The London Lounge

Posted: **Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:34 pm**

I’ve noticed that a lot of discussion on this forum – and very good discussion too – revolves around vintage fashion illustrations. Whilst these are clearly very useful, I can’t help feeling that they are less informative about how garments actually look than our own photographs would be. Wouldn’t this discussion about ‘the perfect overcoat’ which is going on at the moment be made a lot clearer if a few members put pictures of their own coats – good or bad – online? Actual pictures would make the discussions seem a lot more real, far more relevant to members’ current needs, and help us make better choices when we go to the tailors. I’m sure that between all the members of this forum there would be a huge variety of different garments – and a view of these would greatly help all of us understand proper tailoring. Fashion illustrations are a great help, but they will always show an ideal rather than the real thing. So this is the challenge for all members; when you answer a question, try and put a picture of some of your own clothes online!

Perhaps even a new branch of the forum could be created, to build up a virtual library so that when we come, for instance, to discuss overcoats, we can browse through examples of what other members have already ordered.

Posted: **Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:42 pm**

Brilliant idea - since the top coat idea was mine - up it shall come; although picture quality might be less than Norman Parkinson!!

Have to wait for the morning though.
NJS

Posted: **Tue Sep 30, 2008 11:52 pm**

Anonymous wrote:...Fashion illustrations are a great help, but they will always show an ideal rather than the real thing. ...

What is the point of talking about real things if we can platonically stay at the ideal forms?

Marcelo

Posted: **Wed Oct 01, 2008 12:40 am**

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:...Fashion illustrations are a great help, but they will always show an ideal rather than the real thing. ...
What is the point of talking about real things if we can platonically stay at the ideal forms?

Marcelo

The trouble is. then, that we might as well just dream of the ideal forms and not take action and, then, what worth have they, as we go about, if they but remain ideal thoughts? But the ideals should inform our thoughts and, from our thoughts, must flow our motivated actions and, in those very actions, are our thoughts perceived.
NJS

Posted: **Wed Oct 01, 2008 8:41 am**

A few months back I issued a cross forum challenge for more pictures, especially directed at the "sartorial experts." Didn't seem to have much resonance with readers though. We do have a photojournal on the site, for those who are full members. If you do not see the pictures, please write me at alden@thelondonlounge.net

M Alden

Posted: **Wed Oct 01, 2008 1:10 pm**

As promised, I have posted the image, by Mrs Norman Parkinson, on the top coat thread.
NJS

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:07 am**

There is an interesting benefit to this idea, that of seeing the garment in a modern setting. I absolutely love everything about the AA/Esky period drawings. What they don't provide, however, is a vision of those articles in today's sphere. Herein lies the disconnect: the fabled attire of a bygone era, however loved and coveted they may be, remain in that era and all too often a dream in our own. What model wouldn't look better standing next to a 1930 Cadillac? How about a 2008 Cadillac? Or a Camry? I may not aspire to the last two, but they are much more common than the former.

I would love to see modern drawings or photos that capture the same spirit, style, and timelessness. Draw the line from the ideal 1930s image to the 2008 reality. The same may be said for drawings from the turn of the century. If nothing else, modern images will show that these garments can work today and give courage to those wanting to try. (Or perhaps convince them that their doubts are not without merit, as the case may be.) Current sartorial momentum among the public is quite strong, especially for the man average in both means and station. Exclusion of ideals is not necessary; in fact, I think it best to see ideal and application side by side.

pbc

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 2:31 pm**

pbc,

I agree completely with you. I wish we could have a magazine today with such illustrations (and photographs from those people who today still dress in a classic style) of elegant adapted for today's world (having in mind differences to those days such as central heating, travelling changes, social events changes, sports/acitivies changes, etc). But this is not very probable, mainly because whiles in the 30s most men would dress in classic style and would persue elegance, nowadays fashion and "personal expression" seem to have taken over style and elegance. And we must remember that those magazine's illustrators and article writers simply were observers of the world of clothing and dressing, not innovators and creators themselves. And if all that today's illustrators and commentators have to look at is Javier Bardem in his "tuxedo" at the Oscars, or a russian billionare wearing a pompous overcoat with fur linings in St.Tropez, then there's not really a point in creating a new magazine.

Guille

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 3:20 pm**

Anonymous wrote:pbc,

a russian billionare wearing a pompous overcoat with fur linings in St.Tropez, then there's not really a point in creating a new magazine.

Guille

....talk about more money than sense......the Haveall overcoat but worn at...... St Tropez in the cold.....

Posted: **Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:21 am**

Guille wrote: ... in the 30s most men would dress in classic style and would persue elegance, nowadays fashion and "personal expression" seem to have taken over style and elegance. And we must remember that those magazine's illustrators and article writers simply were observers of the world of clothing and dressing, not innovators and creators themselves. ... there's not really a point in creating a new magazine.
Guille

I'd say this is a bit different from what I proposed. I was supporting the opening poster's suggestion that we post pictures of our own items with the images from the 1930s etc. I would not be interested in documenting what is out there; we all know what lurks in the guise of "fashion." Rather, I support posting pictures of those wearing stylish clothing, such as those from the AA/Esky drawings, in a modern setting. It's best if it is side by side with the drawings; tell us what you changed to keep it most practical and elegant in our times. An actual magazine was not what I intended to convey. My apologies for the confusion.

pbc

Posted: **Sun Nov 23, 2008 4:13 pm**

I can't help but notice that the models in the classic drawings are impossibly tall thin and long-legged. If we were to extrapolate their measurements and proportions, we would probably discover that they are not even quite human.

