Illustration of the Week #18: Simplify

[alden]

You have often heard me counsel our younger bespoke clients to be careful with the use of “accessory” items on their orders. Sometimes the embellishments that seem fashionable this year will seem superfluous quickly thereafter, but most often things like added ticket pockets, flaps, buttons and belts simply disrupt an otherwise elegant line.

Here is an example:

The following Ulster design has a lot of potential. The only thing keeping it from being special is that fact that it is overloaded with goodies and doodads in the way of a flapped breast pocket and two unnecessary buttons.

Now I can hear the caterwauling already to the tune of “but that pocket is great to put tickets in, or a cellphone, or my pet mouse. It’s so handy!” All of these things may very well be true for your needs and if it is you can stop reading now because what we are talking about is creating an elegant line.



The pocket and buttons just have to go!



Is it the same coat?

Cheers

M Alden

PS: A tip of the hat and thanks to one of our members who made the pocket and buttons magically disappear.

[yialabis]

Simplicity is probably one of the greatest virtues one can have in today’s world . It is a way of life and in my opinion the only way to elegance and style that actually include respect and dignity. Flashy overcomplicated appearances look ugly and ignorant to my eye and they also indicate that the person who carries them lives far away from our present reality. I would like people to “forget” about the way I’m dressed within seconds after I meet them and still have a pleasant feeling (coming from my appearance as well)in being around.
I believe this is an illustration for all of us to think of and not only when it comes to the way we dress.

Regards
Vassilis

[Costi]

I agree the touched-up Ulster looks more elegant. But what about this ducal model?

It has not less than 5 rows of buttons. I think the coat may be worn buttoned at the 4th or not. It doesn't have a flapped chest pocket, but it does have a ticket pocket.
Unlike the Ulster in the illustration, however, it looks like all buttons are perfectly functional, including the ones placed at the neck.

[alden]

Costi,

I agree with you that it looks a bit 2 much. Let’s clean it up…



Thanks to one of our clever members we can see what the overcoat could have been.

I imagine, to be serious, that this is some sort of military coat made for the Duke to be worn at special functions of state..at least, I hope so.

Cheers

Michael

[couch]

Indeed, careful attention to the buttons, which appear to have anchors in the motif, and to the partly visible adjacent text ("..avy greatcoat," "uadron buttons," "wool, in naval . . .") suggests that this might have been a service greatcoat designed to button functionally to the neck, possibly with collar turned up, against North Sea winter spray. I've no idea what an out ticket pocket would be used for in such circumstances, but perhaps we have some naval members who could comment.

[Costi]

Costi,

I agree with you that it looks a bit 2 much. Let’s clean it up…
Thanks to one of our clever members we can see what the overcoat could have been.

Hehe!
If only it were that easy... Now the buttons are all clustered too high up, the coat is too long in relation to the buttons' position, even the overlap seems a bit too much. You would almost need to cut a different coat to accommodate this new button stance.

I imagine, to be serious, that this is some sort of military coat made for the Duke to be worn at special functions of state..at least, I hope so.

Cheers

Michael

Being a greatcoat, the design was most probably - as you suggest - not a matter of preference. I would say this is one of the cases where "form follows function" - the latter being the one couch very well described. And even if the coat is not elegant (in our acception of the word), it does have character and looks balanced to me if judged as a whole, starting from function. Even the extra pocket may be functional here, since it gives the wearer more easily accessible storage room (you wouldn't want to unbutton your greatcoat on the deck of a ship sailing in the North Sea in November to reach for something in an inside pocket).

But has anyone noticed how the right side overlaps the left one, like on a ladies' coat? This is even more strange since the picture is published in a book as such (and the page was not flipped).

PS: This is all for the sake of balance in the debate, since I actually agree that "extras" do nothing but spoil the line of a garment - but these "extras" are usually meant to recall originally functional elements and, when they are truly functional, they may be justified. Like a suede patch at the shoulder of a hunting jacket.

