The London Lounge

Let us forget the man for a moment and focus on Windsor’s clothes.

In the archives, each piece of the Duke of Windsor’s clothes is wrapped in special protective paper and stored hanging in a kind of vault. Opening the pieces of paper to reveal the suits is a bit like discovering Inca gold or Tutankhamen’s burial crypt. Flashlights blinking, incense smoldering and then suddenly appearing out of the mist the twinkling luminescence of a tweed suit!



The first eyeful of suit was of absolutely splendid tweed. The first fistful of suit was at the shoulder where I immediately recognized Scholte, forerunner of AS and the other tailors who practice the noble art of the natural shoulder. If I closed my eyes I could be feeling my own jacket’s shoulder, a distant relative: the feeling of dense, rich cloth and nothing more. But this cloth was something I had not had the occasion to feel very often. It was very dense and tightly woven cloth, light in the hand for its weight, hand woven cloth that had taken someone weeks of labor.



There are a few topics that are likely to recur in this description of the Duke’s clothes so good sense would have us define the major points straight away: quality of fabrics used, supreme quality of the handwork, overall sobriety of design and perfection of balance demonstrated. It seems to me that this about summarizes what many bespoke clients are after when they choose cloth and visit tailors. Windsor had it all.

Design

The most striking aspect of the design of the suits was the absence of design.
As I went over the coat with my tape measure, hoping to discover some element of elegance heretofore undiscovered, it became quite clear that the clothes were textbook Savile Row. Back balance, front balance, lapel width, lapel height, buttoning point, pocket height, back neck measure, one by one I clicked them off and noted each bit of data carefully. The numbers confirmed the lack of any design anomaly. The only thing out of the ordinary was the shoulder seam recessed to a point half an inch further back from where one might expect to see it. The vents in the jacket are also shorter than what we might expect to see:



The personal features of Windsor’s clothes, what we might call the design features, were hidden from sight. They were features intended to improve his comfort not impress the beholder. No ornaments to be found here. Instead of knick knacks, bells, whistles, accessories, or add-ons, one notes simplicity. For example, no opening button holes:






An example of a personal Windsor touch can be found in the buttoned in boxer shorts feature.



The Duke also favored two back pockets on his trousers, one with button and one without. This was to make accessing his cigarette case easier.



Let’s put another mystery to rest: the crescent pockets are without flaps.



So my first thought on seeing Windsor’s clothes was the absolute futility of both fashion and design: the two charlatans who have successively lured and betrayed men for decades. Take Windsor’s clothes, grow them to fit your size and you will see how actual and modern they truly are.

What has changed since 1932 is the quality of the materials and hand work. Stay tuned for Part II.

Michael,

Thank you for that excellent piece. Looking forward to Part II

Michael,

Can you please show more of the DB in pic 2, and throw some light on the critical measurements that determine balance? I mean pupilla, button stance, lapal width, armsyce, length of coat. Also is the fabric the same as with that in pic 1?

Also, can you also elaborate on the DB notch - I have seen both that open up to be a notch, and those that actually have the collar sewn to the lapel, so the notch is closed. I can see on the Duke's coat, it is allowed to spread, so to speak. Is one practice correct, or are both acceptable? What are the balance considerations for either?

Thanks very much for sharing.

Fascinating, Thank you. I remember when Sotheby's had the auction of their belongings my father went to view the sale, although greatly admiring his clothes, he was shocked to discover that he used zippers in his suits. He has a fixation that a button fly is one detail of a quality suit. He has passed this on to me, and hence, I never have zippers. Is this in any way true? Would a zipper at the time have been a novelty and consodered superior to buttons?
Also, with what kind material are the Duke's suit lined?

Certainly one of the most interesting topics (and there are many) so far. Thank you for sharing. BTW, I would be interested in seeing one of the grey chalk stripe suits the Duke apparently wore so often.

manicturncoat wrote:he was shocked to discover that he used zippers in his suits.

What actually shocks me is the back view of the trousers: the pattern matching is absolutely out. The horizontal stripes (left to right panel) are out by at least ¼”, some thing with the two waistband halfs. Surely someone ought to have seen that and not have passed it.

