The London Lounge

I am submitting an LL member's question to the collected brain trust.

Overcoats are not jackets and, therefore, are not normally garnished with a breast pocket. But what about the Covert Coat? It seems every example one sees shows what is otherwise a SB Chesterfield...with a breast pocket. Why is this?

Any ideas?

Cheers

Mine is DB, and (iirc-- it is only just cooling down here), also has a breast pocket. No idea, except perhaps that the fabric is light enough that a breast pocket isn't a piece of rough carpentry. Also, I have no ticket pocket, so there is some utility.

(This was the only picture I could find without a breast pocket)

OR

The Usual...

I believe I won´t be wrong if I say that the great majority of the overcoats we see nowadays are "hybrids".
I detect a Cover coat basically by its rows of stitches at the bottom hem and on the cuffs. Mine has no breast pocket but I´ve seen many with flap ones (the flap finished with the same number of rows of stitches that at the bottom and the cuffs, which I think it´s a nice detail). I have also seen Cover coats with welt breast pockets. See below an example of a RTW Covert by Cordings.
http://www.google.com/imgres?sa=X&rls=c ... x=43&ty=92
Regarding the Chesterfields, I think that since that style of overcoat,in its pure form, is tailored basically as a jacket, the breast pocket naturally belongs there. Also, the Chesterfield is a direct descendant of the Frock overcoat which was also highly tailored and generally with a breast pocket. See below an example (with a most interesting breast pocket).
http://www.google.com/imgres?sa=X&rls=c ... 1,s:0,i:84

This seems like a good enough thread for this photo:



Charles shows us it can be done. Now we only have to make up our mind whether it's worth doing. I like the look; the 'kerchief bring a bit of colour to an otherwise dark, large surface.

I like pockets on my overcoats. That's where I keep my cellphone.

This question originally referred to covert coats, and it's fascinating. As the covert coat started life as a country style, and retains a hint of rus in urbe, it's hard to see why it should have a breast pocket. However, given its present usage, as a rather "sharp" looking city overcoat, it makes perfect sense that it have a breast pocket.

For what it's worth Purdey doesn't have a breast pocket (or a fly front) on its country-looking version:
http://www.purdey.com/clothing-accessor ... rs016.aspx

Although Fellows' amazing illustration dodges the question:
www.dropbox.com/s/xmuxzr8pdprv1y6/covert%20coat.jpg

While this image does have a breast pocket, but with a flap. This makes sense in a country coat, although I don't like flapped breast pockets, and I'm not sure what they're for:
http://www.dropbox.com/s/tob6fgd33w2ike ... 20Coat.jpg

Perhaps the flap helps in some measure "to prevent the ingress of rainwater" as Purdey so charmingly puts it in explaining their decision to omit the breast pocket altogether.

I also note that Purdey eschews the parallel-track topstitching at both hem and cuffs. To me this suggest a lesser rather than a greater "country" emphasis, though probably few now need to worry about ripping the edges of their covert coats on thorn and gorse.

This question originally referred to covert coats, and it's fascinating. As the covert coat started life as a country style, and retains a hint of rus in urbe, it's hard to see why it should have a breast pocket. However, given its present usage, as a rather "sharp" looking city overcoat, it makes perfect sense that it have a breast pocket.

It is an interesting question. What is most often referred to as a covert coat these days is any coat made of covert cloth, any coat made of fawn colored cloth or any coat with four rows of stitches. I too wonder what the original coverts must have looked like. Were they just coats made of heavy thorn resistant covert?

The fly front would have provided protecton against the weather and buttons. The stitching sturdied up the coat. But the breast pocket and ticket pocket in the thicket?

The coat we see in AA is a Chesterfield with stitching. The chesterfield is the "smart" looking city coat. I made my recent OC as such and left off the stitching.

The Purdey model is handsome. I am making the Angora this way.

Cheers

alden wrote: I too wonder what the original coverts must have looked like. The fly front would have provided protecton against the weather and buttons. The stitching sturdied up the coat. But the breast pocket and ticket pocket in the thicket?

AFAIK the original covert coat (circa mid 1800s) was a weatherproof, thornproof, long, comfortable and practical overcoat worn by horse riders. Hence the ticket pocket (for easy access to toll fares).
As it happened with most country and military garments, it was later adopted by city folks. The overcoat was trimmed and shortened for urban wear. It kept the ticket pocket and in some cases, gained a fancier breast pocket that echoed with stitches on the welt, or on his own flap, those on the side pocket flaps and bottom.
Of course there are covert fabrics and even cover colors but without the relics of the front fly or the rows of stitches, an overcoat cannot be properly called a covert coat (the style) no matter the color or the cloth it´s made of.
Purdey´s is indeed handsome; just not a true covert coat.

So far, even without noticing, I never ended up with a breast pocket on my OC, be it DB or SB.
I think for some italian taylors that is the way, for others the opposite is true (Rubinacci and many others). But I've been enjoying getting in touch with these kinds of dogma, which seem instilled in the identity of a taylor because of a long apprenticeship and development of his craft looking at certain examples as points of reference.
I never missed the breast pocket and I like to know that, despite the majority of the OC I see have the breast pocket and are beautiful as well, for some men that I respect the world is wrong
Then I really have no answer, but I can testify that sans pocket is fun, if a bit different.
I 'm taking the LL Covert to the taylor this week end...