Follow your Sartorial White Rabbit
…when suddenly a White Rabbit with pink eyes ran close by her.
There was nothing so VERY remarkable in that; nor did Alice think it so VERY much out of the way to hear the Rabbit say to itself, `Oh dear! Oh dear! I shall be late!’ (when she thought it over afterwards, it occurred to her that she ought to have wondered at this, but at the time it all seemed quite natural); but when the Rabbit actually TOOK A WATCH OUT OF ITS WAISTCOAT- POCKET, and looked at it, and then hurried on, Alice started to her feet, for it flashed across her mind that she had never before see a rabbit with either a waistcoat-pocket, or a watch to take out of it, and burning with curiosity, she ran across the field after it, and fortunately was just in time to see it pop down a large rabbit-hole under the hedge.
In another moment down went Alice after it, never once considering how in the world she was to get out again.
Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass are two stories out of thousands of other classics I have read and forgotten that remain in my mind. As a child one cannot be but drawn by the fanciful characters and the candy coated fugue of Wonderland and as an adult we are impressed both at the author’s scathing social satire and with his self aware pathos. He was brilliant, he was playful and his stories are rich with nuance. For example the books supposedly operate like a giant game of chess and can be plotted as such. Complexity in a child’s book is undoubtedly part of the reason that as we mature we are all drawn back to Wonderland, where there is always something new for our minds to resolve, consider or delight in.
Many of the literary discussions revolve around Alice’s relationship with the mystical Cheshire cat. Its lingering grin and somnambulistic suggestions turn Alice’s Anglo-Saxon logic on its head. Perhaps the maddest of Wonderland’s creatures it is nevertheless the only one which has control over its arrivals and departures and whose reasoning is as air tight as it is bafflingly useless. However eternal its smile may be, for me the more enduring image is not Alice and the Cheshire cat but her relationship with the white rabbit.
If the analysts are to be believed, then the white rabbit represents adult male worry. Worries about punctuality, worries about propriety and ultimately, worries without reason. The worries themselves might seem very real but Carroll’s rabbit underlines the absurd fact that when boys become men they fritter their lives away on perceived social obligations. Apparently this theoretically normal behavior is odd enough to cause a child like Alice to want to follow the rabbit.
Oblivious to the rabbit’s inner pressures which cause it to act as it does, Alice’s pursuit of him represents curiosity about something rare and wonderful (even magical) and a willingness to experiment without fear. The rabbit merely acts the way he should or must act but to Alice he is a distinct curiosity which must be observed and studied. Alice’s approach, as crafted by Carroll, is a good allegorical lesson in the way to pursue your own style, which should be through experimentation sans trepidation, trial and error and a willingness to constantly move forward or retrace your steps as the need calls for.
Although it is important for you to follow your own path to sartorial enlightenment, it will be easier for you to accomplish this if I tell you a little about my own journey. We are one now, my white rabbit and I. But there was a time before I was aware and when I would catch unappreciated glimpses of what I was yet to become. He was elusive and though (often through blind curiousity) I strained to engage him he would vanish always like vapor in a frost.
Style Develops both Naturally and Gradually
Understand that I was not a natural candidate for a man who loves stylish clothes. Although both my parents liked clothing and mom was especially good with colors and pattern mixing, I displayed zero appetite for clothing beyond what was cool for my age and status. I was more of a “smash mouth” athlete who liked to motivate others on his teams. It is true that nice clothes were always provided for me but they usually weren’t my choice and I usually acted like it was a chore dealing with the buying of them.
However, I became a military history enthusiast from an early age and this lead to a fascination with military costumes which eventually lead to the research of military uniforms. In turn this blossomed into painting lead soldiers which I would enter in competitions at hobbyist shows. As a boy, I often won awards against men with much more experience and it dawned on me rather immodestly that I actually had skill as a painter. Why this is I cannot tell you, I suppose I just wanted to be good at it and spent the time.
Three great model soldier painting artists took me under their respective wings and I learned something different from each of them, one taught me to paint with a hat pin which gave me a sense of crispness of line, one taught me to mix these acrylic colors from Germany called Pelican-Plaka into new colors and also to layer shades of the same colors on top of each other (almost like an architect’s gradient map) for depth and the third taught me to shadow and highlight to create a sense of richness and reality. English military history and their uniforms always seemed to fascinate me most of all. Theirs were so often the battles of the small defying the mighty, and tell me what school boy who hated bullies wouldn’t be drawn to that message of fortitude? After a while, I started paying attention to which colors “worked” with my blazer and tweed jacket and which did not, realizing that what worked wasn’t always the obvious color grouping.
I have written these things about myself to demonstrate that to be able to see one’s white rabbit is something that takes many levels of eye opening and detail noticing. It didn’t happen completely by chance and definitely not overnight, no not even for me. What I am saying is without the effort and maybe some circumstantial good fortune you might be putting off the revelation of your sartorial epiphany. Furthermore, personal styles are developed and naturalized on a person over time, they are not created all at once, and if they are, they aren’t stylish.
This all brings me to that mild spring when my mother took me with her to London for two weeks and I became fully aware that I liked clothes. I came face to face with the future; or rather my white rabbit unveiled himself to me with a “How do you do?” I think it is fitting for me that my sartorial doppelganger was met in England because in many ways and for the following reasons my heart has always resided there.
Why English Style Should be Admired
Let’s take a step back, before the London trip. I grew up devouring old movies populated by English people. English voices were the voices of sophisticated evil in horror movies. Somehow it was more horrible watching insane English aristocrats (who had no real reason to be so angry) unleash demonic schemes whilst hardly moving a muscle. At the other end of the social scale, in war movies for example there were rascally “other ranks” that drank, shirked and swindled but turned out to be true-blue chaps when the chips were down. To me, the pith helmet was the symbol of adventure and the English always had that “sporting style” never losing their cool under fire. Unflinchingly phlegmatic, it was all about form. And concerning form, the English beauty when it was apparent, was the ultimate in refinement. England turned out unique lovelies like Merle Oberon, Angela Lansberry and Jean Simmons who tantalized the imagination, suggesting that the perfect woman existed in our past and in my future.
Even the Roman Empire seemed more real when populated with English voices. Maybe that’s the key to all of this. Like the Roman Empire, England’s is the one we all want to get back to. In some ways it’s the Ralph Lauren of Empires, greater than it ever was in our minds, more stable and longer lasting. With its public school lads pouring down the stone steps of their schools in droves while spinning their capped and gowned professors about and then going on to do great deeds in parliament, fight in great battles in remote locales, returning to public life without so much as a mention of their heroic deeds. Noblesse oblige and the Crown, of young ensigns waving the colors in a crimson square surrounded by French cavalry shouting “Think of England.” And in the movie “A Bridge too Far” we see Sir Anthony Hopkins packing a dinner jacket before careening into the vainglorious battle for Arnhem. His second in command brings a fox hunting horn which sent that enjoyable message to me that to be part of English culture was to live a game, an adventure, prep school camaraderie extended. I suppose in some ways it’s not unlike the prep school experience here.
That’s the England of my daydreams and I am a dreaming creature. Perhaps I idolize it but they remain an interesting people the English (the British) and yet so dichotomous. A small island, possessing no strategic importance and yet it shaped the modern world. A verdant landscape and moderate climate which astonishingly yielded few natural resources came within an inch of owning everything. Rejected and yet remembered fondly by every colony they ever had, and lost. The people are stiff and proper but able to laugh at themselves as Americans never could do. Comfortable in their class system, in control of their language, admired and hated by outsiders. My father, who is from a place that plays cat to England’s dog, freely admits that the English are a remarkable people who sacrificed everything for freedom. He drinks Scotch and eats roast beef and acknowledges Winston Churchill as an incredible man. Courage, it seems, has a face but does style? Yes, I think it does.
The symbols of the sailing ship, the bulldog and the Spitfire are enduring ones of eternal optimism and determination to keep a balance of power and a democratic viewpoint going in the world. To accomplish this has demanded great risk, sacrifice, creativity, courage and national pride. I now believe to all be reflected in what is considered an outfit to be taken seriously in. The next time you put on a navy suit with white stripes, a pink gingham shirt, navy tie with pink spots and black lace ups remember you are the sartorial inheritor of a rich legacy of being well bred, powerful, serious, educated and mercantile whilst saving the world from tyrants.
Back to the London trip. When I saw the shirts in the Jermyn street shop windows, I was hooked. Mom bought me two brightly striped Turnbull and Asser shirts and a necktie which was heavier and richer than I had ever owned before. I wore them with my navy blazer and flannels or khakis and I had to buy a decent pair of sterling cufflinks which I would enjoy flashing “accidentally” with the lads while reclining in a chair (although I stopped this affectation when a girlfriend named Tinker asked me if I was having a wrist spasm attack). Little did I know that the bold color combinations that seemed to go with my aggressive persona would trigger the dandy within. The result was to realize that to have something handsome that excited wonder but also admiration was an end to achieve. No one else I knew at my age had Turnbull shirts or a marvelously lush woven tie in a large scaled geometric.
I was not just seeing me, in those shirts and ties, I was seeing my vision of England somehow tucked deeply inside my mind and of a style that spoke of a pose I wanted to strike. When I wore them, I felt like I was part of a tradition and that somehow I was headed to make great statements on the floor of parliament. Of course, I never will make a grand speech, nor do I want to but it is always fun to imbue oneself with a dash of importance, elegance or courage whether it’s an Astaire like spring in one’s step or the belief that you are in step with those who believe in the balance of power and saving the world for democracy.
A few years after my London trip I saw a man walking down Madison Avenue wearing a bowler hat with a blue and yellow striped shirt, double breasted chalk stripe suit, black shoes, full length umbrella and a snap in his mustachioed gait. The metamorphosis accelerated. Brooks Brothers became Paul Stuart and Paul Stuart incorporated Turnbull and Asser. Thus sack suit in grey solid became two button darted suit in Prince of Wales check which gave way to the double breasted navy chalk stripe.
And all the while I just enjoyed this awakening that clothes could somehow grant you status, big chunks of status, lots and lots of status. I began to pay attention to the same details that I had painted on my leaden soldiers. Pocket squares, dimples, shoe shines. Maybe it had always been there, maybe it hadn’t but I was making up for lost time. And others began to take notice. The first time I was asked by a man much older than me to choose his clothes, I think I must have thought he was making fun of me. Just a few years later at my first post school job, I was choosing wardrobes as a favor, first for one admirer, then two, then an entire company’s senior execs. And no one ever thought I was pretentious, it seemed so natural on me. All the while I was again hardly the natural candidate. Perhaps that’s the secret, perhaps I am so mainstream and unfussy that it legitimizes fastidiousness for men along the lines of “If that lunk can wear them well then it must be OK.” Over time I have simply accepted this without discussing clothes much. In fact, I make it a point to never bring clothes up even when around a third party conversation about it. However I never seem to fool anyone and it isn’t long before I am being asked, out of the blue, for tips on style.
What are the author’s motives in all of this?
I have spent too much time assuming that I knew enough about my style without paying enough attention to its component parts or how they evolved. I have enjoyed clothes and spent a lot of time thinking about their messages but never why they send these messages. Further I never wrote the thoughts down or really discussed clothes at all except with people in the clothes industry. In short too much of it has been instinctive and not enough based on social archaeology.
Although to a certain extent my philosophy is to not dismantle something too empirically especially if it’s a hobby because you might find you’ve eliminated some of the intangible enjoyment you derive from it. In other words, continuing mystery plays a part in continuing titillation. Therefore, while I haven’t hunted down every historical and technical reason for why items or traditions evolved the way they have, I did find some of both to be helpful for what men in England and, as a result, in other places find as acceptable choices when they get dressed for work and for play in tailored clothes.
I realize that while I employ many elements of English style; I am not English and never will be completely not simply by upbringing but also by choice. I do not think it is wise for me to dress exactly as the English dress because I will perform the double disservice of not being true to my own style and bring the contempt of the English down on my head for being a poseur. To be sure, I will continue to borrow heavily from the English look, much of which is now also mine but with definite American-New York City nuances which those in England will admire on me as much as I admire their style on them.
It has been interesting to find on my journey that my tastes often parallel English ones which I think speaks volumes about men’s clothes as they originally developed in this country and particularly in the tri-state area of our eastern seaboard.
Likewise, it is interesting that elevated American tastes often choose something different than the English to express the same idea. For example, the English choose the darkest suits because a man of quality must possess a certain solidity and gravitas. In America, the medium colored grey suit is the mark of the easy going upper middle class man. Partially because life is a game from office to club, partially because of our Great Depression changing the choices (aristocrats cannot look too powerful). An original species isolated from each other by an ocean will begin to develop genetic differences over time, Darwinism at it’s best.
I find that the active mind must continue to question and explore and to keep taking suggestions and recommendations from others in order to grow and to improve, even if that growth is asymptotic. In my opinion the mind that assumes it knows everything and finds contributions from others as a threat to its own authority or imagined expertise is the path of fear, ignorance and ultimately intellectual bankruptcy. I have no issues with starting from scratch under the assumption that I know nothing in order to either recheck my learning with my prior knowledge or to discover better information and better means which might cause me to jettison the old, the tired the dead wrong. I approached this project without ego, the better to grow personally and the better to reward the outside observer.
I want to be clear, I wrote this and the essays to follow for myself, and only for myself. Readers take note that you are reading nothing more than a refined version of my own inner monologue. I had questions and I sought answers. I do not want to choose your clothes for you, nor do I expect you to let me become your style guru. If anything, I merely want to point you in the direction of handsome things and to demonstrate how a single thought or image can unlock a sensibility in yourself that you never knew existed.
To develop your own style you must be open to the new as well. It is, after all, a development and a journey. It is not an easy fence to straddle, it is not an easy journey to walk but this is a sliver of what it is to develop your personal style. It would be more comfortable if we could really decide at the outset which articles define us and stick with them but ultimately a dogma without reflection will doom the issuer to unhappiness.
Although most men achieve their style on their own without reflection, I assure you the ones who do it best think deeply on it. Most of them would not admit it and thus would never attempt to set it down for others to read. Some concepts are excruciatingly difficult to express; sometimes language is just inadequate. And I admit I would like to help those interested in stylish clothes learn and save time and money from my experiences. I may not always have time to write therefore I hope that this series sparks others to likewise set their experiences down.
What is the author’s target group in terms of sampling?
I am not canvassing every cross section of English society, nor, oddly, am I always looking at the very top of it either. I am looking at the Mandarins of the Civil Service, the public school graduates, the military elite, Oxbridge dons, the City lads, the country gents, the club land idlers of the West End, and the peerage, but sometimes also the East End. Sometimes dressing well is, but just as often it isn’t, about class. And although the English seem to have a keen eye for identifying a person’s class whether they are well dressed or not, it is not as important here. Further, we have different class standards. I consider myself from a good background but my attention to precision and cleanliness might score me many points lower in England than here. I simply try too hard for them.
Bear in mind that many of the aforementioned social circles overlap (Venn diagram like) but few of them wear all of the choices that I will be exploring. However, I did keep in mind a level of taste that all of them would recognize in each other and find inoffensive, acceptable and even admirable as choices within the broader group level, even if they would not wear the item themselves. I have when possible tried to find what the average member of this broader group would choose or wear and also what the rarified but nevertheless acceptable flaneur or dandy might choose and likewise still be considered acceptable or admirable by his peers.
The components of the Englishman’s panoply developed over time to represent a man with gravitas, authoritas, and dignitas. To a certain extent the smothering conformity has given rise to some idiosyncratic riots of color and pattern at the edges of the outfit. For example, the London barristers have a tradition of bright shirts which would never do in a U.S. courtroom. Their suits are heavy, they are dull but the shirts seem to be a continuing competition of how many colors one can load on without clashing.
At the moment, style in England for men is set by the “City lads” who set their own sartorial rules, some of which are, like the barristers, astonishingly restrictive and others of which are bold beyond comprehension. The rest of the country follows their lead both because they are the ones spending the money on the clothes and because people like emulating the money men. However the mandarins of the conservative party, the upper levels of the civil service and the settled money inhabitants of London’s “Club-land” in the West End all have different styles. Why do these groups retain separate stylish identities? The City lads, though nicely dressed, may own England but they do not run it. They are after all just lads and are not taken seriously by those who wield political power. They are thus an elite somewhat at odds with another elite, the latter of whom dress in a less flamboyant manner which declares power, insulation and solemnity.
General Stylistic Differences between the English and the Americans
One universal English trait is that one should buy nice things and take care of them but make sure you do not look like you spent any time caring. Looking too prepackaged or too fussy comes across as a loss of caste or face amongst one’s peers. An interesting duality is at work here in a country that makes beautiful things for men and yet strives to make sure it looks as if they do not notice.
Another current and seemingly at odds with the follow-the-City-boys trend is the fact that while wanting to fit in the English man wants desperately to look different. He does this in ways that do not occur to the Americans. Therefore in England, there is a race to subtle detailing that will be caught on closer inspection and impress an onlooker. But you need to splice this with the fact that the British man isn’t as afraid of color as I think the American is, at least for certain items. As long as it is “well done” individuality within the shirt and tie set is a consummation devoutly to be wished.
It seems sometimes it is easier to say what items no Englishman with taste will select vs. trying to record a litany of what he will select. As with Americans, it seems defining the national character, at least for men’s clothes, is about exclusion. Think I am kidding? Go ask an American what defines being American and see how crazy it drives him.
And truthfully there is no one English look any more than there is one American look. A black or navy suit with an all over woven white pin dot pattern might make an old Etonian cringe but may make a young Scot cut quite a dashing figure. Thus, while I have endeavored to isolate the “English look”, I have concentrated more on some circles than on others and tried to look at trends far more than individual specifics (though at times I will address individual specifics). We together as writer and reader have a unique opportunity to interact in that I can go into details or follow on stories or even write spin offs of things touched on in earlier essays. Unlike an old fashioned paper book which once printed is essentially un-editable, I can add topics or detail I hadn’t originally considered.
Additionally the answers are not always what one thinks they should be. During my research I found surprising answers to my questions which when applied to my hitherto assumed observations and conclusions sometimes turned out to be correct but for the wrong reasons. For instance the answer to the question why in a nation of men who want to fit in with their peers and do not believe in buying a lot of clothes, whether they have the dash or not, is there such a huge variation in color and texture and pattern? Apparently, at the same time that they don’t want to stand out they all want to look different! Sometimes it’s enough to drive you to wear synthetics.
And looking a little bit different is a recurring theme with English men. Different but still chosen from within a set parameter of what’s acceptable and what is not. This is no doubt a descendent of the Brummell phenomenon that details should only be noticed by the initiated and should be almost miniscule in their differences. Thus the handmade buttonhole or the cut of a lapel or the type of suit shoulder can speak volumes to someone in the know while everyone else will glance over it.
