Ideal Dress for Les Grande Tables du Monde

[~ Monsieur Xu ~]

Gentlemen,

I've been pondering a question lately that intersects with another of my great passions, that of gastronomy and all the pleasures of the table. If one is given carte blanche, what would one ideally wear to a fine and formal (note the distinction here, so for example el bulli, though culinarily superb, would not count) restaurant for dinner? Think of, perhaps, Helene Darroze in London, Taillevent in Paris, or La Pergola in Rome, to name a few. And yes, I lament that there remain so few truly formal restaurants left in Christendom, be it in dress of staff or clientele, or service, or plating. Innovative, experimental, tapas-centric "tasting" has its place in the pantheon of gastronomy, but so does la cuisine classique and the rarefied air that sterling flatware, tall candelabras or silk fauteuils bring that allows a meal to transcend the imagination.

In antiquity, gentlemen would of course be considered properly dressed only in black tie, and matters were all the simpler and more elegant then. But would a contemporary elegantist don a deejay to a fine establishment today? Would it be elegant or gauche to arrive far more formally dressed than everybody else in the room, especially when even black tie for the service brigade is getting increasingly outmoded? Also, black tie is rather impractical when packing for trips longer than a week that involve the gross vulgarity of air travel.

If I would have to guess, I'd imagine the general consensus would be a dark suit, either a navy or charcoal flannel or linen suit, depending on the weather at hand. But such a set-up leaves little for sartorial distinction, as most men present would be in some manner of black/navy/charcoal suit. Of course, one could quote Brummel and John Bull, or argue that the supreme fit and styling afforded by bespoke is enough to differentiate oneself from the sea of darkness, but I cannot help but wonder if an opportunity to let our sartorial side shine would have been squandered, especially given the context of enjoying fine cuisine and wine. A solid or small-patterned dark suit seems so sobre, so formal, and does not communicate the joviality that a cheerful, light-coloured tweed or glenplaid flannel do. Of course, these latter two would seem odd as well within the great dining halls of our age. One could don a bowtie instead of a four-in-hand to eliminate any possibility that one had just arrived from the office, but I prefer the look of a four-in-hand on myself, and a dark one at that.

Another problem is, if one were to wear an overcoat to such a restaurant, would and should one then entrust that fine garment and all its accoutrements (scarf, gloves, brolly, let's not even mention the fedora). We've all seen the rubbish hangers in the cloakrooms and the way the hostess roughly stuffs one's coat into a sea of synthetics. I still have the jitters from when the front-of-house lost my Fox brolly at Luciano on St James's St (ironically exactly across the road from where I bought it at Lock's), and I had to endure an anxious few days before an honest fellow patron returned the brolly, although it was the house's error. And it seems a tad odd to keep your coat and brolly with you on a separate seat, especially in Europe where space and seats are at a premium, although I do engage in such behaviour when at more casual places. Or, perhaps I'm overthinking this...

And finally, as if all that were not enough, contemporary travel has added its own restraints to the elegant man's lifestyle when abroad. I travel a lot in search of culinary delights and am frequently confronted by this conundrum. If one were to adhere to the one or two suit/jacket rule for trips of a week or so, then what one wears to dinner is limited by this. If one fields a dressier suit ensemble for the evening's dinner, then this necessitates returning to the hotel for a shower and change, which takes up valuable time that might be spent on other worthy sights. So it might be best to wear the day's clothes to dinner, in which case what would this be? Surely not a blazer, for that would be too informal for dinner and rather too dressy for traversing a city or the country in the day. And not tweeds for sure! Flannels would be too fragile and would not stand up to a week's wear. The Brisa, as excellent as it is, is not really suitable for wintry climes if deployed sans overcoat. Heavy worsteds are so.. dull. So what are we left with, gentlemen? I know that I am not alone in ruminating over these profound questions of our age, based on reading previous LL threads on what one should pack for a trip if only a single suit or jacket is desired, or packing for carry-on only, or on navigating modern-day air travel.