[couch]

But has anyone noticed how the right side overlaps the left one, like on a ladies' coat? This is even more strange since the picture is published in a book as such (and the page was not flipped).

. . . strange, perhaps, but not surprising. It's pretty common for Illustrations to be deliberately flipped before publication, even in auction or sale catalogues, if a book designer or art director is not made aware of some informational purpose that would be distorted by doing so. Decisions are frequently made on simple aesthetic criteria, such as not having portraits looking off the page edge, or the designer's preference for which side of the image a shadow falls on. And in the days before electronic composition (as perhaps represented by this catalogue) when book illustrations were copied from positive prints, many a careless (or aesthetically opinionated) photographer flipped a negative when making the print supplied to the publisher.

I suspect the accuracy of buttoning/wrap direction is not often a priority in the minds of those book designers who are not themselves such students of sartorial detail as we . . . .

[alden]

Now the buttons are all clustered too high up, the coat is too long in relation to the buttons' position, even the overlap seems a bit too much.

The coat is very long. The overlap looks like 18-20 cms which quite a bit by English tailoring standards, but we would really need to have seen this coat worn by Windsor to be able to make these comments.

This is all for the sake of balance in the debate, since I actually agree that "extras" do nothing but spoil the line of a garment - but these "extras" are usually meant to recall originally functional elements and, when they are truly functional, they may be justified. Like a suede patch at the shoulder of a hunting jacket.

Clearly this is the case, form following function. I was wearing my shirtjacket today at the open market doing my shopping and the six plus pockets were useful. The SJ was designed with usefulness as a premise. Hopefully the design is also elegant and clean at the same time. What we want to urge young bespeakers to avoid is embellishment for embellishment's sake.

I see our trusty, not so bespoke tailor, Sgr. Giani is feeling a bit threatened by this counsel.

Cheers

M Alden

[alden]

Emily Post in a 1922 article entitled “The Clothes of a Gentleman” strikes a harmonious bell with her advice to young men.

“IT would seem that some of our great clothing establishments, with an eye to our polyglot ancestry, have attempted to incorporate some feature of every European national costume into a “harmonious” whole, and have thus given us that abiding horror, the freak American suit, You will see it everywhere, on Broadway of every city and Main Street of every town, on the boardwalks and beaches of coast resorts, and even in remote farming villages. It comes up to hit you in the face year after year in all its amazing variations: waist-line under the arm pits, “trick” little belts, what-nots in the cuffs; trousers so narrow you fear they will burst before your eyes, pockets placed in every position, buttons clustered together in a tight little row or reduced to one. And the worst of it is, few of our younger men know any better until they go abroad and find their wardrobe a subject for jest and derision.”

She goes on to preview the mission statement of the London Lounge:

“If you would dress like a gentleman, you must do one of two things; either study the subject of a gentleman’s wardrobe until you are competent to pick out good suits from freaks and direct your misguided tailor, or, at least until your perceptions are trained, go to an English one.”

Finally, for all those who confuse “fit” with “painted on”:

“But not even the leading tailors of Bond Street can excel the supremely good American tailor—whose clothes however are identical in every particular with those of London, and their right to be called “best” is for greater perfection of workmanship and fit. This last is a dangerous phrase; “fit” means perfect set and line, not plaster tightness.”

“Plaster tightness” is a perfect description, not a wrinkle, not a pleat…no sign of life whatsoever…

Cheers

Michael

[Hesketh]

[
But has anyone noticed how the right side overlaps the left one, like on a ladies' coat? This is even more strange since the picture is published in a book as such (and the page was not flipped).

If it was intended as a navel greatcoat it may be that it is designed to button both ways.
Pilot jackets were made that way so when standing at the wheel for your 4 hour watch, you could always button the coat away from the prevailing wind and spray.
Rob

[Costi]

Interesting, Hesketh, I didn't know about that. It sounds like a reasonable explanation.