The English tend to wear their things more often and in the same combinations which makes for or perhaps adds to a sense of personal identity. Those combinations themselves seem to be more colorful but less perfect with no insecurity about whether something “goes” with some other item in the wardrobe. I will not make a lot of judgments in this series but this one I will compare with the recent American propensity for needing to look different every day rather like our women. It is not all men’s fault, I think women here do comment if a man wears the same thing too often as if it’s a character flaw and the rest of us have been infected by this. This is an unfortunate direction.
The English also are not as afraid of color in accessories as Americans can be. It seems that the British fear symbols while we dread color, they embrace pattern and we try to match everything. The English also like hidden messages in their clothes like an alternating shadow stripe which is simply a different weave in the cloth. A stripe like this is unnoticeable until you stand in a certain light at a certain angle. And even when you finally see it, only those in the know realize it marks a fabric only available for custom clothes. Americans prefer the cloth either looks exactly like one off the rack or a pattern that immediately announces the article’s custom heritage.
In the USA people dress in what one friend of mine referred to as “expensive conformity”. As a nation we seem to spend a lot of money to fit in and look like we are doing the right thing. We also seem to worry a lot about doing it wrong; comfortable that paying a certain amount makes it all very exclusive.
I think if you ask most Americans if they want to be an individualist or part of the herd, they will tell you almost every time they want to stand out. However, the supposed drive to be individual is belied by everyone heading for the same pre-packaged goods. Everything from clothes, to cars to girls has to look the same. To a certain extent Americans can get away with this, after all we have a country with 5 times the population and 50 times the land mass of Britain. In some ways, the British have no choice but to attempt to stand out because they see each other all the time, whereas the USA is still a place where you will rarely bump into someone and in some remote parts you can travel for days without seeing another person.
Money is not as ready nor is it as important in England. You will find a grandee buying a pair of sterling cufflinks for £20 while a much simpler person will save up to get a pair for 50 times the price. Status has two tiers; items must pass the initial stage of acceptability, and then choose anything that strikes your fancy. At a deeper level this may indicate the British belief in the separation of money and power. Some have the money but it in no way follows that they will wield any power.
Here in the States it seems men are attracted to things they think will impress others, sometimes whether they themselves like the item or not. We are controlled by our status, which is why a man who can afford $5,000 cufflinks will rarely be caught wearing a $25 pair, people might think he’s fallen on hard times. It may be a sign that as a nation we think of power residing in the hands of those with money. A comfortable thought for those who at least believe no “Breeding” or “Education” is involved in the Horatio Alger lottery which seems to attend so many of our cultural daydreams.
What I Hope the Reader Takes Away From This
But what should the reader take away from all of this and why will it be helpful to them? This is an excellent question and I am very relieved you have asked it, bravo! I am afraid the answer itself could be the theme of it’s own essay but here are a few of the more salient hints I hope the reader derives from what will be an ongoing series of articles on the English style and how they go about picking it all for themselves.
When you try to define the parameters of someone else’s style whether it is an individual or a group you will begin to understand what works for yourself more clearly. This is a more natural and stronger path than amassing a list from the beginning of all the things you think are elegant and will make you stand out only to find that you rarely wear them. Instead, if you figure out the message(s) an item sends to others, you can decide whether it is the type you also want to be associated with. If you want to be associated with something, I would imagine that makes you more comfortable wearing it.
Some structure is useful in achieving a sense of self and some reference to another culture helps to sound out the dimensions of one’s own style, sonar like. You would not want to plan a wardrobe too perfectly but keeping all things that you already own in the fore of your mind might help avoid amassing a haphazard one. I hope that a reader will appreciate the art of wearing clothes in England and develop a fondness for its aesthetic as I have. Further that it might make people think a bit more about messages they are sending when they choose a shirt or a tie combination as more than simply looking good. Therefore, here are some reasons to study another culture’s style:
First, to demonstrate that genre of style is a living, evolving thing, partly historical and partly experimental. We do not; we should not copy the mode of dress from the departed except for costume parties.
Second, that it may work only in the location it was designed in and only on the people it was designed for (Bowler hats are an extreme example) or it may indeed be pan global (I always wanted to use that term) like the black cap-toe lace up shoe.
Third, what the business aesthetic looks like when it is shaped solely by a culture dominated by the mainstream man without what may be termed outside or fringe influences. Purity is not superiority but it is origins and sometimes to understand evolution one needs to first understand origins.
Fourth, that what one culture sees as effeminate a similar culture sees as a badge of manhood. In England color is not a problem, rather too much preening is; looking pretty is a disaster.
Fifth, that a person can develop a very definite style within a seemingly tight set of parameters. In fact, the English seem to develop more eccentric dressers within their specific dimensions of style than do Americans who ironically have comparatively unlimited choices in clothes.
Sixth, that clothes carry messages that should protect you, assert you and otherwise identify you with something solid. In the USA if we forget reasons for why something “was as it was” we now feel obligated to toss the tradition aside, while in England they remember and hold tradition still in high esteem.
Seventh, male day attire is not costume but rather part of being a man. In England, being a man is important, there isn’t this endless state of high school that we have developed here nor do they have a layer of baby boomers hanging on and gorging themselves holding the generations under them from advancing.
Eighth, that there may be clothing combinations hideous to outsiders but which have developed a class elegance within a given society. This includes those symbols, patterns, colors and combinations of them all which identify you as a member of the club. For instance, the Fleur-de-Lys pattern is a very common symbol in England for men’s accessories but virtually nonexistent here. Meanwhile the stylized flower symbol is used but goes unrecognized by Americans as a decoration developed for neckties by a civilization which adores flowers. Sometimes outsiders will find native items attractive, and sometimes they will not ever choose them which serves the native group well, after all picking these things properly identifies a wearer as “one of us”.
I realize that one’s style is never perfected and that we jeopardize individuality once we cease to question it and the ossification of complacency sets in. Perhaps the journey should never end or one will never realize their style the best it can be. Maybe I’ve idled too long, maybe I myself am as far away from completion as anyone starting out. I never did treat my white rabbit as an equal but rather as a something to chase but never catch, and I think now I regret that. But it is not too late. Now I can ask him for explanations of why he is what he is. I have grown up and the rabbit while still exciting wonder, can now give me answers, even if they are at times inchoate ones.
The English, like the white rabbit, operate under a set of social norms which are difficult for me to identify and appreciate. I only see the superficial results and wonder about why they behave like this in their land. I am like Alice because their pressures to be accepted generate a sartorial interest for me as an observer and I must follow them and watch for the next odd behavior which will delight me. I will never become like the white rabbit but the pursuit of him forces me to explore and that promotes growth and ultimately change.
I thought the journey was over, it seems it is not. It is therefore a brave new world that hand in paw my white rabbit and I will endeavor to guide you through a tour of the English aesthetic. It is but a sampling because, as in a large zoo during a day trip, we’ll only have time for a fraction of the exhibits. Over the next few months, through a series of articles I will set down some of my thoughts about how the English choose clothes and the reasons behind their decisions. Through my research, I have learned a lot about a topic I believed I already understood. I can only hope that this series helps you to understand what choices to make when your white rabbit finally introduces himself to you.
Comment [2]
Cavalry Commander as Dandy
At a crucial time in a pivotal battle in Spain during the Napoleonic wars, The Duke of Wellington sent an order to the commander of the Household Brigade of Cavalry (Britain’s finest Heavy Cavalry) to intervene against the French. Oddly, the courier returned with the order refused. Thinking it must be a misunderstanding, Wellington himself rode to the front of the Household cavalry’s ordered ranks and diplomatically explained to the Household Brigade’s commander the urgency of the situation and that it required immediate action. Again the brigade’s young commander only recently arrived from London and resplendent in immaculately tailored wool, heavy gold braiding and rich leather boots politely refused the order without so much as a sniffle. Losing patience, the Duke put his foot down and in a rare flash of temper insisted the Household Brigade join the battle at once. Whereupon the officer resigned his commission on the spot and while trotting away across the front of his troopers turned a horsehair crested helmet over his shoulder and precociously reminded the Duke that only the King could appoint a new commander. Scandalized, Wellington could do nothing but stare at the aristocratic whelp trotting off to drink sherry with his friends while the whiz and hiss of battle reverberated behind him.
Through centuries of horse soldiering a pattern emerges of cavalry commanders who are also exquisitely stylish and display the pluck of the dandy. We examine the question why is it that so many independently minded cavalry commanders in European history have also been natty dressers.
Part of the answer is as unravel-able as the complex double helix of history. However, we need to place some logical parameters on the elements we are concerned with, namely why the cavalry often developed a penchant for dressing incredibly well. Therefore our only concern today is why the cavalry specifically became a branch of service noted for its flamboyant and resplendent leaders. Our story begins in Spain.
In 711 AD, Spain unexpectedly saw its greatest Visigoth kingdom collapse to the Moorish invasion at the Transductine Promontories. The remaining European kingdoms of Spain found themselves separated from each other eventually resembling besieged islands adrift in their own land amongst hostile and often better organized (and better dressed) Moorish kingdoms. By the 10th century, it would be fair to say that the Christian Spanish kingdoms had been in a constant state of warfare for over two hundred years.
Generations of Spanish nobles spent their whole lives on campaign and were constantly on the march. For these nobles, “courtly” life revolved around the camp. Consequently, they spent a great deal more on their clothes than the knights of other lands. Their expensive clothes gave them much needed status (earliest instance of street credit?) both when meeting fellow traveling entourages and when resting amongst populations who would not recognize them as they would local knights.
Additionally, the Spanish were able to copy or buy exquisite clothes from the ultra sophisticated kingdoms of the Umayyads and then the Grenadines generations before other Europeans picked them up in the middle-east on crusade. It is safe to say that the Spanish knight wore the Savile row suit of his day. The intermingling of Spaniard and Moor served to create even more sumptuous clothes from the blend of the two cultures. This tradition continued through the Renaissance when Spain and the Holy Roman Empire were united in a series of alliances.
One of the vassal states of the Holy Roman Empire was the Duchy of Burgundy, now a province of modern France. Ruled over by a succession of Dukes, one Charles the Bold (1433-77) stood out in an age of opulence as preoccupied with getting dressed. Here was a man who combined both beauty of arms and clothing. He spent an enormous amount of money on his clothing and encouraged both his knights and his army of mercenaries to outdo each other in their finery. Part of the reason for this was exposure to the international sophistication of the Spanish and Hapsburg courts both of which had access to the best materials and craftsmanship that the known world had to offer. However, part of it was simply that Charles the Bold was a dandy.
In spite of his military incompetence, Charles’ fastidiousness was precise enough that he and his court set the trend both for gorgeous clothes and beautiful sets of armor for their own time. This was true both on and off of the battlefield. After their time, their tastes continued to influence the entire Renaissance in Western Europe. Unfortunately for Charles, his talent with clothes did not help him on the battlefield and he suffered a series of defeats at the hands of the legendary Swiss pikemen
Ironically in his final defeat, Charles was killed during the Swiss pursuit by ordinary pikemen who, in spite of his fine clothes, did not recognize his rank. Perhaps it was because so many of his ordinary soldiers were likewise well turned out that Charles too may have looked like an ordinary soldier to the pursuing Swiss. On a general level, the enviable attire of Charles’ army did not pass unnoticed, even by the thrifty Swiss who marveled at the quality of the fallen Burgundians’ clothes. The Swiss proceeded to strip the corpses for their fine raiment. However, and to their initial chagrin, the larger Swiss bodies found they could not fit into the clothes of the vanquished.
At this point, Swiss ingenuity came to the rescue. They came up with the novel solution of slashing open the arms, legs and even torso of the clothes to allow them to fit more freely. This “slashing’ exposed their solid underclothes which further underlined the richness of what the Burgundian’s had worn. Ultimately “slashing” became the prevalent style for both civilian and military clothes. However, as with so many fashions over time, what began as a practical solution became exaggerated and contributed to the rise of the cavalier style. The cavalier style is one where unbuckled, unbuttoned things which seem about to fall off give a sense of daring and sans souci to the wearer’s stance. And now we switch our stage to England where cavalierism would reach its zenith.
Prince Rupert (1619-82) encompassed the cavalier esthetic better than anyone else. He was the Bohemian nephew of the King of England, Charles I (Himself Scots descent.) Perfumed; bejeweled wearing what would eventually become “Musketeer” boots and a wide brimmed hat with plumes in it. Prince Rupert wore his hair in long perfumed, oiled ringlets. He was accompanied into battle by a full sized white poodle which was likewise groomed to the nines. As a result of Rupert’s dash and disregard for personal danger along with his extreme attention to personal grooming, the word Cavalier, which originally meant aristocratic horseman, is a term we use today for a style both uncaring and rakishly heroic. He gave rise and leadership to an entire movement of young, fashionably dressed and often aristocratic cavaliers, whose ethic was to live, drink and be merry…and of course wear expensive clothes.
Before the English Civil War broke out in 1642, Prince Rupert had served in the Thirty Years War then currently petering out on the continent. That war had put him in contact with the Hungarian free booting cavalry known today as Hussars. These wild, hard drinking cavalry made a deep impression on the Young Prince. In battle, because they were poor but stylish, Hussars would always breakthrough the enemy’s lines and head straight towards the baggage train. There they would loot the valuables and parade around in captured clothes. Indeed the Hussar lifestyle as originally imported by the cavaliers would increasingly define the outward appearance and behavior of the western dandy.
Today, amongst military enthusiasts, a Hussar conjures images of hard drinking and gambling cavalrymen resplendent in their expensively braided uniforms. The Anglicized version of the Hussar would eventually set the mode for the aristocratic gentleman across Europe, combining and ultimately sanctioning licentious behavior for men of quality who debauched while accoutered in the most refined clothes and accessories available. This lifestyle would reach its pinnacle during the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars.
One of the most dashing cavalry commanders in an era of beau sabreurs was Joachim Murat (1767–1815), and the most flamboyant of all Napoleon’s marshals. Murat was both a gifted cavalry commander and a man consumed with ornamental uniforms if ever there was one. He spent a fortune on designing uniforms for himself, many of which made his peers roll their eyes. He was excused this flamboyance by his peers only because of his intensity and talent for command of cavalry in action. His military career’s highpoint was leading a “nick of time” massed cavalry charge atop a frozen lake halting a Russian breakthrough at the battle of Eylau in 1807.
Murat was later crowned King of Naples by Napoleon and proceeded to clothe his recently raised army in bold uniforms. Considering that many of the soldiers were impressed from the ranks of rough convicts it would be interesting to note they often sold items of their uniforms for drink.
During the famed retreat from Moscow, Murat was recorded by contemporaries as wearing custom made furs! Proof that even when one’s army is freezing to death, one can still maintain a stylish look. His vanity continued unabated by Napoleon’s (and his own) dwindling fortunes which saw him lose his Kingdom in Naples and a large part of his wardrobe. When Murat was finally sentenced to be executed by the restorationists for supporting Napoleon’s Hundred Days return from exile, he is remarked to have said to the firing squad “Spare my face, aim for my heart!”
The Napoleonic wars were concomitant with the rise of the modern day dandy. Civilian dandy imitated cavalryman and the reverse was also true. In most armies, officers in every Branch of the military service competed to be the best turned out and the most degage towards dangers in combat. However, the cavalry emerged as the most flamboyant and sans souci of all the branches of service.
Because Napoleon reinvented this declining branch of the military both as a deciding factor on the battlefield and as a means of reconnaissance it regained much of its previously fading elite status. An elite status the cavalry was self-aware of and sought to underline with unique uniforms. The last death defying massed charges of the French cavalry around British infantry squares at Waterloo (1815) would forever leave the impression that a commander of cavalry should combine the riding skills of a Hells Angel with impeccable parade ground uniforms. For decades after Waterloo, the Napoleonic wars remained the greatest conflict in memory for the aspiring cavalryman to model his behavior on. It had been an ideal time in which uniforms evolved both beautifully and functionally. Therefore, by the time of the American Civil War (1861-65), uniform styles were still heavily influenced by Napoleonic ones.
James Ewell Brown (J.E.B.) Stuart (1833-64), considered by many to be the most charismatic and talented of a host of talented rebel cavalry commanders was without doubt a dandy with flourish. He sported a silk lined wool cape and a cavalier style hat. Many of the southern gentry romanticized about being cavaliers of old from the English Civil war defending tradition and aristocracy against vulgar Northern pragmatism. Along with a black plume in his hat, Hessian boots were de rigeur. Stuart’s uniforms were costly and often harkened back to that cavalier age. In fact, he was commonly referred to as “The Last Cavalier”. Many of J.E.B. Stuart’s commanders followed suit. However it was J.E.B. Stuart who was always readily identifiable to his troops by his kit. He served as a morale booster and his presence on the battlefield strengthened a Southern army’s resolve during a fight.
On the Federal side, George Armstrong Custer (1839-1876) was also a competent cavalry commander who paid attention to every detail of dress. However, his initial attention to nattiness with his uniforms morphed into some flamboyant choices after the Civil War. Many of his subordinates at the remote western outposts observed Custer’s “non-regulation” uniform choices in suspended disbelief. The Amerindians however frequently commented positively on “Yellow Hair’s” sense of individualism. In the end, the high profile might have contributed to his getting scalped.
Images of the American Civil War cavalry commander as an individual man of style lingered in the general American military mind as the proper, if unofficial, comportment for officers. Unfortunately, World War One was fought both too late and too statically to produce an American cavalry commander but some of those who fought in that war and became commanders in World War Two (WW2) continued the civil war tradition.
If we fast forward to WW2, we observe George S. Patton (1885-1945) as the culmination of centuries of well accoutered cavalrymen. Fond of wearing his own uniform designs, Patton was likewise precise about the official uniforms of the U.S. Army. He insisted those he commanded were always properly dressed.
Patton was a true American aristocrat but also cut from the same cloth as the Hussar from the Napoleonic era. He swore freely, and believed in heavy reconnaissance and raids. Like both Murat and J.E.B. Stuart before him, Patton was always at the front of his troops. His smart outfits served to define his personality and identify him to his men. Because of his rough, “hard hitting” persona, the clothes he wore are often overlooked but he was a fastidious man. Because he commanded tanks instead of horse soldiers we forget that he was very much a cavalry commander, perhaps the last of his kind.
Certainly popular culture imagines Patton in cavalry jodhpurs and silver helmet rather than in the hum drum fatigues that seemed to democratically swathe other U.S. Commanders. Ironically, popular culture might also imagine George C. Scott’s version from the film Patton (1969) to be the more authentic Patton. Whatever the popular culture’s image of Patton, he considered himself just an “old horse soldier”.
