Why low armholes? My theory.

[Feraud]

Maybe, but, I believe those were placed for adding extra wear to the suit. That is a high friction area and that fabric placed there helped add life to the garment.

FM~

Yes I was hoping someone might say that. I would hate to think of it as a perspiration absorber. Yuck.

 

[Forgotten Man]

Yes I was hoping someone might say that. I would hate to think of it as a perspiration absorber. Yuck.

A perspiration absorber... lol man, I feel safe in saying that clothing designers and tailors of those years never thought of adding something to absorb perspiration! If one didn't want to sweat in their coat, they took their coat off... or, had it cleaned once a week... or used LifeBuoy! lol

Don't think two little pads of fabric would have helped Gene Krupa much lol

FM~

 

[Martin Stall]

One thing that strikes me as interesting in this discussion: We observe that mid 1900's, suits became A: more baggy, and B: the scye became deeper.

Now, as a tailor, I can tell you that to fit an oversized coat (which is basically what it comes down to) with a high armscye on a person is near to impossible. A high armhole only works on fitted clothing, not that it has to be cut-to-the-bone.

 

[luvthatlulu]

How I spent my day the other day.

Or "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the 'Low-Cut Armhole Forum'"

So...I'm in a TJMaxx the other day and I spot what appears to be a gorgeous sportjacket hanging close by. My curious nature says lets see what size this little jewel might be. Turns out it is a 44R Canali number...complete with the original Canali plastic hanger. I'm a sucker for logoed hangers so I'm halfway sold on this one already. I'm roughly a 42R, but this thing fit like it was made especially for me -- correct sleeve length, exact jacket length, no "knapsack on the back", etc. OK, I think, go ahead, break my heart...how much? Original Canali hangtag indicates two mortgage payments takes it home from Bloomingdales, but the TJ tag says I'm the grand prize winner today at a mere $99!!! OK, I think, go ahead, break my heart...where's the dreaded "Second Quality" notation? None in sight. Now I'm starting to wet myself but the Depends do their job and I'm ready to get to the register before someone swoops in and says, "Sorry, that's been mis-tagged and the price is really a full mortgage payment...sorry, but thanks for shopping at TJMaxx today anyway." Then it hits me. I'll bet this thing has low-cut armholes and I won't be able to signal a touchdown at the next game, wave-off an F-18 from a bad carrier landing, or just play badminton with my "fellows" at the club without my jacket riding up! Yep--there it was. Arms go up, so does the jacket. I was so mad that Canali, Bloomingdales and now even TJMaxx had conspired to screw me out of my hard-earned $99 for this worthless piece of pooh that I immediately threw it back on the hanger, raced thru the checkout lane accidentally dropping $99 plus tax as I went, slapped the cashier for telling me to "Have a nice day" when mine had clearly been ruined already, and proceeded to wear a strangely similar item to work the next day only to have my co-workers repeatedly taunt me with how great it looked on me! I was so affronted by their clear lack of sartorial acumen that I kept signalling touchdowns and doing calisthentics to show them how easy it is to be fooled by a great-looking and great-fitting garment. Boy, were they ever impressed!

--Not the Lulu

 

[Matt Deckard]

One thing that strikes me as interesting in this discussion: We observe that mid 1900's, suits became A: more baggy, and B: the scye became deeper.

Now, as a tailor, I can tell you that to fit an oversized coat (which is basically what it comes down to) with a high armscye on a person is near to impossible. A high armhole only works on fitted clothing, not that it has to be cut-to-the-bone.

To be contrary... High arholes don't need to be just on fitted jackets. There were plenty of baggy fitted jackets in the 40's which had very high to the pit cuts with large shoulders and a spread out drape. Tis might be more easily seen on womens' jackets of the time. I don't want people to confuse fitted with requiring a higher armhole. Today you can get plenty of fitted jackets with low slung armholes... for instance Polo by Ralph Lauren.

Back in the 40's you could find drapey jackets with high to the pit armholes... It's not a matter of body fit as much as it is just a matter of cutting, making that hole that connects the sleave closer to the armpit and curving in from the back.

You see at times a wrinkle from the transition on the suits in the 40's with the larger shoulders.

Now Armani is a company that i think spearheaded the lower armhole movement with their Italian drape that tookover in the 80's. Because they wanted the Mili Vanili stand away from the body loose chest and back look they started making the armholes bigger and bigger... I recently spoke to one of the tailors that worked with Armani back in the 80's till now. He said that he loved the look though hated what they had to do to get the look... it was a unique look at the time. Something just about everybody in the industry emulated.

 

[CharlestonBows]

Yes I was hoping someone might say that. I would hate to think of it as a perspiration absorber. Yuck.

There are such things as sweat shields that are added to garments, in about the same location, right under the arm. I've only ever really seen them constructed from a few layers of the lining, not the fabric, but the principle looks to be about the same.

