Parisian style

[RWS]

. . . . In homage to M. Noiret, I shall also attempt to become as good-livingly zaftig as he in the coming months.

Please don't!

[rjman]

Michael:

I wanted to thank you belatedly for the inspiration of your original article. Recently I've started watching the films of Lino Ventura (with great enjoyment) and saw "Touchez pas au Grisbi!" a few days ago. The film really brings home the fact that both Gabin and Ventura could not have been easy fits -- Gabin's character himself emphasizing the depredations of age on his appearance and Ventura being, I believe the technical term is, built like a brick shithouse. Tailoring them as sleekly as they were was an achievement.

[Hartline]

One question that remains is why did Paris become second to London? Savile Row could have easily have been Rue de _____.

Was it a consequence of Waterloo? Were Nash's urban plans for London really any better than the counterparts for Paris? Were Georgian and Regency styles better than those of Empire? Were the British's method's of empire bulding superior the other European powers?

[alden]

RJ

Ventura was a professional wrestler before becoming an actor and that explains his imposing figure.




If you took the Duke and James Cagney in equal measures and filled the pot with old style Parisian, you wind up with Gabin. He is always a delight to watch.



Paris was a major center for tailoring and masculine elegance in the last century. The quintessential Italian dandy Gabriele D'Annunzio, who probably had his choice of good home grown tailors, had his clothes made in Paris.



Let's not forget Yves Montand, another very elegant Frenchman.

[storeynicholas]

So far as the question: were Britain's powers in building an empire superior?' goes, the coloured maps of the world in the 1920s give the answer plainly enough: the most far-reaching empire that the world has ever seen (come on, come on). However, why London and not Paris? - the answer probably lies, inter alios, in the the names: Clive of India; George Bryan 'Beau' Brummell; George IV; Meyer (& Mortimer); Weston; Nugee; Gieves & Hawkes (who made the uniforms which many armed forces everywhere copied, from 1748); Davies & Son; Henry Poole; Peal & Co; Henry Maxwell; The Prince Consort and his Great Exhibition and then all this was carried forward by the 'British Film Raj' in the early days of film both in Britain and in Hollywood - Clive Brook; Jack Buchanan; Ronald Colman; C Aubrey Smith; Ronald Culver; Basil Rathbone; Reginald Denny; even Valentino was a London customer (Niklaus Tuzcek et al) - and then right on through to Fred Astaire; Ray Milland and Cary Grant - style icons all - available to be seen on celluloid the world over and to be copied or to aspire to copy (even Cecil B de Mille was a London man and Foster & Son have his lasts and, even (eat your hearts out Kilgour) Cary Grant's and Fred Astaire's lasts - 'You're the nimble tread of the feet of Fred Astaire'). But it should not be forgotten that, until WWII, many London houses had shops in Paris but let us also not forget that there have been, since a short while after the French Revolution of 1789 and the American Rebellion (pace RWS), closer links between America and Britain than between America and France and now, the USA is easily the biggest provider of bespoke customers and, without custom from the USA, British firms would probably go the same way as the French houses have done - because they did not have such close ties with the biggest market. On a final bumptious note, I don't like the French style here depicted. I can see that it has a striking note but, maybe because the customers were so lumpen, I think that the style would look better on the Kray brothers or Bugsy Seagal or Al Capone than on Cary Grant. And Cary Grant will never die. A template for the world. For good. Didn't even he say; 'I wish I were Cary Grant'?

[RWS]

I agree, without difficulty, Nicholas (save only that I rather like most of the French styles shown). The inherent closeness between Britain and her eldest daughter arises from more than language (despite Von Treitschke's famous assertion), blood (those of English descent are no longer even the largest minority in the States), or personal ties (though I'm not the only Lounger to have been educated on both sides of the Atlantic): it lies in a shared sense of worth and worthiness, seen in much, from our principles of government to, yes, our visual aesthetics.

Though many of us are francophiles (I do not exclude myself), that may flow as much from the delight of both knowing and not knowing a system, complete in itself, which while containing much that is familiar nevertheless retains much at its heart that is "other". There is greater comfort, perhaps, in the innate than in the inculcated; and so an Anglo-American sensibility ultimately is warmer and more welcoming than a foreign, no matter how beloved or even comprehended.

[storeynicholas]

Very elegantly put, if I may say so. My preference for the close shoulders of some hard London tailoring is, as you say, probably born out of familiarity and I am in no position to judge the workmanship of the French clothes on show here. My main point was about the reason for the dominance of the English influence - and a further point on that is that Victoria was the grandmother of many European royal houses and, despite all, Britain has retained a Court for which Henry Poole still makes resplendent uniforms. Their recently made Lord Chamberlain's coat was shown in Paris and it is doubtful whether the skill to make such an article exists outside London. The fact of Victoria's reign and influence brought not just European royal patents to London but also the custom of European aristocrats (for example, the 'Red Baron' - a minor aristocrat - was a Norton customer and his family is still). They came to London and not so much to Paris - and America has continued the trend and that is where the custom now is. I am enjoying the vitality of this forum and I hope that I am not seen as a 'Smart Alec' - it's just good, in a world of increasing, mindless, consensus, to be able to debate freely.

[dopey]

. . . I am enjoying the vitality of this forum and I hope that I am not seen as a 'Smart Alec' - it's just good, in a world of increasing, mindless, consensus, to be able to debate freely.

I am enjoying your enjoyment. Post away and fear not being labeled a smart alec. When I have something to contribute, I will do so, but this is all I can offer for now.

[RWS]

Kind words, Nicholas; thank you. And please know that your own expressed thoughts are much appreciated.

[storeynicholas]

This is the way it should be anywhere: robust but courteous debate.
best,
Nicholas.

[King Francis]

I'm a longtime reader, but since this is my first post, I'd like to thank Alden for his courtesy in letting me join LL, and to thank the rest of you in advance for what I'm sure will be enjoyable comraderie and discussion.

Getting back to the superb (albeit quite French) double-breasted coats shown on Gabin, I'd like to point out a certain detail and ask for your opinions. Unless my eyes deceive me, the buttons on Gabin's coats, while certainly not arranged in a keystone, are also not arranged in a traditional 6x2 -- the "double-legged martini glass" Manton describes in his book. Instead, it appears that the lowest row of buttons is set slightly wider than the middle row, while the top row is set widest of all. Is this simply an illusion caused by the way his DB hangs?



Gabin spends an awful lot of time with his hands in his pockets, so it's difficult to discern in many shots. But look here:



Illusion or no, this arrangement subtly suggests a still narrower waist (the hint of an hourglass) on an already quite waisted coat.

What are your thoughts? Maybe someone who has viewed the actual movie could confirm or deny my impression. I could be completely off, in which case I guess I'll look pretty foolish, but ah well.

And finally, somewhat off-topic, the second photo of Ventura reminds me of this picture of Brando, another man who looked bullish even in suits:



Again, regarding the button stance: sorry if I've made a mistake. I'm a disciple in a forum full of sifus.

[alden]

Dear Francis

As Huntz Hall of the Bowery Boys used to say, "its just an optical conclusion!"

The suits are standard 6 x2 DBs. The fronts fall a bit unevenly as is often the case with DBs. The solution would have been to raise the neck point to bring the fronts to a parallel position when the button is closed.

Even with this slight imperfection, the suits look mighty fine on Monsieur Gabin which goes to show you that details, minute errors and imperfections do not detract from an elegant image in the same way that absolute perfection does not guarantee it.

Keep the questions coming.....

Cheers

Michael Alden