Formal Wear Primer

[avedwards]

I think someone should start a seperate thread for the notched lapel DJ debate, since it's taking up a lot of space here. Just my opinion of course. And everyone should remember to remain civilised since it's just an opinion.

My opinion is that in all modern black tie functions a notched lapel DJ would work, providing the accessories are all correct. At the Oscars I think a NLDJ would be fine, and a definite improvement on some of the things one sees there. At a casino, I think they would work (and they are seen worn in casinos in films from that era). When taking a lady to dinner I really don't see why not. At a cocktail party, why not.

If I were seeing the Queen I would say they are too informal, but then if I had that honour I'd get hold of white tie.

So, my opinion is that correctness is a matter of opinion. White tie is nearly a uniform and any major deviation would look wrong (such as wearing a soft turndown collar shirt would look ridiculous). However, black tie gives more scope for variation with all the different styles of DJ. They may not have been popular, but neither were 6x1 DB suits, but I don't see anyone saying that they are satorially wrong.

The debate should be "do you like NLDJ" and of course some won't and they're fully entitled to their opinions. I personally don't particularly like brown suits, but I'm not going to call anyone badly dressed for wearing them.

And just to add, my only dinner jacket has notched lapels and I can't justify buying another one at the moment, so I'm defending it so that I can feel more comfortable in mine.

 

[Cobden]

I think someone should start a seperate thread for the notched lapel DJ debate, since it's taking up a lot of space here. Just my opinion of course. And everyone should remember to remain civilised since it's just an opinion.

My opinion is that in all modern black tie functions a notched lapel DJ would work, providing the accessories are all correct. At the Oscars I think a NLDJ would be fine, and a definite improvement on some of the things one sees there. At a casino, I think they would work (and they are seen worn in casinos in films from that era). When taking a lady to dinner I really don't see why not. At a cocktail party, why not.

If I were seeing the Queen I would say they are too informal, but then if I had that honour I'd get hold of white tie.

So, my opinion is that correctness is a matter of opinion. White tie is nearly a uniform and any major deviation would look wrong (such as wearing a soft turndown collar shirt would look ridiculous). However, black tie gives more scope for variation with all the different styles of DJ. They may not have been popular, but neither were 6x1 DB suits, but I don't see anyone saying that they are satorially wrong.

The debate should be "do you like NLDJ" and of course some won't and they're fully entitled to their opinions. I personally don't particularly like brown suits, but I'm not going to call anyone badly dressed for wearing them.

And just to add, my only dinner jacket has notched lapels and I can't justify buying another one at the moment, so I'm defending it so that I can feel more comfortable in mine.

I might have a PLDJ in your size (jacket only, but if you're trousers are black barathea, they should match - my current trousers and my jacket came from very different places!) - I've personnaly moved to DBDJ

 

[avedwards]

I might have a PLDJ in your size (jacket only, but if you're trousers are black barathea, they should match - my current trousers and my jacket came from very different places!) - I've personnaly moved to DBDJ

The trousers for my jacket are a very specific style to match my jacket. Not outrageous by any means, but slightly unusual in the texture of the fabric. Matching could therefore cause a bit of a problem. A jacket in a 38R size would be tempting though, even if I may have to then invest in a black tie waistcoat since a cummerbund and PLDJ may be a bit of a clash even if they are satorially acceptable together.

 

[Cobden]

The trousers for my jacket are a very specific style to match my jacket. Not outrageous by any means, but slightly unusual in the texture of the fabric. Matching could therefore cause a bit of a problem. A jacket in a 38R size would be tempting though, even if I may have to then invest in a black tie waistcoat since a cummerbund and PLDJ may be a bit of a clash even if they are satorially acceptable together.

Might be able to help out on the waistcoat front too...I'll have a route about and PM you

 

[avedwards]

Might be able to help out on the waistcoat front too...I'll have a route about and PM you

Thank you kindly sir.

