Formal Wear Primer

[avedwards]

Although I think I read somewhere that his inaugural suit/tux was made byMiguel Caballero a company that manufactures bullet proof clothing. It does not excuse the poor tailoring of the coat. However, if the tailcoat was cut to be worn over body armor of some sort and Obama chose to go without, it would explain why his tailcoat resembles a pair of pajamas. That still does not explain the photo above, nothing excuses the white tie with a notch collar. Nothing.

I don't see why he would need a bullet proof dinner jacket. The kevlar used for bullet proof clothing would ruin both the drape and fabric appearance. If he really needs to wear something bullet proof for safety purposes he should wear a bullet proof vest under his shirt, and have the rest of his clothes made by a proper tailor.

I just find it surprising how so many politicians around the world are so poorly and inappropriately dressed despite being able to afford tailor made clothing and image consultants, whilst so many of the members here can find used clothes at insignificant prices which look infinitely better.

A white bow tie is actually acceptable for dinner suit, as long as it is suitably Edwardian (of course Obama's outfit is not).

I think that look is best left to Edwardian themed events. 1930s black tie is of course different as it is still in keeping with modern etiquette and therefore perfectly appropriate.

 

[DocMustang]

A white bow tie is actually acceptable for dinner suit, as long as it is suitably Edwardian (of course Obama's outfit is not).

Best regards, Dr

I shall revise my statement: Nothing excuses a white tie with a jacket that is nothing but an overdeveloped modern cut, poorly fitted, vented, flap pocketed, jacket that resembles nothing so much as a common suit coat masquerading as a dinner jacket. Particularly when worn by a man whose boyish good looks cause him to resemble a child wearing his father's suit. Nothing.

 

[Qirrel]

I would describe it as pieces of cloth masquerading as a tailored suit.

 

[David Conwill]

I just find it surprising how so many politicians around the world are so poorly and inappropriately dressed despite being able to afford tailor made clothing and image consultants, whilst so many of the members here can find used clothes at insignificant prices which look infinitely better.

I wonder how much of that may be calculated? Most politicians typically campaign on a populist platform, regardless of what they're actually selling once elected.

-Dave

 

[avedwards]

I wonder how much of that may be calculated? Most politicians typically campaign on a populist platform, regardless of what they're actually selling once elected.

-Dave

I agree that half the time it's probably a calculated effort at looking "common". It comes as no surprise that a lot of African dictators (who don't have to campaign) are often the more well dressed politicians at the UN. Personally I think that regardless of policies a politician should dress well, and it wouldn't hurt if they showed more individuality in their clothes like they once did (it didn't do Churchill or Roosevelt any harm) rather than all wore the uniform of an ill-fitting plain black or navy suit, white shirt and plain tie.

 

[Midnight Blue]

They are Americans, nobody has worn it in their family for generations - if ever.

No, they are American PRESIDENTS and they both have worn white tie at least twice before (to Gridiron Club Dinners and Alfred Smith Dinners). If the average guys on this forum can figure out the rules to proper evening dress then there is no excuse for the most powerful men in the free world. Either their protocol officers are completely incompetent (Obama's etiquette gaffes as the recent state dinner with the Queen would seem to back this up) or their bosses are simply choosing to ignore their advice.

 

[Tomasso]

Obama's etiquette gaffes as the recent state dinner with the Queen would seem to back this up

The Brits are just as bad.....who can forget Prince Charles goosing the First Lady.......

 

[David Conwill]

No, they are American PRESIDENTS and they both have worn white tie at least twice before (to Gridiron Club Dinners and Alfred Smith Dinners).

By that logic, shouldn’t any divorced-and-remarried fellow be an expert on black tie, given that he’s probably worn it to both his weddings?

I still say this is at least partially calculated (possibly by their handlers - remember how the President was cited as a fedora-wearer back when he was in the state legislature?). And I’m not saying it’s a good decision. I do think Americans would respect a well-tailored politician (or at least wouldn’t lack respect for him on that basis), but the ill-fitting, plain suit is considered politically safe. If white-tie and morning dress are the western equivalent of Chinese court dress, then the baggy business suit is the western world’s Mao Suit.

-Dave

 

[WH1]

The Brits are just as bad.....who can forget Prince Charles goosing the First Lady.......