But the question remains, why did the cavalry commanders develop such a high degree of dandyism within their ranks? The answer may lie within the lifestyle itself. They lived with the possibility of death at any moment. Combine that possibility with the chivalric romanticism of the Spanish knight forever on the road. The combination might have increased a need to live superficially and for the moment. Constantly moving, you were what you wore. Living with death meant there was simply no reason to save your best for tomorrow.
But again, why did so very many of the best cavalry commanders exhibit the mannerisms of the dandy? Something about the sort of men attracted to the cavalry lifestyle and the dandy’s proclivities are forever interlinked. It embodied the chance to be seen but not touched, the chance to be elevated above others as a knight but have no obligatory court to serve at, and to dress for every day as if it is your last. If you understand this as a motivating factor, you will understand a part of what it is to be a dandy.
Comment [3]
Edward Green shoes: True heart, true friend to the dandy…
And to serious men who want to both look and feel their best. Let’s put our foot squarely on the issue, it’s all about the shoes. Your shoes define who you are and what you think of yourself. Consider the cushion shoes provide to your foot and spine and how the proper size and shape affects your walking gait and stationary stance. Shoes determine how your body will react and respond throughout the day. The fact that most men consider shoes something to be ground down and discarded places among the elite the man that cares about his shoes.
But just because shoes are serious does not preclude a bit of cinematic fancy on the part of the wearer. If you have ever seen the movie Strangers on a Train (Alfred Hitchcock, 1951), in the beginning sequence you will see Robert Walker get out of a cab in a fetching pair of black and white spectators. I had never seen them made in quite that pattern before. It would take years of dreaming on my part after first seeing the film before Edward Green finally reproduced them for me faithfully (Black box calf and white buckskin suede) through their made-to-order service.
And that really is the point; shoes are the things dreams are made of. Women have no problem admitting it, men need to come to grips with it (perhaps they need a kick in the pants?). And Edward Green, recently moved to 75 Jermyn Street in London, are the purveyors of the dream. They make the handsomest English ready-to-wear style shoe for the jacket and tie set. The 202 last is as exquisite as it is timeless. It would be interesting to have a timeline of how many men and dandies of influence wore Edward Greens while making important decisions.
I think too many believe that it is solely the silhouette of the suit which creates this image of what you want to present yourself to the world as. You may fool the oceans of humanity who know little about clothes and genres of style but frankly those in the know will be able to tell who is genteel vs. who is a nasty poseur. The wrong shoes will announce your background faster than sardines on the breath, and might do so in the minds of people who could influence important decisions in your life.
My father, never a man to do things with his own hands, made a pointed habit of shining his own shoes, so important was it in his mind to demonstrate that he was a high sitting member of the sole-agarchy. I gave up shining my own shoes due to the exigencies of modern city living but the reflexes have stuck with me. When I notice men’s shoes in say a board meeting, I can read a lot about them from their shoes. Like tarot cards a man’s shoe choices tell me stories about his past and his future. You don’t like those judgments? Well, that’s too bad. They take place both consciously and unconsciously every day a million times a day and they will affect your value in the eyes of those who know better. Thus if you are clever enough to learn the lingo you will go out and get yourself some E. Greens and you will become a member of the club, whether you like it or not.
The shoes are made with a high percentage of handwork whilst the machine work is actually guided by hand. In the ready-to-wear art gallery, their shoes are located in the wing of the great masters, Vermeers for the feet which also provide support and become more comfortable the longer they are worn. In terms of propriety Edward Green puts the pie in cap-a-pie. It is fair to state that without a pair of Edward Green shoes, a dapper aspirant isn’t quite the full fig. Brummell would have lived at their shop, Fred Astaire did.
Speaking recently with Hillary Freeman, Managing Director of Edward Green I was able to surmise some interesting bits about the biz. I had thought that the newer, sleeker shoes in their “Contemporary Classics” range with either the absence of, or with smaller pinking holes were designed by Edward Green to accompany the lighter weights and finer weaves of cloth men select today for tailored clothes. This is part of the answer, the other part is that we tend towards a minimalist look these days and the lighter more refined range of shoes is primarily to complement and reflect that mood of minimalism
With regards to shoe last styles, the last being the basic shape of the shoe, the 202 last is their classic round toe last. It is very old, their oldest in fact. From a Global viewpoint, Edward Green has to cater to a variety of regional wishes and stylistic dreams. Thus, whereas the Italians love and demand none other than the rounded, 202 last, the French want a chiseled toe. Both Japan and Italy are big markets for the shoe company.
There are several lasts to choose from but I would advise going with the one that fits your foot most comfortably rather than which aesthetic strikes your fancy. Although you may be drawn to one last over another, foot comfort is paramount and all of their lasts are acceptable amongst circles of quality.
The 202 is the master last from whence every other Edward Green last is derived. It would be fair to say that this last has been in circulation so long and become so prevalent among the privileged set that it now represents the most acceptable shoe of a modern man of manners, rather like the way Kleenex eventually became synonymous with tissue.
In contra-distinction to the fate of most luxury items from the old world, Edward Green feels that the quality of their shoes has actually improved over time. To be sure the company has faced some challenges in the modern era but rather than retreating from these challenges, they have endured the trials and emerged triumphant.
It is important to get them fitted properly by a shoe store that knows how to handle their shoes. A large part of the Edward Green experience is being properly fitted (I was re-fitted by Ms. Freeman which was comic if only from the standpoint of her amazement towards the width of my feet.). Once a fitting is done properly, you can rest assured that you will have comfort and dexterous balance the rest of your walking life.
Polishes are hand applied in numerous coats to the shoes and calculated to create a compelling sense of depth in the leather. It is a substantial look which is nothing short of astounding. After a while you stop noticing yourself how beautiful the shoes are, unless you concentrate, but others never stop noticing.
The shape and last of the shoes and their particular type of high grade upper leathers have practically been branded into the Italo-Anglo-American consciousness as the very definition of what those who form the sartorial intelligentsia would be found wearing. When you think of the musketeers, you think of their thigh boots, when you think of Sherlock Holmes you think of laced boots and when you think of the western elite, you think immediately of these shoes, whether or not you in fact know of their existence.
The shoes themselves are well balanced neither delicate nor chunky. The lasts and uppers are both the natural and perfect accompaniment to the properly scaled tailored outfit. The shoes are solid and they provide comfort but they are also designed to make the foot look its best. The company possesses a built in sense of class refinement and never produce a model that wouldn’t do for a well heeled man in some suitable outfit. From spring garden parties to fall deer stalking to boardrooms the world over, Edward Green has several models that will make it apparent to anyone you meet that you are wearing the best. Their medium brown spectator with the khaki twill quarters is a perfect colonial accoutrement for the summer poplin or dupioni silk suit. The mahogany country calf is the perfect red-brown shade for the “Galway” model lace up boots to wear with your tweed suit or cords.
They have a fair selection of lace up oxfords and derbys which are shoes with the open throated separate pieces over the vamp of the foot which are supposedly a little easier on those with a high instep. The monk strap range is probably larger than it needs to be. There are several stand outs like the “Dover” which is a Norwegian style split toe lace up and the “Newmarket” which is one of the handsomest Chelsea boots I have ever seen. Also the “Harrow” slip on which was a favorite of the Duke of Windsor (especially with a cream suede top quarter under a calf vamp).
The burnt pine color: On its own it is not a particularly pleasing color but when mated with a quality trouser material the shading genius becomes apparent. This color has become one of their most popular because it turns an ordinary suit into something fetching. The color is appropriate on all their shoe styles. If you want to turn it up a notch, the willow calf is quite handsome, although if you are conservative by nature, the willow grain finish is probably better relegated to the jacket and odd trousers than the day suit.
Brown suede for the country: In the States we wear suede shoes in lace up styles to work without blinking an eye but In England they are reserved for country or weekend wear. Edward Green suede wears beautifully and defies the elements admirably, developing its own patina over time. The darker to medium shades are the most acceptable from winter to summer respectively.
Chestnut: The medium saddle tan color which the British make so beautifully but dare not wear in Albion. It is a magnificent leather color and the perfect shoe color for spring and summer woolen suits in medium to light shades or in darker shades of linen, mohair, cotton or silk.
Country/Weekend: Edward Green makes a complete country collection in both suede and pebble grained leather in both boots and lace up shoes. Shades abound but the mahogany country calf color has that dark brown with a hint of red that goes so well with country checks and herringbones even if they aren’t true tweeds but millionaire cashmere jackets for a weekend of roughing it at a city brunch spot. Whatever your actual lifestyle, the country shoe range whether the chukka boot (Banbury) in mink suede or the oddly stylish “Elmsley” in brown pebble grained calf evokes images of hunts in the highlands or grouse stalking or Goodwood or Sunday drives in Connecticut for that matter. Double thick soles (which are available on all of their shoes special order) and or hard rubber treads in a variety of designs are available to lend traction and authenticity.
Resort/weekend: For the weekend or the warmer climates or even by the shore there is a selection of slip-ons which are both solid and mature. In brown suede or in the above mentioned chestnut shade they are fantastic for a summer sports jacket and in black for the navy solid odd jacket. I suppose if you wore white, cream or pale blue pants with the navy jacket that you might try something in navy calf or in navy calf and cream buck suede; tres elegante and the deft way that Edward Green renders this hard to execute navy calf color makes them compelling to the smart set. It should be mentioned that Edward Green refuses to make a shoe with a woven quarter.
Black Calf: There is of course the richness of unrelieved black calf. This color is relentlessly serious and the only proper thing for the Public school boys to wear when they start their careers in the City. Black leather photographs poorly but to the naked eye there are immense differences between qualities of black calf. The best black leather has a soft, soothing and compelling allure about it. Cheap black leather looks like cardboard. Apart from some of the English bespoke craftsman, I would not hesitate to advise someone to head right from their custom suit fitting and buy themselves a pair of Edward Green lace ups in black calf.
Evening Shoes: Edward Green still make a calf leather evening pump with a bow, they make patent lace up shoes in just the proper toe shape for this item and they make velvet slippers in a variety of colors which you can have monogrammed on the toe box with your initials or an animal head or a crown or Fleur-de-Lys or any number of imagio dei in various (though principally gold) metallic thread colors.
The original 202 last was designed almost a century ago. This is a tremendous tradition and example of past and future maintaining a constant link. It is exciting thinking that you may be wearing the same shoes that Fitzgerald wore in Paris or the Duke of Windsor wore while elegantly fox-trotting his Kingdom away. Were these the shoes Chamberlain wore while assuring peace in our time or the ones Sir Winston addressed parliament in while England stood alone against the darkness? I do know that present day mandarins wear them as do many the more successful of the City of London set.
Although most of us enjoy referencing the past, I am not sure that many would actually like to live in it. However I do realize that a glimpse of an actor in a classic movie wearing an item in a stylishly lost manner can often excite the viewer. It engenders wonder about a lost world theoretically recent but might as well have existed millennia ago for those of us who never knew it. Perhaps we are the lucky ones; after all we can permit ourselves to imagine that it was all as the old movies promised it was without any comparison with reality to dispel the magic.
No one can bring back the past but if you want to bridge the gap, Edward Green shoes offer you the chance to link to those natty celluloid heroes and still wear shoes that are completely and acceptably current. Edward Green shoes go with everything a man in tailored clothing needs for upscale social or business events both night and day, and for either town or country.
I do not believe if I dress like Fred Astaire that I will become Fred Astaire. I do believe that if I take what he did which is pick the most modern version of what a man of style and talent would choose and give it my own spin I will be as well dressed as Fred Astaire. Likewise, although I enjoy being as well heeled as the dapper “Bruno Anthony” in Strangers on a Train, thankfully I will never become him. A close second is enjoying Edward Green shoes made to my specifications and understood by them to contaminate present day banality with the individualism of a more elegant age.
Stock models are available in London at Edward Green’s own shop at 75 Jermyn Street 011 44 (0)207 8390202 and in New York City at H. Herzfeld (212) 753-6756 and at Jay Kos 212-327-2382, call for specifics. There are also trunk shows at the NYC locations several times a year. If you’re on a budget, the shop has a sale twice a year which is handy if you are in London but If you are thinking of a mail order, I advise making sure you know which of the lasts in which size and width suits you before going this route.
Comment [11]
The Importance of Being Hip: After Hours Casual Attire.
I think it is important for a man who loves clothes to be Hip because all Hip means is for him to be both contemporary and fit in with the moment. That does not mean he has to be fleetingly fashionable. Someone whose clothes look traditional but also up-to-date would be ideal. Well, ideal is a bit dogmatic when employed for this objective. Further, I am not sure whether such a thing exists. Sometimes you have to decide what looks good on you by what looks good on others, which may or not work on one’s self. For instance, that bright yellow zoot-suit which looked terrific on Cab Calloway, may never look good on anyone else.
Extreme exceptions aside, we do indeed learn to dress by observing others. But because we have fewer well dressed people to serve as examples either at work or play, there exists a constantly shrinking set of examples for us to develop our own style around. To make matters worse and unlike with day wear, there seems an absence of agreement amongst men about what a man should and should not wear for “stepping out.” However there are a few guiding principles that can help make it less painful.
First, realize that the many “worlds” some of us can belong to may make our lives look a bit like a Venn diagram and each can call for completely different attire. The smaller your circle or association with different social worlds, the tighter your choices and the more signals you send off if you make the right or wrong choice in clothes. The only choice that cuts across all lines these days is appearing somewhere in your work clothes which might send the common signal that you have just pulled yourself away from your desk and are stopping by for a tense, inattentive moment rather than a fun filled evening to meet new people.
Or even worse, you brought your work attitude with you and are treating this gathering like a business meeting. That is perfectly acceptable if your company is hosting a fund raiser (Make sure you wear your corporate logo lapel pin!) or if you and your significant other are meeting for dinner.
Generally speaking, it is more polite and people will perceive this to be the case if you change specifically for an after hours event. I know some are rolling their eyes thinking, but I work until 9pm every evening how am I going to realistically change? My answer is take some cologne and a more informal shirt (and tie) or a sweater to the office on a day of an event. If you don’t wear informal shirts, sweaters and cologne, you may be beyond my help.
When I approach what to wear for going out, I generally approach it using items similar to what I wear to work but translated and deployed differently. As already touched on, it can depend heavily on the type of crowd that will be in attendance and whether you want to blend in, stick out or arouse comment. Age may play a part; your actual age, your apparent age, the age of the group, the age you feel.
Your target audience may likewise influence your choice. Ask yourself; is the place (and the crowd) old world or new world? Further, do I want to fit in with my peers or do I want to stand apart? Remember that many of the basic sartorial questions now answered for men’s daywear were once the subject of conjecture and similar questions were once asked of the wearers about the appropriateness of a particular item of clothes.
In any case, I have found that either wearing a very straight and narrow casual outfit or (using my same approach as with black tie dressing) one attention getting item is best, as in navy single breasted suit, brown suede shoes, orange plaid on blue button-down shirt. This assumes you aren’t attending a Burning Man after party of course.
If you are invited to a piano recital or to Smith and Wollensky for some steak and scotch, then you will probably be expected to wear a more traditional outfit. Work clothes are actually appropriate here. Although for the steakhouse a dark double breasted suit with a nice necktie is one of the few times a man can wear a good quality white tone-on-tone shirt without looking like he doesn’t know better.
Do you want to have a separate wardrobe or just re-invent work clothes for an evening out? It seems most men in the USA are unwilling to have separate wardrobes for casual. In the UK, it is still common to have suits which are casual (They would be work suits by American standards) worn with a more casual shirt, an open throated shirt (although cravats are still relatively common in England and maybe should be revived here) or (gasp!) more and more, an open throated button down shirt. It seems the button down’s functional design is contaminating our cousins across the herring pond.
Italy is very much a coat and tie country and even in small towns the men wear day dress all the time. But then their aspiration is the England of our imaginations, even if they realize it in lighter weights and more interesting colors while they strip every clothing article of its social label.
Although the English would feel a little uncomfortable at the idea of a tweed patterned jacket for city wear, for Americans it may not hurt to buy a sports coat or two specifically for city functions. This is the time when a bit of silk in the jacket says” evening out”. Other than that, and the use of darker colors sometimes, the jackets would usually follow the standard Anglo-American aesthetic in terms of color and pattern.
Being appropriately Hip also relies on certain assumptions, that you are not going to a counter-culture spot, that it isn’t for business, but rather to socialize and that you reside in a fairly urbane environment. My suggestions for what to wear stylishly for an evening in a suburban mall would differ greatly than for a Hip, downtown Chicago restaurant.
Assuming you’re converting work clothes, and assuming you’re in either a temperate or maritime climate:
Generally, the same colors for work also do for the nightlife but mostly in solids. Sometimes a striped suit works if you wear say a Duchamp style shirt and tie with it but, in general, solids (and many windowpanes) have escaped the business association.
An open necked shirt works. I wouldn’t do white without a tie, unless the white fabric was by its texture unsuitable for daywear. For shirt choices, black, navy (sometimes with white stripes), ecru and shades of grey (sometimes with a pattern.) are on board the Hip jet plane. I don’t think the English will ever take to black shirts but we can use them for limited purposes. The tonal similarity and the keeping to dark colors always seem to both modernize and make casual the outfit. Also (with some exceptions) would not advise letting a white t-shirt peek out of that open necked shirt (except in certain specific situations), better to have a nicely finished black t-shirt in mercerized cotton underneath this ensemble.
And about dark shirts and when you should wear them, consider again the crowd. If you are with your crew in NYC at Tabla looking to meet the models, then a black linen shirt under your charcoal suit with closely set double track beaded pinstripes is in order with black calf chelsea boots. If you are at Le Cirque 2000, then a rich Wedgwood blue sea island shirt with French cuffs under a medium to dark double breasted bird’s eye patterned suit with a beautiful woven tie and a pair of dark brown suede brogues is much more refined Gotham.
The English are an inspiring study for casual shirts. What they consider one of their little sartorial liberations at the office, the Americans still have not completely adopted. Their boldly patterned and colored shirts in the Turnbull & Asser, TM Lewin tradition are salient because of social pressures applied to other areas of the water balloon which constitutes their wardrobe.
Although it is true that American attitudes towards what constitutes acceptable business shirt colors and patterns have relaxed in the last decade, they still have not caught up with the English. But for casual, we now combine the sartorial expressions of English bold shirt fabric with the functionality of the button down shirt. Thus in summer, the orange butcher striped button down shirt is Hip under a blazer or with a pair of odd pants.
