Esquire’s Complete Golden Age Illustrations:

[Peacoat]

These illustrations are now available in the Guides section, sans the intervening comments. An excellent resource.

 

[Flanderian]

Here are Esquire July 1948's slim offerings.

Not on this misshapen old bod!

 

[Flanderian]

This is Esquire's August 1948 illustrations.

 

[Fading Fast]

A cross-country train trip took four or five days in the 1950s. Esquire recommends the following be brought along for the train trip plus, on assumes, some time spent at your destination. In addition to the suit you wear on the train:

• 2 suits
• 1 sport coat
• 2 pairs of slacks
• 12 shirts
• 12 ties
• 12 pairs of socks
• 12 handkerchiefs
• 4 sport shirts
• 6 sets of underwear
• 2 pajamas
• 1 lightweight robe
• 1 pair of slippers
• 2 pairs of shoes
• 2 swim trunks
• 1 raincoat

Seriously, that is a crazy amount of stuff to take even for say a 3 week vacation. Can you imagine the amount of luggage you'd need? Some of the list makes sense, but, all in, 16 shirts, 12 ties (really?) and 12 pairs of socks? Does this person not plan on having some laundry done along the way?

 

[Flanderian]

A cross-country train trip took four or five days in the 1950s. Esquire recommends the following be brought along for the train trip plus, on assumes, some time spent at your destination. In addition to the suit you wear on the train:

• 2 suits
• 1 sport coat
• 2 pairs of slacks
• 12 shirts
• 12 ties
• 12 pairs of socks
• 12 handkerchiefs
• 4 sport shirts
• 6 sets of underwear
• 2 pajamas
• 1 lightweight robe
• 1 pair of slippers
• 2 pairs of shoes
• 2 swim trunks
• 1 raincoat

Seriously, that is a crazy amount of stuff to take even for say a 3 week vacation. Can you imagine the amount of luggage you'd need? Some of the list makes sense, but, all in, 16 shirts, 12 ties (really?) and 12 pairs of socks? Does this person not plan on having some laundry done along the way?

View attachment 294703

Over the years, Esquire has, and will publish more of similar lists of necessary wardrobes for different activities. And a perusal of these lists will illustrate Esquire was never a victim of any "foolish consistency!"

Personally, I find the two swim trunks most encouragingly optimistic for an autumn dip off most points on the East Coast.

 

[Flanderian]

These are Esquire's illustrations for September 1948. Some (All?) of these were posted previously and misidentified as 1946's. But are here presented in correct chronological order.

 

[Turnip]

...

...but a half century back in time!

...

For the food, not at all.

Not even for an Ober, you’ll just have to find a legacy hunter´s restaurant around.

A Guide Michelin is a helpful gadget therefore...

 

[Flanderian]

For the food, not at all.

Not even for an Ober, you’ll just have to find a legacy hunter´s restaurant around.

A Guide Michelin is a helpful gadget therefore...

Sounds delightful.

 

[Flanderian]

This part 1 of 2 of Esquire's October 1948 illustrations.

 

[Fading Fast]

"The Bold Look for the Dominant Male"

How not align to today's modern cultural ethos is this ad campaign?

Twitter would seize up as cancel culture went into hyperdrive and hyperventilation.

 

[Flanderian]

"The Bold Look for the Dominant Male"

How not align to today's modern cultural ethos is this ad campaign?

Twitter would seize up as cancel culture went into hyperdrive and hyperventilation.

Interesting you should point this out!

Floating around in my foggy noggin is a muddled recollection of an article that appeared 30 or 40 years after this publication lauding Esquire's sartorial taste and contribution to cataloging male style, and noting The Bold Look as the one comically embarrassing exception. And I believe it may well have been in Esquire itself where this was pointed out!

Edit: At the time of this publication style/fashion was much more varied by locale, not just nationally, but regionally and even locally. It appears that The Bold Look was an American advertising slogan run amuck that infected largely American RTW. Elsewhere, tailored and casual clothing remained much more discreet. (And tasteful!) English tailoring of the period, for example, was classic, well balanced and handsome.

The boxy, oversized detail that was the hallmark of this style may be best seen in some early '50's TV shows. Certainly Superman comes to mind. But it traveled poorly, and was not long lived, possibly being most firmly and enduringly rooted in that ultimate bastion of style; The Soviet Union!

