Ralph Lauren Roberts Regent Striped Pants

[Hemingway Jones]

I bought these pants at one of those great sales end of season sales at Bloomingdale's. These are Ralph Lauren "Roberts" pants; off-white with a Navy stripe. I thought they were linen. They even wrinkle like linen does, but the tag says 100% wool.

They are surprisingly high-waisted, though I need to wear them higher. I have a tendency to wear all of my pants lower, even my Bill's khakis.

Here is the stripe with a close-up of the texture of the pants:


Here are a couple of pics of the lining:


The lining has an interesting sheen:




Here's a pic of the back of them:


They go well with a blazer:


I rather think they have a 20s or early 30s look. I wish they had pleats, but that's OK. I'll be bringing these to The Queen Mary.

What do you think?

 

[Matt Deckard]

They look very dandy on you. That's good. Classic. Wish it was a suit.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

They look very dandy on you. That's good. Classic. Wish it was a suit.

Thank you, Matt!
And Yes! How great would it be if they were a whole suit! Perhaps a broad lapel double-breasted.

 

[herringbonekid]

nice trousers Hem.
lots of 20s and 30s trousers were flat front so in a way they look more authentic !

 

[Mr. Rover]

I agree with the 'Kid. Having some flat fronts is great, too! Variety, yknow? I think coming from the Indy school of thought nothing looks right until it has double pleats. Enjoy them! You can never have enough lightweight spring pants.

 

[Tony in Tarzana]

Thank you, Matt!
And Yes! How great would it be if they were a whole suit! Perhaps a broad lapel double-breasted.

You'd need the Duesenberg to go with it, though.

 

[Daisy Buchanan]

I know I told you this already, but I'll put it in writing. I really like these pants. They have such a great vintage-y look to them. The entire outfit is a very good look. You wear them well.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

I agree with the 'Kid. Having some flat fronts is great, too! Variety, yknow? I think coming from the Indy school of thought nothing looks right until it has double pleats. Enjoy them! You can never have enough lightweight spring pants.

Thanks Ray,
One thing though, and it's strange, they're really not lightweight. They're pretty heavy by modern standards, and they're fully lined.

 

[Mr. Rover]

Ahh...well, it's a beautiful fabric! It looks a little long in the leg- see how it touches the top of the heel on your left foot and almost skims the floor on your right leg in that picture from the back view? Maybe if you hiked them up a little higher that problem would be remedied, maybe not. It's up to you whether you want to get them shortened or not, because they are quite acceptable in their current state. Lookin' dapper-wear them in good health!

Cheers,
Ray

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Ahh...well, it's a beautiful fabric! It looks a little long in the leg- see how it touches the top of the heel on your left foot and almost skims the floor on your right leg in that picture from the back view? Maybe if you hiked them up a little higher that problem would be remedied, maybe not. It's up to you whether you want to get them shortened or not, because they are quite acceptable in their current state. Lookin' dapper-wear them in good health!

Cheers,
Ray

Ah yes, I am not wearing them quite as high as they'll go. I never quite belt-up high-waisted pants. Also, when I had them tailored, I was wearing higher shoes; my chunky bottomed wing-tips. I should have considered that I would be wearing my Spectators with them.

 

[Mojave Jack]

They look great with those braces, and that was a good color choice. I agree that the length may be a shade too long in the back, but other than that you got a great fit.

Actually, I think a suit of that stuff would be too much, Matt. With the solid blazer they look excellent, but a whole suit would look a bit too zoot. That full lining is a great option, too. That makes wool a lot more comfortable if there is any chance you'll get a bit too warm.

 

[carebear]

It looks a little long in the leg- see how it touches the top of the heel on your left foot...

Is that a vintage faux-pas?

I still get all my trou finished to the touch the welt of my shoe in back. It's the reg on dress uniforms and I started doing it on my civvie attire as well.

I hate having my socks show unless I'm sitting down.

 

[scotrace]

Excellent, excellent score, well done!

 

[Mr. Rover]

Ah yes, I am not wearing them quite as high as they'll go. I never quite belt-up high-waisted pants. Also, when I had them tailored, I was wearing higher shoes; my chunky bottomed wing-tips. I should have considered that I would be wearing my Spectators with them.

Ahh- that happened to me with two pants. I was wearing Dr. Scholl's pads in a certain pair of shoes. I was going for the no-break look so they have a very small break with regular shoes.

 

[herringbonekid]

Is that a vintage faux-pas?

I still get all my trou finished to the touch the welt of my shoe in back. It's the reg on dress uniforms and I started doing it on my civvie attire as well.

I hate having my socks show unless I'm sitting down.

it's more 30s/40s authentic to have no or just a little break.
but i say wear what you're comfortable with and don't worry about whether you're comitting a faux-pas.

 

[carebear]

it's more 30s/40s authentic to have no or just a little break.
but i say wear what you're comfortable with and don't worry about whether you're comitting a faux-pas.

I still don't get much break. Trousers don't have to be tailored straight across, parallel to the waistband. All my dress trousers taper in length from front (shorter) to rear (longer).

Judging from what I'm learning here, from tying a tie to polishing Oxfords to how to fit a suit (and to having the best Dress uniform ever), I was well-served by the Marines, fashion-wise.