Real Camel, Mind! Plus Bush Throwing His Shoes Back at Journalists

• Here’s a coincidence. Over at the London Lounge members are politely answering the query ‘if you only had one coat, other than a rain coat, what would it be?’

• And Will, the same week, is answering that very question. His is camel hair. Not just camel-coloured, mind.

• In the same line of iconic clothes, I also recommend this post on A Suitable Wardrobe. Such simple colours, yet such sophistication. It’s all about fit.

• The feedback of peers is most useful when getting recommendations on fit. Saves so much sole leather with going from store to store. Not to mention dressing room to dressing room. http://www.styleforum.net/showthread.php?t=35147

• It’s also worth remembering that this site featured a post of the exact same problem.

• Meanwhile the thread on the ‘comprehensive list of links to high-end shoes‘ continues to grow. Page 22 drops you in the middle of debate on Allen Edmonds. If only Bush had thrown a shoe back…

• Lastly, another great insight into other threads from Sleevehead. I’d like to think I’d be a ‘one tailor to rule them all’ kind of person. But just as with aftershaves, that doesn’t seem to be the way things have gone…

Why the Fuss: Thom Browne

First in this series, I made evident my puzzlement as to why Abercrombie & Fitch received so much attention and custom; a piece which attracted more than a few comments, most of which echoed my bemusement of that peculiar reverence – a reverence I have recently been witness to as the velvet roped queue for the precious sales items at the Burlington Gardens store snaked around Savile Row. The subject of this piece is an altogether different kettle of fish, for there are no squeaky-clean-teens clamouring at the emporium’s door; no loud thumping music, soap-smelling oily doormen or poor parents, reluctantly removing credit cards from wallets. For Thom Browne, one of the most unconventional contemporary clothing designers, appeals to an entirely different group, although this ‘appeal’ is something which I intend to analyse thoroughly.

I was browsing the racks of sale and non-sale items at Harvey Nichols, temple of fashion and furnishings, when I came across the Thom Browne concession which was really a small number of racks. I had read a great deal about Mr Browne’s clothing and philosophy; the so-called ‘saviour’ of men’s fashion, revered for offering simpler but eccentric choices. He is applauded for the tailoring and construction of his items, notorious for their ‘overgrown schoolboy’ look; incredibly short trousers and now incredibly short jacket sleeves. Many credit this as brilliance; tasteful and unique. Unique it certainly is, as I am unaware of any other designers who have attempted the short trouser trick before, although whether it is fully tasteful is questionable.

Some see Browne as a fad, a reaction to the lack of invention in menswear over the past 50 years that has led critics of fashion to rally and chorus that our designers have run out of ideas. Browne, superficially, counters this suggestion but an ‘idea’ isn’t necessarily a good one merely because it is new. For one thing, although fashion is highly influential, the mass of choice for the consumer puts a good deal of power in their hands; gentlemen are unlikely to have their heads turned by a minor whim. ‘It’s not for the masses though’ screeches a Browne-ite chum of mine ‘it’s for people who are capable of being different.’ An admirable quality indeed but for me, Browne is a symptom of our artistic modernisation; frustrated at our lack of aesthetic evolution, we reach out for the new in desperation. A recent article in The Times argued that we are entering a century of rapid change; the internet will feed our constant hunger for the new. This, the writer argued, makes us well prepared for the tough years immediately ahead: ‘speed of change’, the mantra for the 21st century.

Browne to me is rather like something that appears in the Tate Modern that luvvies, other artists and critics go absolutely mad for, but that the populace at large considers irrelevant. The other similarity between certain items of modern art and the sartorial products of Thom Browne is that many consider them to be monstrously overpriced. A sleeveless cashmere cardigan in ivory could be found for £250 (£160 in the sale) in Ralph Lauren. At Thom Browne, though the design was no more avant garde, the cashmere not discernibly better, the same item cost £900. I saw a cashmere tailcoat in camel with grosgrain ribbon detailing for £6,225. It seemed to me that purchasing an outfit from Mr Browne could cost as much as a couple of bespoke suits from Henry Poole.

Those arguing for Mr Browne may defend his ‘vision’ – something which Brooks Brothers considered worth using – the fact that he manufactures high quality garments using good materials and that the Thom Browne man can always stand out from the crowd. I accept these advancements of opinion; I myself happen to think that ‘interesting’ and ‘expensive’ do not always need to go hand in hand. I also think that quirky as short trousers are, they will never become a serious alternative. I appreciate that ‘new’ fashions are very rarely well received when the curtain goes up. Virtually all major changes in fashion have been accompanied by responses of ‘it’ll never last’, tut-tuts of despair and in some cases (the top hat) persons fainting on the street. But there is a difference between shock-on-purpose and shock-for-purpose. I have a feeling that Browne’s items, lauded, sought after and highly priced, are not worth the fuss.

Popping Poppies, Trunk Shoes and Vintage Herringbone

• Variations on the suit are great, but hard to do. Here’s four suggestions from Amanda Brooks.

• With calm assurance, Prince Charles continues to just dress well.

• Going sockless is a perennial debate. It continues afresh over at Ask Andy.

• While you’re there, check out this discussion on trunk shows. What’s the point of them if the company has a decent website?

• The trunk show itself is over here.