You can wear a necktie too. Just try not to select something that looks like a business tie. Perhaps a rich woven necktie, maybe one that’s a bit too rich looking to wear to the office. Again, the English come to the rescue with the Turnbull and Asser or Duchamp tie. However, there are many other examples of ties which give a more casual air to one’s outfit. If it’s a night out with her to someplace like Balthazar in NYC a navy jacket, medium grey pants, dark brown suede shoes and a shirt with mixed blue and mauve (or lilac) stripes or checks and a magenta, lavender or purple grenadine necktie from www.samhober.com is what I call Hip.
Knits work well too, at least for the torso, generally in dark solid colors. Sometimes, depending on such diverse elements as your coloring, the item’s coloring, the season/weather, a more brightly colored knit is acceptable. There are so many factors that play a role here it is a little difficult to lay down more than guidelines.
There are times when a flannel or cashmere navy jacket and grey pants should be graced with a tangerine or fuchsia mock turtle neck cashmere sweater. Alternatively a medium to dark grey flannel suit could support the occasional oatmeal colored cashmere sweater while a light grey one would pair well with a sweater in burgundy or eggplant. If it’s the dead of summer, I don’t mind an aqua blue, fuchsia or a white polo shirt under a jacket. Just make sure it’s good quality with a fuller collar that stays under the jacket and that it is in good condition. The Lacoste shirt in white under a blue summer weight jacket is a Hip perennial.
As you may have surmised, brown suede shoes are good for casual outfits because they have the same softness and lack of business pushiness as does flannel. I sometimes like them with lug soles if I am in a location where the floor may be slippery and I am indulging in a few libations myself. Also, the realities of winter in New York City sometimes demand better grip for our slippery pavements. Paired with brown suede or calf leather belts, these shoes lend themselves to a more relaxed casual and yet stylish deportment.
Part of the problem (and the fun) with casual dressing, is that it is harder to get it “right” and it has a lot more specifics to the individual, time and place. It takes a bit more thinking and less regimentation. I doubt if there are any rules per se, but there are definitely variations that cause less inflection in the mind’s eye of the observer (including yourself, of course) you may be dressing to please and impress. Depending on the weather and the place a nicely hand finished t-shirt in cashmere can look stylish under your jacket.
A lot of it depends on what image you are trying to present and to whom. Add to that, what constraints do you feel prohibit you from wearing certain looks. For example, it took me a while to get passed not wearing a tie with a suit, now I happen to like the look if it is done well. Further, what attitudes do you bring to the dressing table? If you consider this as an X, Y graph where X is what others think and Y is what you think, it plays a role in what you are going to feel comfortable in. The one thing you shouldn’t do is proceed without reflection because you may not be presenting yourself in the light you think you are.
There are several different types of Hip:
Hip does not necessarily fit into neatly separated zip locks. There are gradations. Old-Boy-Hip is one of these.
Old-Boy-Hip is tricky because it encompasses two concepts. The first is simply the traditional Anglo-American style with some creative elements such as the patch madras or tweed jacket, the fancy dinner jacket waistcoat or the brightly striped blazer. These are all part of that kicky but decidedly “Fogey” world of clothes. If you’ve ever seen the candy canes on the bright green wide wale cords around Christmas time, you’ll know what I mean.
The second concept is that Old-Boy-Hip takes standard up-to-date fabrics that simply say they are right for business but also of the moment. Italian fabrics are considered and fabrics generally are lighter in weight, finer, and softer… oh and a slight sheen is acceptable (At least for summer). Basically this is the “in touch” professional’s look which acknowledges the past without wanting to slavishly replicate it.
For instance, I have a cavalry twill fabric (from the cloth Merchant, Scabal) I am looking at which is only vestigially like the original cavalry twill. It is nearly half the weight (9oz) and it is relaxed and smooth and soft (buttery) and about as far away from Old-Boy cavalry twill as one can imagine. It is still identifiable as traditional and yet is also Hip because it is an up-to-date interpretation of the look. It is just right for the silk and wool windowpane jacket I have placed it next to, a jacket which is decidedly Hip. With a worsted cashmere navy blazer, a pair of medium brown or green pants in this fabric (well just about any of the fabric book’s medium to light colored choices) is sublime.
Actual Hip denotes the casualness of dressing for women, for the evening, for modernity and to a certain extent, the sloughing off of tradition and the class associations that bind. A Hip jacket or suit is often more at home with a sweater than a shirt and tie, sometimes even more acceptable with a hand finished t-shirt in a mercerized finish. But the look of Hip is an interclass look which still has elements of tastefulness to it.
Everyone appreciates the Hip look because it is expensively done, it is very modern, it is appealing to people who you might want to congregate with but who are intimidated by the office and the idea that you might be insinuating your superior pedigree on anything other than merit. Hip is a very democratic and inclusive look which nevertheless relies on a certain amount of taste either on the part of the wearer or the person who selected the clothes.
However, Hip can also be tweaked from situation to situation and social set to social set. Consider the mercerized cotton, hand finished t-shirt. In black, it is right for the night. In navy or royal blue, it looks more genteel under a lightweight, open weave navy jacket with white pants at the marina, in white or pale blue its ready for a stroll under a coral linen jacket along a Caribbean beach and in chocolate brown with jeans it’s right for listening to an alternative band’s gig.
Just as there are different types of Hip for different circles of people or events, there are within each specific circle many degrees of being Hip. True Hip clothes you wouldn’t wear to the standard conservative industry office. However, there are clothes that can be used as Hip which are perfectly fit for the office if you swap out the wrong accessories and swap in the right ones.
But the true Hip look (which can be timeless mind you and is not the slave of fashion) deserves its own wardrobe because it has its own fabrics and its own cut and details. I am not suggesting that the absence of these specific items makes you look less Hip, so much as I am saying the presence of them makes you look more so. Again, I realize that most men will have no interest in a completely separate wardrobe for this look but we are dreaming about the ideal state of affairs.
Think about the messages your clothes send off. Hip says, I may be a dilettante or run a corporation but tonight we are all equal and ready to socialize or party on a level playing field. Even differences between Hip and Old Boy jacket silhouettes can say things about you. Old-Boy has a more military look to it and even if the shoulder is natural it isn’t necessarily sloped. Optimally, the Hip shoulder line is slanted downwards, at ease, less military, less aggressive, and more inviting especially to women. Fabrics are likewise invitingly soft and touchable especially to the hands of that special someone you want to meet and get close to. Business clothing is more of a warning and demand for respect and personal space; Hip dressing is all about being surrounded by an entourage, even if it’s simply an impromptu entourage du soir.
There are those items which transcend the separation between day and evening purposes. For trousers, the reverse pleat is both professional and casual (and Hip) that is to say, the Neapolitans like it, the Milanese, New Yorkers and the English too. Reverse pleats are fit both for today’s business suit and for the evening style of true Hip. I like tunnel loops on my pants which are Hip for evening and also good for the office as an individual custom touch which often serves as a conversation piece. I happen to like them because I am a baseball fan (I am a football fan too but I haven’t figured out how to work that into the wardrobe), and this can segueway into very interesting conversations about sports, or if nothing else makes for a good story.
Contrast the above approach with full blown Hip where its all about night and the city. There the camouflage is influenced by asphalt and marble and stainless steel encompassed by mood lighting. Full blown Hip is also exhibited by the sportscasters on ESPN. I may disagree with many of the jacket details and styles but the fabrics, the color combinations between jacket, shirt and tie are very Hip and up-to-date, mostly right for after hours. I don’t think that’s an accident.
One caution when wearing the “all black” look or using the black pants and/or torso covering under a jacket is employed. When it comes to wearing black or black torso coverings, which is very common for Hip style as it is essentially a modern-city-party look, I want to say that there is one unfortunate effect Hip dressing can have that old boy dressing doesn’t ever seem to. It accentuates what you look like. If you look like a wimp it makes you look wimpier. If you look like a bouncer it can make you look like a hit man, if you look effete it can make you look more precious. That is why when wearing “all black” or a predominant amount of black, its components have to be carefully made and finished and have to be and be maintained in a state of true black-black color.
Hip dressing can be tricky with even the smallest detail done wrong ruining the whole look. Now, if you do the Hip look improperly you can move yourself into what a lot of people fear which is “slick” the so called Garmento look which translates into:”Cheap Hood”. However, that doesn’t ever have to be the case. All you need do is follow the guidelines and avoid the pitfalls. Let me be your lantern bearing sartorial Virgil.
We have covered some elements of relatively timeless Hip and, I should add, a traditionally tailored Hip to boot. There is also extreme Hip or Hipster and fashionably Hip (the Hip of Dolce et Gabbana and the designers) which I haven’t touched on. These looks are freely accessible in several popular “menswear” magazines.
The basics of this essay are complete but if you retain reservations about being Hip or what it means to be Hip, here is a friendly aside from Film Noir Buff:
Let me relate a story. Years ago, I realized I was showing up to parties and being routinely passed over for choice conversations. Now comments about my looks or personality aside, I realized that my outfits said that I was just coming from work and that I was dressed like what one girl described as a stuck up jackass. It was actually a little ruder than that but one never knows when Mom is reading one’s site.
I had a friend that worked in an elegant men’s clothing shop; and because he was also a man with a great deal of personal style, I asked him how you might dress for nightlife in New York City without being too trendy and garmento. I was in luck because he actually had a fun and active social life while also firmly rooted in the 1930s tradition. His answer was a style that’s actually called “Hip“… well maybe I invented that label.
Anyway, my friend helped me to see what was important with night time dressing. And yes, on the Upper East Side it’s a bit more traditional, but the prettiest are downtown these days. In any case, I learned the language. It’s all tailored by my tailor so the style is the same, but the choices are a bit more noir. In some ways the looks are timeless, they are just more relaxed. I have seen movies in the sixties where Steve McQueen is wearing a black suit with a black sweater.
Now, It took me a long time to wear a jacket without a tie without feeling like Tony f****n Montana, but I finally managed it. Understand that my entire upbringing went against it, my father being a very formal, buttoned up person (blazer at the beach). Let me tell you, I had anxiety over appearing in public in a jacket without a necktie on. I got over it though and so can you. Let this be your necktie shedding twelve step program.
Now, Ill tell you the difference not wearing a necktie with a jacket made on other people. When I wore a tie flirting with women was always awkward, I always felt stiff and uncomfortable. It was almost like at any moment they expected me to give them an order. In the tie less outfit, the same women would stop me, flirt with me, laugh, give me numbers, invite me to parties, look me in the eye, and touch me. I had gone from unapproachable corporate jackass to “it” boy. That is what I call tangible results.
So, before you assert that traditional dress was good enough for FDR, so it’s good enough for you (and the ladies), at least do some experimenting. Insisting that you are doing the right thing without really knowing for sure can run you into trouble with clothes inappropriate for the occasion.
There are several factors at work with all of this. On the one hand, you have men who with a mixture of fear and resentment refuse to understand that there might be a middle ground between dressing trendy, and showing up dressed like Thurston Howell III. No one suggested that anyone go out and start wearing Versace snakeskin pants. All the things Im speaking about, with the occasional odd piece for the torso, will follow traditional Anglo-American tailoring and shoemaking (ahem, except for an occasional lug sole).
Am I asking for a lot here? I don’t think so. A solid black suit in a light weight fabric, say a Zegna high performance and a black linen shirt, doesn’t make you a gigolo. It is a very smart look. It combines tradition, modernity, power and approachability, that’s why its been adopted by so many lifestyles. It has a bit of the urban commando about it, danger, training, honor, and mystery. Best part about it is there is no hair gel or chains that go with it. It actually has traditional roots in the 50s and 60s.
No one’s asking anyone to wear the blue shirt with the diagonal lighter blue stripes with the double fold cuffs pulled up over the jacket sleeves. The look I am talking about is still a quiet and refined look. And I’m afraid anyone who doesn’t think so is not enjoying clothes but rather hiding behind a social code. What do I mean? I mean that you’re the sartorial equivalent of the guy walking around in the frock coat, monocle and spats in the Fred Astaire movies. They too were smug in the fact that they knew better, but they were wearing the previous generation’s clothes and what fools they seemed; comic relief to an audience which wanted to enjoy the moment and not feel controlled by the past.
Again, it’s not about being trendy, just relaxed, approachable, fitting in with the night, with the party, with the black and white marble, the sheet glass and the stainless steel of so many urban haunts. It is hardly revolutionary, it is called being well dressed when to show up to those same locations in a blazer with brass buttons, an oxford shirt and boat shoes is about as proper as showing up dressed for a Comedia del Arte.
Comment [2]
Trafalgar Limited Edition Braces: Support your local Brace manufacturer.
Why do I like Trafalgar Limited Edition braces? It all started when a girlfriend presented me with a pair for a graduation present. The ones with the Wall Street bull and bear on them. She said, through mischievous lapis eyes, that I reminded her a little of both animals; kind of like a bully-bear.
Bull and Bear. The original Bully-Bears, invoker of hopes, dreams, romance memories and the spirit of a nation.
Ahem, needless to say my glee at receiving a gift was put on pause and an eyebrow went up on that comment. Without looking downward, I continued unwrapping my gift, revealing the pinkish-beige silk braces. They were so…grown up and beautifully rendered. I held them up into one of the finger beams of light rushing through the chapel stained glass on that brilliant spring day and wondered at how the silk sparkled (almost winked) like precious metals.
I had never seen such art built into what had always been a functional afterthought of getting dressed. My father had often worn braces as had the set of people I grew up around but never so decorated. Those that I had previously seen worn had always been either plain solid or two color striped barathea from Brooks Brothers.
Gazing upon my gift, my face flushed and an involuntary smile pushed up the corners of my mouth. My arm slipped around her well channeled bare back as she kissed me and giggled while doing so. “You like them?” she thrummed in my ear while silky ashen locks brushed my cheek. How could I not have? Since that moment I have been a collector of Trafalgar braces.
Braces for trousers themselves became prevalent during the Victorian era in England. Loose, stove pipe like trousers replaced the tight fitting pantaloons with loops under the feet for support. Braces were mostly unseen in an age when the removal of one’s jacket in public was thought boorish. Consequently, decorations appeared on the straps (or ribbons) of the braces in wild and colorful themes and patterns. In fact, braces from this period often bordered on the “psychedelic” as befitted that age of absinthe.
In the USA, braces were worn too. Both the heavier type from England and the plainer sort from the likes of Brooks Brothers and J. Press. However, it took an American maverick to truly come up with a version in keeping with the light hearted, more carefree spirit of the American male that was taking shape in movies during the 1930s. This image, to counteract the very real pain of the depression era, served as a role model for men to “pack all their troubles in an old kit bag” just as British soldiers had learned to do a generation earlier whilst suffering the trenches of Northern France.
These American braces were originally a series designed by the legendary, if somewhat mystical, New York City haberdasher, Calvin Curtis. He sketched out various designs of braces for smartly dressed men around the country in the 30s through the 60s (or thereabouts). He actually designed a pair for FDR! His brace designs have appeared in many movies from the black and white era such as Inherit the Wind (1960) and Sabrina (1954). The silk he used was softer and thinner, and the tabs were made of glove quality leathers. Lean but strong; they echoed the American feeling during the 1930s and 40s.
Spencer tracy summing up with the support both of Calvin Curtis and of the Good Book in Inherit the Wind.
Unfortunately, Calvin Curtis stopped procuring these wonderful braces and no one else seemed to care to put the effort out to continue offering them. During this suspended period of style, the Calvin Curtis brace became forgotten by a sexually revolutionized, belt wearing male populace.
Indeed, The craft of weaving delicate denier silk braces of this type, which possess this depth of color and that slight, prosperous glitter which makes them so coveted, had been all but lost to posterity when eight of the old style looms needed to weave the silk properly were found by enterprising American, Marley Hodgson in the mid seventies (who also founded Trafalgar based in Norwalk, Connecticut) in an old French mill.
These ancient looms were restored and reunited with the original Calvin Curtis patterns, many of which were lent to the company by enthusiasts who had a last cherished pair of Curtis braces in their possession. It is safe to say that without their selflessness some of these Calvin Curtis patterns might have been lost to refined dressers forever. In any event, the Curtis braces were copied and reissued in limited editions of one thousand each. They received immense acceptance and were “embraced” by the yuppies of the eighties. I admit I was skeptical and believed that the purportedly limited number of each brace was a marketing gimmick but apparently this is in fact the case.
Each of the original Calvin Curtis designs was clever and timeless with just a hint of abstract imagination so evocative of the jazz era. Because during this “black and white” period it was considered odd for a person to talk about fantasy and science fiction outright, ordinary items expressed more abstractness than is evident today. Therefore both overly active imagination and artistic freedom flowed into mainstream items. Add to this that Mr. Curtis had an elevated sense of taste and a master’s eye for what men of affairs find handsomely alluring.
Therefore, in terms of Calvin Curtis brace designs we realize the back view silhouettes of a male and female cat sitting on a clothesline and gazing at the moon together, their heads tilted against each other and the entire scene rendered in a navy background with white design. Very abstract, very stylized but speaking comforting volumes to any who observe them, evoking the wry understanding that we all get when an emotion has been cleverly and simply portrayed to us through use of animals. The net result for the wearer is a piece of indisputable sophistication and tongue-in-cheek humor.
Like the famous race ticket from the movie “The Killing” these braces evoke a time when it was acceptable for men to take a lady to the track.
Another pair has the drawing of an old fashioned race track ticket and a jockey and horse in the winners circle with a victory wreath. From an age when going to the track (and wearing your track suit in double breasted Prince of Wales wool, rather than brown velour) was a diversion for members of the ton.
The reissued Calvin Curtis designs sold well for a number of years but most of them have now been retired. One reason is that Trafalgar tired of running the same patterns over and over. Another reason apparently is there were complaints by customers that the Curtis designs were too simplistic and did not have enough blue in them to go with the age of the French blue shirt. This is a shame and Trafalgar needs to rethink re-circulating the original Calvin Curtis designs (Especially the Corps of Cadets in 3 different colors) which do evoke the spirit of a less whirlwind, less commercial age.
I am sensitive to the fact there exists only a few looms which can weave the silk properly (The silk is woven in the actual strap width) and that it takes quite a lot of time to create enough yardage to make up one thousand of any particular design. I also find many of the new patterns agreeable. However, the classic Calvin Curtis designs somehow keep us in contact with our past, and with those old movies, with Film Noir and the Thin Man series.
Many of the new designs I do not like, but just as many I find to be excellent and in keeping with a modern day continuity of Calvin Curtis’ vision. The one with the skunk on it is especially appropriate for certain professions.
