"Tightness"

[manton]

Over the past couple of weeks I have watched several old movies (partly at the inspiration of Tutee) and some documentaries. I was, it goes without saying, mostly paying attention to the clothes. All for science, of course. Or history, at any rate. My principal subjects were Fred Astaire and the duke of Windsor.

What I noticed was a certain "tightness" or "closeness" that I don't find today on clothing with a similar cut. The Astaire films were all from the 30s. When not in formal clothes, he was wearing mostly (but not exclusively) DB lounge suits. They clearly had very sloped, soft shoulders. They also had a definite waist, without being too waspish. But they seemed to be tailored much more closely to the body than what we would expect from (say) an A&S suit made today.

The documentary footage of the duke was mostly from the 30s, but ranged more widely, up through the 60s. In the 30s, his clothing appeared very close. In later years it looked like he was wearing clothes that were a little more loose.

Some of what I saw may have been due to the fact that heavier cloths were used in those days, and heavier cloths drape more "cleanly" or smoothly. But not all of it. I think the duke and Freddie were simply wearing more closely tailored coats. They certainly did not appear the least bit uncomfortable, however, and the tailoring certainly did look soft.

Anyway, has anyone else noticed the same?

[ccox]

Dear Manton;
I have noticed the same thing with Mr. Astaire's clothes. I chalked it up to his being a dancer and having a need not to have excess materail swirl around when he turned. But now that you mention it, the photos of the Duke show the same thing.

Perhaps cloth was more expensive for tailors back in the day and they made do with less? I'm thinking of cuffs/turnups and the War rationing. But both men needn't have worried about price. Maybe it has to do with the rise of off-the-peg clothing and the ratios that the manufacturers use to make sure that one size fits almost all? We, as a society, may have become used to a looser look and fit. Or it may be that climate control made looser clothing more comfortable -- no need to stay warmer or cooler inside.

Fashion or function? I'm curious to hear what other members think as well.

Regards,
CCox

[manton]

I don't think price had anything to do with it. Also, I don't think the distiction between OTR and bespoke does either, as the "looser" coats I am comparing these to are alsl bespoke coats, just made in later decades.

Somehow, the cut just evolved. I'm wondering why. Climate control may be the answer, or a partial answer. Close-fitting clothes tend to be warm. In a drafty house, that may be just the thing. In a heated room, however, a little looseness to allow the air to circulate might be much more welcome.

[Matt Deckard]

The looser fittied clothes I think was just a part of fashion and after the 60's where suits were on the tighter spectrum, things went back to a looser fit.

check out this FL thread, you'll see some pics on my friend Rob in one of his many suits from the early 30's.

http://www.thefedoralounge.com/showthread.php?t=2866

The fits I see in movies are tighter throughoutt the late 20's early 30's, then they get looser after WWII, tighter again when the mod scene hits. The fit gets looser again in the 70's and the jackets get a bit longer and you see more of a break on the pants.

The fit swings back and forth if you watch movies from all the decades, seems like righ now we are in a loose fitting rut and tailors make suits too big, less for the fit and more for the drape.

[Leonard Logsdail]

I believe the main reason the "lounge" suits you are describing were so close to the body of the wearer can be explained by the time period. Clothes were far more formal, white tie being worn, probably every week. The tailors term for a dress coat is a "body" coat. In other words it was cut close to te body. As the tailors who made these also made business and casual clothes, they made them in the same manner, hence close to the body.

This can still be seen in and around Savile Row where military tailors cut their lounge clothes in a militaristic manner.

Leoanrd

[Mark Seitelman]

Clothes were more fitted in the 1920's and 1930's.

I think that Mr. Logsdail's explanation is a sound one, i.e., clothing and manners were more formal then. Hand in glove with such formality was the need for custom tailoring since this look cannot be acheived in RTW.

Today our clothes (and manners and morals and culture) are much looser. E.g., the Armani suit and the dreaded track suit people wear on airplanes.