THAT IS MY NEW FAVORITE PICTURE! thank you Tomasso you just made my decade:eusa_clap

 

[Charlie Huang]

Oh, well, no I did not forget, but uses do warry from country to country Basically, in many countries (like the Vatican City - Holy See, which also has a good number of knights among people from the UK or USA let alone other countries), the riband is worn under the waistcoat if the Grand Master of the order is not present (in UK terms it probaly applies to whenever H.M. the Queen is there as many UK orders have a Grand Master who is not the Queen herslef, while she is the Patron or other similiar figure of Supreme moral authority). In all other occasions the riband has to be worn under the waistcoat and in such cases the chain does not interfere at all. Actually teh extra weight on the waist may even help to keep things in place.

Still, it is true that whenever one has to wear the riband over the waistcoat a chain becomes an impracticality. Another good reason to use a fob.
Yours,

Phileas Fogg

The bit about wearing the riband under the waistcoat does not apply in Britain. It is always worn over the waistcoat or if wearing a military tunic over that. Never worn on morning dress. The Court Dress book describes this in detail:

http://www.archive.org/stream/dressinsigniawor00greauoft#page/114/mode/2up

 

[Dr Kilroy]

Polish President Ignacy Mościcki was often shown wearing white tie with a riband under his waistcoat. I must say that I prefer the look of riband worn over the waistcoat, but that means nothing.

Best regards, Dr

 

[Guttersnipe]

You forget that most decorations of the highest level involve a sash/riband worn over the waistcoat which would make wearing a watch on a chain impractical and illogical.

Obama's white-tie kit has all the elegance of rented prom wear. Just as bad as George Bush Jr. What's with American presidents and their turndown collars and low-slung trousers?

In both of those cases the worst offender seems to be the trousers . . .

I remember watching the DC Press Club Roast during the '08 election and both (then) Senator Obama and Senator McCain looked quite good in their white tie outfits. President Obama definitely looked better then (and wore a wing collar too, if I remember correctly). I wonder if it's the same tails suit?

President Bush certainly looks uncomfortable in that white tie rig. I've heard he's more of an informal dresser, though, so considering that, and the fact those pants are so long, it's not at all surprising.

 

[Tomasso]

I bet the President isn't wearing braces.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

Dear Mr. Huang,

the rules at the Court of Saint James are one thing (and it is good to know them, so thanks for the link) but the world does not end there. What if, say, the Polish Ambassador (thank you Dr. Kilroy for the pictures of President Moscicki) were to attend an official function in the UK (not at Court) where white tie and decorations are needed.
If the regulations for his Grand Cross of, say, the Order of the White Eagle should state clearly that without the Grand Master in attendance the riband has to be worn under the waistcoat (some orders actually do state such things, so even at Court you could have people wearing the riband under the waistcoat) he would not be following the UK regulations even though in the UK (at Court he might decide to follow local regulations out of respect for H.M. the Queen but he would then contravene the regulations set for his Order so he would anyway be breaking some rules).

As for the morning coat in some European countries regulations are very strict and ribands, stars, neckdecorations of full sized decorations are not to be worn with a morning coat. Sometimes it is just miniatures or nothing. Wearing decorations as per Candian regulations or as per Debrett's would make you look like the worst and most uncouth parvenu ever seen.
A good example on how to wear decorations on a morning coat in France is seen in the pcitures of the Count of Paris at the 2009 wedding of the Duke of Vendome (can be easily found on internet).
I still remember the sharp criticism I heard from friends and acquaintances about Beckham wearing his OBE in full-sized format at the Royal wedding. I had to explain them that in the UK things are done differently and that, yes, the side he wore it was wrong but the format was correct.

Thank you for this opportunity to discuss somewhat more in detail the different customs and rules regarding the use of decorations with formal wear.
Yours,

Phileas Fogg,

 

[Midnight Blue]

I remember watching the DC Press Club Roast during the '08 election and both (then) Senator Obama and Senator McCain looked quite good in their white tie outfits. President Obama definitely looked better then (and wore a wing collar too, if I remember correctly). I wonder if it's the same tails suit?

