Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

A 1912 Suit/Tie/Boater you could wear 100 years later and look at home.

scotrace

Head Bartender
Staff member
Messages
14,392
Location
Small Town Ohio, USA
Miss Neecerie:

Mac trick:

Hold down the control key and roll the scroll ball. Whole screen makey ZOOM!


It's a moth hole. So when I spot one on my clothes from now on, I can say "Bah. Pencils get shorter, clothes get moth holes." And fergit it! :)
 

vitanola

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,254
Location
Gopher Prairie, MI
I would expect that the ribbon worn by the elder Clark is attateched to a simple pair of eyeglasses. The older style of spring bridge pince-nez are a trifle unbstable, and were often secured with a ribbon to the wearer's clothing, or with a light chain to an ear clip.
 

Brinybay

Practically Family
Messages
571
Location
Seattle, Wa
Along the same thought lines and the same source, (Sorpy) I like the clean-cut, wholesome look of these gentlemen. Particularly the guy on the far right. The haircut, the suit, but maybe not the shoes. The pic says their Army students, but those aren't uniforms. Although the pic is b&w, I'm going to guess the suits were gray. The shirt he's wearing looks like a regular button-down collar white shirt, but the collar appears to be a little more prominent (higher), or am I mistaken? Granted, I would have to lose about 30lbs and 30 years to look as trim and dapper, but no reason I can't still dress the same.

1918.jpg
 

reetpleat

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,681
Location
Seattle
Brinybay said:
Along the same thought lines and the same source, (Sorpy) I like the clean-cut, wholesome look of these gentlemen. Particularly the guy on the far right. The haircut, the suit, but maybe not the shoes. The pic says their Army students, but those aren't uniforms. Although the pic is b&w, I'm going to guess the suits were gray. The shirt he's wearing looks like a regular button-down collar white shirt, but the collar appears to be a little more prominent (higher), or am I mistaken? Granted, I would have to lose about 30lbs and 30 years to look as trim and dapper, but no reason I can't still dress the same.

1918.jpg


Cute. Look a that wide tie.. I really like the way one is sitting with his arm around the other. Imagine any young american men doing that today. No way.
 

reetpleat

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,681
Location
Seattle
scotrace said:
A little about the man in the photo, from Wiki:

In the 1932 election, Clark was elected to the United States Senate as a Democrat. Clark was re-elected in the 1938 election, but lost his bid for renomination in the 1944 election.
Clark is perhaps most famous for declaring that Emperor Hirohito should be hanged as a war criminal on the senate floor on January 29, 1944. He died in 1954, while serving as a judge.

C000440.jpg
.
(U.S. Senate Historical Office)

His father, Champ Clark, in 1921. Quite a hat, a fuzzy topper. Dandyism was a family trait, apparently. :
509px-JBClark.jpg

(Library of Congress)
His father was Speaker of the House of Representatives:
Clark's Speakership was notable for two things: First, Clark's skill from 1910 to 1914 in maintaining party unity to block William Howard Taft's legislation and then pass Wilson's; and second, Clark's splitting of the party in 1917 and 1918 when he opposed Wilson's decision to bring the United States into World War I.
In addition, Clark opposed the Federal Reserve Act, which concentrated financial power in the hands of eastern banks (mostly centered in New York City). Clark's opposition to the Federal Reserve Act is said to be the reason why Missouri is the home of two Federal Reserve Banks (one in St. Louis and one in Kansas City).

The suit and collar looks remarkably sixties. I knew there was an influence, but not to that extent. EVen the lapel treatment, angled pocket, and the narrow collar with built in tab. I have seen almost identical shirts. As for modern, not quite so much, but certainly more than I would have thought. except that there is a bit of sixties influence going on today.

I do think I have found a descendant from this family who is a modern minor celebrity.

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...stery%5C&um=1&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&sa=N
Actually, I think there was a bit of a trend of this both in the late fifties and mid to late sixties.
 

WildCelt

One of the Regulars
Messages
178
Location
My Imagination, South Carolina
reetpleat said:
I really like the way one is sitting with his arm around the other. Imagine any young american men doing that today. No way.

It depends on the demographic. Young American men on high school wrestling teams, for example, tend to be much less worried about how such things might be perceived and more physically affectionate. I've seen wrestlers hugging their friends and walking with arms around each others shoulders. I've even seen entire teams taking naps in a pile using each other for pillows (in both CA and the southeast). My guess is that they've already proven their masculinity by wrestling and don't need to worry about their proximity to other males.

I don't think it's just that wrestling necessarily breaks down the social barrier to males having physical contact with each other, either. Such behavior seems to me to occur in intimate (but non-sexual) situations in which privacy is minimal. Many team sports provide this environment (e.g. locker rooms) as does the military (as in the above pictures).
 

reetpleat

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,681
Location
Seattle
I agree. I wrestled in school and while I did not see that, I can say that while many wrestlers were jocks and played football, they tended to be a little less macho and uptight about their masculinity I guess, so no surprise.

But I also think that men back then were not so adverse to physical contact. many people slept in one bed, many people lived in close quarters, heck, laurel and hardy slept in a bed together in many movies. And while Homosexuality was not acceptable, it was not discussed and thought about so obsessively I think. I imagine it was so remote to so many that the accusations and fear was not so present.

Of course, in foreign cultures it is not the same at all. I think it is very sweet and intimate in an obviously non sexual way.
 

Brinybay

Practically Family
Messages
571
Location
Seattle, Wa
reetpleat said:
Cute. Look a that wide tie.. I really like the way one is sitting with his arm around the other. Imagine any young american men doing that today. No way.

I hadn't noticed. Looking at the picture more closely, it appears his arm is resting on the back of the chair. The second picture supports that.

It was the attire and hairstyles I was trying to draw attention to, not any perceived "gay" posturing.
 

reetpleat

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,681
Location
Seattle
Brinybay said:
I hadn't noticed. Looking at the picture more closely, it appears his arm is resting on the back of the chair. The second picture supports that.

It was the attire and hairstyles I was trying to draw attention to, not any perceived "gay" posturing.

I wasn't suggesting any gay posturing. I was pointing out how back then they obviously did not fear any implication of homosexuality. Chair or shoulder, it is obviously a rather close intimate position that most young men of this country would find terribly frightening. Shame.
 

Brinybay

Practically Family
Messages
571
Location
Seattle, Wa
reetpleat said:
I wasn't suggesting any gay posturing. I was pointing out how back then they obviously did not fear any implication of homosexuality. Chair or shoulder, it is obviously a rather close intimate position that most young men of this country would find terribly frightening. Shame.

Interesting observation in that respect. Could probably write a book on the subject. A lot things can probably be factored into that, the two biggest being economics and the influence of the church back than. Heterosex wasn't even discussed amongst "polite" company, homosexuality not even on the radar.

Back to talking about those suits. They don't all look quite the same, 3 have vests, 2 don't. The shoes look similar except I noticed the guy on the far right has shoes that are higher up the ankle. But they all look muddy.
 

mike

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,000
Location
HOME - NYC
_RAGNAR_ said:
ROTC students don't generally wear uniforms, ROTC started in 1916 at Columbia.

Pardon me in advance, what's ROTC? All I know is LOTC, which stands for "Legion of the Cramped" - the Cramps fan club that was started by Morrissey in the late 1970's :p
 

Forum statistics

Threads
108,944
Messages
3,071,247
Members
54,003
Latest member
brendastoner
Top