Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Manton, Jul 30, 2012.
It can be many things but never "fun"...that's some valley girl shit
FWIW, this is an "office day" shirt, and not one I'd wear to court. Apparently not in good taste, irrespective.
I agree with you. To be honest I find it downright stressful. My doctor put me on Cymbalta.
The only time constrasting collars look good on people is if:
1) you are cast as a early 20th century dandy (a la Great Gatsby)
2) you are over the age of 70 and it just doesn't matter anymore because your wearing Rockports and shitting in a bag
I, unfortunately, learned this the hard way after rocking a constrasting RLPL shirt that upon reflection made me look like I was playing "dress up"...
I used to have quite a few and every one resulted from re-collaring shirts where the original fabric couldn't be found. For good reasons, those shirts no longer fit me, but if they did, I am sure I would still wear them. But I am only a few years short of the bag.
agreed. sometimes there is just as much to learn from the poor taste posts and the subsequent commentary, than the good taste posts. and sometimes more imo. its not always easy to learn just from seeing what is right. there is a wealth to be learned from trial and error, and seeing something that you may thing is right, only to learn it is wrong, and to then understand why.
i dont think that every time something is designated as wrong here, it by definition is, and there has been fair and interesting disagreements here, but there are plenty of instances where something is wrong, that i never would have known to be such. and for the areas in question, each person can decide what side of the line they find themselves on.
i like it quite a bit as well.
what is the logo on the tie towards the bottom on gazs tie?
it's a keeper.
Your seal of approval weighs heavily.
They may not be pure good taste, and the fact that the three I own are all over ten years old tells you how often they are worn, but I have found two other niches for them:
(a) with morning dress at weddings: they hark back to the old detachable stiff collar without the hassle, and allow a degree of individuality within a traditional aesthetic;
(b) as a hyper-CBD look when you want to play with CBD a bit: charcoal suit, blue bengal stripe white collar shirt, maroon woven silk tie, white PS; it's a way of introducing a small hint of dandyism but, again, firmly within even the most limited interpretations of the "rules".
So sayeth the Geezer....
But, do you disagree?
I suppose my core proposition is that if you are required to wear a (civilian) uniform each day, there are three broad options:
- "pure" good taste, which is highly tasteful, but boring; do we really want to wear an "interview suit" every day (and I do, a lot, just not every day)?
- the basic uniform, which I am surrounded by, of styleless iterations of dark suit, light shirt, tie, etc; often slightly crumpled, rarely well put together;
- occasionally showing some individuality, but within the "rules" (so: yes to DB suit; no to Mickey Mouse socks). So today was a dark navy SB linen suit, blue and white narrow striped shirt, navy plain tie, yellow and light blue large paisley PS, dark navy socks and black austerity brogues: the PS deliberately chosen to lightly disrupt the otherwise monotonous - I hope - tastefulness of the rest.
By the way, I agree on "fun". Clothing is far too serious to be "fun".
Not to mention haircut, beard, tie-bar.
Would look better with a regular collar. There's never an instance where contrast collar is a better option than non-contrast. I think that's pretty much their issue in a nutshell
Which is not entirely inconsistent with me owning something like 100 shirts and saying: "that the three I own are all over ten years old tells you how often they are worn". Put an "almost" in front of never and we are in complete agreement.
Separate names with a comma.