If your wardrobe is too large, you end up looking worse.

Originally Posted by radicaldog

Click to expand...

Deal, on both accounts.

I've seen it, and I have it on DVD. 'Doomed. Bourgeois. In love', says the cover of my Region 2 edition. I'll tell you more: before I clicked the Youtube link I had a feeling that it would be Metropolitan.

"That would be self-hatred. Which is unhealthy."


- B

Originally Posted by RSS

Click to expand...

If this works for you ... fine. Personally, I'm not willing to live by such limits.

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

I have your back on this...we're outnumbered (ironic, isn't it?) but we'll go down fighting.


- B

No reason for a fight. I love the thrill of the hunt & buying new things all to much which is why I have set a personal limit. Even though I do not exceed (for an extended period of time) those limits, I'm constantly buying stuff. Trust, I wish I had the space to keep it all.

Sometimes I get OCD and wear the same suit over and over again, only changing the shirt, tie, square and shoes.

Originally Posted by Phat Guido

Click to expand...

I'm off to get some coffee & pastries..

Anyone?

I'll have the almond biscotti and black coffee, please.

Originally Posted by radicaldog

Click to expand...

P.S. Let's say that I'm content with being some sort of European Tom Townsend.

Good. When this came out, I was instantly doomed by friends to Nick Smith.

And please: Tommy.


- B

Originally Posted by bigbris1

Click to expand...

No reason for a fight. I love the thrill of the hunt & buying new things all to much which is why I have set a personal limit. Even though I do not exceed (for an extended period of time) those limits, I'm constantly buying stuff. Trust, I wish I had the space to keep it all.

I like your system, which is geared (get it?) to improvement.

I've been doing something similar, but not as disciplined. I probably have about half the clothes that I had five years ago. Each new bespoke thing involved donating two or three old RTW/MTM things.



- B

Once I lose some of my, uhm, momentum, I would like to embark on bespoke and do the same. Either that or buy all of the Paul Stuart Charles cuts as those are the closest thing to bespoken I have bought to date.

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

I like your system, which is geared (get it?) to improvement.

I've been doing something similar, but not as disciplined. I probably have about half the clothes that I had five years ago. Each new bespoke thing involved donating two or three old RTW/MTM things.



- B

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

Good. When this came out, I was instantly doomed by friends to Nick Smith.

I didn't have a shadow of a doubt about it! (It's good to be able to blame the recourse to trite expression on not being a native speaker -- truth is, it's getting late and I'm quite tired.)

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

And please: Tommy.


Tommy.

I agree with Vox--about the fake "lived-in" look, about having more suits rather than trying to make up for it by overdoing it with accessories, etc.

Except about the shoes (and I realize I'm not the first to say this). Shoes ought to look like they're lived in, and that's tough to do when you've got a hundred pairs of $500 shoes.

