Polo/Chesterfield overcoat

[RWS]

. . . . I like the idea of wearing a non-formal overcoat over a dinner suit, it de-emphasizes the perception of it as "formal" dress. I think this makes it easier to take a dinner suit to a good restaurant, for instance, these days, wearing it in a degage manner without appearing "overdressed". If you are not dining very informally, or going to a concert in the evening, why wear a lounge suit rather than a dinner suit . . . ? . . . . It is a pleasure to look at a restaurant lounge where men wear proper evening clothes and women wear elegant evening dresses, simply because they chose to go out in the evening, not because of some special event. Why don't we take the dinner suit off the pedestal of formality where it sits today and offer each other this pleasure more often?

Thanks, Costi, for putting into words what I (and, I now know, others) have long thought. I'll start doing exactly that -- just as soon as my excess funds are redirected from tailors to dining.

[garu]

I like the idea of wearing a non-formal overcoat over a dinner suit, it de-emphasizes the perception of it as "formal" dress. I think this makes it easier to take a dinner suit to a good restaurant, for instance, these days, wearing it in a degage manner without appearing "overdressed". If you are not dining very informally, or going to a concert in the evening, why wear a lounge suit rather than a dinner suit, like so many of our contemporaries do? It's not difficult to wear, it doesn't require a stiff bib or collar, or a difficult to maintain white pique waistcoat, and a pair of plain black calf oxfords will do just fine. It is a pleasure to look at a restaurant lounge where men wear proper evening clothes and women wear elegant evening dresses, simply because they chose to go out in the evening, not because of some special event. Why don't we take the dinner suit off the pedestal of formality where it sits today and offer each other this pleasure more often?

Costi, I agree with RWS - very well said, indeed. I don't know about your neck of the woods, but here (Japan) it very much is the case of "following the leader." Once a few good examples are seen, they tend to be followed - even emulated. As we all profess to be Disciples of Elegance, why not be an examplar of The Proper Way?

Cheers,
garu

[Costi]

Dear RWS and Garu,

Thank you for your kind words. I do it every now and then, but I usually find myself quite alone in it. The pleasure is not to look like a sore thumb and turn people's heads, but to find oneself in the company of sufficiently many others who do the same. Then, it takes a notorious character to trigger a wave of emulation. Perhaps I could secretly pay my tailor to offer some popular character a free bespoke dinner suit, along with a DS wearing manual, so I could then "emulate the new fashion"

[storeynicholas]

Here are the 2 film stills that I promised; the first is the enlargement of Clive Brook and Marlene Dietrich in Shanghai Express (1932) - he is in a uniform British warm over a mess jacket and black tie:



And the second is William Holden and Gloria Swanson in Sunset Boulevard (1950) - he is in full evening dress and belted raglan-sleeved camel hair (polo?) coat.



Two sound precedents, by extension.
NJS[/img]

[angelo]

Costi wrote:
Also note that the sketch on the left appears to depict a gentleman in a particular location: leaning against a rail on a ship. Have you got any information on the location of the other one?

Costi,
Unfortunately even at bigger magnification it was impossible for me to realize in which outdoor context the drawing scketch ( by L.Fellows) of the second gentleman with a midnight blue dinner suit, has been located. I agree with You that this knowledge could be relevant for the understanding of the situations believed "in the classical era" as the proper ones for wearing polo overcoats with formal dresses such as dinner suits.

Regards
Angelo

[couch]

Doesn't a Chesterfield take a velvet collar on top as well?

Best Regards,

Cufflink79

I am clearly not the authority here, but there seem to be plenty of instances where it does not, in AA, as well as elsewhere (e.g. Henry Poole):

Not to quibble here, but the Poole coat in the middle is in fact a covert coat. It's a particularly luxurious cloth they recommend, containing some cashmere. Because coverts have been trendy (T.M Lewin, etc.) Poole has been suggesting omitting the traditional railroad stitching in order to differentiate the bespoke model, but will make it up either way.