Friction wouldn't be too much of an issue under the arm if it was fitted appropriately. If it was, it would move freely. The only friction problem would be on the outside, where fabric would rub against fabric and cause an issue - not the inside.

I've seen some strange things in garments, and some things that just have no expectation -- thats the beauty of bespoke!

 

[CharlestonBows]

Now Armani is a company that i think spearheaded the lower armhole movement with their Italian drape that tookover in the 80's. Because they wanted the Mili Vanili stand away from the body loose chest and back look they started making the armholes bigger and bigger... I recently spoke to one of the tailors that worked with Armani back in the 80's till now. He said that he loved the look though hated what they had to do to get the look... it was a unique look at the time. Something just about everybody in the industry emulated.

This is very much the case - at least what made it a popular thing. People like to knock Armani, and your opinions can be what they are - thats fine. But you can't deny the effect that his designs had on the mens clothing industry during the high-flying 80's and early 90's.

While this may be a secondary cause or reason, though it started as a trend, it is easier for coat makers to produce a garment with a larger scye. Most coats and suitings are made on a machine in a matter, quite literally, of seconds. The larger scye provides for more machine maneuverability -- and don't forget, less waste. It may seem like a little on each garment, but when you're producing 35,000 suits a week (like Peerless of Montreal) then it adds up.

MTM and Bespoke are different altogether, especially depending on your maker.

 

[Orgetorix]

Seems to me there are an awfully lot of guys of various body types walking around in high-armhole, off-the-peg, vintage suits and are perfectly comfortable in them. Why should they all of a sudden have to be 'perfectly cut' to fit?

On the other hand, I have two '60s jackets that fit me well except for the fact that the armhole is small and positioned too far to the rear for my stance. The front and lower front part of the armscye are uncomfortably tight against my shoulder/armpit, and it's enough that I'm about to get rid of the jackets altogether.

 

[BellyTank]

...but I think that a higher armhole is for a person that wears his jacket all day and doesn't remove it much. When you move around and raise your arms, the jacket doesn't pull back so much from your hands with cuffs sticking far out. Men used to live in their suits, and suits had to move with them. As the 20th century wore on, that began to change.

When men began to take their jackets on and off at work, and started just wearing them for the cleanest and least mobile of jobs, a close fit was no longer required and became somewhat annoying. A high arm is a bit harder to don and remove. A low arm is easy to slide on and slip off.

Chicken/Egg-

I think the opposite-
A jacket became a tradition, rather than functional, useable garment,
due to the impractical fit and the non-articulating arm.
Jacket comes off because it can't be worn to do anything- off to drive,
on for the walk to the office, then on the back of the chair....


B
T

 

[BellyTank]

Maybe, but, I believe those were placed for adding extra wear to the suit. That is a high friction area and that fabric placed there helped add life to the garment.

FM~

Armpit pads-

in a vintage jacket, with high-cut armscye, one may observe that the arm-hole almost appears to be "extended"(the "hole" is out on an extension), out, beyond the "body", in order to allow a high cut AND also allow arm articulation- (rather than a high armscye, tight against the body)the armpit pad adds a little filler to the part of the jacket's "armpit", beyond the human.
The jacket is a surreal, hollow extension of the man and must be accomodated with some stuffing.
Maybe also some cushioning AGAINST a high seam in the armpit.
This is the way I see it.
I don't believe that the armpit is a critical "high-wear" area, in reality- especially on an outboard-extended-high-armhole.


B
T

 

[Jovan]

Or "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the 'Low-Cut Armhole Forum'"

So...I'm in a TJMaxx the other day and I spot what appears to be a gorgeous sportjacket hanging close by. My curious nature says lets see what size this little jewel might be. Turns out it is a 44R Canali number...complete with the original Canali plastic hanger. I'm a sucker for logoed hangers so I'm halfway sold on this one already. I'm roughly a 42R, but this thing fit like it was made especially for me -- correct sleeve length, exact jacket length, no "knapsack on the back", etc. OK, I think, go ahead, break my heart...how much? Original Canali hangtag indicates two mortgage payments takes it home from Bloomingdales, but the TJ tag says I'm the grand prize winner today at a mere $99!!! OK, I think, go ahead, break my heart...where's the dreaded "Second Quality" notation? None in sight. Now I'm starting to wet myself but the Depends do their job and I'm ready to get to the register before someone swoops in and says, "Sorry, that's been mis-tagged and the price is really a full mortgage payment...sorry, but thanks for shopping at TJMaxx today anyway." Then it hits me. I'll bet this thing has low-cut armholes and I won't be able to signal a touchdown at the next game, wave-off an F-18 from a bad carrier landing, or just play badminton with my "fellows" at the club without my jacket riding up! Yep--there it was. Arms go up, so does the jacket. I was so mad that Canali, Bloomingdales and now even TJMaxx had conspired to screw me out of my hard-earned $99 for this worthless piece of pooh that I immediately threw it back on the hanger, raced thru the checkout lane accidentally dropping $99 plus tax as I went, slapped the cashier for telling me to "Have a nice day" when mine had clearly been ruined already, and proceeded to wear a strangely similar item to work the next day only to have my co-workers repeatedly taunt me with how great it looked on me! I was so affronted by their clear lack of sartorial acumen that I kept signalling touchdowns and doing calisthentics to show them how easy it is to be fooled by a great-looking and great-fitting garment. Boy, were they ever impressed!

