The London Lounge

uppercase wrote:(...)
Why fight the tide: if you want to dress well today you need to dress well in a casual style, and know how to do that. Here, RTW trumps bespoke. There are so many compelling RTW clothes, beautifully designed, wonderful cloth, light, vibrant and liberating that I wonder about the need for bespoke on all but a few occassions....
(...)

This is interesting.

Dressing down is harder than dressing up. Anyone can look good in dark suit, dark tie, white shirt and black oxfords. Informal looks are easy as well if your tailor is good: anyone can look sharp in well cut blazer and a pair of grey trousers, or a tweed jacket and flanel trousers. But what about 'extreme' casual?






















In my opinion the (classic) essentials are: jeans, chinos, versatile knitwear (layer it), fitted white t-shirts and poloshirts, popovers (optional) and button down shirts. Avoid lace up leather shoes and socks. Belts are optional as well. Oh yeah, you gotta be in shape, no tailoring can hide the love handles when you are wearing a white t-shirt. I consider Steve McQueen to be the ultimate casual dresser. He did in a way that was classic yet modern, even by current standards.

I would broadly agree and certainly, basing oneself on the selection you kindly provided, it would seem that "extreme casual" looks good under the following conditions:
> very thin wearer
> simple, solid colours (khaki, grey, white, navy)
> simple, unfussy cut and detailing
> no patterns or " statement accessories"
Basically a very minimalist wrap around a gorgeous body.

Many (most) chaps buy a white polo shirt... then a navy one... then if they need more they start going through the rainbow...

It took me 20 years to see the mistake in that (obviously not the sharpest...). If you need X polo shirts, where X >=10, my advice is get X...10 white ones, from the 11th (assuming anyone needs that many) you can start getting some light grey ones, etc. If you need more than one pair of jeans and khakis...get more jeans or khakis of the same or very similar shade, etc...
Then, any jacket, belt, shoes combination you pick will always look good, on that neutral but flattering canvas.

Taking it even further, if we assume a man wearing trousers, a shirt and a jumper or jacket of some sort I would submit that the following combination would always work very well: white shirt, one navy blue item (trousers OR jumper/jacket), one dark khaki or similar tone 'earth' colour (again, trousers OR jumper/jacket). One of the trousers/jumper items can be white IF you're really, really rail thin and it is properly fitted.

suits hide a lot of sins

Daedalus wrote: In my opinion the (classic) essentials are: jeans, chinos, versatile knitwear (layer it), fitted white t-shirts and poloshirts, popovers (optional) and button down shirts. Avoid lace up leather shoes and socks. Belts are optional as well.

Luca wrote:I would broadly agree and certainly, basing oneself on the selction you kindly provided, it would seem that "extreme casual" looks good under the following conditions:
> very thin wearer
> simple, solid colors (khaki, grey, white, navy)
> simple, unfussy cut and detailing
> no patterns or " statement accessories"
Basically a very minimalist wrap around a gorgeous body.

I'm inclined to agree in principle with the opinions above. But for looking stylish and nonchalant in "extreme casual" there has to be much more (may be a pre-existing condition) than showing up in your fitted white underwear, distressed chinos in solid colors and white trainers with no socks.
I have recently spent a whole week surrounded by three slim and very in-shape gentlemen wearing those kinds of outfits (they were painting my house) and choosing them as examples of "extreme casual" would be as fair (or unfair) as the biased selection of the excellent photographs provided. Newman, Lancaster and McQueen would look always great no matter what they wore.
BTW, I loved the inclusion of Montgomery in the list.

Part of the trick is to have your photographer toss all unbecoming photographs, and make sure that none of them survive.

Another is to combine simplicity with refinement, as seen above, either the shoes are inappropriately good, the fit perfect, or it is the hair that is well groomed to contrast with an otherwise disheveled look. Something has to be perfect to allow other elements not to be.

The most extreme of all: the front line. BTW Does anybody know what is the little circle hanging from OldPa´s herringbone jacket?

castiglione wrote:The most extreme of all: the front line. BTW Does anybody know what is the little circle hanging from OldPa´s herringbone jacket?

Castiglione,
I´m afraid I have difficulty framing "extreme casual" within the boundaries of a war front line. Do you mean Hemingway? the Republican soldiers? all? Maybe you would like to elaborate on your point.
The little circle hanging from the lower button looks like a key chain to me.

hectorm wrote:

castiglione wrote:The most extreme of all: the front line. BTW Does anybody know what is the little circle hanging from OldPa´s herringbone jacket?

Castiglione,
I´m afraid I have difficulty framing "extreme casual" within the boundaries of a war front line. Do you mean Hemingway? the Republican soldiers? all? Maybe you would like to elaborate on your point.
The little circle hanging from the lower button looks like a key chain to me.

Hemingway of course.

castiglione wrote: Hemingway of course.

I thought so.
I´d rather think of Papa in "extreme casual" wear this way:

hectorm wrote:

castiglione wrote: Hemingway of course.

I thought so.
I´d rather think of Papa in "extreme casual" wear this way:

Absolutely right. And what happens at minus 10C as it was the case that winter at Teruel? For all the extreme casual pics happen to be summertime. No extreme casual at extreme cold temperatures? Interesting subject.

Annette & Roger Vadim, à Cannes & St-Tropez en juin 1958.

Some amazing photos in this thread - what Summer should be!

Mining our history.

Prep kids, Nantucket, 1939.