Although I do like wearing braces, I sometimes wear a belt instead. And, I have been known to forego both, satisfied with the simple d-ring waistband adjusters. However, there are times when a pair of braces is the only thing that make you feel complete and secure. Silk is stronger than steel filament of the same micronage and there is a certain sense of security involved in sporting a pair. In fact armed with the knowledge that your pants will never slip or distract you with the need to snuggle them back up with your hands (not a terribly well mannered movement) you can walk boldly into your day, superhero like. If you are taken to wearing simple suits and accessories, the braces are that hidden indulgence of color or pattern. Something to excite wonder if you are ever required to remove your jacket in the presence of a lady. And a woman will notice and comment favorably on them more frequently than will a man.
The brace straps themselves are just wide enough and narrow enough not to cause discomfort on the tops of one’s shoulder. To the wearer, they are almost unnoticeable because of their feather weight. Additionally, the silk is thin and fine enough to not show through the jacket of your finely tailored suit. This is especially important with more delicate materials and summer suit cloths where the possibility of the outline of a heavier pair of rayon braces is equivalent to a woman’s fear of “panty lines”.
I know there is a wavelength out there amongst men interested in clothes about matching the leather of the brace tabs to their shoes and belt. In fact, the silk loops evident on many of Trafalgar’s braces which were originally created for comfort under formal wear’s vest or cummerbund, were adopted by Trafalgar to eliminate the need for concern over leather color matching. However, I have to say that I have never been a slave to that particular neurosis and do not consider it a worry that need be addressed. Sometimes the mismatch is what keeps one’s style more squarely in the male, rather than female, realm of “Matchy-matchy”.
Over time the silk will fray a bit on the edges and will develop a broken in, softer feeling. Just trim the fraying strands with scissors and appreciate the patina of it all. However, should the tabs sag too much, the elastic lose its snap and the silk fray enough to push you to the limits of propriety, you can always send the braces back to Trafalgar’s reconditioning department for a nugatory fee. The author has gone this route many times for a most satisfactory outcome.
In terms of artwork, there are many different themes offered, most of them universal but some of them catering to a specific profession or interest. I have to say I am not totally restricted by a theme but a lot of others seem to be. Once when I wore a pair with a golf motif a man asked me for my handicap, when I replied I didn’t play, he asked why I was wearing those particular braces. I said, you mean I can’t wear these braces unless I play golf? He replied with a solemn but resonant, “NO.” I felt it an interesting take on the western mind’s ability to assign images.
There have been some amusing downsides to wearing braces. I have had my braces snapped from behind by malicious passers by, including one time when one rear inside button came spiraling out of my pants due to the excessive strength of the “snapper”. Once, a child on the commuter train following his mother and sister off the railcar came scurrying back, his sole intention to pluck (bull fiddle style) one of the frontal ribbons of my Calvin Curtis specials. A cheeky monkey to be sure, but demonstrative of the all too bold American spirit found in our nation’s youth. Still, I did actually stick my foot out and trip the little blighter which combined with his haste to escape my clutches made for additional comedy.
The positive points of braces have far from made up for all of these indignities. In braces, I am a sartorial soldier. I can stand in a more military fashion, stomach in, chest out and shoulders straight. I am secure in the knowledge that my trouser cuff will never slip under the back of my shoe. Additionally, I can wear my pants more loosely (and the pants themselves can hang more fully) than would be the case with a belt. This is a welcome comfort factor, and if you are given to day dreaming about romantic liaisons, it can cover a multitude of sins.
Whenever I see someone else wearing a pair of Trafalgar limited edition braces, I think more of them. I think there must be some quality to them that I may have missed. You really must have some additional facets to your character, perhaps you are from a more rarefied circle, and perhaps you have tastes. Even for me, it is an item, when viewed on another, which commands admiration and respect. In a world where you are increasingly what you wear, this item assists in defining you as a man of ways and means.
I have many pairs of Trafalgar braces but none more treasured than that original pair of Bull and Bear braces given to me years ago by a square faced daughter of Fairfield County. I have acquired another dozen of the very same pair, thanks to eBay and a thriving after-market for Trafalgar braces of yesteryear. I wonder how many others have pleasant memories associated with owning a gift given to them by someone with privileged tastes. It seems each time I wear a pair of those bull and bear braces, I relive that first loss of innocence, passing from boy to dandy, becoming ever more aware of beautiful things in this world.
A current collection of Trafalgar braces can be found at: www.limitededitionbraces.com
If you cannot find a stockist near you, or are a haberdasher looking to add these products, you can always contact the company directly at 203-853-4747.
The Plates
Matador suspenders for images of a fabulous country, Ole!
Pussycats in Love, an abstract image from our art deco past.
Chinese art, delicate and cultured with a neutral buff colored back drop for use on almost any colored shirt.
America Hurrah! FDR deployed the New Deal and saved the world for democracy wearing a pair like this, designed for him by Calvin Curtis, Haberdasher extraordinaire.
Vroom, Vroom! Every boy loves race cars and these are a stylish way to keep in touch with that passion.
Memories of college activities for the Old-Boy crowd Curtis designed his wares for.
Comment [26]
The Tree of Style: Genres of Clothes for Men
Legend has it that in the temple of the style gods there resides a sartorial tree. And although amongst the mortal fashion scholars there is considerable conjecture as to how many branches constitute it, they concur that the trunk itself is sound. The trunk of all style for men is the tailored suit, the long sleeved and collared business shirt, the necktie, the lace up cap toe or wingtip shoe in either black or brown calf leather, the dark solid sock and the dark leather belt or silk braces. Men have worn this for long enough that even the most dissident amongst us defer to the power (authoritas), dignity (dignitas), and the verisimilitudinous glow (veritas) it bestows on the wearer. At one time in the West, this tasteful dress code was carried by oral tradition emitting from one source. That is to say, that which we consider the democratic style in men’s clothes was actually dictated by a rather small circle.1
Today, wearing clothes has become more truly democratic and one viewpoint no longer prevails. Now, other life styles or sub cultures have grown self-sufficient enough to branch out from the trunk of style. Some of the branches are small and represent but slight deviations, modifications or improvements from the main trunk. Other branches are almost large enough to constitute a trunk in their own right. Ultimately, whichever branch of the style tree you find yourself perched on, there still remains a divide between the tasteful and the tasteless way to execute the look. In order to understand the differences between tasteful and sans gout choices one must consult the oracle of the style gods. Modesty naturally precludes one from offering any candidates. However for the sake of bringing order to the articles which appear here, terms for four major branches of style will be employed and one coverall category of what is never stylish. They are: Fogey, Old-Boy, Old-Boy-Hip, Hip and Slick.
As touched on earlier, today no one viewpoint for men’s style reigns supreme in the national conscience. Even when it comes to tailored clothing, the question arises if indeed there could ever again be a consensus about what the proper look should be. I recently commented to a friend that there seem to be so many distinct and different subgroups and that unlike the first 90 years of the twentieth century when everyone more or less marched to the drum of a single dress ethos; there could never again be a universal style. He replied that there were just as many subcultures then as today, it is that there was common agreement about one dominant look that signified propriety. This no longer exists.
Perhaps the current lack of common agreement about men’s style rests on the absence of one pattern of behavior for the ideal man. At one time everyone wanted to be a “gentleman”. The term itself struggled to define itself within the thousands of stories both fiction and not which pursued plots of “who is a gentleman” and “how to become one” while “outing the imposters” with it ultimately being revealed that the character in doubt “was indeed one” all along.
To be perceived as quality was a preoccupation of all classes and the class that seemed to produce the most well mannered men set the tone. That is because quality in people was associated with restraint as opposed to those who could not resist succumbing to base urges. It is interesting to note that while in much of Europe you were born a gentleman irrespective of your personal character’s flaws or vices, it began to morph into a set of universal behaviors which transcended class. Eventually becoming in the USA something bestowed by the people one interacted with, rather like being knighted hundreds of times a day by people who approved of your behavior.
In any case, they (quality that is) dressed in a certain way and other people copied them. Copied I say because they could never truly imitate the originals. Didn’t Holmes figure out that one man was indeed not a gentleman because his laces were tied too carefully? It betrayed middle class fears of being discovered and it illustrates the mania with which people wanted to be accepted as one of the well mannered set.
I would imagine it was the seminal reason that a coat like that made at the venerable tailoring firm of Anderson & Sheppard (Founded in 1873) could reign supreme in the first sixty or seventy years of the twentieth century, after all only “gentlemen” (and they all shopped at the same handful of shops) could be both idle enough and secure enough to slouch in what some today would consider a shapeless suit and not be told to correct it. Rather like a time when being upper class was considered so unassailable that people sometimes affected purposeful lisps to show that they were powerful enough for no one to ever mention the impediment, let alone attempt to suggest its correction. Thus like the lisp the Anderson & Sheppard jacket was a stance that few could afford both in terms of actual cost and social risk to emulate and so the classes remained a-rift.
Even Fred Astaire, one of the style gods himself, who probably dressed better than any aristocrat of his day, was denied entry to a shop that made formal waistcoats on the strength that he was “Show business people”. Oprah Winfrey’s current ability to make one of France’s most refined shops cower at her displeasure might have made Astaire smirk…and then roll his eyes.
It was related to me by a social scientist that in the 80s when Bloomingdale’s tried to capture some of the proletariat cachet of the English Punks it turned out to be something of a failure. Anything that was copied off of the Punks and totted in Bloomie’s as authentic Punk style would immediately be rejected by the Punk subculture as having lost its caste. Similarly, in England during the interwar period when common people copied a perceived “gentlemen’s” style (The privileged set were the Rock Stars of that era) it was dropped by the very same inner circle it was gleaned from in order that those who were truly part of the group could still identify each other.
Well that was England where class differences are a daily concern. Here in the States, we might have developed a similar class albatross but the country is too big and too young to have gelled to the point that England allowed itself to. Also people no longer desire to be gentlemen; they want to be famous and to be cool. It is no longer hip to be square. But perhaps we can squarely peg what it means to be hip. Being famous is about the present, the future, with the attendant fascination of being able to identify the next exciting wave of fame and fortune. Being cool is somewhat about being considered objectively social and easy going and appearing to make no judgments about the limitations of others. Somehow in the collective societal mind’s eye, traditional genteel garb does not convey that message. Just try getting on American Idol in a three button sack suit, button down and bowtie and see how the crowd reacts.
It amazes me that clothing for being something that can make and/or break the male career oft receives little attention.2 Perhaps the tradition of not paying attention to clothes revolves around culture’s demonizing of the term “dandy”. Templar-like many dandies were persecuted and because their tradition was mostly oral, similar to that of the Druids, much of its lore has been lost. That is the subject of another essay.
In the meantime, you need to separate the social judgment of clothes from the enjoyment of clothes. They are distinctly different and conflicting philosophies. When you judge clothes and the people wearing them you are falling victim to the very class associations you may think yourself free from. If you think everyone else is type cast due to a selection, you reveal more about your own inflexibility and feelings of predestination. One needs to evaluate each article of clothing for its intrinsic merits before it can be determined what improper associations it may also carry. By contrast, people who enjoy clothing may want to be observed but ultimately the clothes are reward enough in themselves and they are rarely looking for the acceptance of others.
To make matters more complex there are people who believe that both solid colors and consistency in the wardrobe is a sign of solidity in the man.3 It may or may not be true but this is also a social judgment it may be wiser to be free of. It has led many a man to attend a Hip social event in his prep school best only to find his outward display of his inner virtue is rewarded by sipping his drink alone in a corner for most of the evening. Instead, you may want to use clothes like a film maker’s costume wardrobe to elicit the response you need from your audience. All clothes transmit messages to the viewer; however the data can be received in different ways. Your blue and white striped tie which blends your white shirt and blue suit together may be my infringed college symbol. As with music, I think Alexander Pope would agree that what grates like demons for some resound as if from angels for others.
Today it’s all about target audience and dressing right. Everyone reacts to clothes, everyone loves clothes. Those who do not love it simply do not know they love them. In our ultra commercial and media driven culture, even subversive countercultures are concerned with looking their part stylishly!
If you run an IT company (or would like to look like you do), you might need to dress differently than if you run a Brick and Mortar or Main Street company. Ask yourself, what are you selling? Considered once to be a vulgar thought, there is no room for that outdated philosophy gleaned in books or from our grandparents. Because in these times we have limited time and unlimited information to sort through, your clothes had better help you make your intended statement. Therefore, do ask yourself what message you are trying to convey and what image you are trying to maintain or conjure. Do you need to tell people you are rock solid, likeable, cutting edge? These factors are considerations. Are you an entertainer or do you just minister to the Stars? If you are a sports agent, do you wear what your clients wear or something that will register trust and empathy within your client base?
But how does all this relate to the sartorial tree of style? How do we delineate genres so that we can proceed to make choices which would please the style Gods? More specifically, to make certain that the reader understands certain concepts of style conveyed in essays found here in a manner which facilitates their involvement, it was felt a reference key would be useful. The categories are neither universal nor empirical. Likewise there is no desire to promote discussions about whether the categories are too few or too many. Rather, it is intended merely as to explain the approach to style and it is hoped it may help the reader to apply what appears here.
Although there are many, many branches on the sartorial tree, there are only a few that will be referred to consistently. The branches concerned with are actually all closely clustered to one another and are closely associated with the trunk. These branches are: Fogey, Old-Boy, Old-Boy-Hip, and Hip. To do any of them well is to have style, and to do any of them improperly would label one as “Slick.”
Fogey:
Fogey (The big F) style is the purist’s style. It reflects a love of tradition so strong that it employs a desire to use clothes materials in their traditional weights, finishes, colors and color combinations that have stood the test of time. Some say the look is dated and others appreciate its Burkean clarity as seen by the ancients. On the young it can look anachronistic and has given rise to the term Young-Fogey. Harris Tweed sports coats (and suits); serge blazers with metal buttons, heavy flannel suits, shirts and ties that hearken back to the 1920s-60s are the primary stomping ground for the Fogey. In America and Japan the post WW2 natural shouldered look is revered and called “Trad”. If you go back to the 1930s in the USA, the look is more international, (sometimes referred to as the International look or the Hollywood look). In England it may be referred to as the Bond Street or City of London look.
For everyone who likes the look of the old movies, Fogey is for them. Generally a heavier tailoring effort, though not always. However, sack suits aside, shoulder pads are heavier, interfacings and linings are heavier and the cloths used are heavier. Shirt fabrics aren’t necessarily heavy but the finer shirt fabrics do not align properly with the jacket weights and the lapels of the jacket may crush the more delicate shirt collar.
Designed at a time when we were less substantial, less affluent and less able to heat our surroundings 24/7, the Fogey look is very comfortable against continued exposure to the elements, as long as it is 60 degrees and below. The concept of summer weights was relegated to mohair, fresco cloth, cotton poplin or seersucker and Irish Linen. Many of these were in much heavier weights than used today (They are all still used today in lighter weights and more exciting colors, and blends) but they were undeniably better than the 16oz worsted or serge and for a time when comfort was understood on a lower level and propriety took precedence over personal relief. Back then, these fabrics must have seemed heaven sent.
A war raged between belt use and braces use for pants with the result that either is considered “Old School” as long as they are in the right pattern, colors and or materials. From the chocolate brown crocodile leather belt with simple sterling buckle (either attached or detachable) to the colorful canvas ring belt to the various beautiful silk or rayon braces.
Because of the weight of many of the fabrics, braces seem to work better because they distribute the weight across the shoulders and literally suspend the pants. By contrast, belts unless fitted perfectly (which is why many use a detachable, adjustable buckle) will be dragged down by the weight of heavier pants.
This is a look that can support elegant lapel pins, stick pins, ascots, walking sticks, hats of all types, beautiful metal jacket buttons and pocket crest badges, smoking jackets in silk velvet, dressing gowns in cashmere or silk, unlined gloves in a variety of leathers, hand blocked socks. Fogey may be outdated but make no mistake; the articles are from a plusher, gilded age of personal indulgence. Unfortunately, the hand made master craftsman cannot always keep pace with the exigencies of modern day-to-day.
The Fogey is currently being marginalized in that many of his sources for piece goods recede. True there still exists enough of a market to continue offering the cloths and accoutrements necessary to make the Fogey what he is, reactionary fabulous. Additionally, shops in Europe still carry and make a lot of Fogey items which although often times from cultures not originally considered a part of the Fogey look are now, due to the exigencies of generally dwindling resources, viewed as comfortable old friends.
Unfortunately for the Fogey, each year sees one of his erstwhile sartorial companion items drop suddenly dead or brought back to life by a demographic which shocks the Fogey out of his boulevardier-like complacency.
Fogey is a dry (Both figuratively and literally from the standpoint of material finishes), mature, all-male look from a time when showcasing secondary sexual characteristics were not a concern of men and they received little influence from any but a small circle of families who all saw things basically the same way. Sources for Fogey include kings and their aristocrats in England, captains of industry and their school/professorial circles in the United States. While having an element of Fogey in or a few outfits of the Fogey style can signify your sense of pride in tradition, immersing yourself in it too deeply may make someone think you are an anachronism. Many who wear this look possess a strong sense of nostalgia and loss…of the colonies.
Old-Boy and Fogey-Hip:
Old-Boy (OB) style is a style that absolutely takes its cues from the Fogey style but does so with up to date fabrics, colors, textures and color combinations. The major differences from Fogey are that there are fewer anachronisms in terms of clothing choices; the “Grand Old World” look is left at home. However, jacket and pants materials are still relatively dry and follow the same mature approach as Fogey without slavishly employing original source materials used by the Fogey. An Old-Boy may wear a tweed suit, but it will be in a 14 oz not an 18 oz. An Old-Boy will look for the dry and traditional but with some levity in the weight and does not mind if the fabrics are not what was actually worn in the past. Not a high gadget look, you will often see adherents of it unable to “log on.”
Old-Boy is in some ways just a diluted version of Fogey. An Old-Boy is a man who supports tradition but is not averse to progress. Old-Boy style is appropriate everywhere but although it is updated enough, it still defers to maturity over youth and propriety over the singles party ethic. The colors and patterns can be quite Bold as long as they are conservative.
In general color combination lean towards the traditional (often influenced by both the hunt and the military) rather than the beautiful. The idea is what is traditional IS beautiful. However the Old-Boy sees nothing wrong with buying a necktie made to modern rather than traditional specifications or in a width that is more up to date.
Jackets are lighter than Fogey but heavier than the next variant and details like ticket pockets and roped shoulders are seen as elegant details from the Casablancan past. They prefer pants with functionality over sexuality and have only the most unnoticeable details, except if they suggest a custom touch.
If pure cashmeres, or cashmeres/silk and wool/ silk are chosen they are chosen in colors and patterns that suggest no excitement at all or were considered bold a long time past. The Old-Boy does not like gimmick fabrics and leaves the one percent cashmeres to the purview of others.