I think PG's post may have said it best. Aren't we all over thinking this? Doesn't the existence of someone like Vox kind of debunk the OP's argument? Dude has what looks to he an insanely large wardrobe and he has a success rate in the high 90%ile with what he wears. I think it boils down to a couple things... 1) You either have "it" or you don't. It doesn't matter how you got it, just that you have it. Guys like vox, PG, iammatt, cravate noir, maomao, yfyf have it. It doesn't matter how large their wardrobe is and how worn/lived-in/"owned" their items are. Sure, having the money to purchase said items is important, but key. Their style allows them to pick items, coordinate them, and wear them with what is perceived to be relative ease. Their consistency and success via good fits (and good photography, which is an underrated factor) leads to the next big point..... 2) WAYWRN thread. What started off as an innocent way of sharing what you happen to be wearing today has snow balled (mutated?) into the beast it is today. Everyone sees how good the aforementioned posters look and the first thought for new people is "Wow, I want to look just like those guys!". And in a rush to immitate these looks people forget that these guys have been honing their wardrobe/'craft' for YEARS. (Regardless of the size, the clothes they wear have years of thought behind them) People start posting their looks and the rest is downhill. As a relative noob to this board and men's clothing, I can speak from first hand experience. I've gotten caught up in the hype and circle jerk and posted fits that probably aren't the best, but I just wanted to be a part of it, I guess. The direction of the thread has taken a turn toward posting for the sake of posting. The fits, regardless of their general success, are usually met with a circle-jerky or which has kind of turned me off to the thread. I tend to agree with the previous poster who said that it seems that people are wearing these clothes just to post them on this message board. IMO, the poster child for the new nature of this thread is Mr. Moo. (I'm sure this will get me a 'go *************' response, but it really is the truth) He came onto this board with good intentions and he figured out that the key to a succesful post is some solid photography, and okay clothes. The rest is history. I mean, would Moo have ever REALLY even considered wearing the now infamous shorts suit if his previous fits weren't met with such thunderous applause? Think about it, he looked at those clothes, decided that the guys on SF would give him a and the hits would keep on coming. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that if it were not for WAYWRN, he would never think of wearing AND photographing that outfit. I'm probably rambling now, but my conclusion to the OP is that it doesn't matter how large your wardrobe is, if you have style, you have style. This message board, for all of its benefits (and they outweigh the negatives by a landslide), has created a culture where the focus isn't on the process of discovering your style but just sharing ANYTHING you can come up with as fast as possible.

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

This thread is eliciting so many thoughtful replies that I can't get to all the ones that merit comment.

So let me just start with Mattypoo's excellent point.

I think that it would be impossible to disagree fundamentally with this goal, the goal of "owning" a way of dressing. It sounds nice. Sartorial terroir.

But we live in a rather swirly world today, do we not? Whether the rush of the waters is a circling of the drain or the adventure of the high seas, who can say?

Chinese men wear Italian slip-ons and photograph themselves with Germen lenses drinking French wines. Americans dress like lethargic and picky Neapolitan aristocrats. Californian men are in skirts. High JASPS of the UWS trod about in Japanese denim. Descendants of the Mayflower and the cannibal feasts of the South Seas get English tailors to make FabergÃ

eggs out of simple buttonholes. Topsy turvy. Glorious?

Inglorious?

It is simply the way things have become.

And then when you jump out of the plane from this high altitude view and parachute deep into the clothing Interwebz and things like WAYRN threads, you also have the following going on: quests for information, change and self improvement; validation and conformity on the fly; vanity.

Unless one equates "ownership" of dress with manifest, demonstrable uniformity of dress, I think that it would hard to go much further than that in such an environment to determine who owns what look...particular among a bunch of strangers.

Chew on that.

- B
I guess that isn't really what I am talking about, or at least, you, and many others seem to think about and intellectualize clothing to a degree which would never cross my mind. I suppose I am blind to, or at least consciously blind to, ideas dealing with various social and regional backgrounds. Now, you will say that I prefer clothing that is distinctly regional, but really I prefer that clothing despite the fact that it is regional, and simply because it fits my eye. To me, while the analysis can be interesting (when somebody else is doing it,) it leads to the very phenomenon I am talking about, which is the inability to own what you wear because it is something that is though about and rationalized rather than bought because it is enjoyable and fits into the life you lead every day. At least, that is what I think.

I agree, Matt. There are 3 things that drive me to make a purchase; 1. I must like it, like I have to have it (pleasing to my eye), 2. It's something most others wouldn't buy, can't find anymore or just think is wrong & 3. Price.

Take the paisley Polo jacket I once wanted. I liked the look, I knew not too many others would have bought it nor could go out and buy one if they did like it. What held me back was the price.

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

I have your back on this...we're outnumbered (ironic, isn't it?) but we'll go down fighting.
My travels preclude me from giving real time (or thought) to this matter ... and so does the spotty internet service. As you know, of course, I'm severely iChallenged ... but I'll take advantage of it when I find it.

In the mean time I leave you with fighting words ...