The great joy of bespoke clothes is their ability to magnify our strengths and hide our flaws--not to make us look like the illustrations, but to make us our best selves--to make the most of what we have.

The illustrations are an excellent starting point, but it would be good to see real clothes on real people.

If our egos can bear it, it would probably best to submit photos along with our measurements, height, weight, waist, chest, and inseam, neck and hat sizes. This would be the best way for others to analyze the photos and get a clear idea of what works, and what doesn't.

For example--the Duke of Windsor was tiny, and very thin, but this does not appear to be so much the case, looking at photos of him. He chose his clothes to look taller and more substantial. If photos of the Duke were displayed along with his measurements, then taller and bulkier men would have sufficient warning to emulate him at their risk.
The Duke's clothes would make me look like a large human mudslide, wonderful as they are on him.

This forum is really a master's course in dressing well, and these are my humble suggestions.

Carl Browne

Posted: **Tue Nov 25, 2008 8:13 am**

Well said, Mr. Browne. Not only focus on if it has been done, but also a bit on how. Sator has done this to some extent. He comments on what was available in fabrics and accessories and a few compromises with the tailor.

His detail of the 20-oz three-piece suit is exemplary. He found a style and attempted to duplicate it, doing very well with his tailor. The pictures of original inspiration are included along side his finished product. That is exactly the thing that gives others ideas and encouragement. There are many here new to bespoke clothing or elegant style in general. Such practice would seem to be one of the best uses of the Lounge. (Many post newly finished articles of clothing, though not all commissions are so directly inspired by an image.)

pbc

Posted: **Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:13 pm**

The other problem is in holding up various film stars as examples--most notably Cary Grant. Let's face facts. CG's physical defects were minimal. He would have looked well in a series of potato sacks, or rags and a three day beard ("Father Goose"). Also true of Gary Cooper. The chief lesson we learn from CG is that George Clooney does very, very well to ape his style. No surprise there.

For the rest of us (who are neither fashion models nor film stars) it might be a more useful exercise to try to imagine how best to dress Quasimodo, or at least try to focus on style-icons of more ordinary appearance. Fred Astaire, for example, or Jackie Gleason. Rex Harrison. David Niven. Noel Coward. Orson Welles. The Duke of Windsor. Harry Truman.

I note that those mentioned above are dead. Who are the best dressed living men? Without falling into the film star trap, let me suggest a few: Dominic Dunne and Henry Kissinger. Ralph Lauren isn't too bad, either. Surely we can think of others.

Posted: **Tue Nov 25, 2008 6:16 pm**

If olduns are allowed (Kissinger) - then - Ian Carmichael - but very few youngsters. One more dead one (not sure if mentioned already) is Robert Donat - possibly the best screen actor that England (via Poland) ever produced - his lead in Good-bye, Mr Chips; the Hitchcock - The 39 Steps; The Magic Box and The winslow Boy attest to that - but he died at 53 and had had to decline many roles that others took (owing to perennial ill health) the lead in Hobson's Choice for one (John Mills took the part) - RD was often described by other great actors as in a league of his own - not least because he played parts and not just himself, convincingly ageing In 'Chips' from 25 to 80:

[img][img]http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg55 ... tDonat.jpg[/img]

Judy Garland said that wihen she wias supposed to be singing You Made Me Love You to Clark Gable - she was really singing it to Robert Donat.
NJS. [/i]

Posted: **Tue Nov 25, 2008 6:41 pm**

Anonymous wrote:If olduns are allowed (Kissinger) - then - Ian Carmichael - but very few youngsters. One more dead one (not sure if mentioned already) is Robert Donat - possibly the best screen actor that England (via Poland) ever produced - his lead in Good-bye, Mr Chips; the Hitchcock - The 39 Steps; The Magic Box and The winslow Boy attest to that - but he died at 53 and, in hios career, had had to decline many roles, first offered to him, that others took (owing to his perennial ill health) the lead in Hobson's Choice for one (John Mills took the part) - RD was often described by other great actors as in a league of his own - not least because he played parts and not just himself, convincingly ageing In 'Chips' from 25 to 80:

[img][img]http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg55 ... tDonat.jpg[/img]

Judy Garland said that when she was supposed to be singing You Made Me Love You to Clark Gable - she was really singing it to Robert Donat. Moreover, his voice and delivery in voice recordings of pieces by as diverse a range as John Donne to TS Eliot (many made in the months just before he died) demonstrate a singular quality, to my ear, beyond the other great voices of the time - Olivier, Gielgud, Colman, Sanders, Richardson, Richard Burton. there is an interesting biography by Kenneth Barrowi: Mr Chips - The Life of Robert Donat (Methuen, 1985).
NJS. [/i]

The London Lounge

A Challenge

A Challenge

Re: A Challenge

Re: A Challenge

Modern photos