I'm not sure what he wore to that event but he wasn't dressed any better for the 2006 Gridiron dinner or the 2008 Alfred Smith Dinner

2006 (note the lack of waistcoat)

2008 (Senator McCain wore a proper wing collar to this event)

 

[Charlie Huang]

Dear Mr. Huang,

the rules at the Court of Saint James are one thing (and it is good to know them, so thanks for the link) but the world does not end there. What if, say, the Polish Ambassador (thank you Dr. Kilroy for the pictures of President Moscicki) were to attend an official function in the UK (not at Court) where white tie and decorations are needed.
If the regulations for his Grand Cross of, say, the Order of the White Eagle should state clearly that without the Grand Master in attendance the riband has to be worn under the waistcoat (some orders actually do state such things, so even at Court you could have people wearing the riband under the waistcoat) he would not be following the UK regulations even though in the UK (at Court he might decide to follow local regulations out of respect for H.M. the Queen but he would then contravene the regulations set for his Order so he would anyway be breaking some rules).

As for the morning coat in some European countries regulations are very strict and ribands, stars, neckdecorations of full sized decorations are not to be worn with a morning coat. Sometimes it is just miniatures or nothing. Wearing decorations as per Candian regulations or as per Debrett's would make you look like the worst and most uncouth parvenu ever seen.
A good example on how to wear decorations on a morning coat in France is seen in the pcitures of the Count of Paris at the 2009 wedding of the Duke of Vendome (can be easily found on internet).
I still remember the sharp criticism I heard from friends and acquaintances about Beckham wearing his OBE in full-sized format at the Royal wedding. I had to explain them that in the UK things are done differently and that, yes, the side he wore it was wrong but the format was correct.

Thank you for this opportunity to discuss somewhat more in detail the different customs and rules regarding the use of decorations with formal wear.
Yours,

Phileas Fogg,

Well yes, hence why I said 'in Britain'.

Now comes the paradox: is it correct to wear your own country's decorations in your own country's conventions in a foreign country that has a different convention or must you wear them in the said country's convention even though it is aganist your country's regulations?

 

[Rathdown]

Well yes, hence why I said 'in Britain'.

Now comes the paradox: is it correct to wear your own country's decorations in your own country's conventions in a foreign country that has a different convention or must you wear them in the said country's convention even though it is aganist your country's regulations?

Quite simply, unless the host country specifically prohibits the wearing of foreign decorations, one always wears their orders, decorations, and medals in compliance with the customs or regulations of their own country, irrespective of where one might be. Where this may cause complications (the wearing of medals, etc. with morning dress), it is best to forgo the wearing of insignia.

 

[Rathdown]

Oh, well, no I did not forget, but uses do warry from country to country Basically, in many countries (like the Vatican City - Holy See, which also has a good number of knights among people from the UK or USA let alone other countries), the riband is worn under the waistcoat if the Grand Master of the order is not present (in UK terms it probaly applies to whenever H.M. the Queen is there as many UK orders have a Grand Master who is not the Queen herslef, while she is the Patron or other similiar figure of Supreme moral authority). In all other occasions the riband has to be worn under the waistcoat and in such cases the chain does not interfere at all. Actually teh extra weight on the waist may even help to keep things in place.

Still, it is true that whenever one has to wear the riband over the waistcoat a chain becomes an impracticality. Another good reason to use a fob.
Yours,

Phileas Fogg

My Dear Mr. Fogg,

With reference to that portion of your post which I have highlighted in bold face, would you be so kind as to supply the source of your information?

Yours Truly,

Rathdown

 

[mercuryfelt76]

With regards to host vs guest it's entirely down to the individual. In the UK the wearing of foreign state formal wear is encouraged and if there is a difference in custom/tradition then it is never frowned upon if you conform the highest of formality for that country. Personally, if I was the guest at a state banquet abroad, I would conform to the custom practiced by the host country.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

Dear Mr Huang and Rathdown,

regarding orders each one has its specific rules and national "rules" are very broad and more like customs. Even British orders follow different rules, the riband of the Garter and the riband of Saint Michael and George are worn differently (the first from left to right thes econd from right to left).

As to the source of my statement highlighted in bold face (riband over or under the waistcoat) there is more than one. One is a book on how to wear decorations at the Papal Court, another are the regulations for members of the House of Savoy Orders, also I have been told that the regulations for the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic are the same. As far as I know the Order of Malta (Sovereign Military Order of Malta) follows the same custom. Still, as in most cases regulations are not strictly enforced some knights do not follow the regulations and wear their decorations as it suits them.
Let me check if I can find something on English and post it here.
Yours,

Phileas Fogg