Why I'm not renewing my Esquire subscription

[ortega76]

In their A Style Manifesto For 2009, Esquire.com gets one or two things right.

"Respect the tie". Good advice.

Then they proclaim "Mad Men killed the pocket square". Why don't they respect one of the hallmarks of great men's style?

 

[Sefton]

Do the characters on that show not wear pocket squares? If Esquire is advising on style based upon the Neilsen ratings then that is just one of many good reasons to skip the renewal (and borrow a friends copy).

 

[Flitcraft]

fftopic:

Sefton:

Where do you keep getting these awesome avatar pictures?
Are you a retired photographer or something?
Who is the subject of this one?

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Esquire has been naught but toilet paper for a very, very long time.

Total garbage.

bk

 

[donCarlos]

Well, slide nr. 4 has a point and shall be respected by EVERYONE. (and the suit on that picture is very nice)
The slides about showing cuffs and navy blue suits and length of pants are good as well.

On the contrary, pronouncing the pocket square dead, saying that tux can only have peaked lapels... What kind of people they are? Many loungers clearly know more about this than these so called advisors. And what´s even more sad - people will listen to them.

 

[Sefton]

fftopic:

Sefton:

Where do you keep getting these awesome avatar pictures?
Are you a retired photographer or something?
Who is the subject of this one?

The gentleman is a citizen of the nation of Tuva and his occupation (pure speculation on my part) is Shaman. I dig the mix of native attire and western hat. No photog me. Just a short attention span for avatars and a large collection of ephemera with which to pilfer freely. Thanks!

Back on topic: The current Esquire is sad really. I can picture the current editors opening a vault and ushering in the new hire writers with the words: "Here is the Esquire archive. You will find within the sum total of decades of sartorial wisdom that was hard won by our illustrious founders. I want you to read everything and remember nothing. Now get to work!

 

[WildCelt]

. . . saying that tux can only have peaked lapels... What kind of people they are?

Well, it is better than saying you should wear a four-in-hand with notch lapels a la GQ. (Not, of course, that I would get a subscription to Esquire, either. I can get both GQ and Esquire free at work--the recycling center.)

 

[KY Gentleman]

Take a stand Ortega76! :eusa_clap

 

[MEDIUMMYND]

Esquire has been naught but toilet paper for a very, very long time.

Total garbage.

bk

HERE,HERE.

 

[BinkieBaumont]

I have a pile of GQ from the early 80's which I hope to scan and post,they feature shoots by legendary photgrapher Bruce Webber the best one was the 1980 Olympic addition............... that never was!!!!! due to the American boycot, of the Moscow olympics, America objected to Russians invading Afganistan????(its not politics its history moderators)

 

[Suitable]

Well, it is better than saying you should wear a four-in-hand with notch lapels a la GQ.

Indeed. Peak lapels are not the only option for dinner jackets: shawl lapels are also acceptable (which is not to say advisable for every man and every situation), but that is all. Notch lapels on formal attire are a solecism. They scream "rental shop"—only now the rental shops are more likely to promote a "classic" ensemble of a turquoise notch-lapel overcoat, an eleven-button satin waistcoat, a clip-on four-in-hand tie, and a clownishly ruffled shirt. The best that I can say about notch lapels on dinner jackets—editors who call these "tuxes" should be boiled in oil—is that they are a damn sight better than most of what passes for formal attire these days. They will do if the proper options are unavailable (as they often are nowadays), but the rest of the outfit should be correct. If notch lapels are worn with a four-in-hand tie, all bets are off.

It is probably too much to expect a periodical to uphold classic sartorial style. Periodicals, after all, have to keep publishing new material if they wish to sell copies.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

If notch lapels are worn with a four-in-hand tie, all bets are off.

What fresh insanity is this? [huh]

bk

 

[Tomasso]

Notch lapels on formal attire are a solecism. They scream "rental shop"

I wonder if the medals are rented as well.

While all my DJ's are peak, I'm just not a big notch hater.[huh]

Black Tie is Semi-Formal, after all; Much more latitude afforded compared to Formal-White Tie, IMO.

 

[Feraud]

What fresh insanity is this? [huh]

bk

It's more of that, "no blue suit with brown shoes" business..

 

[Fletch]

That's messed up. I think it's supposed to be no brown suit with blue shoes.

No one wants to tell him.
Apologies to Oxner, Apparel Arts, spring, 1934.

 

[Matt Deckard]

I think I said it before... when it comes to style they are behind the curve for some reason. I think it's because they aren't global. I prefer British GQ.

When it comes to style,
We are the music makers
We are the dreamers of dreams

 

[Suitable]

Yes, I know that notch lapels on dinner jackets are common (in more than one sense of the word). And you can produce a million photos of people wearing them. That doesn't mean that they're proper, never mind classic. They are a recent innovation of the mass-market prêt-à-porter industry, which finds it cheaper and easier to produce single-breasted dinner jackets from the pattern used for ordinary business-suit jackets.

Unfortunately, notch lapels are now dominant, and many people have trouble finding a proper SB dinner jacket with peak lapels (which is a good reason to turn to a tailor). They've become acceptable (more's the pity), but they look like ordinary suit jackets, because that's what they are. Again, I won't fight to the death on this issue. I do, however, categorically deplore the four-in-hand ties, sternum-high satin waistcoats, and other tacky innovations that are being passed off as formal wear today.

 

[skyvue]

The slides about showing cuffs and navy blue suits and length of pants are good as well.

A great many here know more than I do about classic style, but I thought they fell short on the length of trousers. I have long understood that there's one rule for cuffed trousers (no break), another for uncuffed dress trousers (the only one they addresssed), a third for khakis/chinos, and a fourth for jeans.

Me, I'm a stickler especially on the length of cuffed trousers. They just don't look right with more than the tiniest of breaks (and better none at all).

 

[Fletch]

Yes, I know that notch lapels on dinner jackets are common (in more than one sense of the word). And you can produce a million photos of people wearing them. That doesn't mean that they're proper, never mind classic. They are a recent innovation of the mass-market prêt-à-porter industry, which finds it cheaper and easier to produce single-breasted dinner jackets from the pattern used for ordinary business-suit jackets.

Proper they may not be, even classic. But neither are they a recent innovation. They were common way back in the 1920s - sometimes even with belt looped trousers.

The Wolverine Orchestra featuring Bix Beiderbecke, 1924
(humungous file, showing more detail than you could use)

 

[Lou]

I take Esquire and especially GQ with a grain of salt. Apparently, the number of well dressed men I see sporting pocket squares feel the same way.