Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Formal Wear Primer

Marc Chevalier

Gone Home
Messages
18,192
Location
Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
From Fawlty Towers



Mr. Hutchinson: "There is a documentary on BBC2 this evening about 'Squawking Bird', the leader of the Blackfoot Indians in the late 1860s. Now this starts at 8.45 and goes on for approximately three-quarters of an hour."


Basil Fawlty: "I'm sorry, are you talking to me?"


Mr. Hutchinson: "Indeed I am, yes. Now, is it possible for me to reserve the BBC2 channel for the duration of this televisual feast?"


Basil Fawlty:
"Why don't you talk properly?"


.
 

Orgetorix

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,241
Location
Louisville, KY...and I'm a 42R, 7 1/2
Evan and Midnight: Would either of you care to quote the period sources you cite in reference to the inappropriateness of the notch lapel? I'm particularly interested in pre-WWII sources, as most of us here recognize this period as setting the standards of good taste.

Oh, and please make sure, if possible, that they're American sources. Thanks.
 

avedwards

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,425
Location
London and Midlands, UK
This is just generally to those who feel strongly about whether or not notched lapel dinner jackets are acceptable.

I posted a picture of myself in one to see what the general opinion on it was. Naturally there were to be different opinions, as unlike a peaked lapel a notched lapel is a grey area as far as correctness goes. However I didn't want people to end up getting offended as a result of that. I had a fight ensue between two strangers a few weeks ago because of the clothing I was wearing. Completely unneccessary.

So please, please do not turn this into an argument. Show evidence by all means and share opinions. But keep it friendly, as that's usually a great thing about this forum. We don't want to have a bartender intervene by suspending anyone, or anyone leaving because they feel insulted.

So let's all try to remain civil in the debate and thank you for the opinions so far. :)
 

Lokar

A-List Customer
Messages
383
Location
Nowhere
Orgetorix said:
Oh, and please make sure, if possible, that they're American sources. Thanks.

May I ask why? The discussion was started by a post made by someone living in England posting a picture and mentioning notched lapels - I'd say British viewpoints have possibly more weight than American in this case due to the location, and regardless, Britain wasn't exactly a nobody when it came to setting sartorial standards in the pre-WW2 era.
 

avedwards

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,425
Location
London and Midlands, UK
I'd say British and American satorial standards are reasonably similar. For example hats are removed in the same instances and both usually leave the bottom button of a waistcoat unfastened. So I'd say both American and British sources are equally valid.
 

Orgetorix

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,241
Location
Louisville, KY...and I'm a 42R, 7 1/2
Lokar said:
May I ask why? The discussion was started by a post made by someone living in England posting a picture and mentioning notched lapels - I'd say British viewpoints have possibly more weight than American in this case due to the location, and regardless, Britain wasn't exactly a nobody when it came to setting sartorial standards in the pre-WW2 era.

Because my defense of the appropriate of the notch lapel dinner jacket (NLDJ) has been made explicitly for the American context, as my original post will show. While avedwards is right that US/UK sartorial standards are usually similar, I believe that this is one area where the US and UK have differed historically. While Savile Row tailors have traditionally declined to make NLDJ, American tailors were apparently quite happy to make them (considering the large numbers of vintage examples always available on ebay).

Since, as I assert, Americans and the British have viewed this garment differently, a British style authority isn't to be expected to provide a reliable guide to what is appropriate for this side of the pond. There is a pronounced Anglophilia on the internet clothing fora, and I believe this is why so many people think the NLDJ is wrong.

If someone is personally of the opinion that the British are more tasteful than their American cousins in this regard, fine. I don't necessarily disagree. But when we look to the past for guidance on what we should do today, we need to recognize the important distinction between inelegant and inappropriate. Inappropriate is wearing a four-in-hand tie with a dinner jacket. Inappropriate is wearing brown suede shoes with white tie. A NLDJ, by contrast, is not inappropriate. Just inelegant.

N.B: My original comments were aimed at Evan, not at the OP. It may be inappropriate for the OP to wear a NLDJ in the UK. But I'm not British, and I don't know. And I think it's pretentious for the Americans on this board to lecture folks across the pond on what's appropriate, particularly when they're apparently ignorant of sartorial traditions in their own country.
 

Cobden

Practically Family
Messages
788
Location
Oxford, UK
I think though, as I explained earlier, that one is faced with the problem that the "rules" of black tie during the Golden Era changed. A publication written in 1920 would treat black tie as informal, and not to be worn when ladies are present. One in 1939 would class it as semi-formal and perfectly acceptable for wear when the opposite sex are around and white tie isn't appropriate

I think we can all agree that for formal dress nothing but peaked lapels are "correct", right? Day dress reflects this. In 1915, a morning coat/cutaway was "business informal" (the frock coat being formal) and in 1935 it was formal (the frock coat becoming, in the US and UK, a costume piece, rather like a codpiece would be) and during this period notched lapels were replaced by peaked on morning dress, reflecting this change in status. Similarly, the dinner jacket changed from being informal to the newly introduced concept of "semi-formal wear", it's day companion being the black lounge suit(UK)/stroller suit (US), which was by and large an invention of the 20's. When one introduces a new clothing designation, there is naturally going to be some rocky times before things are settled. One only has to look at that most recent introduction into the formality designators, "business casual", to know what I mean. Had you asked five people in the 1990's what was appropriate for business casual, you'll have gotten get five different answers - it's only recently begun to settle. Of course, semi-casual had a head start, being built on pre-existing suits of clothing that had moved designation (such as with the DJ/Tuxedo) or newly introduced clothing that was merely a slightly less formal version of something else (black lounge/stroller), but what features and embellishments were appropriate for this new concept had yet to be worked out. In the UK, it seems, notched lapels were not considered formal enough, and neither period semi-formal day nor evening dress has notched lapels.

