A couple of fashion pet peeves...

[Zoukatron]

Classic is indeed a somewhat elastic term (and I certainly used in a loose way) - but I think most of us can probably agree that anything any of us would consider classic has a good fit to it, and this is what gets lost when manufacturers follow the fashions. Yes, it is true that they make primarily what people want, but they make what MOST people want, leaving those of us who don't want that without a lot of options in a lot of cases (at least without reasonably affordable options).

 

[BlueTrain]

Classic has a very strict meaning, whatever it is, to people who spend a lot of time in front of the mirror and the rest of the time observing closely what everybody else is wearing. But classic clothing does not by definition fit well. That's up to you, the wearer to make sure it fits before wearing. I find fault with some things about contemporary clothing and fit is one of them, although I hate to admit that I'm a fault-finder. Want me to list them?

I understand that men's pants are usually made to sit lower on the waist (I went through the hip-hugger styles 45 years ago) but it seems like the zippers are too short on all pants. Is it okay to mention that? Likewise, suit jackets no longer seem to be made to actually button in front and if you do so, the lapels bulge out. But maybe they push me into the wrong size. Men who are really serious about the fit of their suits only buy made-to-measure suits anyway. Shirts don't matter so much because a shirt is an undergarment, or used to be, at least. By the way, take note of the fact that a Brooks Brothers suit from their "timeless classic" collections will set you back $998. But the shipping is free if you order on line. But beware: it's a two-button suit and as we all know, that isn't classic.

 

[HudsonHawk]

...I don't think manufacturers create fashion: they follow it and follow it intensely, just the same as some of you do. Has there ever been a time when the factories were making things people didn't want...

I think we're living in those times now. Not that factories make things people won't buy, but we've become a society of products built to satisfy an urge people didn't even have until they saw the product.

 

[HudsonHawk]

Folks, let's not forget the obnoxious omni-presence of "distressed" clothing among the contemporary offering.
I'm not talking vintage (obviously), but artificially aged and weathered: I'm talking about sandblasting denim, using sandpaper on leather, yellowing white sneaker soles before they come out of the factory, fake paint stains and many other little devilish tricks. Honestly it's gotten to the point of ridiculous.
Several times I had to pass on an otherwise fine article of clothing because it was artificially distressed, especially graphic t-shirts where I liked the design, but it was printed to look worn in.
If I want distressed I'll buy vintage/used or wear the heck out of my own clothes, thank you.

I have a pair of jeans that I love wearing around the old place. They're soft, comfortable and I just like them. I tore the knee out of one leg getting the tractor off the trailer. I still wear the jeans, but my wife gets on me about wearing torn jeans. I remind her that people are usually paying extra for tears like that. She responds that those are *supposed* to have tears and come from the store that way, mine aren't. But mine are "authentic" tears...

 

[deadlyhandsome]

Here's another fashion pet peeve of mine (gosh, I didn't know I had so many until I came across this thread!): Untucked shirts. Oh, I don't mean polo shirts, although that's debatable, or t-shirts, or any of that uber-casual stuff. I'm talking about dress shirts worn with the tail out. There's even a company now bragging on how they make dress shirts designed to be worn untucked (I'm looking at YOU, Untuckit.com). So, maybe it's passable with jeans, but I even find wearing jeans together with a dress shirt unsettling. Worse still, is the guy who puts a jacket or sweater on over an untucked shirt, and then walks around like he's got a duck's patoot waving over his backside. Looks flipping stupid to me!

I think I agree with you. Some button down shirts are cut to where they are obviously meant to be tucked in and those shirts look horrible when untucked. Other button down shirts are meant to be untucked, and I'm not referring to the new company you referenced. I still have some 30+ year old button down oxfords from J. Press and Brooks Brothers that were not cut to be tucked in and it would be a losing battle trying to keep them tucked in if you tried.

As for untucked shirts under coats and sweaters; again, I'm on the fence. If the shirt's tail extends passed the bottom of the outer garment it looks ridiculous. Of course, tucked in is the only way to go with a suit or a blazer, but the more casual sport coats.... Remember, sport coats were meant for men to do sporting activities in. Shooting, hunting, riding, hiking, etc. require freedom of movement and can't bind on you so the untucked shirt with a sport coat looks acceptable to my eye (or maybe I'm just trying to justify my slovenly habits). In any case, the shirt tail should be designed to be worn untucked and it should never extend passed the coat.