 

[Flanderian]

This is part 2 of 2 of Esquire October 1948.

 

[Faux Brummell]

Something interesting I caught in one of the 1934 images - at the top next to the velvet dinner jacket is a pinkish pleated shirt "for town wear." Could that have been intended for black tie?? I guess morning dress is more likely (though I've only ever seen white pleated shirts with a morning coat) but seeing it next to the velvet jacket made me curious.

 

[Flanderian]

Something interesting I caught in one of the 1934 images - at the top next to the velvet dinner jacket is a pinkish pleated shirt "for town wear." Could that have been intended for black tie?? I guess morning dress is more likely (though I've only ever seen white pleated shirts with a morning coat) but seeing it next to the velvet jacket made me curious.
View attachment 296386

Pleated shirts were then, and until not that long ago, worn with more formal business suits. Plus, with a detachable white collar, this would be a dandy shirt for semi-formal day wear. (I.e., Stroller, also other terms.) Pleated, colored shirt bodies with white collars are featured with strollers frequently through the early years of Esquire and Apparel Arts, but can also sometimes be seen discretely worn with business suits.

 

[Flanderian]

This is part 1 of 2 of Esquire, November 1948.

 

[Flanderian]

Part 2 of 2 of Esquire November 1948.

 

[Fading Fast]

This illustration is so nice that it feels pre-war Esquire:

 

[Tiki Tom]

I like these reminders that the color brown was once in fashion for suits. Of course I know that brown suits still can be bought, but they are not part of the “power look” these days. I myself have a brown suit, but it is generally only worn on rare autumn days when my trench coat is coming into play or who knows why I’m in the mood.

 

[Nobert]

Of course I know that brown suits still can be bought, but they are not part of the “power look” these days.

"Power Look," bleah. I hate that whole concept. Just wear a loincloth of animal skin if you're so set on alpha-male dominance, and may your B.M.W. blow a tiny part that costs your entire bloated yearly bonus. And yea, huzzah to brown.

I do feel like, in some of these ads, I can see the Bold Look inching toward the Ivy League cut. It's easy to forget that fashion doesn't change the morning after a new roll-out from the clothing manufacturers.

 

[Flanderian]

This illustration is so nice that it feels pre-war Esquire:
View attachment 296844

A lot of similarities. Until a few years ago, I'd pretty much wear it as depicted!

I like these reminders that the color brown was once in fashion for suits. Of course I know that brown suits still can be bought, but they are not part of the “power look” these days. I myself have a brown suit, but it is generally only worn on rare autumn days when my trench coat is coming into play or who knows why I’m in the mood.

Brown is much maligned, but on some guys, it's a great color. And the right brown can look good on almost anyone. Specific browns, like other colors, will have secondary color tones hidden in it, and these can make a world of difference for particular complexions.

Going back 10, or so, years ago Manhattan men's retailer Paul Stuart was featuring browns they termed "charcoal brown" which were mixed with black and very dark and formal, and certainly suitable for conventional business suits. I found they also tended to expand that number of men which the color would compliment.

I've always found the the term "power look" offensive along with the entire chest-thumping ethos which underlies it. I can recall in the mid '80's when someone with little better to do had dubbed the pale yellow ties with discreet navy spots, of which I'd always been fond for business, "power ties!"

"Power Look," bleah. I hate that whole concept. Just wear a loincloth of animal skin if you're so set on alpha-male dominance, and may your B.M.W. blow a tiny part that costs your entire bloated yearly bonus. And yea, huzzah to brown.

I do feel like, in some of these ads, I can see the Bold Look inching toward the Ivy League cut. It's easy to forget that fashion doesn't change the morning after a new roll-out from the clothing manufacturers.

Most certainly "Bleah!"

The Bold Look is not one I find generally appealing, though there are elements I can enjoy.

In mass fashion, the two trends that competed to replace the Bold Look were Ivy (TNSIL) and what American retail called Continental. Both were mid-20th Century minimalist aesthetics, and very much in reaction to the over-sized Bold Look. The so-called Continental look attempted to imitate Italian tailoring, while the Ivy attempted to imitate what was being worn at Northeastern schools. And Ivy largely won out, and became the dominant fashion for about a decade.



And a much happier new year to you all, gentlemen!