Fight Fiercely Vox
Fight, Fight, fight!
Demonstrate to them our skill.
Albeit they possess the might,
Nonetheless we have the will.
How we shall celebrate our victory:
We shall invite the whole lot
Up for tea! How jolly!
So hurl our suits, shirts & shoes upon the field;
Enough to stop any Bonesman in his tracks,
And Fight! Fight! Fight!​

Originally Posted by iammatt

Click to expand...

To me, while the analysis can be interesting (when somebody else is doing it,) it leads to the very phenomenon I am talking about, which is the inability to own what you wear because it is something that is though about and rationalized rather than bought because it is enjoyable and fits into the life you lead every day.
Iammatt has hit the nail squarely on the head.

And now ... I must go find breakfast. Sorry vox ... no camera with me.

Originally Posted by iammatt

Click to expand...

I guess that isn't really what I am talking about, or at least, you, and many others seem to think about and intellectualize clothing to a degree which would never cross my mind. I suppose I am blind to, or at least consciously blind to, ideas dealing with various social and regional backgrounds. Now, you will say that I prefer clothing that is distinctly regional, but really I prefer that clothing despite the fact that it is regional, and simply because it fits my eye. To me, while the analysis can be interesting (when somebody else is doing it,) it leads to the very phenomenon I am talking about, which is the inability to own what you wear because it is something that is though about and rationalized rather than bought because it is enjoyable and fits into the life you lead every day. At least, that is what I think.

Well, I just took it for granted that anybody with an account here is guilty of this style-adverse overthinking.

But, professional overthinker that I am, I offer two replies: (i) the current style disarray of the real world partly justifies taking refuge on the interwebz, the idea being that it a small evil (overthinking) for a greater good (the preservation of the classic style sensibility); (ii) there are some people here who are certainly more guilty of this than others (Mafoofan, yours truly, etc.), but I say, if you're going to do something, do it properly! (Where's the smiley for tongue-in-cheek?)

Originally Posted by iammatt

Click to expand...

To me, while the analysis can be interesting (when somebody else is doing it,) it leads to the very phenomenon I am talking about, which is the inability to own what you wear because it is something that is though about and rationalized rather than bought because it is enjoyable and fits into the life you lead every day. At least, that is what I think.

It seems to me that the degree to which you think about clothes has no direct relationship to this notion of "owning" what you wear.

Here's an excerpt from my re-post of Filangieri's old piece on AAAC on Neapolitan tailoring:

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Click to expand...

Talking about fitting sessions, I would like to share a little hint of local history.

An old Maestro told me that many decades ago, when he was a young apprentice, most of the best customers belonged to the old Bourbon aristocracy and they had a lot of time to amuse themselves in the “sartoria” because they were not supposed to be personally involved in any kind of professional occupation (labour belonged to the bourgeois middle class and to the poor members of the working class). The affluent gentlemen of the high Neapolitan society used to spend endless hours perfecting their exclusive wardrobes down to the tiniest details, and they literally “trained” generations of tailors to work in a finical, exacting manner and to seal into their bespoke suits the patrician allure and the appetite for perfection of their aristocratic customers.

Many members of the Neapolitan gentry grew so affectionate to their custom tailors that they used to say (of couse in Neapolitan dialect) : “E’ mane ’n cuollo m’e ponno mettere sulamente mugliereme e o’ sarto” (“I allow only my wife and my tailor to touch me .”) That’s how - through decades of countless, endless fitting sessions - the elusive, aristocratic style that is known as the “Neapolitan cut” came to life.

Now, despite what a person with a philosophy of non-chalance about clothes might call an obsession with details, could one actually claim that these men of leisure did not "own" their Neapolitan clothes? They most certainly did.

Now, their obsession was aesthetic. Beyond that, it was probably devoid of intellectual content, and therefore, they were not "intellectualizing" clothes in the way that I think you mean.

I think, however, that 99% what you might call intellectualizing on Internet clothing forums is really just shooting the breeze...like I am doing right now.


- B