Magnoli suit gone wrong - update

[Alan Eardley]

So we would not expect to find clothing from the period (including military uniforms) below 32" waist? Not my experience. Also, I don't think we can reasonably assume that one catalogue by one vendor defines the whole range of sizes of a population. Maybe the 'middle class professional' to whom you refer was more well-fed and took less excercise than the manual workers who made up the majority of the population in the 1940s.

Statistical studies show that the average man has become larger in terms of height, weight (and consequently BMI) between the 1940s and the present day, and the average age of the population (including males) has increased, so any representative sample taken today will include more older (and less fit) males. I base this statement on papers in medical journals, for example a study of records from the UK between 1947 and 1998:
H. Woodward, J.E. Rutty and G.N. Rutty* (2001) A 51-year retrospective study of the trends of height, weight and body mass index at the time of death in those aged 16–103. Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages 66-73.
Quote from abstract: 'The data confirmed reported trends that the population is getting older, taller and heavier with the mean BMI increasing such that the proportion of individuals who can be classified as obese is increasing. These trends will potentially have an impact on healthcare as more people will have an increased risk of associated morbidity and mortality, as well as an implication on welfare and housing for the increasingly elderly population'.

Studies of the effect of a war-time diet on male populations are not so common, but a classic Japanese study showed that males who were at the adolescent stage in the period up to 1942 were significantly smaller than the previous and succeeding generation and never made up their 'growth retardation'. In other words, boys who became men in the 1940s in Japan (which had similar food shortages to the UK) were smaller throughout their lives. See:
Shunen, I. Tetsuya A, Katsuya F, Hidenobu K1, Soichiro K, Takafumi E and Masayuki, I (1997) Body Constitution of Young Male Workers in Kyoto, Japan in the World War II Period. Journal of Occupational Health. Vol.39, No.2 Pp.152-153

Personally, I have little problem in accepting that the average male in most countries that experienced wartime restrictions was smaller in the 1940s than today, but everyone believes what they want to believe.

Equally, I am not convinced that a 180lb man in a suit looks or moves like a 150lb man in a suit, irrespective of how it is tailored or which tailor did it. But then again, same comment as above.

Alan


* Authors from Department of Forensic Pathology, Medico-Legal Centre, Sheffield, UK; School of Health Studies, Nursing Division, University of Bradford, UK

Alan

True Baron that is the ideal, but is using a fashion plate the same as a using a fashion photo now to say what the average look is like and how clothes should fit? I am unsure if really many people were actually like that, as today, very few men look like the models we see displaying the clothes of designers and fashion stores.

Alan, the Army and Navy catologue starts the waist size of "off the peg" trousers at 32", and increases to I think 42", so one would say that this is the most popular size range, and thus the range for the middle class professional of the time.

Ben

 

[benstephens]

Alan, that I do not doub, As I have said, Orwell comments on how in general the whole population looks under nourished in the 1920s and 1930s. I also do not think I was trying to say that you can not find clothing below this size, in fact, as you know as well as I do, the majority of clothing from the period is below a 32" waist!

However, I was trying to say that as Matt comments, he has a good look, the clothes fit him as they would have fit him had he been alive in the 30s and 40s, and it is possible for someone to "get the look" even if they are above average for the period, if they have a well tailored outfit!

I was just trying to use the Army and Navy Catologue as an example that it is hard to class what is a 1940s size and cut to a suit that was all, and what the 1940s shape was.

I agree tottally the average size was smaller in the 1930s.

Kindest Regards

Ben

 

[benstephens]

So we would not expect to find clothing from the period (including military uniforms) below 32" waist? Not my experience. Also, I don't think we can reasonably assume that one catalogue by one vendor defines the whole range of sizes of a population. Maybe the 'middle class professional' to whom you refer was more well-fed and took less excercise than the manual workers who made up the majority of the population in the 1940s.[]

That was why I wrote "Middle class proffessional", so that it would be seen that I am not talking about a whole population, just one small proportion of it, who would have been on a wage anywhere from say 300 pounds a year to over 1500 pounds a year, were well fed and in some cases over fed.