And I believed, everything was done better in the olden days.
Just another illusion shattered.

Good observation. So much for "pants across the sea." The jacket is perfectly matched.

Having looked at the pictures, it appears that the Duke of Windsor was not averse to tucking his shirt into his underwear. Am I the only member to find this rather odd ?

bengal-stripe wrote:. . . . What actually shocks me is the back view of the trousers: the pattern matching is absolutely out. The horizontal stripes (left to right panel) are out by at least ¼”, some thing with the two waistband halfs. . . .

My screen is small and the definition coarse; but it appears to me that the waistband (and cloth below, I should think) was let out after making (marks appear three-quarters of an inch or so to the right of the seam). If it were, we might blame the alterations tailor rather than the cutter or making tailor.

On a tangent, I wonder if the boxer shorts buttoned into the trousers were actually an additional lining. The whole contraption strikes me as so odd that some such explanation impresses me as more plausible.

RWS wrote:
On a tangent, I wonder if the boxer shorts buttoned into the trousers were actually an additional lining. The whole contraption strikes me as so odd that some such explanation impresses me as more plausible.

I have come across a few Italian tailors who will still make boxers to fit. I don't know if the connections are so numerous, but you can definitely get boxers that button into your trousers.

Mr Alden, i've heard it said that the Duke prefered to have his coats made in Savile Row but his trousers made in America, is this true? also when a tailor perfectly matches a pattern at the shoulder seam, is there any compomise in the way the coat fits?

Mr Alden, i've heard it said that the Duke prefered to have his coats made in Savile Row but his trousers made in America, is this true?

Yes. Commonly referred to as "pants across the sea", a reference to the American trouser maker who made his "pants." The Duke did not like Scholte's trouser style that required braces. Scholte refused to make trousers in the way the Duke wanted. And the Duke refused to wear braces....so "pants across the sea."

when a tailor perfectly matches a pattern at the shoulder seam, is there any compomise in the way the coat fits?

Normally there is not a compromise in fit. The only exception would be for stripes that normally do not match at the shoulder seam because of the need for fullness to get over the shoulder blades. Very few men can be fit well with matching stripes: maybe those with no blades. Tom Mahon has written an excellent piece on this subject on www.englishcut.com

I think one big quality he did have was the bold gesture-the plainds in those pictures were of a size and color not commonly used by men for suits- He also kept his slender figure which helps.
I have a friend who works with young Mr. Hitchcock and uses crescent pockets-they do make it much easier to stand with your hands in your pockets-no small thing for those of us always looking the affected gesture. Frankly, I think modern fabrics are as good or better and there are some great young craftsman-look at Tony Gaziano and Stephen Hitchcock.
And shirt fabrics have never been better.

alden wrote:Good observation. So much for "pants across the sea." The jacket is perfectly matched.

According to the auction catalog, those "pants" were not from "across the sea", rather more like "across the street". To wit, they were made in the mid-1930's by the London firm of Forster & Son. Only later, did the Duke engage H. Harris in New York to make his trousers.

Frankly, I think modern fabrics are as good or better and there are some great young craftsman-look at Tony Gaziano and Stephen Hitchcock.

I would have to agree that by many standards tweed fabrics have gotten better: smoother, softer and lighter. There are some of us who prefer the dense, rough and heavy tweeds of the past.

Fabrics have changed. For those who like the feel of the lighter more airy cloth, they have changed for the better. For those who like the traditional heavyweights, they have not done so.

I am off for another four days in Scotland next week looking for the traditional stuff I felt in my hands the other day. I don’t expect to find any, but I may come close. In any case I will report to the members on my findings in a photo trip report.

Where modern cloth really falls down is in the availability of large, interesting patterns of character. To procure these wonderful patterns we have found a workable solution in the clothclub thanks to the complicity of our LL members.

Many artisans are just as good today as the ones of the past. The pages of the Certified Artisans Program are inscribed with their names and trades.

When it comes to tailoring, I am quite sure any of the CAP artisans is fully capable of stitching a coat like Scholte’s tailors did. I am only convinced that the cost of a jacket in artisan man hours would be not economically feasible. A jacket like the one I saw of Windsor’s would necessarily cost a small fortune.