I keep having to remind myself that once we get passed the functions of warmth, protection from scratches and scrapes, and limiting our exposure to the elements, all the rules are artificial and contrived. For the most part, we like or dislike things because of our upbringing and what we have become accustomed to. We internalize the "rules" as we learned them and without being aware of the reasons we judge styles according to those conceptions. I'm just a s guilty as everybody else, and I have no plans on changing. I do, however, let practicality and comfort win out over style on many occasions. I'll also add that my dress is activity and audience specific and I'm always tucked in at work, church, business meetings, etc.

 

[OldStrummer]

For the most part, we like or dislike things because of our upbringing and what we have become accustomed to. We internalize the "rules" as we learned them and without being aware of the reasons we judge styles according to those conceptions. I'm just a s guilty as everybody else, and I have no plans on changing. I do, however, let practicality and comfort win out over style on many occasions. I'll also add that my dress is activity and audience specific and I'm always tucked in at work, church, business meetings, etc.

This is why this thread is titled "pet peeves." In the grand scheme of things, what we think about how someone dresses or comports himself/herself doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

I am reminded of the saying, "Having a resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to die." I neither say nor do anything more than shake my head when I see someone committing a fashion faux pas. Besides, I'd rather give a resentment than have one!

 

[deadlyhandsome]

This is why this thread is titled "pet peeves." In the grand scheme of things, what we think about how someone dresses or comports himself/herself doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

I am reminded of the saying, "Having a resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to die." I neither say nor do anything more than shake my head when I see someone committing a fashion faux pas. Besides, I'd rather give a resentment than have one!

Stated like the gentleman you are. I'd only add that what is a faux pas is not universally agreed upon. The prevailing thought on the hats forum is that stingy brim hats are for hipster wannabes and high school kids, but I personally have no problem incorporating them into my rotation. Our pet peeves are indeed our own.

 

[F. J.]

[...] The prevailing thought on the hats forum is that stingy brim hats are for hipster wannabes and high school kids, but I personally have no problem incorporating them into my rotation. [...]

I suppose it depends on what you mean by ‘stingy brim’. I would say a ‘hipster hat’ and a proper stingy are worlds apart. I put an example of each below. This first is stitched together out of what would appear to be polyester while the second is made of fur felt.

 

[deadlyhandsome]

I'll reiterate that I'm fond of keeping a few stingy brims in my rotation. Now, your images are both stingy brims (obviously) and they are both looked down on, as a general rule/consensus by the hat affectionados. The hipsters that I'm most familiar with, and they are textbook hipsters, prefer the vintage "authentic" hats. I see lots of old fur felt hats among their ranks.

The fabric stitched together hats are just disposalable fashion hats. I don't disparage those who wear them, but they aren't normally worn by "hat guys." The hipsters I've met know a decent amount about their hats as they are partial to all things artisan, and some also like taller crowns and larger brims.

As for me, while I like some stingy brims (1.8" minimum) the second image you provided has way too much taper for my tastes, and the shape has been pressed in by the maker so I wouldn't wear it, but that's just me. I guess I'm a hat snob too.

 

[Bugguy]

What an interesting thread. How did I miss it and not make foolish comments already.
I have my own idea of classic clothing, too, and true to form, they aren't available anymore, at least not the suits. And alas, suits don't come with two pair of pants anymore. I have spent my working life sitting down, mostly, and the pants are the first to go. Admiral Byrd said he made all of his achievements sitting down, too, but he never mentioned pants.

I could say more and you know I will.

Two pair of pants... and a vest. I haven't bought a vest with my suit in years - partially because it seems to call attention to my growing gut; but also because most business men I interact with wear two-piece suits. I'd quickly go back to a vest IF they came back in "style". I'd also invest in a handsome watch bob to go with my fathers pocket watch. So to the forum: to vest or not to vest?

 

[MondoFW]

Two pair of pants... and a vest. I haven't bought a vest with my suit in years - partially because it seems to call attention to my growing gut; but also because most business men I interact with wear two-piece suits. I'd quickly go back to a vest IF they came back in "style". I'd also invest in a handsome watch bob to go with my fathers pocket watch. So to the forum: to vest or not to vest?

Well, I always thought larger men looked great in three piece suits. There is a stigma around them, though, generally that they make you look too conservative. I would personally love a 1930s double breasted vest.