At most, the old boy will spice up his day suit with an Hermes or a Vineyards Vines tie for some jaunty color with most of the other furnishings remaining predictable (if not necessarily devoid of color or pattern).
Things can get more expensive in the wardrobe of the Old-Boy too. Not that the Fogey doesn’t have his odd expensive item but the Old-Boy spends a lot more and on items the Fogey would never dream of spending money on. Blazer buttons in 18k gold on a worsted navy cashmere jacket and handmade crocodile penny loafers are items the Fogey might pass out over when considering the immoderation of it all.
Interestingly, although it was no doubt Hip when it was first introduced, I would group the Carnaby Street color riot along with the Turnbull and Asser look in the Old-Boy category. As long as you are not using superfine shirt materials and you are wearing heavy woven ties that Carnaby/Turnbull look which was once so Hip, is now decidedly Old-Boy.
I mention this to illustrate that being Old-Boy has nothing to do with drab tonality, it is rather details and fabric weights and finishes and an absence of the “designer” ethic. Tongue-in-Cheek references and playfulness in clothes patterns and colors are plenty in Old-Boy style as the Firm of Chipp once and Chipp2 still attests to. Again, combinations can be quite bold as long as they are traditional or play on the traditional.
Although it is a bit of a split hair, Fogey-Hip is a sub-variant accomplished by wearing the more daring but still practically extinct versions of Fogey. A stroller with its black jacket and striped pants would be Fogey-Hip. A bold 16oz tweed suit with a wool challis vest with repeated hunting/country images on it, heavy gauge but colorful argyle socks and country grained boots with an Austrian loden shooting coat is definitely Fogey-Hip.
Old-Boy-Hip:
Old-Boy-Hip (OBH) is similar to Old-Boy except that it uses only the most up to date or latest fabrics that demonstrate the last 30 years of influences in style (in the USA at least) from women, the Italians, Hollywood/Sports and Entertainment, Fashionable Mobsters and the new luxe culture of portable wealth and modernity. Many items that are considered too old fashioned are discarded for new interpretations. A blazer may have gold buttons but they might be white gold and the jacket itself is made from super 120s hopsack with 5 percent cashmere.
You might wear a striped blazer jacket with an ascot but the awning stripes will be in updated color combinations and be made of spun worsted cashmere and the Ascot will be from Hermes. Old-Boy-Hip takes nearly all its cues from Old-Boy but upgrades its panache and luxuriousness. It also displays a certain minimalist expression. Lighter cloths, less decoration on shoes, more suede, more refined, softer, color blend is of particular concern and things are more matched than in Old-Boy where color combinations often eschew the pleasant for the traditional. With OBH, you can be somber or have a color riot, as long as it all matches nicely or is coordinated beautifully without slavish regard to tradition.
Fogey items are copied in the most refined manner imaginable. An 18oz Edwardian tweed suit is re-rendered in a super 110s 8oz smoothly worsted fabric where the texture of tweed is emulated through use of shading and design. We remember the traditional in the conscience but shed the textures and weights for the realities of 21st century living. It is in this category that new cloths will be tried out in traditional colors and patterns. A super 180s worsted cloth is acceptable as long as it is in a charcoal solid or has white pinstripes.
In some ways the Milanese were the originators of this OBH look. They beat the segmented associations out of clothes and freely mixed color and usefulness and purpose to their liking. Thus regimental ties ceased to be a social identifier and instead became a stylish way to blend the colors of your outfit together. In OBH, we know that there are some underlying traditions and principles of style at work but we don’t feel the need to slavishly follow them. It should be mentioned that the Neapolitans have created a niche that cleverly blends elements of Fogey (Think Marinella tie patterns) into the OBH.
Paul Stuart is perhaps the best example of at least the American natural shouldered version of Old-Boy-Hip. Like the furnishings Paul Staurt offers, cutting edge reinterpretations of traditional accoutrements and accessories are often seen with the OBH style. This is the look I think most men should shoot for.
Hip:
Hip encompasses the modern approach, clothes for the jet age. Hip is an ephemeral idea to grasp and to explain. Hip is of the moment but it is also timeless. With regard to clothes, Hip are those items which are both conformist and pass muster with the establishment but are still cool enough and appeal to the young enough to be not only acceptable but desirable. In other words, Hip shows the young that they can look formal their way without selling out and still look decent and promising enough to their elders. Not that Hip dressing is reserved only for the young, it is more proper to say that it is for those both young and current of heart.
Hip borrows the tailoring of Old-Boy but it uses fabrics that are slightly outside the ambit of most traditional businesses. Fabrics will be made in the most expensive and refined way imaginable but will have just that certain something that makes them wrong for a corporate law firm during the day. Fabrics may have silk in them or a self herringbone which is too large for a banker’s suit. Stripes are generally avoided as being too Old-Boy unless the stripes are decidedly non traditional. Much use is made of the most cutting edge fabrics available like super 240s wool, silk and wool and Bamboo. Often Hip cloths have smoother finishes and are softer than those in the past. For example, cavalry twill will be light weight and buttery soft, as if the Fogey had been beaten out of it.
Many items that are Hip can be used in all but the stuffiest business circles and will remain undetected except by clothing fanatics (who will be relieved that you are well dressed at all) and a handful of people who believe things should all look like they did in 1950. Fortunately the eye witnesses to that look rarely inhabit the contemporary office unless they’ve been taxidermied and placed in a corner. And though their glazed eyes may seem to sneer disapprovingly at you in the elevator bank like those of the heads ranged on Temple Bar, they can do no further harm.
Patterns and colors not always acceptable in the more conservative business environments are mainstays here. Hip fabrics are very relaxed, luxurious and soft – very soft. They often have a touch of sheen to them. The purity of midnight black dye in a wool suit fabric is of paramount importance. Fabrics no longer frequently used for the traditional western day suit such as barathea and faille are common for the Hip wardrobe. Hip employs as staples the fabrics that are used only for specialty outfits in the Old-Boy wardrobe. A worsted cashmere suit is not a luxury for Hip dressing, it is a basic.
Neckties are never traditional looking but the silks and finishes sometimes can be. However neckties are more often chosen judiciously from designer offerings and in colors or shades of colors that no Old-Boy would wear. Although Hip necktie choices can be from the same range as those Old-Boy’s choose from, they should not reference the traditional. When colors are described as “off”, a navy blue tie may have a hint of grey in it, and the weave may be nontraditional. Fabrics are more relaxed and synthetics can appear in small amounts to create certain sheens on the tie’s surface, though 100% silk is still preferred. A satin finish tie will not resemble the self-lined and relatively stiff type made by RL to an updated 1940 ethic, instead it will have a softer, fleshier finish and the colors will be “off” to the eye of a Fogey.
In many ways Hip is the second coming of the jazz age for fashion; a time when people tried to blend in with the city landscape. A time when people from different walks of life formed a sartorial lingua franca which allowed them, when congregating together, to focus on jazz and being cool or tolerant with one another. Hip takes its cues from the concrete and the chrome and the black glass and blue lights of the excitement of city life. It is an assertion that man has kept pace with machine, with technology with the times. That the old tribal jealousies are eroding in favor of a universal culture of men.
Ironically, because the original Victorians would doubtless be scandalized by the parallel, Hip also takes its hues from the great masculine renunciation of the industrial revolution. In this renunciation men forswore the colorful and fussy clothes for plain, dark clothes that made them seem more substantial, more serious and more defensively formidable. These clothes gave them anonymity in a crowded and oft voyeuristic city setting. If you add mystery and sex appeal to the list, you have the second renunciation’s coming. Black, midnight blue, steel grey and a silver grey are along with black/brown the basic language of the Hip suit. When you dress in a certain element of Hip style you are simply aping the materials and colors and lights, in a word the “zeitgeist” of your time and your cities.
Hip has several sub-branches. There is the office Hip for more cutting edge industries and there is the evening Hip of the urbane and talented. In some ways being Hip hides your background and levels the playing field so that you can mingle undetected. It is perhaps the first merit based self-imposed sumptuary law of city dwellers. Colors are more limited in some ways with darker colors predominating. But there are also occasions when the colors are quite bright.
This style carries similar minimalism of Old-Boy-Hip but can be even more streamlined. Pocket flaps on jackets are often omitted; shoes have no brogueing at all, there are more boot styles evident, and black suede is acceptable. White metals for jewelry are preferred. Cutting edge electronics are part and parcel of this look. Hip is useful for cutting edge and artistic industries that want to give off the idea of modernity. I find this look primarily useful for the nightlife.
Basic Hip as opposed to the more advanced version relies on one cutting edge item to make it work. Rather like the idea that you should only wear one individualistic item for traditional black tie dressing; with Hip you should have one item that is current. Perhaps a black sweater from Versace with the medusa logo woven onto the chest or a Necktie from Dolce & Gabbana with the firm’s name woven repeatedly onto it in self silk. It should be mentioned that color combinations can be quite non traditional, a brown suit, a black shirt and a copper colored tie is very Hip for a downtown evening.
In many ways dressing Hip is not so very different than Old-Boy-Hip or even Old-Boy. It is more often a matter of fabric and color choice. The cut of the jacket can remain the same; the pants will usually be belted but will be a traditional cut. In this manner, one could conceivably use the same tailor to make clothes for many different looks.
Additionally, Hip can re-employ a Fogey staple in an updated fashion. The satin finish necktie already mentioned and the white on white shirts, popular as a dinner shirt in the 50s and 60s is now Hip (even for the office) but in lighter weights and finer finishes. It seems that the previous generation damning that weave of shirt as in bad taste was enough to make it a popular choice with the newest jacket wearing generation.
In other ways Hip is the hardest style to pull off. It hasn’t nearly the amount of choices as either Old-Boy or Old-Boy Hip and yet it is ironically the hardest to accomplish and avoid looking Slick. This is why most choose the noir sub branch of Hip.4
Even more ironically, although being Hip in some ways thumbs its nose at the Old-Boy style canon to get it right it helps immensely to understand the elements of the Old-Boy look. This is because dressing Hip is about picking the right cut, texture and finish with regard to clothes and only someone with well grounded taste in what is Old-Boy tasteful can determine what is still tasteful but decidedly not Old-Boy. Did I say it would be easy?
The best example for the contrast between Hip and Fogey I can come up with as an image is a cinematic one. In the Movie Time after Time (1979) the Character H.G. Wells chases Jack the Ripper to present day San Francisco from Victorian London. Both men are from Upper English backgrounds but what is interesting is that H.G. Wells remains unable to change from his Fogey tweed suit and pocket watch and wanders around in a daze looking so out of place while the Jack the Ripper character is wearing a modern sports jacket with a turtleneck sweater and enjoying the town. It is curious that the film director made this conscious distinction. Maybe the parallel is that dressing Hip brings out the aggressively passionate socialite in all of us.
Hip in the way I use it entails a certain amount of timelessness to it. If you could look at a photo from the late sixties or early seventies, you might see Steve McQueen in a black turtleneck sweater and a black suit. In Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (1972) notice that the suits on the men are presented in a way that makes them appear more modern. And being modern was wearing a mock turtleneck in a dark color with your suit. In some ways the modern look is always with us but constantly refreshed with finer or different fabrics. In another way the “future shock” keeps getting reinforced on us and it becomes the reality.
There are many more genres but they are outside the ambit of recurring interest. They are either too fashionable, too flamboyant, too complex, too mired in sub culture (Though I will do articles on sub cultures from time to time and the way they affect mainstream American male attire) or too uncomfortable. The focus will remain in the realm of the tailored clothes for mainstream men who make the rounds in circles of talent, money and education whether it is at work or play. You will find that few categorically exist solely in one genre but that blending usually takes place between abutting styles, thus OBH/Hip but rarely Fogey/Hip.
Clashes arise when genres are mixed from non abutting genres. A hip pair of cufflinks might go with an OBH suit but with a Fogey suit it will look “wrong”. This is why it is important to understand some structure to genres before mixing them. A silk faille double breasted suit is beautiful because it is refined and dry and smooth. In midnight blue, it is very Hip. However add to it the classic J. Press repeating whale tie (Fogey) and you get a disaster. Mixing the wrong genres together goes hand in hand with making the wrong individual item choices on their own. This is referred to as “Slick.”
SLICK:
Being slick is a term unto itself. It is when a person of any class from a culture selects and item that has not got a certain level of objective beauty, refinement or talent innate to its design. We sometimes refer to the choice as garmento or cheesy. How does one develop this eye for selecting items that achieve the proper level of objective beauty, refinement or talent? That is a very good question, and language may prove inadequate for the answer.
It can be said that those who cannot make up their own minds or have no talent for tasteful objectivity rely solely on designers. Sometimes this achieves the person’s aim because good designers capture what our culture finds desirable and turns it into clothing. And not everyone gets dressed for the pleasure of wearing clothes; many get dressed to influence how others accept them. So if you don’t know how to make the right choice, I suppose at least let a designer announce that he/she made the right choice for you. This reaches the Nth degree when the subject announces he is wearing a “Fellini” or a “Bellini” or dispenses with an utterance altogether and simply wears his label on his sleeve.
Here is another way to understand Slick dressing. Within any style, whether you approve of it or not, there is both a tasteful way to execute and a lowbrow one. Therefore, whenever someone does something lowbrow as opposed to highbrow, it makes the observer’s nose wriggle up from suffering observation of the failed attempt. Again, this reaction would be measured irrespective of the judgment of the overall look and with the understanding that the only measured reactions are against those observed actions of having executed a particular look either properly or improperly.
A Navy super 120s suit with violet pin stripes cut in a Paul Stuart style of silhouette is Old-Boy Hip, a Dacron polyester navy suit with a violet stripe at a fashion warehouse is decidedly Slick. A Zegna black crepe suit in the Anglo-Milanese cut with a hand made and finished cashmere t-shirt and Prada boots or E. Green black monks with a double sole can be quite Hip, A black suit made in a heavily padded shouldered style with a self stripe and a black Hanes cotton tee with pointy toed ostrich shoes is Slick.
Items that transcend genres:
I touched on the idea earlier that an article of clothing or jewelry can usually operate within its adjoining genre. Thus OBH and OB can share many articles in common. Dangers arise when you skip a genre and try to place something that is Fogey in the Hip genre. This is because what we think of as Fogey revolves around the homage to the countryside and the outdoors as signs of the good life. That is why Fogey often embraces heavier, drier, rougher, more earth toned shades. For the Fogey, leisure was the country estate.
Today it is the opposite, we tend to think of the city and the indoors as leisure. The good life revolves around city excitements, car or air travel. It requires cooler, Lighter, smoother, finer fabrics in colors reminiscent of urban camouflage with accents of strategic metals.
There are articles which transcend this guideline dividing styles. Many items can co-exist usefully in three or even all 4 of the genres. Some items, curiously enough, do indeed skip genres but we will deal with those few exceptions as they come up.
Chelsea Boot:
In black by Edward Green it is universally correct. I always think Sherlock Holmes and the Victorians; tres Fogey, n’est ce pas? However it works in each category in its classic form. To be sure you can tweak it a bit. In chocolate suede it is Old-Boy-Hip and in Black suede it is very hip.
Black Alligator Belt and Sterling engine turned belt buckle:
Is this a Natural shouldered American classic? You bet but it is also a favorite Hip classic. Its simplicity and unquestionable refinement is both Old-Boy in its quiet patrician approach and perfect for the Hip, modern dresser.
Grey suit with black stripe:
This is a very old fashioned Fogey suit in 15oz grey flannel and a heavy black chalk stripe done in a Double breasted 6 on 2 button stance jacket. In two button, notch lapel 10oz 120s and cashmere it is Old-Boy-Hip. However, do it in a 120s and mohair with a black beaded pinstripe in a one button peak lapel and it’s Hip. It would seem the adage applies that what is old is sometimes new.
Button Down Shirts:
Although the fabric choices and colors and patterns vary tremendously between genres all agree that the shirts ruthless design efficiency makes it at a minimum a tie-less staple. In beefy oxford cloth it is Fogey, in pinpoint it is Old-Boy, in 160s broadcloth it is Old-Boy-Hip, in Medium blue satin twill it is Hip and in navy twill it is Very-Hip. We have not dealt with Very-Hip but as an illustration in a Versace silk print the modest button down becomes Uber-Hip.
Here then is the framework of what I hope will be useful for people trying to understand the nuances of different dressing styles. Rather than a tree you can alternatively think of these styles as a continuum, rather like a conveyor belt. At one time Fogey was Hip, and what is now classically Hip today may become Fogey in the future. However the movement from Hip back to Fogey is a slow one. What is Hip may become Old-Boy-Hip for a time before moving along the digestive track of style.
Although there appear to be interesting facts that make one wonder exactly what is new and what is old. Some things have been around for a while but have not been employed by men wearing tailored clothes. Other materials or patterns on materials were Fogey at one time and have been rediscovered as Hip. Yet other items have been used all along. For example, in the book Hatless Jack, there is a mention of a GQ article from March 1961 citing that JFK wore lighter suits in 10-11 oz for fall/winter and 6-8 oz for spring/summer! I have seen few six ounce cloths today and had no idea that 8 oz cloths were regularly produced in 1961.5
Going forward, discussions will revolve around elemental style details relating to Fogey, Old-Boy, Old-Boy-Hip, Hip and Slick. I will flesh out the genres in a common law manner but these control terms will recur to illustrate my takes on different branches of tailored style from the sartorial tree.
1 The suit remains, in spite of “upper class” tastes driving its details, democratic because of its basic simplicity but also because the divide between have and have not is not nearly as pronounced as it once was. Therefore, subtleties continue to separate taste from tastelessness, giving at least the illusion that differentiating the tasteful from the outré has nothing at all to do with money. Because the suit acts like a key to the temple of respect and propriety and seems easily attainable by all, it actually poses little friction between the upper and middle classes. Perhaps this important element serves to keep the suit stable as a democratic symbol. For the moment, I think the suit is safe. DeTocqueville was correct in his observation that whilst Americans do not like to be made to feel inferior they still relish feeling superior, and mastering the suit and tie remains a means to accomplish this, often with aplomb. Also, no other item of clothing possesses the built in message of substance and authority. The Greek philosophy behind the purpose of language may be at work here. The Greeks believed that language should cram as much meaning into as few words as possible (as you can see, I am decidedly not Greek). It seems the suit sends such a world of implicit messages that a replacement cannot be dreamt of in our philosophies.
2 If the USA has say 300 millions split evenly between male and female, I would hazard that 150 million women know that clothes are important and discuss them and plan them all the time and that maybe 2 million American males do the same. Something ain’t right. It’s not that the other 148 million do not care about clothes, it’s just that the choices they aspire to are benighted.