 

[Tomasso]

Sorry, I refuse to believe that gents like these three were committing a sartorial faux pas by choosing to wear a NLDJ. shakeshead

Vice President John N. Garner, 1932:

http://pro.corbis.com/Enlargement/E...6804ACME&cat=20,15,19&cf=2&mt=2&caller=search

Arturo Toscanini, 1947:

http://pro.corbis.com/Enlargement/E...00001594&cat=20,15,19&cf=2&mt=2&caller=search

Jimmy Stewart, 1956:

 

[Orgetorix]

I'm glad MB responded with all those great citations. He has clearly done his homework and knows what's he's talking about.

However, I think the authorities he quotes only go to reinforce a point I've already conceded: that the peak and shawl lapel options were the greatly preferred options by the style mavens of the Golden Era. I don't contest it; and I think there's a perfectly good explanation: the styles of the rich and famous during the 20s and 30s were very much influenced by the British and other Europeans, with whom the notch lapel DJ has never been as popular as it has in the US.

However, I still say that the NLDJ maintained at least a minimal level of acceptability, even in the Golden Era. And none of MB's sources specifically disallow the notch lapel. Witness the fact that, as MB acknowledges, they were heavily advertised in the fashion magazines--ads targeted, presumably, at men who cared about clothing and style, not at rubes from the sticks. Witness, too, the fact that a small minority of those in attendance at the most fashionable watering holes of the era were wearing them. If they were really the abomination that Evan (and others) make them out to have been, would even 4% of the cognoscenti been sporting them? Finally, there is the fact that actual vintage examples of the style turn up so frequently--there's at least one on ebay right now, a 1918 dated example from Gimbel Brothers of Philadelphia, and I've seen many, many more on Ebay and in vintage stores as well. I can't help but conclude that there wouldn't be so many examples surviving today if the NLDJ really was so unacceptable.

Not to rehash what I've already said, but I'm not arguing the NLDJ is the best option. I think it's the least desirable of the three. At the end of the day, like Dan, I'm just arguing for some common sense and common civility. Men have worn NLDJs for a hundred years, and they've been perfectly acceptable, if not perfectly elegant.

 

[Charlie Huang]

This peak vs notch lapel debate has gone on for as long as I can remember.

The thing is it is a matter of personal preference. Notches have become more common that it is foolish to go against this tide. However, that does not mean you are forced to wear it. By all means wear whichever lapel you feel suits you but those in the know will know.

Personally, I do not find notches substantial enough for DJs unless they are rather wide to create a good triangular form from the button to the shoulders that peaks would automatically create. Peaks (and shawl) are more sophisticated IMHO.

 

[Orgetorix]

This peak vs notch lapel debate has gone on for as long as I can remember.

The thing is it is a matter of personal preference. Notches have become more common that it is foolish to go against this tide. However, that does not mean you are forced to wear it. By all means wear whichever lapel you feel suits you but those in the know will know.

Personally, I do not find notches substantial enough for DJs unless they are rather wide to create a good triangular form from the button to the shoulders that peaks would automatically create. Peaks (and shawl) are more sophisticated IMHO.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[dhermann1]

Say it ain't so, Joe!

So what do we think of good old Joe Biden's get up the other night? (Just ignore that character at the left. )

[/IMG]

 

[Richard Warren]

This debate has gone on since the Platonic realists and and the nominalists started it millennia ago. I kind do enjoy it,and hope my comments don't offend anyone.

Standards of dress are social intellectual constructs formed by the way individual people actually dress. Outside of that construct, there is no absolute authority (not even a critical mass of rich, sophisticated people) which can be invoked to prescribe what is proper.

Ever since Plato (at least) people have had a habit wanting to turn their preferences into absolutes or universals. An "absolute" rule that exists only until a figure like Prince of Wales for example violates it (after which everyone else does too), may not be exactly a fad, but it is not truly an absolute rule.

I personally grant neither the Prince of Wales nor anyone else any greater rights to establish what is proper for me than I myself possess.

