An interview with LL member Bruce Boyer

[alden]

First of all, I have to say that Mr Boyer is an LL member and used to contribute on the old yahoo site. I have had the pleasure of corresponding with him over the years and he has been extremely gracious (and chic) to me at all times. His reference to the LL, casts its members as defenders of authenticity, a compass in an otherwise directionless fashion world.

Boyer is a class act. His writings, as has been noted above, derive from a combination of scholarly research and good taste that make his work highly readable and entertaining for the substance it contains. I cannot think of an instance where Boyer got his facts wrong. And that kind of clarity is very hard to find among professional fashion writers.

It’s John Lobb London versus John Lobb Paris, and which one is better. That’s one reason why I don’t get involved. The other reason is that they’re amateurs, and I’m a professional, and I ought to get paid for my opinions.

There are two messages to be found. Unrestrained, immoderate and not so innocent chit chat (that would potentially do disservice to a major fashion house like Hermes) creates an environment a professional writer, who depends on keeping good terms with all, would be best to avoid. Agendas are rooted out of the LL as quickly as they are identified. And innuendo, gossip and malevolent behavior is not tolerated.

The second message is very simple. Boyer is a professional writer who earns his living with his pen. There may be lawyers or doctors who donate time in charitable offerings of their services but why would we expect a professional writer to do so? If he wrote for free, why would anyone be tempted to pay to read him?

Those who write on the net are amateurs. And there is nothing to be ashamed about if one has another career but pens a few lines for enjoyment. I can guarantee you that Boyer is not the kind of person to have used the word “amateur” in a disparaging tone. That would be catty and clearly not his style. He uses the word in the Bobby Jones, winner of the U.S. Amateur golf championship, sense of the word. And I read no insulting reference to igentry or any insinuation of same in his writing at all.

Cheers

M Alden

[Bethlehemtown]

I would like to use this forum to clarify my statements in a recent interview concerning Ivy League style. In my opinion, The London Lounge is the most serious and authoritative site for a reply.

Mr. Alden (and others), in his comments, takes my point exactly. I use the word "amateur" in its original meaning: someone who studies a subject simply because he has a great love for it. A professional is someone who undoubtedly loves his subject, but makes his livelihood from hios knowledge thereof. That someone feels I should not be paid for my work is a mystery to me. Writing about men's clothing has been my livelihood for 36 years now. Is not the laborer worthy of his hire?

I have gained an incalculable amount of knowledge from this site and its members. Since you are all, I must assume, amateurs, my only payment can be an enormous thank you for the wealth in knowledge, spirit, judgement, and taste you've given me.

I remain, yours sincerely,
G. Bruce Boyer

[ProfMoriarty]

Thank-you to Messers. Alden and Boyer for their posts which help me understand the context of the remarks about LL in the interview. Often the interview process, which takes a verbal interchange/conversation and reduces it to writing, looses something in that transition. I wonder if that did not happen here. Other than mlsunderstanding that small part of the interview, as I said above, I found it fascinating. Thanks again.
jack

[Mark Seitelman]

Bruce, when is the new book being published?

[marcelo]

Since I posted the excerpt from the interview with Mr Boyer where the reference to ‘amateurs’ occurs, I feel it is my duty now firstly to explain that my remark to the relevant quotation was by no means intended to imply that a passionate author should not be paid for his painstakingly amassed sartorial knowledge. It would have been not only a “mystery”, but a most absurd piece of reasoning to imply such an idea. Neither did I assume that “amateur” was being used in a pejorative sense. (In my own language, it literally means a “lover”). On the other hand, I can think of at least two further LL members who happen to be professional writers on men’s clothing; the amount of their contributions to this forum suggests – it seems to me – that their interacting with amateurs has not been deleterious to the editorial success of their respective books. What I had in mind with my otherwise fortuitous – or unfortunate, if one prefers – remark is that this sort of interaction between amateurs and professional writers, contrary to what I had understood to be Mr Boyer’s opinion, does not necessarily put in jeopardy the gains authors may rightfully expect to obtain from the publication of their works.