[manton]

Again, I don't mean to compare the 30s to the Brooks Sack or to Armani, but to bespoke silhouette being cut in later decades. I just saw Funny Face again. This was made in 1957. Astaire's clothes have a very similar shape to what he wore in the 30s, and his overall style seems hardly to have changed at all. Yet his clothes look a lot looser and more comfortable. Not sloppy -- not at all, just somehow more relaxed.

[RWS]

. . . . Astaire's . . . . clothes look a lot looser and more comfortable. Not sloppy -- not at all, just somehow more relaxed.

Less padding? Thinner cloth?

[manton]

Less padding? Thinner cloth?

Of course, it's impossible to tell, but I don't think so. The older suits did not look padded at all. Certainly the shoulders were sloped and natural. The chest was smooth but it looked soft, given the way he moved in it. I think the cut of those older suits was just much "closer."

[Matt Deckard]

The cut of Astaires older suits was definately more fitted to his frame. I guess his tailors just followed the trends. Same goes for Armhole cuts (my biggest pet peeve), later decades armholes were cut bigger. If you watch some of the older movies in the 20's and 30's you'll see guys doing hand stands in their jackets, possible because their armholes are cut high.

[manton]

mistaken post

[schneidergott]

Both, the Duke and Fred Astaire, were more on the tiny, yet sporty figure side with the resulting good posture. Plus both were returning customers with an established pattern. So changes according to fashion of the time could be easily made without effecting the basic fit.

In case of Fred Astaire, as a dancer he would stick to his tighter coats to allow better movement along with his ballroom dancer sleeves (lower sleeve crown). His armholes and sleeves are way tighter than anything coming from A&S and Mahon today, also following better the shape of the body. So the cut has not evolved, in fact I'm tempted to say it has left the path of evolution.
When and why that happened, I don't know.

All I see is that the drape coats of both are much cleaner in appearance, which is actually more pleasing to the eye.

Like this one of the Duke (Although I don't like the tightness around his hips, indicated by the drags on his closing button, which may not be intended as a closing button. Hard to tell from the picture). The man to his left looks dreadful in his way to tight coat.
Which just shows that extremes in cut (too loose or too tight) are no good.

[alden]

Hi SG

What you see as a drag on the closing button of the Duke's coat is actually due to the fact that he does not have the inner button fastened. It was a stylistic habit of his.

Cheers

Michael

[schneidergott]

Hi SG

What you see as a drag on the closing button of the Duke's coat is actually due to the fact that he does not have the inner button fastened. It was a stylistic habit of his.

Cheers

Michael

I've seen those drags before in other pictures where he even buttoned the wrong button.
I guess bad habits are hard to break, then! I'd still say that his coat is a tad too tight over the hips, but if he was happy with it, why bother.
But I've seen worse recently, mostly RTW. So the evolution of cut has left the right path of good fit in exchange for a quick make and/ or a certain "Style"!
The "slim fit" fashion one sees at the moment looks absolutely terrible, even on those it is meant for. To me it reads like the patternmakers don't know their basics any more.

[alden]

I've seen those drags before in other pictures where he even buttoned the wrong button.
I guess bad habits are hard to break, then! I'd still say that his coat is a tad too tight over the hips, but if he was happy with it, why bother.
But I've seen worse recently, mostly RTW. So the evolution of cut has left the right path of good fit in exchange for a quick make and/ or a certain "Style"!
The "slim fit" fashion one sees at the moment looks absolutely terrible, even on those it is meant for. To me it reads like the patternmakers don't know their basics any more.

I don't think it was as much a "bad habit" as it was something he did as a personal signature, more of a quirk or eccentricity than a habit.

I agree that clothes made to be worn close to the body can be attractive if they are well made and worn by someone with a suitable figure. Sadly, most of what passes for slim cut is poorly designed and worn by men who really shouldn't. Its not a question of age, its a question of physique.

The "slim cut" fad you decry does in fact have the effect of diminishing a man in so many ways, reducing him to some kind of formula that inspires only the wearer's imagination. More on this later...

Cheers

M Alden