WAYWRN: Classic Menswear, Casual Style

[Steedy Gent]

You've got to go track down Acridsheep's diagram now, while you still have a chance.

Too late. I've seen it and plowed on, heedless.

 

[Digmenow]



2 shirt buttons undone?

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

WW :foo: D?

 

[ballmouse]

I just remembered who this outfit reminds me of.

Friend challenged me to wear no brown, no earth tones, without dipping into my business casual.

This may be the first post that I put on here that doesn't get utterly shredded...

 

[gort]



Another episode of minimalism on campus:




Shirt: WvG
Denim: LVC '47 501
Jacket: JCrew
Socks: JCrew
Shoes: Alden Cigar LWB

Love this shirt. Which WVG is it? I just may have to pay his ridiculous prices to get one.

 

[El Argentino]



Love this shirt. Which WVG is it? I just may have to pay his ridiculous prices to get one.

Before Dinner Oxford - Blue Raspberry, if I remember the color correctly. It's a pinch too tight in the arms, but otherwise it's an amazing fit. In the future I'd probably do ADs, but whatever.

 

[Liam O]

Another episode of minimalism on campus:




Shirt: WvG
Denim: LVC '47 501
Jacket: JCrew
Socks: JCrew
Shoes: Alden Cigar LWB

The shoes. Gimme.

 

[gnatty8]



I love hwen Fuuma goes on a tear.

Almost as much as I love watching men come out of the woodwork posting fits and asking to be critiqued, secretly longing for the seal of afuumaapproval..lol

 

[Hayward]

Was in nyc last week. This is my tribute to Foo. Or Bill Cunningham. I forget. (the blue is much more vivid in person)

Note black shoes and wool undershirt.

 

[I am DIL]

 

[anginaprinzmetal]

^ those pants are too tight...

 

[andrewgreg]



^ those pants are too tight...

This is TIGHT.

 

[jives]

Biz-caz sighting. Yuck.
Everything in the top half needs to be changed out. Burn the tie.
It's hard to get stripped pants to work; they look fine in the top pic because the stripes wash out, they look odd in the last pic when you can see the stripes.

Being a complete noob (first post ) I really have to ask why this does not work... To me the fit looks good, and the colors are harmonic.
I get and agree that the collar should stay under the sweater and that the tie may be too much, but I have no idea what's wrong with the rest - could anyone please explain a bit more?

 

[james_timothy]



^ those pants are too tight...

He has that shrink-wapped look that isn't good. Plus the shoe color is ugly. He's got the idea, now he's got to execute better.

Being a complete noob (first post ) I really have to ask why this does not work... To me the fit looks good, and the colors are harmonic.
I get and agree that the collar should stay under the sweater and that the tie may be too much, but I have no idea what's wrong with the rest - could anyone please explain a bit more?

You have to understand the standards around here- they are high. Higher than what will get you a pat on the head from your favorite Aunt Betty.

1) What he is wearing is fine for a graduate student trying to make a good impression. It gives off a vibe of a respectability that will come one day- many years down the road.

2) What CDHagg did right was fit: the clothes fit him well. Nothing looks shrink wrapped, nor do are they so loose that he seems to be hiding in them. That took work, and it proves he's been on SF for a while. In fact, the silhouette is just plain good.

3) The tie. If he's going to wear a tie, he should wear a jacket. In fact, the whole thing would be better with a jacket, since he's trying to look respectable.

4) The shirt. The pattern on it is too close in size to the tie. But why is there any pattern on it? Why is there pattern on the tie? Why is he wearing a tie?

5) In the shot where he doesn't wear a tie, the collar outside the sweater reads as guido-ness. Plus, why is the shirt patterned? Is he going to a bar after work? Or is he merely British? Still, that is the most coherent, the best, of the looks.

6) The sweater, pants, belt, and shoes work for me, although on close inspection they looks like they could use upgrades.

7) The peacoat is a giant WTF. It must be warm, as there's no other reason one would wear that peacoat with a look that reads: trust me, one day I will be truly respectable. The peacoat is just noise on top of that.

Jives- it looks like you agree with everything I just ranted on. So, let's look at the tieless photo, his best one.

What do people read when seeing it? I am respectable, I'm to be trusted as the assistant manager of a mall store. Then the attempt to de-formalize it with the striped shirt, especially one thats seems to be a sport shirt, is misplaced. Better a white shirt, or a blue oxford cloth button down. Still, the striped shirt is a mistake of detail.

The real mistake is aiming for the look in the first place. "trusted assistant manager of a mall store" ... isn't something styleforum aspires to. Biz-caz- dreadfullness, it is. He could reach the same place without much trouble just by adding a jacket. A sportscoat, not that peacoat monstrosity. He could then back off the sort of over the top striped pants. In fact, he could be much more louche in the details of everything but the jacket, and people would read it as "I'm doing this because I want to, and I'm good at it", with nary a Aunt Betty pat in sight.

 

[Van Veen]

JT, how do you define biz-cas? dress slacks + dress shirt - (jacket & tie)?

 

[james_timothy]

Pretty close- though it has a lot to do with how it looks, if it reads as "I'm (petite) respectable".

I've seen MMM looks of (dress slacks+dress shirt - (jacket+tie)) that look downright disreputable, and I wouldn't call that biz-caz.