Kindest Regards

Ben

 

[Rooster]

Just watch old movies..... there are older gents in all of them who's waist is the largest measurement of their body. They have no waist suppression in their suits, but their suits still have the "classic or vintage fit" that we can't seem to get today with out a bunch of headaches.:eusa_doh:
I've noticed this may be due to the drape of the fabric as much as anything else. It's nearly impossible to get a good vintage look with the flimsy fabrics that are available today. I saw some pictures of somebody on this board that had some vintage fabric made into a vintage suit. It looked dead on as it draped properly as well as it was made by some tailor who obviously knew his business and how a vintage suit is supposed to look. Of course this tailors prices were inline with his abilities too..... I'm coming to the conclusion that it would be better to have one suit by the right tailor than four suits from the wrong tailor. even though the one suit would cost as much as the four others together.
Before I do another suit from overseas, I'll send along one of my vintage suits as an example. I'm still unconvinced even this would work as they have their set patterns they cut from that probably won't conform to vintage style....

 

[Alan Eardley]

I think Ben and I have agreed that we shouldn't be generalising on size across countries. Things were very different in the US in compared to the UK and other parts of Europe in the late 1930s and the whole of the 1940s when food was very severely rationed. 'Hollywood' was, by definition, better fed than most places and car ownership was much higher and and manual work less common.

Further, I wouldn't go by 'movies' (except documentaries) when deducing the size of people. They are actors and extras and are chosen for their appearance. If you look at films and TV programmes today, you could conclude that the population (say of the US) was much slimmer than observation shows it to be. The actors and extras are chosen to conform to what the film makers think people want to see. Today that is slim people. Who is to say that it was not the other way around in the 1930s and 40s?

Anyway, who wants to dress like an 'old gent'? I also suspect that fabric weight is different in the UK, perhaps due to the climate or the conservative attitude of tailors.

Alan

 

[Big Man]

I ... Further, I wouldn't go by 'movies' (except documentaries) when deducing the size of people. ...

Alan

Folks should remember that "the movies" and "real life" are two vastly different things.

 

[Rooster]

Anyway, who wants to dress like an 'old gent'?

Some of us have no other reality......

 

[Rooster]

I think Ben and I have agreed that we shouldn't be generalising on size across countries. Things were very different in the US in compared to the UK and other parts of Europe in the late 1930s and the whole of the 1940s when food was very severely rationed. 'Hollywood' was, by definition, better fed than most places and car ownership was much higher and and manual work less common.

Further, I wouldn't go by 'movies' (except documentaries) when deducing the size of people. They are actors and extras and are chosen for their appearance. If you look at films and TV programmes today, you could conclude that the population (say of the US) was much slimmer than observation shows it to be. The actors and extras are chosen to conform to what the film makers think people want to see. Today that is slim people. Who is to say that it was not the other way around in the 1930s and 40s?

Anyway, who wants to dress like an 'old gent'? I also suspect that fabric weight is different in the UK, perhaps due to the climate or the conservative attitude of tailors.

Alan

My point is , or was, that you will see big men in old movies that wear suits that look very good even if they don't have some of the classic features such as waist suppression because they don't have a small waist.

 

[Big Man]

Some of us have no other reality......

This is a very valid point that I think folks sometimes miss. If you are 40 or 50 or 60 years old today, why in the world would you think you could dress like someone in their 20's or 30's did in the 1930's or 1940's ? As much as I would like to look like Clark Gable or Carry Grant did in the movies, it just ain't happening. [huh]

 

[luvthatlulu]

Many of us can't afford the cost of a true bespoke suit. Even Charleston Bows' (I wish I knew your real name) bespoke jobs start at $950 -- and that's with half-canvassed front. The next best thing is getting a tailor to measure us, and sending those measurements off to someone who has sent us a swatch. Location is another. I'll be damned if I can find a single person in this town who will competently take my measurements, much less one who will make suits as well! Add to that, not all the travelling tailors out there can visit near where we live. As CB said earlier when we were discussing this thread, "I've said it once, and I'll keep saying it -- a good tailor is harder to find than a good surgeon."

In conclusion, I'd say many of us know that we're "shortcutting," but price and location are factors in the decision.

Believe me, as someone else who lives on a budget, I know what you're saying. But I ask everyone to stop and consider this for a moment:

1. Ask yourself how important a proper fit and vintage styling is to you. Be honest with yourself.

2. Ask yourself how much you can afford to spend to insure and achieve the above.

3. The more important it is, the more you need to be prepared to invest and take the proper steps toward achieving these goals first. I absolutely guarantee you that having your buddy "measure" you, writing those measurements down on a piece of paper, submitting that to someone half way around the world, throwing in a few "special vintage styling" requests for good measure, then hoping they can take that one-dimensional blueprint of your body and turn it all into a three-dimensional sartorial masterpiece on the first pass is pure folly.