3 Mastery of the use of solid colors in the wardrobe is laudable; using them solely to play it safe is the coward’s camouflage.
4 Noir dressing in many ways is the most minimalist twig on the Hip branch. However, it is a little too safe and predictable, which is partially why everyone does it. Although it fits in with the Greek ideal of “Everything in proportion and nothing in excess” it actually doesn’t look as good on as many people as its simplicity might suggest. Nevertheless, it is the direction we are heading in.
5 Steinberg, Neil. Hatless Jack: the president, the fedora, and the history of an American style, New York: Penguin Group, 2004, p. 182. This is a good book in its own right for describing how articles of clothing go in and out of style.
Comment [3]
Alan Flusser: Back to Basics
Alan Flusser? He is the man who dressed Michael Douglas’ Gordon Gekko character in the film Wall Street. He is an author of four informative books on men’s clothing and style. He is a dandy in the original sense of the term, a man who loves both clothes and to dress stylishly. I have always, admittedly, been a fan of his tastes. Recently, I had a special chance to meet up with Alan Flusser at his custom shop and play a different role than I had hitherto. It was special for several reasons. Not only is the man an award winning, industry driving force of style but he was also a heavy influence on my sartorial development.
It was also a different role for several reasons. In the past when speaking with Mr. Flusser I was ordinarily in the role of acolyte, fedora in hand, using it to catch as much of the cascade of stylish suggestions as I could manage. But this time, he was impressed enough to observe aloud that he had taught me well and that the sartorial circle was now complete. Many were the hours he would instruct me in the stylish ways of the dark side. Dark side because his style is aggressive, it has attitude; it is not for the meek. His tastes are the proverbial iron fist in the custom made, velvet glove. When you wear clothes designed or chosen for you by Alan Flusser, you are as a dandy wolf amongst sheep.
So here I was, in the Style Wolf’s lair, and eager to write an incredible article about my mentor, to put some back in the kitty, as they say. I had an entire list of advanced dandy-esque items and stances I wanted to discuss with him. Everything from the types and shapes of shirt collars suitable for pinning to the most beautiful type of cuff one could place on a suit jacket’s sleeve. Mr. Flusser, however, though always willing to discuss such stylistic minutiae with a fellow dandy was a bit vexed. He enlightened me to the fact that my questions were set in a selfish font, fit only for the interpretations of the already degreed dresser.
Advanced secrets about how to stay in front of the style curve may be fascinating for a select few, but what of everyone else? What possible use would the average but aspiring to “smart” dresser derive from my interview – from his words? We decided on reciting the mantra on the basics of dressing well that, once mastered, will enable anyone to get in touch with their sartorial chi and from there develop their own unique style.
People learn to dress well by observing other people who already dress well. It sounds so easy, and it is. However, in our modern era, the number of the walking well dressed dwindles constantly. It has reached the point that several large fashion houses have a very hard time teaching their employees to dress well because of a dearth of suitable examples for them to learn from. As a matter of fact, there remain only a handful of department stores in the USA where you can rely on the taste of both the establishment and their staff to guide you properly in an approach to classic dressing.
Midnight Blue hairline beaded pinstripe Voyage fabric from Dormeuil. White poplin shirt and woven necktie all by Alan Flusser.
The only other resources available are magazines, many of which have no committed interest (or ability) these days to teach men to dress both stylishly and timelessly. Perhaps that is why this age of the designer lasts so long. Similar to fantasy writing, there need be no research or analysis (or even taste) for designers to come up with “original” fashions; simple fancies of the imagination suffice to justify new, and often pricey, looks. Therefore, for the moment, unless a man is fanatical about clothes and style, it is rather hard to learn the basics.
And the basics, says Mr. Flusser, is really what it is all about. Although the basics should, theoretically, be extraordinarily easy for any man to learn, the information is not readily available. Thus that which should be easy to obtain has become painfully hard to uncover. Indeed, one has to be a veritable style Egyptologist excavating (in your single breasted three button vanilla wafer shaded suit, of course) long abandoned sartorial tombs and temples.
We now live in a world where there are so many different visions about what constitutes proper dress that it boggles the mind which tries to determine in what direction to go in or how to assert a sense of consistency. However, all current men’s tailored styles emanate from the common stem of having to wear a shirt and tie, even if the style ultimately arrived at by a man is tie-less. It seems thus plausible that a starting point revolves around the basics of getting everyone to do this well for themselves. The assumption is that the great bulk of serious men want to dress in a way that makes them look smart and not foolish. That is why it is best to have one common look for men, which they can use as a palette to mix their own stylish tints from.
According to Flusser, the business casual revolution is apparently over. Even the fashion industry itself is glad to rid itself of that garment guillotine if only because of the difficulties the industry already faced trying to teach men how to properly wear a basic shirt and tie. To make matters worse, the industry discovered that it was incrementally more difficult to teach men (and in fact define in their own professional minds) the basics of business casual. Business casual hasn’t a strong lineage and items had to appear both casual and business-like at once, and where were the experts for that coming from?
Now we understand that to be stylish does not just entail the buying of clothes, it is also about learning to select clothes properly and dress well. Mr. Flusser maintains that historical knowledge of the origins (or development of clothes) is both useless and of little interest to the modern man aspiring to dress both well and effectively for his purposes. There are rather certain things “of the moment” that need to be addressed, what suit silhouette (the pattern and scale of the suit’s cut) will look good on the wearer and remain useful over time.
Additionally, the color of a man’s hair and pigmentation play a part in what colors and combinations will look good on him. And seeing that he looks good in certain items, this will serve to excite him further about continuing on a journey to develop sensibilities about dressing well. Usually this type of advice on style goes to only those spending large amounts of money for custom clothes. However, Alan thinks this is a shame and that this information should be readily available to everyone. That is why he is offering a more affordable made to measure clothing service which includes advice on accoutrements that compliment both the outfit and the wearer. It is hoped by Monsieur Flusser that younger men will learn to thus command their own destinies when it comes to choosing articles of clothes in the proper patterns, fabrics and colors.
Does Alan think that having a large variety of outfits, or being able to or willing to wear a large variety of outfits makes one a good dresser? Yes, once a person has gotten the mantra of the basics down cold. However, we are talking Dantean 9th circle of hell cold. Additionally, the most important ingredient of clothes and dressing well is comfort, followed by fit and style for one’s build and occupation, then quality, design of the garment itself and, finally, color choice (depending on the specific coloration of the individual being clothed).
Although it is true that Alan dresses in the most modern way imaginable during his leisure hours, it must be pointed out that he was raised in an affluent East coast suburb, and attended an Ivy League school and thus was exposed to the natural shouldered/Paul Stuart look rather early. He has transcended this look but the ability to understand its basics and importance for the professional man remains paramount in his mind.
Medium Navy Blazer with white spread collared shirt and Art Deco style necktie reminiscent of the Charvet prints from the 1930s and 40s.
And he is of the mind that for the ordinary person who wants to learn to dress in a sophisticated way, the jumping off point will always be a navy (or dark) solid suit, white shirt, navy tie, navy socks, black shoes and white pocket square. This look must be mastered before branching out. It must be worn well, which means you must be firing on all style cylinders. These include: cleanliness, upkeep/condition, quality, design, fit, proportion, construction, weight and the texture of all items/elements must mesh with each other and be appropriate for the season or weather.
It simply cannot be stressed enough how important it is to achieve this classic and yet often elusive basic step. Alan maintains that if you do master this look, and it really isn’t hard if you receive the right information, you will be better dressed than ninety five percent of men walking around in midtown Manhattan. One would not think that Navy suit, white shirt, navy socks, navy tie and black shoes would be a stumbling block to style but there are a number of men interested in clothes who seem to gloss over this stylistic foundation and head right to the suede shoes, windowpane suit and boldly colored shirt counter. The result is that they fail to learn the importance of fit, comfort and design that flatter them eternally rather than give them that fleeting fashion fix.
The word is out now in the form of the first dandy mantra, that if you want to become a stylish dresser, then you must master the basics of navy and white. As pedestrian as it may seem when there are an abundance of patterns and colors in every clothing store, one’s first step is restraint and rejection of the sensational in favor of the handsome, dignified and important. Simplicity is seldom far from elegance. Perhaps to the western mind, it helps to approach this like an empirical scientific theorem, needing constant proof. Apply this proof throughout your sartorial pursuits and you will eventually find yourself well dressed. All you need really do to become a Lord of the Sartorial Sith is read the first four chapters of his recent book Dressing the Man to invoke the elementals of dressing properly and, in this age of plebian dishabille, well.
Credits
Photos courtesy of The Alan Flusser Shop, www.alanflussercustom.com
Photographer: Heather Oppelt, Heather Oppelt Photography.
Comment [3]
H. Herzfeld: This is not your Fathers store…well not totally.
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution revolves around survival of the fittest. Recently, another scientist hypothesized that Darwin’s theory is more akin to survival of the luckiest. What then would you have if had a creature that was both the fittest and the luckiest? Why H. Herzfeld in NYC of course.
H. Herzfeld, located in midtown Manhattan1 has survived for over 70 years primarily because it is capable of adapting the term “classic” to the needs of the present. Although the store is geared for the more mature and self-assured man, there are many things suitable for the younger person looking for a quality upgrade. It is a nirvana for the sports coat and blazer set in terms of accessories.
The overall look offered is Anglo-American which can mean a lot of different things these days. The Englishman prefers double breasted suits with woven ties and strongly patterned shirts, it is more military, alert comportment. The sports coat is not a strong look there, but the “businessman’s” look is quite stable. The American likes a softer, less built up more playful look. Sports jackets are common in town and fabrics the English would never wear to work because of their colonial associations, work here because we ARE the one time colonies.
I would say H. Herzfeld is dimpled in the middle between the natural shouldered look and the small but elite tradition of the Jermyn Street shops in London, where stylish secrets lay in drawers waiting to be rediscovered by some savvy owner. At H. Herzfeld, One can always find a discontinued handmade piece good which will absolutely make an outfit. Today, to the outside world self image may go hand in hand with marketing but the inner dandy, as they say, is in the details.
H. Herzfeld has three tailors on the premises who work both on their own and in tandem on customer projects. In any case, the tailoring department is not wedded to any particular look, although a moderate English look is the standard production. However, they can produce a variety of “looks” for the discerning client. There is a wide assortment of fabric choices. Odd dress trousers are a strong suit here in ready-to-wear, made-to-measure and custom make.
H. Herzfeld is always trying to provide classic elegance which is updated for the contingencies of modern living. In terms of providing classic elegance a polo coat can either be styled, rather like a throwback, exactly the way it was in 1956 or simply be an updated version of what a polo coat should look like in 2006. That is, lighter, softer material, slightly different cut and details for the modern dresser who appreciates a soupcon but not a dousing of tradition.
Sometimes that which is hip and luxurious fuses harmoniously with things old world as with the baseball jacket in a bamboo colored micro fiber. On the subject of micro fiber, the store also carries a “weekend” jacket in this material, lined in a cashmere blend. It is light weight, traditional and “cool”.
A camel hair, full collared cardigan in camel colored camel hair or in four ply charcoal cashmere. H. Herzfeld maintains a higher more consistent price point but they ensure that you are only paying for quality, not for a label. Cashmere sweaters and vests are from Scotland where the water from the river Tweed produces a finishing on the fabric which makes it incomparably soft and luxuriously lofty.
H. Herzfeld is reminiscent of the traditional English shops along Jermyn Street, Bond Street or Piccadilly with some contemporary accents for the younger gent. Those stores have and continue to deliver to their clients frank, helpful suggestions with an almost military crispness and precision. This same deeply knowledgeable service is presented by H. Herzfeld to the American client right smack dab in the middle of midtown Manhattan.
Seven fold ties are carried, and make a wonderful full knot for wear with cutaway collars. In fact, the store has a bewilderingly assorted selection of neckties. Prints and woven ties in both playful serendipitous patterns and serious solid citizen patterns. All ties are of the highest quality with linings of wool. Many of the ties are made up especially for the store.
H. Herzfeld carries Vineyard Vines ties, Lee Allison ties, Holliday and Brown, Richel, Leonard of Paris, Drakes and a dozen other makes. The only thing consistent here about the ties is their quality. The new natty indulgence is the eleven fold (that’s right, a single piece of silk folded over eleven individual times as in “Mine goes to eleven”) by Dolcepunta, printed, woven and many with the trade mark round (and thus hand cut, rolled and finished ends).
Atkinson’s poplin ties which are a mixture of wool and silk that create an elegant and matchless look went out of business and then, phoenix-like, re-opened. This is a good thing because the ties are so unique and it proves that survival of the fittest can be taken one step further to revival of the fittest.
Soon chukkas from Hield in suede with a fancy rubber bottoms are on order for a casual man-about-town type of flair. Pantherella socks both sized and one size fits all.
Shirts in many different, attractive patterns and colors are also a feature of this store. They have a large selection in sizes ready to go and three different shirt programs for made to measure and custom shirt services. English, Italian and Swiss fabrics are offered in a large array.
They carry boxer shorts in the store’s own label made from Japanese cotton and from makers such as Zimmerli. Gloves are carried in a wide array of hides and linings (and without linings). Straw Hats from Lock and felt hats from Borsalino.
Casual shirts by Paul Shark are exquisite in both knit polo style and woven madras button downs, traditional and hip all at the same time. Magnificence of color, fabric and pattern matching combine to make these a superior golf shirt. Again, proving there can be a crossroads between old and new.
Intimidation is a result of ignorance and most men are in the dark ages when it comes to deciding what choices to make and suspicious of salesman pandering to their egos in order to make a sale. That can make entering a seemingly exclusive shop a somewhat quietly desperate experience. However, the atmosphere at H. Herzfeld is relaxed and the prospective client here gets the same service whether he buys one tie, a whole wardrobe or nothing. Old customers are treated like family because H. Herzfeld wants clients for life not a mere sale. And H. Herzfeld is chock-a-block with sartorial knowledge. The entire staff is expert in those matters of what makes a man look good.
But it’s really all about one of their longtime salesmen, Ira. Ira knows everything. I mean everything. His taste in clothes and their appropriateness for the occasion intended is phenomenal. Even those genres of dressing style that are not to his taste he understands perfectly. This says to me, he has forgotten more about style and clothes than many of us will ever know. It would not be far off the mark to declare Ira a national “dandy” treasure. And Ira is the high priest presiding over the cult of the blazer and the tweed suit. For instance, whilst showing me a green tinted, plaid tie for wear with a navy blazer he brought the shade of grey flannels in as an element to consider along with the tie, which was an eye opener for me.
Ira is the details god in the store. He knows which things are good and he remembers items of style that have passed into lore. You can tell him your needs or describe an outfit you want to spruce up and he will come up with the answer for you. I would listen to Ira’s advice about dressing without question for anything involving traditional men’s clothing. His modesty and graciousness is astonishing considering it is worth his weight in spondulaks to have him set up a series of tie, jacket and shirt combinations and give one pointers on how to match things handsomely.
Ira really needs to write a book to preserve his vast and irreplaceable knowledge of traditional men’s dressing. If I were a writer, I would record it all myself and publish this Library of Alexandria for the sake of stylish posterity. Ira knows everything and over a long span of time (including periods of stylish dress that died out long before his time) and in such enviably rich detail. He has seen and worn every item of fine tailored clothing. And his taste is magnificent. If Ira tells you that an item will make you look good, buy it!
The dinosaurs, the large mammals, the marsupials, the carrier pigeon and the genuine, old guard republican, they all have seemingly either gone the way of extinction or are close to it. The same is true for the haberdasher. However, there are still some holdouts who hang on because they are ingenious mutations, sartorial chameleons who can adapt to the times and remain “classic”.
Although the barbarians are arguably at the gate of style, H. Herzfeld stands like a citadel of sartorial light. There may come a time when a store like H. Herzfeld is excavated like some long forgotten Inca temple yielding curious relics from the “tailored age” but for now, H.Herzfeld by sheer virtue of its innate excellence, avoids the slings and arrows of those who would extinguish style from the world.
1 118 E 57th St, New York , New York. (212) 753-6756
The Plates
Navy loden coat Breton Blue Belvest blazer, cream, lightweight gabardine pants. Knit gloves with suede palm.
Hunting coat with cartridge pockets in Navy Blue Flannel wool (cotton also available) it is Teflon treated for water repellency, suede collar and red wool lining. Perfect for treating that rare game you’ve landed to a cozy lunch on the weekend.
100% wool sports coat, cashmere argyle sweater, flannel trousers, cashmere scarf.
Cream colored weekend jacket, micro fiber shell, lined in a wool/cashmere blend. Purple cashmere cable sweater, Borsalino hat.
Brigg umbrellas
Shot from lower back landing of H.Herzfeld.
Striped for summer fun. High quality repp silk ties.
Leonard of Paris neckties. Some people consider these an acquired taste and wear little else.
Lee Allison ties. Serendipitous fun ala 1950s-1960s.
Blazer accoutrements. H.Herzfeld’s staff are experts at dressing the blazer and sports jacket. If you need something last minute to go with something tailored but casual, this is your first stop.
Some Jermyn Street dash. H.Herzfeld has always considered itself positioned at a crossroads between the American natural shoulder and English Bond Sstreet ethos.
A rich cream shirt with a Lee Allison tie on it. It’s raining cats and dogs! At least show the girls you have SOME sense of humor.
Matching all the colors in both shirt and tie well takes some practice. These guys have been doing it for a long time. Let them show you the way.
Again, the Bond Street/Wall Street style. Imagine Gordon Gekko and Francis Urquhart shaking hands in a photo op.
Handmade cotton Paul Shark knit shirt for summer playfulness. These shirts are beautiful and comfortable.
Paul Shark linen button downs in the “Prep school’s out, let’s summer” tradition.
Trad Star
“One day the two button, darted suit appeared. Sometimes it was marked down, sometimes it was returned, but it always reappeared. And those who wore it swelled its ranks…and those who wore it swelled its ranks.”
-Excerpt from the Song of Townsend.
David Wilder: Natural Shouldered Man of Mystery
The natural shouldered set was once the dominant style? Once maybe, for a time. They founded, created and ran all you see, men who wore those un-darted, three button models, that is. Men, whose acts of restraint required no legislation. There was a time, you know, when they thrived, when a civilization spiraled into essence from their talented, hardworking fingertips. They were the Rock Stars of their time. Ah, but their time is faded…And yet, there still remain rangers amongst them who patrol tradition’s outskirts and protect the faith until such time as it is called back to its rightful place.