 

[Midnight Blue]

You're making a leap. Have you found anything declaring the notch lapel DJ incorrect?

If you're going to take the position that anything not specifically forbidden in a dress chart is potentially correct then the whole point of dress charts becomes redundant. Following this line of logic, patterned dinner jackets, button-down shirts, brogues, four-in-hand ties and soft caps could all be considered acceptable evening wear during the 20s and 30s as long as we can find an example of someone wearing these features.

 

[cufflinkmaniac]

My opinion, if it matters, is that a notched lapel looks "unfinished" on a dinner jacket. That may make no sense at all, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Tomasso]

Following this line of logic

Don't stray, we're talking about DJ's.

Have you any comment on the garb (most likely bespoke) that these elite gentlemen are wearing?



Vice President John N. Garner, 1932:

http://pro.corbis.com/Enlargement/E...6804ACME&cat=20,15,19&cf=2&mt=2&caller=search

Arturo Toscanini, 1947:

http://pro.corbis.com/Enlargement/E...00001594&cat=20,15,19&cf=2&mt=2&caller=search

Jimmy Stewart, 1956:

 

[Evan Everhart]

OK, guys. Let's get civilized about this. If you throw a party, and the invitations says "Black Tie", and somebody shows up in a notched lapel jacket, with everything else perfect, are you gonna throw him out? Beat him up? Hate him? I hope not. Go ahead and make snide remarks about him behind his back.
I think that the more you get exposed to the classic use of these outfits, the more you'll like the peak or shawl collars. But it's still just a matter of taste!
I'm getting a little weary of the excess passion being thrown into this discussion. Please, people, let it go, already!

Hehe. You are in general correct sir, but I have in the past specified that notch-lapels were verbotten in the invitation, just to be a smart-ass, and of course, to get my point across regarding what I expect of my guests. When I've held New Years bashes before, I've told my friends that they only notched lapels I wanted to see on them were on a smoking jacket if they chose to wear one of those instead of a dinner jacket for whichever reason. I also specified that no neck-ties were to be worn under any circumstances. No tie is better than a neck-tie with evening wear. I have a lot of bow-ties though and a small circle of friends who I invited to my soiree, so I was able to loan out bow-ties to those who didn't have any or were unwilling to spend the five dollars to get one...Aw. I miss the days of five dollar evening bow-ties! DANG!

On another note, who hates open-laced evening shoes! I CANNOT STAND THEM! UGH! Formal shoes should ALWAYS be Close Laced! Oh, and those round toes models that look like work-boots, and square toed models, or even worse, those who were Moccasins with their evening clothes! GHASTLY! Who here prefers leather soled evening shoes? I cannot dance in those rubber soled monstrosities you see so often now. Why do they even make them?! Three out of four people at formal events that I've been to in the past ten years who were wearing formal wear were wearing rubber soled shoes! You can't move smoothly over the dance floor in them!

 

[Tomasso]

Formal shoes should ALWAYS be Close Laced!

 

[Geesie]

Hehe. You are in general correct sir, but I have in the past specified that notch-lapels were verbotten in the invitation, just to be a smart-ass, and of course, to get my point across regarding what I expect of my guests. When I've held New Years bashes before, I've told my friends that they only notched lapels I wanted to see on them were on a smoking jacket if they chose to wear one of those instead of a dinner jacket for whichever reason. I also specified that no neck-ties were to be worn under any circumstances. No tie is better than a neck-tie with evening wear. I have a lot of bow-ties though and a small circle of friends who I invited to my soiree, so I was able to loan out bow-ties to those who didn't have any or were unwilling to spend the five dollars to get one...Aw. I miss the days of five dollar evening bow-ties! DANG!