Secondly, even before Michael Alden came in Mr Boyer’s defence, it had been my intention to adduce a no less fortuitous post to this thread in order to make it clear that I, in a certain sense, did pay Mr Boyer for his opinion, and I do not regret. Though I skipped the chapters on “Cowboy boots” and “Polyester”, I did read almost at one sitting his Elegance: A Guite to Quality in Menswear. From his Eminently Suitable: The Elements of Style in Business Attire” I have read thus far only the eighth chapter, on grooming. In both books the illustrations are neither great nor aplenty. Yet, the text is most enjoyable. I did learn a lot from Mr Boyer’s erudition in things sartorial. For some time now I have also been looking forward to reading his Black Tie, though its eventual publication seems to have been postponed more than once.

This having been said, I should like to mention that I would be glad to read further posts by Mr Boyer, alias Bethlehemtown, in the future.

Marcelo

[Guest]

but the purpose of the forum was to share views and information, i guess Professional writers can't help nor opine, since it's an unpaid hobby.
apologies doesn't change anything. i don't consider the users of this forum amateurs and they're very good writers as well.

[Guest]

i liked rebel style by the way. unique and very nice pictures.

[Costi]

Santy, no apologies were sought and none were made, either. Mr. Boyer clearly explained the sense of the word he used, understood in its purest denotation, without any pejorative connotations, and his posting the above piece is proof of it. Perhaps another widely misunderstood word that could very well replace "amateurs" in this context is "dilettanti" - those who do something for their own delight, "per diletto". My exchange with uppercase was, of course, a joke in reply to another joke. Writing professionally is not at all the same as writing as a dilettant only you get paid for it - the level of expectations and responsibility is quite different.

[uppercase]

I'd love to see another interview with Boyer soon, perhaps conducted by our Alden for LL.

I hope that that could be arranged down the road.

This Ivy interview inspired me to get Boyer's books down from the bookshelf and revisit , "Elegance", "..Suitable" and "Astaire" and it's certainly a pleasure to do so.

Boyer certainly has a passion for bespoke and classic clothing and this comes through clearly in his books and in the following note he wrote in 2005 on his first visit to a tailor as a youngster:


http://thesartorialist.blogspot.com/200 ... bruce.html

Anyway, in the meanwhile, we haven't spent anytime on the substance of the Boyer Ivy interview which is really pretty fascinating and I'd be interested to hear anyone's general thoughts.

I thought that these comments below were particularly interesting regarding authenticity vs. mimickry/costume in dress:

"IS: We live in an inauthentic world.

BB: That’s exactly it. There’s a lot of style and no substance, and that’s what we’ve come to. The clothing doesn’t reflect what it used to."

"BB: ....Then by the early ’70s the designer look in menswear had firmly taken hold, and that leads to the beginning of what I’d call Postmodern Preppy, where the clothing becomes a costume. A guy like William F. Buckley dressed that way because it was his heritage, but kids today dress that way because they want to assume a look of the moment. It’s not a real belief, it’s just a costume."

[Costi]

The more I think of it, the closer I come to the notion that elegance is a talent, as Balzac defines it: “a cultivated inclination”. If the seed is not there when we first open our eyes upon the world, any amount of education will be useless: we will be informed, perhaps able to recognize elegance when we see it, but never elegant ourselves. If the seed is there but it is not cultivated, it will sprout a couple of leaves and maybe a bud, but it will never grow into a fully blossomed rose.
The innate component is a predisposition, a certain keenness of the senses backed by good intuition and imagination: a good eye for colours and shapes, a good ear for harmonious sounds, a sensitive palate and nose, but also the intelligence needed to discern and make connections between these things. I have yet to meet an elegant man who is not moved by beautiful music or doesn’t care what he eats. All these often come as a “package”, there is a quality and fineness to the senses that manifests itself in all of them, even if not necessarily in equal measure. The educational component regards the superior forms in which these basic principles are put with intelligence to produce outstanding results, the study of how they work and how they work together. The study of elegance is, therefore, a matter of resonance: if one’s inner strings are propitiously calibrated, they will pick the vibes from the outer world and make them into their own music.
What we admire in others' dress is the expression of this quality of the spirit and of the senses. To be truly inspired by them, and not just copy a style, we should seek to understand the person – intuitively, first of all, and through study, whenever possible. We need to accord our spirit with theirs - once again, “resonate” - and pick those particular vibes. It is through empathy that it is possible to dress “a la Cary Grant” or “a la Fred Astaire” without immitating. It is the difference between memorizing Shakespeare’s sonnets to mechanically reproduce them when an opportunity presents itself, and writing sonnet CLV as if by Shakespeare himself.
But inspiration is just a stepping stone, a phase towards decanting one’s own style. Inspiration strikes our strings, but some will produce pleasant chords while others will be in dissonance or simply not react at all. We pick what we like, what we understand, what makes an impression with us. Day by day, with each new inspiration we keep tuning our cords, which will begin to sound differently with time even to the same stimuli. That is how we remain authentic, original and dynamic.

