___________________________________________________________________________________________
Re. Alden's post above.
No. No. No.
Let's not misrepresent matters nor derail consideration of the issue at hand.
No one is deliberately choosing poor examples of soft shoulders to make debating points; there is no need. These photos were simply quickly accessible and illustrative of the soft, round shoulder which is, afterall, the subject of this thread. They were not posted as bad examples of coats, only as
current examples of soft, round shoulders.
Nor is there any suggestion that style is formulaic, one style fits all, etc. etc..... And certainly a structured shoulder could not be considered an artifice; it seems to me that virtually every coat from the 30s and 40s had structured shoulders. Nor is a structured shoulder suggestive of anyone puffing up their shoulders to appear masculine, is certainly not a feminine embellishment nor could a man be thought to hiding insecurities by wearing a structured coat. Where did that idea come from? Where Gable, Grant, Gabin hiding something...?
Now back to the matter at hand: the myth of the soft shoulder.
Alden is right when he writes that a priori acceptance of a style is counterproductive and one should arrive at one's own conclusions after due research and development. I agree.
Indeed, that is one of the main points of this thread: there is an overwhelming impetus to wear soft clothing today, without much thought if it is the right silhouette for us. It is evident in the fascination with anything Rubinacci or A&S, and other soft houses: witness the outsized number of posts in various forums on the subject of these tailors, though not really of the substance of their silhouette. I am not sure what accounts for this. I can tell you though that I too was caught up in the drama.
And I am here to report, after research and development, that the soft shoulder
as often made today is a myth, it's bad looking and looks bad on most men. My opinion.
Allow me to continue.
Will you concede that Windsor's coats made by Scholte are the ne plus ultra of soft tailoring? Well, if you do, like me, admire the coats, this is where soft tailoring began, this is how Scholte tailored a soft suit, this is was what a soft shoulder looked like. I am not talking about the style of Windsor, I am talking about the silhouette of his coats. We have a clearly documented history of the soft coat as made by Scholte for Windsor. And it is fabulous.
Now it is painfully obvious to me that what is called 'soft' today does not remotely resemble what Scholte produced. It does not. Now there are other points in Windsor's coats which also differ from what is produced today, but what is absolutely clear is that Scholte's soft shoulder is not round, it is squared. Scholte's shoulder for Windsor more closely resembles what we would describe today as a lightly structured, square shoulder. Certainly not round, not tight around the shoulder, not overly extended off the shoulder and not pressed down at the sleevehead as is most common today. A tailor could better explain what is technicaly different as I am only describing what I see.
The subject of a squared yet soft shoulder is interesting. A&S does not produce it; they produce a soft, round, extended shoulder. Nor Rubinacci; they produce a shoulder perhaps a touch softer than A&S, even more rounded though less extended. Nor Huntsman; they use a good hunk of padding to achieve a square, high shoulder; not soft, not fluid and malleable, though certainly not uncomfortable, this another myth.
The only soft, square shoulder I've encountered was made for me in Naples. This is a rarely seen shoulder and you will only find it occassionally in Naples and perhaps Sicily. This particular coat was made for me by Gianni Marigliano. There is padding, but not much and this particular shoulder, whose Italian name eludes me at the moment, and its structure, is achieved through a cutting technique and extensive handwork not by piling on the padding. This shoulder is an acquired taste, very
particular as the Italians would say, unique, with a bit of rollino; it's not something that I think most men would be comfortable wearing. And it does not resemble what Scholte made for Windsor. But it is a soft, square shoulder. It would be fascinating to dissect a Windsor coat to see what Scholte actually wrought.
And again, Naples is not only soft and round. It is square as well; there is a tradition for this. Not only in the past but also today.
Below is a photo of the famous Neapolitan tailor Nicola Blasi in a soft, square shoulder, illustrating how a more formal shoulder would look, years ago, in Naples, rather than the soft, casual round shoulder commonly associated with that city today.
What about Rubinacci's shoulder?: how has his shoulder developed, or strayed, from the original conception developed by his tailor Attolini some 80 years ago?
Well, if this photo of de Sica (below) is a Rubinacci, it seems that the silhouette has developed in a measured way. Nobody today would wear what de Sica is wearing in the photo; entirely too exaggerated but the DNA seems to there when viewed today.
Yet you will find increasingly today that Rubinacci is making a square shoulder. This is an interesting and natural evolution as Rubinacci expands from its provincial roots in Naples north to cosmopolitan Milan. There is a confluence of tailoring influences now occuring within the Rubinacci sartoria; this directly the result of employing tailors trained to cut a northern Italian silhouette as well as catering to an international clientele which expect a less rustic silhouette, but rather a sharper, more city, bespoke silhouette ala the Milanese school. Rubinacci are simply diversifying and offering the customer a choice. This choice of shoulder treatments was available when I had my suits made in Milan several years ago. And as Drakes London, the tie people, write, the idea is not to look as if you've just arrived on the boat from Naples, a chauvinistic comment in the arch British manner, though with a grain of truth. Perhaps Rubinacci is moving in that direction, though its internet clients are not.
Gentlemen, there is much to be said for directness and honesty among friends as we converse over the internet, exchanging information, ideas and views.
Now, let's simply agree that today's soft silhouette is not what Scholte had in mind. I admire good examples of both soft and structured tailoring; there is a place for both. But if parodies and travesties are foisted upon us, well, that is unacceptable. . Why turn our heads away pretending that they do not exist, that what we regularly see are exceptions, they are poor examples. Who are we fooling?
Standards and expectations have collapsed around us. There is a tidal wave of compromise, subjectivity, uncertainty and acceptance of mediocrity among bespoke clients. This only promotes the downward spiral in the quality and standards of bespoke further and affects each and every one of us...even though there are many references in the past as to what a good looking bespoke suit can be but instead of seeing the bones, the silhouette, we choose to become distracted with the details. If the bones aren't right, the details don't count for much in my view.
Whose fault is this? Well, that could be a subject for a future post.
But if we continue to be evasive in our own assessments, unable to accept, at least consider, to open our eyes, to what is happening in our bespoke commissions, what we are getting, what we are not getting, and how it all stacks up, well, then that really is a pity as we succumb to self deception.
I will close here.
There are a few brilliant photos below (and more posted in "Great Photos") of suits from the past. Structured. Worn elegantly, yes, with style, charisma and panache indeed, but I am only commenting on the silhouettes themselves in this post, They are structured, some more so, some less, some much less. All brilliant. With no excuses.
Cooper
Gable
Grant
Nicola Blasi
de Sica
-------
.
I must say that it is amazing how much fervent excitement this topic causes. Michael has just demonstrated that different tailors have different ways of making coats. I think that what is being called 'soft' shoulders work if you have a good square frame. If you have narrow, irregular, boney or sloping shoulders then you might need a bit of structure and gentle wadding (not pads or anything approaching armour plating). Equally, if you have a good figure, a little bit of structure does no harm. But I don't see this subject as worth repealing the 1819 legislation which proscribed trial by battle!