How to Ruin a Perfectly Good Suit

[Marc Chevalier]

12. Pepperpots without tea cozies.


.

 

[jml90]

Don't feel like reading too much so If it's been mentioned forgive me.
Undone tie Undone top button on shirt
Kiltie Loafers
Too long pants
Too baggy pants
Too long jacket sleeves
Short sleeve shirts
Sneakers
White socks
Athletic socks of any kind
Clip on ties
Too big anything
Backpacks (really irks me)

 

[Benny Holiday]

This is a personal impression, but . . .

I wonder what you guys think about loafers worn with a suit?

To me, the two don't go together. Loafers imply to me a degree of casualness, and I feel comfortable wearing mine with a sportscaot and slacks combination, but not a suit. I don't know if this is a hard and fast rule or anything, it's just something I don't do. I always wear (lace-up) dress shoes with a suit.

What's the etiquette regarding loafers?

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I think it depends on the loafer. I've seen some very elegant ones, made of excellent leather on really fine lasts. Prince Charles wears them from time to time with his suits, and it works.

.

 

[jml90]

I wonder what you guys think about loafers worn with a suit?

To me, the two don't go together. Loafers imply to me a degree of casualness, and I feel comfortable wearing mine with a sportscaot and slacks combination, but not a suit. I don't know if this is a hard and fast rule or anything, it's just something I don't do. I always wear (lace-up) dress shoes with a suit.

What's the etiquette regarding loafers?

As long as they're not kilties I'm okay.
Kilties are never appropriate

 

[Benny Holiday]

Thank you gentleman

jml90, for some reason I'm imagining you pronouncing 'kilties' with a thick Scottish accent!

 

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

Who is Jack Castronovo? :eusa_clap

I'm flattered that my issues of overstuffed pockets and open DB jackets were taken up, but I feel bad for introducing the question of clipped-on mobiles. (I had written I don't do that myself, but wouldn't necessarily consider it bad style. I gather it mainly depends on how narrow-fitted or drapy the jacket is, doesn't it, unless you consider it a matter of principles.) And haven't I made it clear I regard pocket squares as optional, not compulsory?

Alright, maybe I should think that over. I mean, the Classic Style Magazine says you need one, and that paper looks like they know what they're talking about..... *


* Five ordinary dots in honour of the editor.

 

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

knapsack

Funnily, I don't even think a city rucksack is such a violation of style as such - there are nice ones made of good cloths or leather. Still, they don't really suit a suit, but what's really bad is that they tear your jacket back so it doesn't fall any normal way.

Knapsack - the jacket itself is even more distorted than the bearer's sense of style.

 

[nightandthecity]

If the 1930s and 40s are our guide, pocket squares are definitely optional. My impression from old film/photos is that for most people the square was reserved for more formal ocassions. Personally, I would only wear one when "steppng out".

 

[nightandthecity]

oh....

...........

Shaul, we could start a pro-dot organization. Call it Join the Dots...........

 

[MK]

* Five ordinary dots in honour of the editor.

LOL!!

 

[Senator Jack]

Pocket squares: Optional? Of course. But I did write 'transforms man ordinary to man debonaire.' Look at the third pic. Guy looks great, but I thought the square would have made him dashing. Just seems incomplete to me.

Knapsack: If you're going to blow $1,500 on a suit, why look like a hiker?


Regards,

Senator Jack

 

[Matt Deckard]

Good job Jack... Super informative. Pocket square completes the image... I'm not always wearing one... though it ads the last stroke to the image.

 

[CharlieH.]

How do you ruin a perfectly good suit?

Rip the lining off the back and let it hang like tails!
I saw a chap who did just that to an unsuspecting DB jacket.... and he wore it with a wrinkled white shirt, no tie and sneakers. Either he was furthering his role as "class clown" or he was... well, keeping up with the latest trends, it may seem.

 

[Samsa]

The biggest pet peeve of mine is something I've noticed on TV lately (and, as a matter of fact, in person):

wearing a pocket square without a tie!

What are you supposed to match the pocket square to if you don't have a tie!

 

[Orgetorix]

The biggest pet peeve of mine is something I've noticed on TV lately (and, as a matter of fact, in person):

wearing a pocket square without a tie!

What are you supposed to match the pocket square to if you don't have a tie!

You aren't supposed to match your tie and pocket square, anyway. The only things in your outfit that should match are your socks (with each other) and your shoes (with each other). Those tie-and-pocket-square sets that are cut from the same cloth are the height of cheesy sartorial no-nos. Both tie and pocket square should coordinate with your entire outfit. Therefore, even if you weren't wearing a tie you could choose a square that picks up colors from your suit or shirt.

 

[Wild Root]

You aren't supposed to match your tie and pocket square, anyway. The only things in your outfit that should match are your socks (with each other) and your shoes (with each other). Those tie-and-pocket-square sets that are cut from the same cloth are the height of cheesy sartorial no-nos. Both tie and pocket square should coordinate with your entire outfit. Therefore, even if you weren't wearing a tie you could choose a square that picks up colors from your suit or shirt.

Ah, bologna! I've seen some photos of the classic stars in the 40's who sported that look rather well... it was something that was started in the 40's... I've seen some very nice examples of matching ties and handkerchiefs... the look is nice if done right. My self, if I found a 1940's tie and handkerchief set, I'd buy it and wear it, if the pattern was special. I've even seen a photo of Bogart wearing socks that matched his sweater vest... kind of a nice look I think.

Also, I've seen in Esquire magazines or Life magazines ads for ties with matching braces and handkerchiefs... with shirts with matching underwear! And sock garters that match the braces! In the 30's and 40's it was high class to wear matching things that had colors that went with the suit.

I don't own any matching sets my self but, I try and use a handkerchief that has like colors as my tie does... and that compliments the suit which was done all the time in the period catalogs or fashion plates.

=WR=

PS. If it was so utterly distasteful, why were there big name clothing makers making the sets in the first place?

 

[Marc Chevalier]

... it was something that was started in the 40's... I've seen some very nice examples of matching ties and handkerchiefs... the look is nice if done right.

It was started in the 1930s. eBay occasionally has auctions for '30s sets in their original packages. Nearly always, some Hollywood heartthrob is shown on the box: Clark Gable, Dick Powell, etc.

As for the appropriateness of wearing a matching tie and handkerchief, Esquire magazine (in the '30s) went back and forth on it. One season, it was deemed okay; the next, it was considered "gauche".

.

 

[Matt Deckard]

It will always depend on who it is wearing the set.

I prefer to color coordinate. I don't think I could match.

See avatar to the left.

 

[Orgetorix]

I admit I'm a newbie when it comes to what was common in the 30s and 40s. All I know is that today these sets are sold mostly only in Mens Wearhouse and such like stores--not exactly havens of sartorial excellence. And wearing a pocket square that coordinates with--but doensn't match exactly--the rest of your ensemble shows an ability to work with colors, patterns, and textures in harmonious ways. You have to admit that wearing a matching tie and square set is unimaginative, at best.