Now, I'm not saying you shouldn't use these sources. I'm saying you'll have to do a little more legwork for them first and you'll have to spend a little more to acquire the data they will need if you are unable to get that personal fitting with them. And that's where most of us find ourselves. So I suggest:

1. If there are no local tailors who you feel can measure you properly, you need to see Step 1. above again and then decide how much you're willing to travel to find one.

2. If its important at all--do whatever it takes to find one somewhere and get properly measured. Hopefully, you'll only have to do this once and everything else will be done by remote control in the future. A well-fitted suit is a major expenditure and says a lot about the wearer. Therefore, you should at this point be willing to have and spend for what's necessary for only one that's right rather than a closet full that aren't.

3. If possible and practical for you, take a suit or garment that fits you relatively well now and "sacrifice" it to the cause. Let the same tailor mark, pin, alter the garment to your specifications and rough cut the styling changes you desire (a belt-back, for example).

4. Send the professional measurements, the "sacrificial suit" and some photos of you wearing it to the desired manufacturer (understanding that you may never see it again as it will need to be de-constructed) along with your check. Pray a lot.

I still wouldn't guarantee you a perfect fit on the first go around, but I guarantee you've increased the odds exponentially in your favor.

P. S. - Note to BellyTank: Shhhhh. You caught me! Touche. :cheers1:

 

[Alan Eardley]

I'm in my 60s and I like to wear slim fitting vintage clothing. I wouldn't say I wore clothes that would be worn by someone in their 20s or 30s in the 30s or 40s, at least not according to editions of Esquire and Apparel Arts that show Fellows's sketches of grey haired mature men wearing trim, well-fitting suits. An ideal look perhaps, as in the case of all fashion illustrations, but why not aspire to that look irrespective of one's age?

Alan

This is a very valid point that I think folks sometimes miss. If you are 40 or 50 or 60 years old today, why in the world would you think you could dress like someone in their 20's or 30's did in the 1930's or 1940's ? As much as I would like to look like Clark Gable or Carry Grant did in the movies, it just ain't happening. [huh]

 

[Rooster]

I'm in my 60s and I like to wear slim fitting vintage clothing. I wouldn't say I wore clothes that would be worn by someone in their 20s or 30s in the 30s or 40s, at least not according to editions of Esquire and Apparel Arts that show Fellows's sketches of grey haired mature men wearing trim, well-fitting suits. An ideal look perhaps, as in the case of all fashion illustrations, but why not aspire to that look irrespective of one's age?

Alan

I have grey hair and look nothing like those jaunty chaps in Fellow's drawings....be nice if I did though.
I have a 42" chest and a 40" waist. The suppressed waist look seems to be difficult for modern tailors to reproduce properly with those measurements.:eusa_doh: Having said that, it is still possible to do. At the moment I have on a '70's sport coat that is a belted action back and a very excellent copy of 30's styles. It has excellent waist suppression and the action back stays closed unless it's needed, which is something I've found difficult to accomplish with today's tailors.

 

[Smithy]

I've just stumbled upon this thread and thought I'd add my opinions.

I personally would be wary of using "mail order" tailoring over the internet (this has nothing to do with the skills of these tailors) but due to the simple fact that a bespoke suit ideally should be made by the tailor who took the measurements. Some may dispute this but I shall give my personal experience.

I have been using a tailor originally from Nepal for several years now who has spent time working in London for a couple of well known bespoke tailors, so the chap knows his onions. I was first measured for a suit by this gentleman several years ago after he was visiting a friend of mine who also has his suits tailored by this fellow. The suit which he made for me was the perfect fit, only thing I needed was having the trousers taken up a 1/4'' which he did when remeasuring me when he returned with my new suit. Around 2 years later I wanted another suit from this gentleman and although he still had my measurements he asked whether I could visit him for measuring, I couldn't and used a local tailor in NZ to take my measurements. The subsequent suit was not a perfect fit by any stretch of the imagination. Luckily I was able to meet up with him a few months later as he was visiting. He took my measurements and once again I received a suit which was the perfect fit.