 

[deadlyhandsome]

Two pair of pants... and a vest. I haven't bought a vest with my suit in years - partially because it seems to call attention to my growing gut; but also because most business men I interact with wear two-piece suits. I'd quickly go back to a vest IF they came back in "style". I'd also invest in a handsome watch bob to go with my fathers pocket watch. So to the forum: to vest or not to vest?

Thin, rotund, or anywhere in between, a waistcoat is a good call.

 

[tropicalbob]

Most guys don't put a lot of thought into clothes, so they'll take pretty much whatever's on offer at the stores. Somebody must have decided about ten years ago or so that, because guys weren't wearing as many suits as they used to, perhaps they'd buy more if they cut the suits down to two pieces. Vests seem to be coming back, though, if you want to use Nordstrom's or Brooks Bros. as a sort of standard. I've never stopped wearing them, both in suits or as separates. Especially in the steamier months down here, I find that vests not only look great but provide those extra pockets I so much miss when it's too hot for a jacket.

 

[Zoukatron]

I started wearing odd waistcoats a lot around eight years ago (not three piece suits - I usually wear separates). Some people looked at me oddly, but there were lots of compliments too. These days, I see a lot more waistcoats in London, not just odd ones being worn for fashion, but as part of three-piecers by businesspeople. I don't think they look at all unusual here now - and hats are starting to follow suit. But this is London, so...

 

[deadlyhandsome]

A good indication of the return of the waistcoat/vest is the vintage market. You're spoiled for choice in blazers and sport coats, but nice waistcoats are hens teeth and quite dear when you do find them. Ten minutes on eBay is all it will take to prove my point.

 

[Bugguy]

Most guys don't put a lot of thought into clothes, so they'll take pretty much whatever's on offer at the stores. Somebody must have decided about ten years ago or so that, because guys weren't wearing as many suits as they used to, perhaps they'd buy more if they cut the suits down to two pieces. Vests seem to be coming back, though, if you want to use Nordstrom's or Brooks Bros. as a sort of standard. I've never stopped wearing them, both in suits or as separates. Especially in the steamier months down here, I find that vests not only look great but provide those extra pockets I so much miss when it's too hot for a jacket.

Now I'm encouraged, even inspired. The only vests I see are odd fabrics with similarly odd stingy brims on pseudo-hipsters, i.e. wannabe's.

 

[shadowrider]

+1 on waistcoats

 

[tropicalbob]

Now I'm encouraged, even inspired. The only vests I see are odd fabrics with similarly odd stingy brims on pseudo-hipsters, i.e. wannabe's.

A three-piece suit is a classic look and will always look great. It's perhaps one of those things that does look so good that you'll find others wondering why they didn't think of it: in other words, if you forget about the current stupidity and wear it with confidence, others will do the same. Also, if you keep your eye out for a sale, BB has a couple of silk and linen vests for the warmer weather that look really fine with a white or blue shirt, jeans or linen pants, and a decent straw to ward off the sun. I think one of the reasons I don't worry too much about what others think is because I teach at a college, and academics are, for the most part, some of the most horrendously-dressed people on the planet. I have no idea why, but they are.

 

[tropicalbob]

I started wearing odd waistcoats a lot around eight years ago (not three piece suits - I usually wear separates). Some people looked at me oddly, but there were lots of compliments too. These days, I see a lot more waistcoats in London, not just odd ones being worn for fashion, but as part of three-piecers by businesspeople. I don't think they look at all unusual here now - and hats are starting to follow suit. But this is London, so...

It's odd how, in the truly cosmopolitan cities, there's almost a tacit competition going on that encourages you to be a little daring in your outfits. I grew up and worked for much of my life in New York and never gave a second thought to what others might think, except in a positive sort of way. I don't know if it's because of where I now live or because of a kind of conservatism (I mean a sort of fear of being singled out) these days, but there does seem out here in the hinterland to be a fear of any real sort of individualism.

 

[Bugguy]

I think one of the reasons I don't worry too much about what others think is because I teach at a college, and academics are, for the most part, some of the most horrendously-dressed people on the planet. I have no idea why, but they are.

I know why... you offered up another example of dramaturgy (30 posts back). The disheveled, pre-occupied with pondering the universe look is the "uniform" we expect to see worn by a college professor. I love it when a circle closes!