
I remember when we told to 'wear something tidy' as kids it meant no jeans or T shirt, perhaps 'smart casual' is something like that ?

I don't think that for instance a Harrington is going to outshine a suit,for a start a suit is probably more expensive and (again) it is meant to look smart.
I cant imagine wearing a suit to the pub or any other social occasion and I don't see anyone else wearing one either (unless its someone like Rab C Nesbitt and I tend to avoid pubs that he would drink in ), but a Harrington/shirt/trousers/shoes would look ok in most situations,not everyone is going to be able to get that right though.

Interesting that in most of the pictures on Clouseau's challenge the people are wearing jeans,jeans are NOT smart imo even if they cost megabucks and I thinkthat they should be avoided by most older blokes,the excuse "but I have always worn jeans" doesn't work.

 

[cerneabbas]

Looks like a US Navy deck jacket, the US Army did seem to have some fairly modern-looking short jackets in WW2 as well so maybe it was a returning serviceman thing that developed into something more civilian.

Some variation of the Tankers jacket ?

 

[Yorky]

Looks like a US Navy deck jacket, the US Army did seem to have some fairly modern-looking short jackets in WW2 as well so maybe it was a returning serviceman thing that developed into something more civilian.

It also demonstrates the "blouson effect" which some people seem to dismiss for the slim fit look.

 

[Clouseau]

Some variation of the Tankers jacket ?

The design is close to a A1 Flight jacket.

 

[Mr Knightley]

Apart from work wear where is a suit necessary now ? when we were younger you had to wear a suit on a Saturday night to get into most dance halls etc but not now (in any case I finished with going to places like that years ago).

On SF surely we don't worry about what might be 'necessary'. We have a passion for clothes that transcends the everyday.

Over the last year or so I have worn suits or jacket, trousers and tie for all of the following:
Work - meeting a client, running an event, going to London and working in the office of my Associates, etc.

Non-work - funeral, lunching out, dining out, the ballet or theatre, going up to London shopping, hospital visits, on holiday, especially on a cruise, just to name a few.

But you are quite right that (apart from the strict dress codes on board ship) I could have got away with less on almost all of the above, even work.

 

[Jimmy Balantyne]

Last one. For a while. Got this today;

View attachment 1283296

Had to back this. It was great in every way. Wool and silk, made in Italy and, it fitted. However, it was boxy and... Well, I looked like a large square box in it. Bit of a drag.

 

[cerneabbas]

On SF surely we don't worry about what might be 'necessary'. We have a passion for clothes that transcends the everyday.

Over the last year or so I have worn suits or jacket, trousers and tie for all of the following:
Work - meeting a client, running an event, going to London and working in the office of my Associates, etc.

Non-work - funeral, lunching out, dining out, the ballet or theatre, going up to London shopping, hospital visits, on holiday, especially on a cruise, just to name a few.

But you are quite right that (apart from the strict dress codes on board ship) I could have got away with less on almost all of the above, even work.

I was thinking about a point you made on page 556 MrK, about looking as good in the local on a Friday night as you would in your Suit on a Saturday night.
The Friday night at the pub back in the day could see you wearing Brogues,Sta Prest,OCBD, Harrington ? possibly a Jumper as well,quite probably that would be seen as 'Smart Casual' now ?
My Brogues/wool flat front trousers/OCBD/Harrington look of today isnt a million miles from that look imo and will do for me unless it needs to be a few degrees smarter (Sports jacket or Blazer) or 'Smartly dressed' = a Suit.

I still think that 'Smart Casual' is a rubbish description,I Googled it yesterday and lots of conflicting opinions,some saying that it could include jeans or shorts ! and one Cruise line saying that it certainly didnt include jeans or T shirts.
Surely any description that has to be qualified like 'dress code Smart Casual (no Jeans)' is crap ?

 

[Clouseau]

"Casual chic" ?

 

[Mr Knightley]

I was thinking about a point you made on page 556 MrK, about looking as good in the local on a Friday night as you would in your Suit on a Saturday night.
The Friday night at the pub back in the day could see you wearing Brogues,Sta Prest,OCBD, Harrington ? possibly a Jumper as well,quite probably that would be seen as 'Smart Casual' now ?
My Brogues/wool flat front trousers/OCBD/Harrington look of today isnt a million miles from that look imo and will do for me unless it needs to be a few degrees smarter (Sports jacket or Blazer) or 'Smartly dressed' = a Suit.

I still think that 'Smart Casual' is a rubbish description,I Googled it yesterday and lots of conflicting opinions,some saying that it could include jeans or shorts ! and one Cruise line saying that it certainly didnt include jeans or T shirts.
Surely any description that has to be qualified like 'dress code Smart Casual (no Jeans)' is crap ?

Yes it’s a crap term open to all kinds of different interpretations.

Cruise lines just struggle with dress codes in this ‘casual age’ and one hears of fights breaking out among passengers over this very point. At least on SF we debate the issues like gentlemen ?

 

[Mr Knightley]

Anyway, ( look away now @Kingstonian ) here is my 1969-inspired FC entry:







For those who may be interested:
Jacket - Combat MiE
Shirt - PoloRL
Knitwear - Wolsey
Jeans - 501s
Socks - Barbour
Shoes - Florsheim via JS

 

[Clouseau]

Did my entry too if you wanna have a look guys...

Friday Challenge : The Blouson (or 'Harrington')

You all look like you could have been interviewed for the John Simons film :) I wish. I visited the Ivy Shop and the Squire Shop back in the day. Bought threads and footwear there in 1969. The rest is history. [I didn't manage to get into that film, but did squeeze into the Don Letts docu...

www.styleforum.net

I tried to be a creative a bit, with a Tartan shirt instead of the classic Tartan lining.

Black Harrington : Uniqlo U G4
Red tartan Popover shirt - Uniqlo X JW Anderson
Black Belt (unseen) : Paul Smith
British Khaki Trousers : Gap Straight 'Vintage' Chino
Oxblood Shoes : Loake Royals

KEEP THE ENTRIES COMING, THEY ARE VERY GOOD SO FAR !