Does a jacket without breast pocket look odd?

[Undertow]

That picture of GW Carver almost (ALMOST) looks like some of them are wearing overcoats.

I am the very last person on the FL to be familiar with sartorial history, but do those jackets not look like overcoats - or at least plain outerwear? And they are buttoned quite high, with what appears to be 4 buttons total. Am I on to something here? :spider:

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I am the very last person on the FL to be familiar with sartorial history, but do those jackets not look like overcoats - or at least plain outerwear? And they are buttoned quite high, with what appears to be 4 buttons total. Am I on to something here?

Those definitely aren't overcoats or even topcoats, though I understand your point.

 

[Oldsarge]

Really? Really???

Absolutely!

 

[Salieri]

I really can't understand what people would want to do with a shirt pocket. Do you have pockets in your underwear too?

 

[hPPYs]

No,a shirt with double cuff does not need a pocket.

 

[Hal]

I really can't understand what people would want to do with a shirt pocket.

Neither can I - but for the last 25 years or so, all shirts I have seen (and therefore, unfortunately, all I have bought) have had pockets. They did not have pockets before that time, and pockets seem to me a (small) waste of material and additional cost.

 

[Edward]

Thank you.

I also found a photo of George Washington Carver in 1902,and most of those people didn't have breast pockets.

Interesting, the guy on the far right in the front row appears to be wearing his db jacket butting to what we would now consider the "female" side. I know the naval origin of the db was to do with being on deck in the cold and being able to button the jacket one way or t'other to keep the draught out, but I wonder when the convention of 'male' and 'female' buttoning sides came in? The other men in this photo all have their (SB) jacket buttoned to the "male" side, so it's not a reversed photo, one would presume at least.

With the exception of that shooting jacket (which I actually like), I cannot help but feel that a shirt or a jacket without a breast pocket approaches uselessness. If I am feeling really dressy I want a pocket square. If not, like Tomasso, I want a place for my dark glasses/notebook/shopping list/etc. Nothing official, just a personal opinion . . .

About the only thing I keep in the pocket is a pocket square nowadays (maybe occasionally a pen), so it's more decorative than purposeful for me. I prefer to have one, though I don't know that (other than not being able to have a pocket square, of course), I'd miss it for any reason other than the look of it should I not have one.

That picture of GW Carver almost (ALMOST) looks like some of them are wearing overcoats.

I am the very last person on the FL to be familiar with sartorial history, but do those jackets not look like overcoats - or at least plain outerwear? And they are buttoned quite high, with what appears to be 4 buttons total. Am I on to something here? :spider:

They look to me more like more casual lounge suits / jackets from that period, the sort of common workwear that would have been worn (c/f modern denims) in contrast to the morning suit which the more upper class might have still regularly worn at that point.

I really can't understand what people would want to do with a shirt pocket. Do you have pockets in your underwear too?

On days like today when it is too warm to keep my suit jacket on at my desk and/or when I am wearing a vintage suit with only one inside pocket and no waistcoat, I find a breast pocket in a shirt a remarkably convenient place to stow a pen or field telephone.

No,a shirt with double cuff does not need a pocket.

Well... arguable no garment "needs" a pocket, but they can be convenient. I have several shirts (not evening shirts, of course) which have both breast pocket and double cuff. [huh]

 

[MisterCairo]

I really can't understand what people would want to do with a shirt pocket. Do you have pockets in your underwear too?

Would you store your crucial items like this in YOUR underwear?

 

[Undertow]

Do you have pockets in your underwear too?

Why, don't you? I guess that's where I keep all my junk. (pens, pencils, erasers, and such, in case you're wondering) :nono:

lol

 

[Mr Vim]

And of course, let us not overlook the idea of pockets for our socks.

 

[dustyjohnson10]

yeah it does but by having a jacket on the coat, it gives a nice look.

 

[Undertow]

And of course, let us not overlook the idea of pockets for our socks.

I've seen this. I think they may have been handmade, but I've seen a pair of OD wool socks with little pockets. lol I'm not sure what they were used for, but I can only imagine something pretty small.

 

[hPPYs]

Western jackets have no breast pockets,right?

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Sure they do. I've seen vintage western jackets with "smiling" (crescent) slash pockets, one on each breast.