[marcelo]

I'd love to see another interview with Boyer soon, perhaps conducted by our Alden for LL.

I hope that that could be arranged down the road. (...)

Some time ago I posted a link to an article on bespoke suits published twenty one years ago in the New York Magazine : http://thelondonlounge.net/gl/forum/vie ... ht=article (I arrived at this link by searching for “Bruce Boyer” in the Wikipedia.) In this article, Bruce Boyer is mentioned several times. If an interview with him does occur in the LL, as I hope it will, it would be interesting to have his opinion on the “evolution” of interest for bespoke ever since that article appeared.

[Mark Seitelman]

Mr. Boyer's new book, "Black Tie" will be published on October 1st.

I look forward to it, and I commend his other Assouline books, "Astaire Style" and "Rebel Style."

[marcelo]

The more I think of it, the closer I come to the notion that elegance is a talent, as Balzac defines it: “a cultivated inclination”. If the seed is not there when we first open our eyes upon the world, any amount of education will be useless: we will be informed, perhaps able to recognize elegance when we see it, but never elegant ourselves. If the seed is there but it is not cultivated, it will sprout a couple of leaves and maybe a bud, but it will never grow into a fully blossomed rose.
The innate component is a predisposition, a certain keenness of the senses backed by good intuition and imagination: a good eye for colours and shapes, a good ear for harmonious sounds, a sensitive palate and nose, but also the intelligence needed to discern and make connections between these things. I have yet to meet an elegant man who is not moved by beautiful music or doesn’t care what he eats. All these often come as a “package”, there is a quality and fineness to the senses that manifests itself in all of them, even if not necessarily in equal measure. The educational component regards the superior forms in which these basic principles are put with intelligence to produce outstanding results, the study of how they work and how they work together. The study of elegance is, therefore, a matter of resonance: if one’s inner strings are propitiously calibrated, they will pick the vibes from the outer world and make them into their own music.
What we admire in others' dress is the expression of this quality of the spirit and of the senses. To be truly inspired by them, and not just copy a style, we should seek to understand the person – intuitively, first of all, and through study, whenever possible. We need to accord our spirit with theirs - once again, “resonate” - and pick those particular vibes. It is through empathy that it is possible to dress “a la Cary Grant” or “a la Fred Astaire” without immitating. It is the difference between memorizing Shakespeare’s sonnets to mechanically reproduce them when an opportunity presents itself, and writing sonnet CLV as if by Shakespeare himself.
But inspiration is just a stepping stone, a phase towards decanting one’s own style. Inspiration strikes our strings, but some will produce pleasant chords while others will be in dissonance or simply not react at all. We pick what we like, what we understand, what makes an impression with us. Day by day, with each new inspiration we keep tuning our cords, which will begin to sound differently with time even to the same stimuli. That is how we remain authentic, original and dynamic.

I once posted this excerpt from a text on Hardy Amies in another thread, but I think it also illustrates Costi’s point on the idea of elegance and style as being like a “package” of virtues, supposing I did understand his point. Hardy Amies, too, argues that his own understanding of tailoring would have been less comprehensive, if he had not acquired some understanding such things as antique furniture, proportions, and even botanics in the course of his career.




[...]

[Costi]

Yes, Marcelo, the excerpt is excellent in illustrating that a taste for elegant dress does not occur in an individual with no interest for other fine things in life. However, it emphasizes the educational side of elegance, the acquired refinements.
What I believe is that, in order for anything to be refined through "cultivation", it needs to be there as raw material in the first place - the "inclination" part of Balzac's definition of "talent" as "a cultivated inclination". Of the two, I would say the latter is indispendable. However, without education this "talent" won't become elegance - it is the same Balzac that says in "The Illustrious Gaudissart" that talent is a note of hand nature gives us often with a rather late due date...

How visionary (even prophetical!) is this passage from the same book?
"Our century will bridge the age of isolated energy, fertile in original creations, and the era of uniform but levelling power, which evens out the products and churns them out in heaps, subjecting them to a unitary thinking - the ultimate expression of social structures."
Gaudissart is the forerunner of modern marketing and globalization. Who would have thought how far things would go...