From my own experience I have found that tailoring is a highly skilled and individualistic thing. It seems each tailor has his quirks and own ways of doing things. There is a reason why it is easier to use a tailor who can personally measure and remeasure you during the process of having a suit made.

Others' experiences may very well be different but that is what I personally have found.

 

[dakotanorth]

Late addition to the discussion....

First off I apologize, I didn't read everyone's posts.... I couldn't keep up and it seems like this became a discussion of personal opinion.

I think I'll try to summarize:
Yes, clothing is always styled to an "ideal" physique, whatever that may be at the time. Clearly the low-rise hip huggers of the 70's didn't work on most women because they weren't stick thin! However, most styles can be adapted to different body types.
Also something to consider- up until, say, the 60's, clothing was not treated with the "pop art" influence we started to see. People began breaking down the lines, the forms, the scale, the pattern, etc etc. Before this time, clothing was still treated as a GARMENT, something people wore for a practical purpose- to cover themselves! Even if the garment was embellished, it was still done without disrupting the functionality. Art was applied ON it, not IN it. Clothing became abstract not just in detail, but in form/composition, much like the art of the time.
So, everyone keeps flipping about waistlines. Your traditional waistline has not changed; it's the application of this word that has. Again, low rise, high rise, hip huggers, crotch kissers, all of these manipulated this concept of "waistline" and "fit". Same thing with the "rise" or seat of the pants.
Ok, mail-order suits? Clearly, we as Americans are victims of our own greed- we want everything, we want it NOW, and we don't want to pay top dollar for it, yet we want the best. Hmm doesn't sound plausible does it? If you buy a suit from a man 3,000 miles away, there's a good chance his work won't fit you. Measurements help a great deal, but again, a man that is 5'2" and 180 lbs could have the same waist and chest as a man who is 6'3" and 160lbs. I'm going to extremes, but you get the idea.
SO, maybe the idea is to get a suit from Magnoli, then take it to a local tailor, one you TRUST, to alter and size you into it??
What else did I miss?
It's quite fascinating to read this whole discussion- some people come from the "All theory, no practice" angle, while some have "All practice, no theory" and a few have some of both. My only advice is for anyone who knows this stuff IN THEORY but doesn't understand the actual techniques, TRY IT!! Try altering pants, move buttons on a sportscoat, "turn" a collar on a dress shirt. You will be amazed to see just how dynamic the shapes and sizes of a garment can really be. It still catches me off-guard to this day! :eusa_doh: :eusa_doh:

 

[Matt Deckard]

You bring up a good point. Functionality and style have become two seperate things when it comes to things like suits. Hats have always had the awkwardness of being non functional in some occasions, those most jackets from all eras fit until the last century... But wait, i need to check out some books.

 

[luvthatlulu]

fftopic:

Matt Deckard-

Everytime I see your avatar my whole sordid life passes quickly before my eyes!!!! And Lynyrd Skynyrd's "Gimme Three Steps" lyrics come to mind!

Please point that cannon a little more to your right, OK?

Thanks.

 

[Michaelson]

If he has only one good eye, like he says, I wouldn't be too concerned at the moment....lol

Regards! Michaelson

 

[BellyTank]

And he has the good one shut-


B
T

 

[Michaelson]

And he has the good one shut-


B
T

Oh?

NOW you should worry!!!

Regards! Michaelson

 

[CharlestonBows]

The oddity about all this online measuring and ill-fit is that I, and I believe many vintage collectors, can look at the measurements of any suit offered on ebay and know if or exactly how it's going to fit (as long as the seller has, of course, measured the suit correctly) If I ask the seller for the pit-to-pit laid flat and I get anything from a 19.5 to 20.5, I know I'm good for the chest. If collar to hem is from 29.5 to 31, I know jacket length will work. Shoulders, sleeve length, on and on. Yet if I plug these measurements into an online tailor's site, I'll get a suit that is completely off.

Regards,

Senator Jack

I think it has to do with several factors. You don't know, really, who is putting shears to cloth. You don't know they're training, they're abilities, or the methods they use. You also, generally, get what you pay for.

With eBay, the thing is already made. And, the assumption that the measurements are correct is a big assumption - I've been a victim of that on occasion, and I've never gotten anything vintage on eBay that hasn't required some measure of reworking.