• While the Church’s show is covered at Leffot here.

• Did you get to the H&M / Comme des Garcons opening? The suits in particular were a highlight.

• Finally, if you are still looking for a good winter overcoat (as I am), have a look at the vintage inspiration on The Fedora Lounge.

British Style Genius: Paul Smith and Train Sets

Men’s style appears to be a hot topic over at Broadcasting House. The BBC recently showed its second menswear-related series in as many months, with the original series on Savile Row being followed up by one called British Style Genius.

The overlap with the previous series was obvious, with the same narrator and the initial section of the first episode following the same Savile Row exhibition, as it moved from Pitti Uomo to the British embassy in Tokyo.

But gone was the comedy of Henry Poole in China (with its odd reminders of an episode of The Office). Instead, this was a serious look at the history and development of men’s style. According to them, men’s style can be defined by two twin concepts: propriety and eccentricity.

Every man has a sense of what is right for the right occasion, and this has driven much of the sense of buttoned-up formality associated with the British. But on the other hand, every style-conscious British male has an urge to experiment, to undermine tradition with a touch of fun and sarcasm.

Paul Smith sums this up best. Both because his clothes have always been propriety with a twist, mixing great tailoring with different buttons, linings and colours, and because he summed up the British approach in the best quote of the episode:

“People always say ‘why do British men dress so poorly when other nations, like the Italians, dress so well?’ Well, the Italians do dress well. But they also dress identically. They all look stylish but they all look the same. I’d rather have the British eccentricity and humour any day.”

Smith was the epitome of this style as he flounced around in front of an audience of ecstatic Japanese fans. He is the biggest selling European brand in Japan, did you know that? None of your Gucci or Armani; it’s Paul Smith they love.

Smith played with a varied array of props and projections onstage, and told stories of his early career, when he would get out train sets and other toys in meetings, claiming to be bored. “It always broke the ice and make people laugh,” he said.

In a recent post I referred to Paul Smith’s buttons and linings as gimmicks. And this programme didn’t change my mind: I am still more personally interested in tailoring innovation, in how fabrics, linings and padding are manipulated to make subtly different garments. But you can’t help but be impressed by Smith’s energy, inventiveness and business acumen.

This episode (A Cut Above – The Tailored Look) and the second in the series are now available on BBC iPlayer. Unfortunately, I believe this is only accessible to UK residents.

Gieves & Hawkes These Days

“You really should” someone told me “check out Gieves & Hawkes these days. They’ve got some interesting things and they’re trying to appeal to a sort of… younger generation.” Warning sirens started to sound. An ancient, world famous tailor? Clothier of some of the most colourful characters in military history? Having to appeal to a younger generation? “What on earth for?” I pondered. I decided to follow the advice and wander in on one of my regular trips to Regent Street. On entering the large and attractive emporium of Gieves & Hawkes I got the distinct impression that custom was somehow lacking on that particular day. The ratio of staff to customers was something approaching that of a penthouse suite. Evading the usual questions inflicted on unrecognised clientele I asked for the ready-to-wear fashion sections. I was led through glorious columns, ‘neath lanterns and chandeliers to a quiet section of the store that looked rather like Ralph Lauren or a more upmarket Massimo Dutti.

There were a vast number of jackets in particular colour palettes; browns and greens for autumn, some navy blues and reds and there was also some knitwear nearby in a predictable variety of complementary colours. Investigating the jackets, some tweed, some moleskin and some corduroy I decided that I must have been led to the correct part of the store. I slipped on a navy moleskin in my size and wandered over to the cheval mirror. “Too big” I muttered to myself. “It’s a lovely jacket isn’t it?” I heard a voice behind me. Caught. Confound it. “And such a lovely colour too.” I was rather stupefied by this follow up. Had I, in some delusional state, wandered out of Savile Row into one of the emporiums on Bond Street, where such simple and directionless obsequiousness is practically a disease among the sales assistants? It seemed wrong for a Gieves assistant to behave in the same way; it clanged. The mahogany cabinets, creamy columns and wrought iron were all for nothing; I might as well have walked into Armani. I agreed, naturally, that it was an attractive colour but that the jacket was a little on the large side. I knew the response before my last words had left my lips; “We could always adjust it for you” the assistant replied “because, we are tailors as well.” You don’t say.

On the design side, Gieves really need to start bashing their heads together if they’re trying to appeal to a younger generation (although that could easily mean anyone below 50 on Savile Row). There was something Boden-esque about some of the clothing and, though well constructed and substantial, was rather expensive. A lot of it seemed the sort of thing a prematurely aging 35 year old might treat himself to on the occasion of a promotion, wear to the Old New Inn at Bourton-on-the-Water and point to the label eagerly; “Look, Gieves and Hawkes. Savile Row.” A few items are interesting and occasionally wonderful, particularly in terms of fabric or colour choice but there is a great deal lacking. To say that Gieves treads cautiously is tremendous understatement. I cannot quite see how my acquaintance was of the opinion that Gieves was attempting to focus on younger customers. Aside from the young men in the advertising photography, I have seen no gentleman of noticeable youth in any such attire. With their name, heritage and address – all things which innovative men’s designers would kill for as they simply cannot be bought or even earned in less than 200 years – Gieves could be so much more than they are.