The London Lounge

The idea originally behind Scholte’s drape cut was the slight extension of the shoulder designed to enhance a man’s figure by creating or stressing the V shape of the silhouette. This illustration clearly demonstrates the idea and its potential benefits.




This second coat taken from the same edition of Esquire 1936 shows a more fitted, contained shoulder with a good deal of flare to the coat. Rather than creating a V, this cut resembles more of an A.




Two different approaches with two very different results.

Cheers

Yes and I much prefer the first approach.

rodes wrote:Yes and I much prefer the first approach.

Agreed!

I think it's dangerous to base ones opinions on illustrations. Whilst these and all those AA illustrations are fantastic inspiration they are often far removed from anatomical reality! The men tend to have the physique of a lamp post. The "A" in reality is usually more of an X, unless the fellow is seriously lacking in the shoulder department.

V for me.

Scot wrote:The "A" in reality is usually more of an X, unless the fellow is seriously lacking in the shoulder department.

Very true! The second image doesn't really represent the main trend of time before Scholte's 'innovation'. The A shape is more of an X indeed (borrowed from the traditional cut of the Victorian tailcoat; padding in the chest and under the armholes contributed to the hour-glass shape), or of an I (see below).

The A shape is more of an X indeed, or an I

Indeed, without the flared quarters, the narrow shoulders create the tubular, parallel lines look that resembles an "I".

So its V A I or X

Cheers

But the A is clearly functional. It is riding wear, not for the saloon or drawing room but the field and paddock. My own Hacking coa has a flaired skirt. It's how one sits on a horse.

Man at C&A wrote:But the A is clearly functional. It is riding wear, not for the saloon or drawing room but the field and paddock. [...]

..and here is another application of the same cut (left):


Hourglass shape (Regency period):

I must say it's hard to improve on perfection.





Compare the narrow shoulder on the same man:

Whatever style of clothes you choose, give yourself an ample shoulder to draw the elegant and masculine V shape.

When it comes to breadth, don't cut yourself short!

Cheers

I agree that the V looks best, but my question is what is the optimal amount of additional space to give yourself in the shoulder. Also does this amount depend on the wearer's body shape and the construction of the coat? For example, my tailor cuts in the drape style with minimal wadding in the shoulder and initially extended the shoulder on my coats to 3/4" beyond my natural shoulder. As I'm short and have slightly broad shoulders (one of which is dropped slightly), I thought it made the coat look too big for me, thereby emphasizing my shortness. My tailor reduced the extension to 1/2" and I think it looks much better, even though there is a bit less tapering. I could see though, how someone else might benefit from a greater amount of shoulder extension.

You've got to have some padding in the shoulder, at the sleevehead to get that V.
For example, the A&S I have is probably cut at least one inch beyond the end of my shoulder. On each shoulder! But because it is so soft, I've got a rounded, drooping shoulder line and that's not becoming.

Duke's coats never looked soft to me. At least in the manner soft is interpreted today.

My huntsman, full of padding, does deliver the V look, but the padding is excessive, though the V silhouette is more flattering.

There is certainly a golden mean here but I believe you need that padding at the sleevehead to extend the shoulder line a bit and achieve a broad shouldered, though not exaggerated, V.

The Neapolitans and soft English houses don't do it for me, are not attractive nor elegant. Nor do the stuffed, padded , wasp waisted, slanted pocket sausage purveyors though I do look better in these than a soft treatment. Somewhere in the middle is needed.

Hence I would always opt to fly to Rome.

UC

I think you just need a tailor who will do what you want them to do now that you know what you want them to do. Sounds easy, but it is not. We have all been in exactly these shoes.

The shoulder does not need padding if extended a reasonable amount unless you refuse a more rounded look, as opposed to square. The more extension without padding, the rounder the look. My own coats are either not extended at all or very little because I have broad, square shoulders. I prefer a rounded look to offset my square shoulders. A person with rounded or drooping shoulders might want a little squaring up to neutralize the rounding or drooping.This balancing is part of the work that tailors, theoretically speaking, are supposed to do. Mine do. Most don't.

My advice to all men is to err on the side of a slightly wider shoulder than a slightly narrow one. I would suggest the opposite for women depending on their chest measurements.

Cheers

yes, i agree.
I do prefer a more squared shoulder for suits.
And a rounder shoulder for sports coats.
For sports coats, these are cut larger for me through out to allow for wearing a sweater underneath.
To my eye, a squared shoulder is more elegant than round; hence, my preference of squared for suits.
Rounded shoulders do not look good on me particularly if they are excessively soft and particularly if the shoulder is cut too far off the shoulder line as has been my experience.
Extremes in either direction always look off to me.
I do enjoy draped silhouettes, but the drape to be in the chest, not the droop in the shoulder.
I'm a pretty average build; I can always get a good fit as a 50R in RTW and be happy with this.
And infact I can often get a better looking suit in RTW than bespoke, though there are trade offs, but that is the fact. MTM can take care of many of those trade offs, and here in MTM land is where I reside these days.
Unless I find myself in Rome with my favorite tailor.