It always comes to one while riding quiet commuter trains or catching a whiff of a lady-like perfume. Suddenly, the world around you changes and you are out of body, back in Southern Westchester at a garden party in the spring time or a Yale/Harvard football tailgate in autumn. Christmas parties in Bronxville, that crisp air combined with chimney smoke and blonde girls armed with bobbed hair clapping their hands and snooping for an unopened champagne bottle in one of the myriad cases scattered in abundance. Indian summer rays, clashing refreshingly through thousands of golden carapaces. Back then, you weren’t a sap if you displayed noblesse oblige, that counted.
That era, which seemed a forever but was merely an eyelash flutter at the sun. Bermuda shorts and loafers with madras shirts at the marina, shrimp cocktails and excellent white wine. A known crowd, a trusty crowd, with a set of rules you could follow for social interaction and expect the same in return. Cheerful memories replete with long strawberry blonde curls and flashing green eyes, all gone, all gone, like a black and white photograph in a slow smolder of white plumes at the edge of a bonfire. A world apart now, rent by some terrible sartorial cataclysm. But there was no conflict, just a fading of men of restraint, not up to the modern pace, no match for the talons of modern media. Old money reflexes without new money talent, doomed to twilight, helped, inexorably, by several economic upheavals that broke the old bonds of kinship. Oh ye faded republic, gleaned for an instant out of the corner of our eye; a brass eagle finial reflected in a dusty attic mirror. A last taste of the old Americana, as in our dreams.
Ten years ago he would hardly be considered remarkable by even the most arriviste observer. Now, however, he is a somewhat like a tarnished paladin from a more elegant era holding back the minions of darkness. Like the Tasmanian wolf, the carrier pigeon, last of a breed… last of a breed. Which brings us to our hero, David St-Clair Wilder. He is one of those aforementioned rangers amongst us, patrolling the borders of fashion, ever vigilant and unassumingly keeping the natural shouldered flame lit for posterity.
To the natural shouldered wardrobe born, David has made his background his life. It is no accident that he works within the hallowed halls of J. Press. Indeed, it is a testimony to life imitating art, and driving it. Born in Greenwich, Connecticut, his father was a native New Yorker; His mom is from Minnesota (but grew up in South Africa.) While a child, David’s family introduced him to the custom service industry, when they opened a beautiful personal stationery boutique in downtown Greenwich.
Therese St-Clair, started in 1977, by his mother, a Greenwich-ian lady of leisure who wanted to showcase her genteel talents. Although the shop started as stationers, the family was soon embossing leather vanity items with monograms and engraving metals (as in, please put that biting phrase from Kipling about being shipped somewhere “East of Suez” on my hip flask). Old world services offered in the 20th century; bespoke stationery for the tri-state area’s elite. A living room environment was created for potential clients to pore over choices of paper, font style, or reproduce their family crest. If a client was particularly lazy or wanted an expert opinion as to what sort of stationary would suit them, the Wilder family would apply their artistic advisory talents. The author himself indulged in this service once to be told that hot cerise stationery was “Him”.
For a generation, Therese St-Clair was the toast of Greenwich. Everyone had David’s family design their personal stationery or a special announcement whilst still in full lilt they sold it to another party. Nothing has changed at the shop which retains both the same zeitgeist and personnel. David’s family simply needed a break from the intense focus and resources that were required to provide the exacting excellence and quality. The new owners carry on at the very same level.
Indoctrinated into the natural shouldered creed early on, David had to wear a jacket and tie (often knit) from third grade onwards at Greenwich Country Day School (Where a certain father of a certain U.S. President attended.) Because the jacket mandated wasn’t necessarily a blazer, David was free to experiment with corduroy and madras and seersucker and tweed. Although I was shocked to learn that darts were not discussed in his circle until high-school, on second reflection I was relieved he had not heard of them until then.
At Yale, this legacy was all button downs and khakis, penny loafers, and both argyle socks and sweaters. Even then, he owned all the right clothes from J. Press. David actually worked part-time in the New York City, J. Press store. Incidentally, New Haven, Connecticut is where the Press family originated its business to cater to the natural shouldered herds which migrated from club to dance to football game; always in need of that article of clothing to be both comfy and correct in. His father had shopped there in the late 1940s and David had this example to draw upon.
In some ways though, being a throwback Yalie was to also reveal the fissures appearing in the social wall. Walking around in full preppy rig would sometimes elicit derisive comments from students who didn’t appreciate (or even understand) David’s tongue-in-cheek style (which was sometimes a kicky parody of itself) and therefore mistook his sincerity for highhandedness. The pendulum of modern fashion, it would seem, was swinging menacingly towards the Trads. The term “Trad” from traditional, may have originated from Japanese worship of the post war East Coast, American natural shouldered lifestyle. A lifestyle from an era when, as a nation, we were both playful and secure at once. Though the Trad stance apologizes to no one, it is seemingly under siege by all its detractors whom it makes feel inadequate.
The years passed, and America moved farther apart from the natural shouldered look. That which had evolved to make the wearer appear eternally young, evolved too far and was now, ironically, associated with an undesired maturity. To console himself, David drew inspiration from such Trad film classics as The Apartment, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying, That Touch of Mink and Will Success Spoil Rock Hunter? With solid influences like this, David realigned his sartorial priorities and began to wear a more authentic version of this “Throwback Trad” getting his ties narrowed at Tie Crafters and injecting a little color and European influence into his style. However, his true favorite remains the pre-1960 Ivy-League look in its purest form because of the cleanliness of the lines. Additional influential movies were Casablanca, Trading Places, Metropolitan, BridesHead Revisited, and the TV series I Dream of Jeannie.
Growing up in Greenwich in the 1970s and 80s basically saw the last gasp of the “country squire” crowd. Quiet, un-showy living, which revolved around clubs, long skiing trips in shared lodges and summering in private domestic or Caribbean beach locales.
And whither does David think Trad go-eth? The concentric circles that both acknowledge and approve of the Trad look get tighter every year asymptotically approaching the frozen state of Dante’s Ninth level. However, those that do remain still are some of the most robust. In many ways, they, the Trad, are the chosen dressers, forced to incessantly recite the mantra of the genre lest valuable sartorial lore be forgotten and pass into artifact. Sadly, as time passes, so do their comfortable social ambits. Nothing stays the same. Grand old, wood paneled Gotham shrinks to the point where only a few endroits remain: The Algonquin Blue Bar, The Roosevelt Hotel, 21 Club, the Racquet Club, The Yale Club (well, before its untimely collapse into a tourist curio), the Yacht Club, Lexington Bar and Books, PJ Clarke’s, Mellon’s for a burger (ah, the memories…), The National Arts Club, and the wherever the Colonial Dames’ events take place (Trad on the hoof?) David enjoys being stuck in his rut but how long until even these hallowed places drift into memory?
For the moment, David enjoys swathing himself in such diverse Trad raiments like his Nantucket Blues from Mark, Fore & Strike or his dozen or so MaGee tweed (Irish tweed, Scottish tweed, cashmere blends) jackets, Lacoste shirts and shaggy dog merino, v-neck sweaters (the ones with the deeper, more tasteful v-neck placement), ties at 3-3/8ths-5/8ths width, lots and lots of J. Press button downs, and club collared shirts worn as often pinned. It should be noted that, David’s passion within the natural shouldered checklist of accoutrements is eyewear.
In terms of glasses, David possesses an enviable collection of what may be termed “Trad” frames. 1920s-1960s frames that may evoke Tab Hunter or Brideshead Revisited, depending on his mood. He notes that whereas a movie like Quiz Show often gets the costumes dead on, they more often than not drop the ball when it comes to the eyeglasses. Monsieur Wilder owns over 80 pairs of eyeglasses, many of them vintage and only available in the after market or by having them recreated by a firm called AR Trapp. David has gone this custom route many times and has had frames recreated for him, getting Trapp to alter their shape and size to adjust for his individual specifications and measurements. O’Malley’s frames are a favorite. He also has the FDR1 model in several shades (clear, blonde tortoise, Skye Vodka blue, black, natural.) He also likes a style he calls the CIA2 because it is reminiscent of the style those suit wearing, government security forces wore in the 1960s. It would be fair to say that within the Trad world, David has experimented with several different styles. However, as he gets older, David feels he is heading towards a Dr. Bellows look (from the I dream of Jeannie television series) right down to the eyewear!
But what is Trad? Do I take its existence and the elements that compose it as a given? Was it an era, a culture, a mode? Is it clothes reflecting a lifestyle or a lifestyle reflecting clothes? I know of many examples where one can take the boy out of the Trad, but is the reverse ever true? Can you take the Trad out of the boy, or do the reflexes linger for a lifetime? It seems to me Trad was America’s version of Gentlemanly restraint as developed here first by the work ethic and then reinforced by the travails visited here by once the industrial revolution and thence the Great Depression. These milestones made it indelibly bad taste to flaunt one’s wealth. Wealth was enjoyed in private and virtue was considered as enriching as material baubles. This stance was reflected in the simplicity of the clothing, good quality but not the very best. The Trad style became, functional, playful and comfortable.
However we live a society where increasingly it is OK to judge but not be judged. Befitting the age of the voyeur, we are in an era of greater awareness but lesser self-awareness and perhaps that cloaks the jealousies that may attend the natural shouldered stance. Women assert that they want proper men but not really and the confusions abound about what and who is a “real” man. Certainly the fashion industry doesn’t represent the solid, dauntless man as the never changing pillar of manhood; that would obviate the need for the “au courant” man of fashion who needs to replace his wardrobe every season to appeal to the girls. And this is the point, the natural shouldered Ivy league look is the last American style untouched by sub-culture, the fashion industry or feminine influence. For work and play, it is a purely “Old Boy” approach to color and one ups-man-ship.
Far from dead, Trad simply carries on its aristocratic business on the fringes, its heirs are as rangers protecting the unsuspecting faithful whilst, somewhat unappreciatively, unseen themselves. David simply keeps his natural shouldered kit in good repair, his preppy coif anointed by Peter who is master of the Trad hair style3.
But the world is moving on, becoming more “connected.” Ironically, considering it is one of America’s most cloistered and uncontaminated of homegrown styles, globalization may actually be good for the Trad style. Certainly, it enjoys a cult following in Japan who worship the American 50s and 60s natural shouldered look almost to the point of fetish. J. Press itself was bought and enhanced by a Japanese company. Proving that sometimes a cross cultural fusion into a classic is progress. Sake-martini? Serve them by the pitcher full.
1 The FDR model was made by The American Optical Company, when they were still in business. Now they are available mostly in the aftermarket.
2 Apparently, AR Trapp calls them the CIA model as well.
3 Peter’s Hair Styling on 1st Avenue between 64th and 65th streets in Manhattan, 212-535-9546. Peter is from Finland and has mastered the fine art of the natural shouldered coiffure. Consider also his associate, Nat, who is the master of the Trad, Neopolitan style, straight edged shave.
Film Noir Style: The Maltese Falcon (1941)
A life long interest with old movies. When others considered them out of touch, I was drawn to their offer of an alternate reality in black and white. Because they were filmed in black and white, they seemed unreal to me, a perpetual netherworld where everything, even the disasters, worked with sinister, clocklike precision. Indeed, with a cavalier slash of the remote anyone could teleport into this netherworld and move amongst these mysterious persons from the past and, for once, reverse roles where the living viewer haunts the ghosts. The characters and their motives were fascinating to me, they were us but they weren’t also. They spoke like us but differently, THEY were different, things LOOKED different, they SOUNDED differently. As an overly imaginative child my cinematic ghosts kept me company when I couldn’t sleep. In particular there was one ghost who wasn’t like the others, he wasn’t good looking, he wasn’t athletic, he wasn’t young looking and he had a stoop, but somehow when he spoke everyone else marched to his step. He seemed inimitably in a trench coat, and wiping his lower lip with his thumb. And he was always in situations where he was being lied to and needed to talk tough to people.
His name was Humphrey Bogart, and even then, I knew he went by “Bogie”. And before I knew the style of film (I should say art form) he often played in possessed a label, there was one he starred in that stood out in my subconscious. I would eventually discover that it was the movie that essentially launched what we call the Film Noir movement. That movie was the Maltese Falcon [1] (1941), and it was as good for its stylish wardrobe as it was for its riveting script and excellent “noir” photography. Noir, that black and white dream world populated with “grey” characters and their slippery half-truths. A world of shadow seemingly no different than the regular world on its surface except that when suddenly you find you are in it, escape is almost impossible. Film Noir, is a real life Twilight Zone, where the lead character is separated from the world of daylight by a fluid but invisible wall. Once one walks into the invisible wall (which is easy to do) one cannot easily break through again and the scenes of Noir start to play out as if from a loop from a reel. Film Noir, most powerful and abstract of all classic Film styles, yet as soon as you recognize its outlines that define its allure they are gone, like the dissipation of well formed smoke rings.
For those of you, who have not yet seen the Maltese Falcon, be sure to watch it at some point. It is a fantastic film in its own right. A plot summary is as follows (and minimizing spoilers), Humphrey Bogart2 plays a partner in a detective agency and his partner is killed while tailing a suspect for a client. It turns out that the client who hired the man to tail the suspect for her, neglected to tell him that she was interested in a highly and criminally sought after statuette of a jewel encrusted falcon. Humphrey Bogart, as Sam Spade, gets sucked into the entire drama which has a surprise ending. Along the way, the path is strewn with moral quandary and violence both potential and kinetic.
Although it is not the first film to be of the noir style3, it is the first to both popularize the medium and include most of the elements that would become associated with noir’s expressive art form. Included in that list of elements are a cynical detective (Often kicked off the force for excessive aggression) or hero with a heart of stone (possessed of fast talking slang and a soft spot for the femme fatale), the ignored girl next door, the cast of villains who never say what they mean and festoon the drama with enough double crosses to dizzy the casual observer. The sense of alienation by the lead (often anti-heroic), and of the audience’s identification that sense of alienation and impending doom. The moral dilemmas for the anti-hero which seem to worsen and become more complex as the plot unravels like a brittle sweater.
Film Noir’s low budgets and high level of censorship by ratings boards demanded ingenuity on the part of the director. Thus you get the grainy film, the neon lights outside of the bay windows creating an eerie, transient glare, the faces cloaked in shadow, the sinister wet streets, the abstract shots away from the violence that make the violence somehow more hair-raising. The lurid underworld and the candy coated rotten day life of many of the characters aided in the sense of bottomless-ness and paranoia which were beginning to grip the USA. It is interesting how much everyone seemed to love the clothes in this style of movie which makes some sense because most of the characters lived a peripatetic existence and probably had to wear their wealth on their backs.
The screenplay is top notch, the directing by John Huston (who also wrote the screenplay based on Dashiell Hammett’s original novel) takes the viewer on a non stop theme park ride of deception and underworld double cross, and the script is ablaze with talented Hollywood stock actors who play their character roles with pluck. The sets are oddly abstract and yet reminiscent of a 1940s style that appears almost rent free. It was probably an accident that the movie became a cult classic and launch for an entire movement in film. Sydney Greenstreet, in his first starring role, almost steals the limelight away from Bogart with his masterful presence and delivery of his lines.
All the characters are in place, the fop, the heavy (In this case quite literally), the gunman, the bottle blondes, the overlooked “nice” girl, the Cops or detectives breathing down the main characters back, the rich politician or society man who is mired in corruption. It is so much fun to watch film noir it is a wonder they started using color film (Though, oddly enough, several color pictures were shot in the noir style). The fact is, almost everyone likes the style noir, and everyone knows what it is either directly or indirectly. We all like to incorporate some of that dramatic mood into our wardrobe because we would like to wear the mantle of the hard nosed detective who makes time with the ladies, and whom no one shoves around. Noir also makes us ask the difficult question when we watch these character’s behaviors of “Are we Americans?” and what exactly defines our culture and morals.
The movie was made 65 years ago, it is a slice of America I only know from the movies, and interesting that the characters still seem cool. Who wouldn’t want a soupcon of Sam Spade in their persona? He delivered wisecracks flawlessly and sans souci. He wore his fedora and suit like he expected the best treatment all the time and yet with an element of mystery. He was a tough talking private dick in 3 piece peak lapel suits and double breasted chalk stripes. Men pinned their shirt collars as a matter of fact back then. You will notice the absence of collar stays in Bogart’s shirt collars which gives the collar a more degage air to it4 . A modern look amongst the more uptight, restricted villains he interacts with. Perhaps this is a parallel to the Fred Astaire in those myriad movies made with Ginger Rogers where he wears the modern clothes rig while the rest of the male cast is, over starched, over stuffed and over blown.
Back then (1940s and 50s) the suit was heavier. The wool used was maybe 14 or 15 ounces per yard as an average (right through the summer!). You would want to approximate the look of that time but updated. Today, 11 oz. per yard fabric is generally the heaviest a city dwelling office worker would want to wear, and 9-10 oz are quite common. There was a time when the issue of drape came to mind, that is the heavier the wool the finished suit behaved itself gravity-wise. One doesn’t want their jacket curling up around the bottom edges because the fabric is too flimsy to keep a crease. Luckily, in recent years, the textile industry has pioneered lightness and substantiality into the weaving of men’s suit cloths. In general, as long as the cloth is 2 ply in both directions of the weave, you are assured a good drape right up to 6.5 ounces per yard. Adhere to some of these principles and you’ll find your outfit is the “stuff that dreams are made of.”
1 There were two other movies based on the popular Dashiell Hammett’s story The Maltese Falcon; The Maltese Falcon (1931) and Satan Met a Lady (1936). It is interesting to note that the script Director John Huston was expected to use to adapt a screenplay was the same as from the 1931 version. Warner had made the prior two versions of the movie and was not about to expend more money on a fresh rewrite. At the time it seemed like the fates would not favor Huston’s directorial debut. Both Bogart and Astor were aging “B” actors and the script was literally the same as for the 1931 version (which indicates how tight the budget was) and it was rather outdated for the times. Huston wasn’t interested in a 10 year old script and was determined to write a fresh screenplay directly from Hammett’s work. Huston was nominated for best screenplay adaptation. Not only did Huston make the screenplay good, he made it seem au courant with the zeitgeist of the times, and, as such, a fascinating link for us back to the mood and feel of 1941 America.
2 George Raft turned the part of Sam Spade down. He may not have made a bad substitute but he was too fit and healthy and precise for the jaded dilapidation that the role required. Raft was a dandy in his day, dressed to the nines at all times and an excellent actor.
3 Movies such as Fritz Lang’s M (1931) and the original King Kong (1933) were precursors to the Noir movement.
4 Although, in the 1940s, shirts were made of heavier fabric to better protect leaner frames in leaner times, today one should wear 100s and up for general business shirts. There are some exceptions, notably involving wool and cotton mixtures. However for the modern weight of suit a 100s 2 ×2 fabric and up will feel better against your torso and complement the lighter wools used for suits.
Comment [4]