However, I do agree that there are differences in the "rules" on either side of the Atlantic, especially with regard to the notched lapel. In much the same way I noticed that both the black lounge and the dinner jacket have peaked lapels in the UK, I have noticed that during this era US stroller suits often, indeed more usually have, notched lapels. So it is indeed possible that NL tuxedos were considered perfectly acceptable in the US, as NL were fine for semi-formal; later on in the Golden Era, the British notion of them being "not the done thing" for DJ/tuxedos could perhaps have crossed the ocean, or the elegance of PLDJ's being too much for the American's too resist - who can say?

You may have noticed I have ignored shawl lapels. This is because what I have just said is far too complicated for me to understand reading it back without myself getting more confused by the introduction of something else to the conversation entirely!
 

Tomasso

Incurably Addicted
Messages
13,719
Location
USA
Cobden said:
I think we can all agree that for formal dress nothing but peaked lapels are "correct", right?
Wrong!!!.............Are you lacking in basic comprehension skills?
 

Lokar

A-List Customer
Messages
383
Location
Nowhere
Tomasso said:
Wrong!!!.............Are you lacking in basic comprehension skills?
I think Cobden was referring to proper "formal dress" - white tie, frock coats, etc., not black tie or other semi-formal forms of dress.
 

Tomasso

Incurably Addicted
Messages
13,719
Location
USA
Lokar said:
I think Cobden was referring to proper "formal dress" - white tie, frock coats, etc., not black tie or other semi-formal forms of dress.
You're right.....I'm just so sick of this nonsense.




MeaCulpa1.gif
 

Cobden

Practically Family
Messages
788
Location
Oxford, UK
Marc Chevalier said:
Ironically, peak lapels were also very popular for early to mid 1930s single-breasted business suits ... in the U.S. and Britain.

.

Oh, indeed - I have one from the 40's that has peaked lapels, and I think it's a very good look. I have some thoughts concerning how this came about, but they aren't appropriate for this thread.

Slight clarification, I was indeed referring to formal dress as in tail coats and morning dress
 

Richard Warren

Practically Family
Messages
682
Location
Bay City
It strikes me that we retroactively impose more rigid requirements on the past than those who lived in it imposed on themselves. I believe for example that I have seen historical examples of the evening tail coat with shawl collar.

By the way, I have a db dinner jacket with six buttons. It never occurred to me that it might be an oddity either in an historical or contemporary context.
 

Marc Chevalier

Gone Home
Messages
18,192
Location
Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Richard Warren said:
I believe for example that I have seen historical examples of the evening tail coat with shawl collar.

Yup. I've seen vintage turn-of-the-century evening tailcoats with shawl collars. An 1896 "Spy" caricature from Vanity Fair shows some British personage (don't remember who) with such a tailcoat:


45297.jpg




Several more 'Britishers':

shawl2.jpg


shawl1.jpg


shawl3.jpg




.
 

Cobden

Practically Family
Messages
788
Location
Oxford, UK
Yes, that's why ignored shawl collars - trying not to complicate things ;)
Shawl collar tailcoats were very common in the bell epoque and rooring 90's, as were other features that would later be considered not the done thing, black waistcoats being one (as shewn above), and various numbers of buttons. The length of tails also descended (then rose a bit, to knee length)...as I said, what was considered the done thing and what wasn't evolved over time: what was fine and dandy in 1900 may not have been fine and dandy by 1939. Seam decorations on the trousers worn with tails is another example; originally one would have no silk on them, then one silk line of silk braiding, then two. The interbellum period was a period in which things such as this became standardised - it was the period of evolution in formal, and semi-formal wear, towards the "norms" we'd considered "correct" nowadays.

It's why I say that the NLDJ is both fair enough and not the done thing during the Golden Era. It was both, at different points.
 

avedwards

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,425
Location
London and Midlands, UK
Cobden said:
Yes, that's why ignored shawl collars - trying not to complicate things ;)
Shawl collar tailcoats were very common in the bell epoque and rooring 90's, as were other features that would later be considered not the done thing, black waistcoats being one (as shewn above), and various numbers of buttons. The length of tails also descended (then rose a bit, to knee length)...as I said, what was considered the done thing and what wasn't evolved over time: what was fine and dandy in 1900 may not have been fine and dandy by 1939. Seam decorations on the trousers worn with tails is another example; originally one would have no silk on them, then one silk line of silk braiding, then two. The interbellum period was a period in which things such as this became standardised - it was the period of evolution in formal, and semi-formal wear, towards the "norms" we'd considered "correct" nowadays.

It's why I say that the NLDJ is both fair enough and not the done thing during the Golden Era. It was both, at different points.
I think the reason late Victorian tails varied so much could have been that they were worn so often that people wanted to differentiate themselves. Now they are almost a uniform but worn less frequently, so there is less room for variation. The same was the case with modern garments like T-shirts; when they came out they were usually white but now they come in all sorts of patterns and designs.

At least that's my guess.

As for the infamour NLDJ, I think it comes down to the fact that smart clothing is made to make you look good. Rules are made because they usually fulfil that purpose. If a NLDJ makes you look bad (like so many celebrities) it shouldn't be worn. If it can still make you look good, then I think it can be done.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,307
Messages
3,078,508
Members
54,244
Latest member
seeldoger47
Top