On another note, who hates open-laced evening shoes! I CANNOT STAND THEM! UGH! Formal shoes should ALWAYS be Close Laced! Oh, and those round toes models that look like work-boots, and square toed models, or even worse, those who were Moccasins with their evening clothes! GHASTLY! Who here prefers leather soled evening shoes? I cannot dance in those rubber soled monstrosities you see so often now. Why do they even make them?! Three out of four people at formal events that I've been to in the past ten years who were wearing formal wear were wearing rubber soled shoes! You can't move smoothly over the dance floor in them!

:whistling

 

[Marc Chevalier]

:whistling

Ain't you used to it yet, Geesie?


.

 

[Evan Everhart]

Don't stray, we're talking about DJ's.

Have you any comment on the garb (most likely bespoke) that these elite gentlemen are wearing?



Vice President John N. Garner, 1932:

http://pro.corbis.com/Enlargement/E...6804ACME&cat=20,15,19&cf=2&mt=2&caller=search

Arturo Toscanini, 1947:

http://pro.corbis.com/Enlargement/E...00001594&cat=20,15,19&cf=2&mt=2&caller=search

Jimmy Stewart, 1956:

Just because you like those gentlemen, does not mean that they are style or fashion authorities. I haven't looked too far into the other two gentleman, but Jimmy Stewart's whole look was a sort of declasse' casualness and having an extremely informal notched lapel on a formal garment was right up his ally. Actors back then usually dressed their usual character role in real life to keep up the illusion. It was all a part of the whole Studio System which sought to control actors' lives and public personae.

Toscanini was an artistic type, a definite mark against his necessarily being "correctly" dressed. Artists were expected to be somewhat eccentric or outre in their appearance as a rule back then. Also, Italians have historically been rather more adventurous in their attire as regards fashions. They are not so much concerned with correctness as the British are, or the Americans who follow the British. That is the main difference between Italian and British or American school tailoring and garments, this difference in philosophies regarding the purpose of clothing. I rather like how it was stated in Roetzel's Gentleman, in his synopsis of Italian, British, and American tailoring and styles. The Italians have been starting Fashion trends since the Renaissance, but not all of those Fashions have stuck or were later viewed as correct or tasteful.

Fashion is not Correct Style though.

They are quite different as can be seen in any Fashion magazine of today, whether for men or women. I wouldn't wear half of the things shown in GQ and I wouldn't follow most of the monthly Fashion tips which they have given for at least the past five to seven years. What I would and actually do follow however, are the Edwardian and Victorian stylistic philosophies which have heavily influenced such individuals as The Duke of Windsor, Cary Grant, William Powell (especially as the Thin Man), Fred Astaire, et al. These men all followed the rules and understood how and when to break them. They also understood that some rules were better left alone (with the exception of the Duke of Windsor...While he was certainly stylish and correct for the most part, he also espouses some things which were to have dire effects upon the world of Men's Clothing and tailoring even today...Baggy trousers, banishment of the Full-skirted Frock Coat from court functions effectively killing it societally and socially, embracing of soft clothing and sporting clothing over regular business and dress clothing, the soft fronted evening shirt with turn-down collar (though alright)....The list goes on!) Anyhow, I'm ranting, but you see what I mean.

As to Vice President John N. Garner; since when have Vice Presidents been style icons? I've never even heard of him. Furthermore, I have seen some presidents and vice presidents who have been positively atrociously attired. It's a toss of the dice whether a political official is familiar with what is correct in dress.

I'm not seeking to attack you or your men here, just deductively dissecting your argument as I see it and responding to it: discussion.

 

[MisterGrey]

My opinion, if it matters, is that a notched lapel looks "unfinished" on a dinner jacket. That may make no sense at all, but that's just my opinion.

I actually think that may be the most legitimate reason offered in this thread for NLDJ "hate."

Peaks and shawls certainly look classier-- I'm a shawl fan, myself-- but I don't see anything "wrong" or "improper" with the notch. I'd simply say that, just as black tie is less formal than white tie, notch lapels represent a subcategory within black tie itself, still being semi-formal, but less formal than the peak or shawl.