Turnbull & Asser

[raurell]

Wanted to share a bad experience that I had with Turnbull and Asser. Had a suit made that took them 2 years. Got a hole in the pants and had them fix it and they lost them. Guy offered to give me a new suit - and then went in only to have him treat me like I was trying to get one for free. Never asked for him to give me one he offered. At first he acted like I was look for a freebie when I came into the shop. He forgot who I was because it was so long ago that the suit was made. Offered me an bunch of ugly off the rack suits which I didn't want. Then he ralized who I was and started to kiss ******. The entire experience was so frustrating and insulted that I haven't been back and don't ever intend to.

 

[lisapop]

Rule #1 of the sartorial jungle: Never have a suit made by a shirtmaker. (Mimmo Siviglia in Rome is an exception.)

Rule #2: If in doubt, refer to rule #1.
Grayson

 

[zjpj83]

so did you end up getting the replacement suit?

 

[newyorker]

Rule #1 of the sartorial jungle: Never have a suit made by a shirtmaker. (Mimmo Siviglia in Rome is an exception.)

Grayson,

Do you care to give more information about Mimmo Siviglia's custom shirt program through Raphael in New York city? Process, cost, minimum order, quality (where it is in the hierarchy)?

Greatly appreciate it.

 

[newyorker]

It always seems to me that there are these restaurants and clothing stores that will treat customers like dirt yet customers seem to feel the need to 'win' the respect of their staff. Part of it I think is the whole idea that although the money flows from the customer to the store, the (socioeconomic) class flows from the store. Hence, if you are an average person buying a Hermes product, you are really exchanging your cash for "socioeconomic" class; this also happens when you visit a very prominent restaurant in New York city.

But for people who are already who they are, they should not be interested to shop on the basis on brand names unless they truly like their products. When Kofi Annan prominent shops at Brioni for instance, Kofi Annan is probably conferring class to Brioni instead of the other way around. Such individuals should support small independent artisans who produce excellent garments but may not have instant brand name recognition. I personally believe that it is hard for a large brand name to rival the quality of the highest-end small-operation bespoke artisans.

 

[lisapop]

NYer: Just PM'ed you. Hope the info is helpful.
Grayson

 

[Horace]

It always seems to me that there are these restaurants and clothing stores that will treat customers like dirt yet customers seem to feel the need to 'win' the respect of their staff. Part of it I think is the whole idea that although the money flows from the customer to the store, the (socioeconomic) class flows from the store. Hence, if you are an average person buying a Hermes product, you are really exchanging your cash for "socioeconomic" class; this also happens when you visit a very prominent restaurant in New York city.

But for people who are already who they are, they should not be interested to shop on the basis on brand names unless they truly like their products. When Kofi Annan prominent shops at Brioni for instance, Kofi Annan is probably conferring class to Brioni instead of the other way around. Such individuals should support small independent artisans who produce excellent garments but may not have instant brand name recognition. I personally believe that it is hard for a large brand name to rival the quality of the highest-end small-operation bespoke artisans.

The idea in your first paragaph is brilliant observation. It's also the inevitable result, unfortunately, when money is the measure of a person.

 

[STYLESTUDENT]

Hence, if you are an average person buying a Hermes product, you are really exchanging your cash for "socioeconomic" class

Very interesting post, Newyorker, but it is difficult to avoid branded products, which are constantly discussed on these fora.

Perhaps recognizably branded products tell less about the wearer than we suspect. If you describe the logoed Hermes tie and its wearer as "parvenu" then why is the equally recognizable Lobb Lopez penny loafer from the same company (or Alden cordovan moccasin or Weston as the case may be) "iconic"? It places still another burden on us to find, say, a pair of shoes that has no "identity" at all. We all seem to bemoan the deterioration of the brands ("the Brooks shirts are now made overseas and I can't recognize them because the collar is shorter-they're no longer real Brooks&quot while at the same time applauding the absence of the recognizable brand. Confusing?

If we try to classify individual identities by brand names worn (or even by their absence), IMO, we're over-simplifying, perhaps name-calling (e.g,"your LV monogram necessarily makes you a chav&quot and ignoring just how complex we all are. Alternatively, we're elevating "our crowd" (unchanging Alden or Lobb wearers) over others and venturing into the elitism we all would like to avoid.

 

[zjpj83]

As someone who has been forced to read most of what Marx had to write, as well as Veblen, this discussion is all too familiar (and not among my fonder memories.) Nevertheless, those intrigued by patterns of consumption and its relation to class, I suggest you look at Douglas Holt, "Does Cultural Capital Structure American Consumption?" He reformulates Bourdieu and presents this idea of varying degrees of "cultural capital." It's actually quite interesting.

 

[Concordia]

Quote:

(newyorker @ April 08 2005,18:42) Hence, if you are an average person buying a Hermes product, you are really exchanging your cash for "socioeconomic" class
Very interesting post, Newyorker, but it is difficult to avoid branded products, which are constantly discussed on these fora. Perhaps recognizably branded products tell less about the wearer than we suspect. If you describe the logoed Hermes tie and its wearer as "parvenu" then why is the equally recognizable Lobb Lopez penny loafer from the same company (or Alden cordovan moccasin or Weston as the case may be) "iconic"? It places still another burden on us to find, say, a pair of shoes that has no "identity" at all. We all seem to bemoan the deterioration of the brands ("the Brooks shirts are now made overseas and I can't recognize them because the collar is shorter-they're no longer real Brooks") while at the same time applauding the absence of the recognizable brand. Confusing? If we try to classify individual identities by brand names worn (or even by their absence), IMO, we're over-simplifying, perhaps name-calling  (e.g,"your LV monogram necessarily makes you a chav")  and ignoring just how complex we all are. Alternatively, we're elevating "our crowd" (unchanging Alden or Lobb wearers) over others and venturing into the elitism we all would like to avoid.
I think it's a matter of shifting the bar and drawing the circle just tight enough to include ones self. In the land of beer drinkers, popping Ch. Latour is a statement of taste and wealth. In the land of wine collectors-- well most people would want to drink the Latour. But it's so easily identifiable, and can be found in so many places that it has a tad less snob appeal than, say, a Cros Parantoux even though the latter costs about the same. It's a way of separating out the truly dedicated and well-connected from the yahoos who point at the obvious choice and say "I'll take 4 cases."