[Costi]

Isn't that a bit long for a covert? It looks more like a Chesterfield cut in covert cloth...

[Costi]

Thank you for your response, Angelo - we'll have to live with that mistery

[couch]

Isn't that a bit long for a covert? It looks more like a Chesterfield cut in covert cloth...

I suppose it depends on how long you wear your coverts. The famous AA illustration of the fellow in the the covert and homburg outside St James's Palace buying a buttonhole from a flower girl shows a covert at least this long. I was simply reporting what Simon Cundey told me last year when I asked about the pictured garment . . . .

[Costi]

You ARE right about that drawing... A citified covert, perhaps. Although I think that much of the covert's charm is in its length, whether one chooses to wear it in town or just in the country.
Then we should also note that not only is the railroading missing, but the sleeves have buttons, another city coat detail inconsistent with a covert.

[NCW]

Well, not being a Savile Row customer, it had not occured to me that this was the champagne of covert coats, with citified features, and cashmere. You live and you learn.

[NHR]

Good morning. If I might be permitted to contribute to the debate in my first post to this excellent forum. When my tailor made my covert coat he suggested a longer length to protect the knees when walking through long grass. Interestingly, I was subsequently quizzed by a complete stranger asking where such a coat could be acquired since he had noticed that those on sale in outfitters were generally (in his words) "too short".

[Costi]

NHR, welcome to the Lounge.
One certainly can't be a good tailor without some fantasy, but does that strike you as a sensible explanation? I mean, the calves and the ankles are still exposed in the tall grass
I think the principle is, on the contrary, to shorten and tighten the skirt so that it doesn't get dirty or caught in thorns and bushes. Isn't that the origin of trouser turnups, too, after all?

[NHR]

Costi, thank you.

Yes, at the time, I was not conviced by the explanation but I was very pleased with the finished coat.

[couch]

Costi and NHR,

While I hold myself up as no sort of authority on the history of the covert coat, and I think the length and fullness of skirt should be calibrated to the wearer's taste and application (I've seen handsome examples in both modes), my impression is that NHR"s tailor may have been appealing to a tradition rather than mere fantasy.

In a 1997 article, Bruce Boyer quotes Hugh Holland, then MD of Kilgour, French & Stanbury as follows:

"The business about the signature stitching on the sleeve cuffs and hem," relates Hugh Holland, the managing director of the famed Savile Row tailoring firm Kilgour, French & Stanbury, "is a good example of how the practicality of one age becomes the stylish form of the next. It was found that, while riding through the scrub and gorse--the covert, as it were--the sleeve cuffs and hem of the jackets would abrade and tear. So this rib stitching was originally both for mending and reinforcement. The stitching then became a sort of badge of bravery: the more rows of stitches a man had, the more aggressive a rider he was thought to be."

Boyer himself defines the covert coat hem as one that "falls no lower than the knee," but if one imagines the covert coat as a riding topcoat, adding a few inches could be useful, whether riding in coverts or walking in them, to protect the knees from drizzle or wet vegetation, while boots were worn. I also wonder whether the historical prototype of the covert coat would ever have been worn over suits with breeks and heavy wool hose rather than trousers.

In any case, the recent fashion for coverts in the city certainly favors the short, straight model. Those who expect to drive in automobiles would find them less troublesome, and this silhouette comports nicely with the general fashion for narrow, minimalist suits. Remembering the age of the fuller AA depictions I've seen, though, I wonder whether what is considered a "short, straight" cut in the universe of topcoats may be a relative thing, and the "below the knee" model may not be ahistorical.

One of the appeals of a covert coat for me is its ability to turn aside the unexpected light shower, and the slight extra length would make a significant difference in its effectiveness. One isn't of course talking mid-calf, but just below the knee. I confess to not having made up my mind which length to specify, when this item comes up in the pipeline.