--Not the Lulu

The closest thing we have at the TJ Maxx I work at is the occasional Sean John suit... those things are cut so horridly it's not even funny. The last one I saw was $219.99!

 

[luvthatlulu]

The closest thing we have at the TJ Maxx I work at is the occasional Sean John suit... those things are cut so horridly it's not even funny. The last one I saw was $219.99!

So, are you telling me I shouldn't have washed the car with it last night?

-- Not the Lulu

 

[Jovan]

I'm saying, even with low armholes, that Canali was probably a steal.

 

[luvthatlulu]

That's almost word for word what the TJ Maxx security people first said to me in the parking lot.

--Not the Lulu

 

[Forgotten Man]

Armpit pads-

in a vintage jacket, with high-cut armscye, one may observe that the arm-hole almost appears to be "extended"(the "hole" is out on an extension), out, beyond the "body", in order to allow a high cut AND also allow arm articulation- (rather than a high armscye, tight against the body)the armpit pad adds a little filler to the part of the jacket's "armpit", beyond the human.
The jacket is a surreal, hollow extension of the man and must be accomodated with some stuffing.
Maybe also some cushioning AGAINST a high seam in the armpit.
This is the way I see it.
I don't believe that the armpit is a critical "high-wear" area, in reality- especially on an outboard-extended-high-armhole.


B
T

I see your point, and I agree but, I believe it is also designed as what I originally said, I'll tell you why.

Some of the original pieces I have seen and that I own have worn armscye in the place where that pad would be... I've got liners that are stressed out in that exact spot, and the lining around the lower part of the armpit is warn... it is a stress point on a suit, since one does move his arms.

All due respect, most suits I have don't have that extra piece of coth so, I think it was an extra detail that most European and Asian tailors must have done... I know I do have some American items that have it but, it's not as common.

FM~

 

[BellyTank]

I'm actually thinking of "cutaway" diagrams of suit jacket construction, in 1930s/40s, Sears and Ward's catalogues, etc.,
(American, rather than Euro/Asian) when mentioning this(pocket stays, armpit pads, etc..).
I posted one example somewhere on the FL....

I would believe the sweatpad thing if they were made more replaceable,
or called such.



B
T

 

[Martin Stall]

Hm, interesting thoughts. Sweat pads.... Think about it....

I'm not sure what the correct term is in English, in Holland we use the french sous-bras (under-arm).

One of the functions, and a very important one, is to prevent the lining of the coat from being affected by the wearer's perspiration. There is no particular excessive wear and tear on that part of the coat, but sweat can be very caustic depending on the person. By putting sous-bras in a coat, they will be the part that gets eaten.

Don't believe me? It's no joke. With some people, sweat can be very very aggressive. I knew a man who cold only wear gold-rimmed spectacles, because that was the only metal that could resist his sweat. All his other specs broke in two over the nose. A very extreme example, but the application to coats is that if one perspires a lot, whether it's because of the climate or because of the physiology of the person, the lining is prone to start deteriorating. Sweat pads (ghastly word, actually, no?) prevent this.

And they are far more easy to replace than an entire lining.

 

[Jovan]

Thank you for dropping by and for the informative post, Mr. Stall.

 

[CharlestonBows]

Sweat pads (ghastly word, actually, no?) prevent this.

And they are far more easy to replace than an entire lining.

I try to make it a little nicer with terming it "sweat shields," but you are entirely correct. And it is much, much easier to replace them.

 

[herringbonekid]

Armpit pads-

in a vintage jacket, with high-cut armscye, one may observe that the arm-hole almost appears to be "extended"(the "hole" is out on an extension), out, beyond the "body", in order to allow a high cut AND also allow arm articulation- (rather than a high armscye, tight against the body)the armpit pad adds a little filler to the part of the jacket's "armpit", beyond the human.
The jacket is a surreal, hollow extension of the man and must be accomodated with some stuffing.

BT you've really lost me here with your " armhole is out on an extension" idea. i can see nothing to back this theory up in my own jackets. could you provide any visual aid ? i'm intrigued by the idea, but having trouble grasping it.