On the somewhat easier issue of footwear, I have decided that balmoral boots are the ideal cold-weather travel shoe (I only pack one pair, and wear an almost decommissioned pair of chelsea boots on the plane). They are suitable for heavy walking as is de rigeuer in Europe and for all day activities, and can be worn under a suit and look sufficiently dressy (formal would not be the right word). But I have not found the ideal versatile, yet interesting, ensemble to pair with these...

So if you will forgive my aforesaid stream of consciousness, my contemplations may be broken down into two basic questions...

1) Given carte blanche, what would the elegant gentleman wear to a restaurant of esteem, including footwear? Would he be de trop in black tie?

2) What would he wear if travelling to such an institution in the winter, given the limit of packing one or two jackets and one pair of footwear? Would he take along an overcoat given that he would have to pack it in check-in luggage and hence risk losing it?

[davidhuh]

Gentlemen,

Think of, perhaps, Helene Darroze in London, Taillevent in Paris, or La Pergola in Rome, to name a few.

(...)

If I would have to guess, I'd imagine the general consensus would be a dark suit, either a navy or charcoal flannel or linen suit, depending on the weather at hand. But such a set-up leaves little for sartorial distinction, as most men present would be in some manner of black/navy/charcoal suit. Of course, one could quote Brummel and John Bull, or argue that the supreme fit and styling afforded by bespoke is enough to differentiate oneself from the sea of darkness.

Dear Monsieur Xu,

I know your problem too well. I'm afraid Brummel still applies, and the dark suit, navy or charcoal, is the perfect thing to wear.

Another problem is, if one were to wear an overcoat to such a restaurant, would and should one then entrust that fine garment and all its accoutrements (scarf, gloves, brolly, let's not even mention the fedora). We've all seen the rubbish hangers in the cloakrooms and the way the hostess roughly stuffs one's coat into a sea of synthetics. I still have the jitters from when the front-of-house lost my Fox brolly at Luciano on St James's St (ironically exactly across the road from where I bought it at Lock's), and I had to endure an anxious few days before an honest fellow patron returned the brolly, although it was the house's error. And it seems a tad odd to keep your coat and brolly with you on a separate seat, especially in Europe where space and seats are at a premium, although I do engage in such behaviour when at more casual places. Or, perhaps I'm overthinking this...

The overcoat is de rigueur, I'm afraid. May be things are not stored properly, or even disappear because they please the eye of another client (happened a few weeks ago when I went for dinner at a respected institution in Covent Garden) - such is life, and things are only things

If one were to adhere to the one or two suit/jacket rule for trips of a week or so, then what one wears to dinner is limited by this. If one fields a dressier suit ensemble for the evening's dinner, then this necessitates returning to the hotel for a shower and change, which takes up valuable time that might be spent on other worthy sights. So it might be best to wear the day's clothes to dinner, in which case what would this be?

Some people can do with two suits for a week - I feel too limited for my activities and need three (one tweed suit or odd jacket with trousers, something versatile/neutral like a grey suit, and a dark blue or dark grey for the evening). This is carry on, so no problem.

(..)

On the somewhat easier issue of footwear, I have decided that balmoral boots are the ideal cold-weather travel shoe (I only pack one pair, and wear an almost decommissioned pair of chelsea boots on the plane). They are suitable for heavy walking as is de rigeuer in Europe and for all day activities, and can be worn under a suit and look sufficiently dressy (formal would not be the right word). But I have not found the ideal versatile, yet interesting, ensemble to pair with these...

I need 3-4 pairs of shoes from 4 days of travel. Suede, burgundy, black and a fourth pair depending on climate or activities.
Shoes need to rest, especially when you walk a lot.

So if you will forgive my aforesaid stream of consciousness, my contemplations may be broken down into two basic questions...

1) Given carte blanche, what would the elegant gentleman wear to a restaurant of esteem, including footwear? Would he be de trop in black tie?

Black tie is too much, unless you attend a première in the opera. If you wear bespoke, you will be better dressed than 99% of other men at most events. Dark blue (preferred) or dark grey are the safe and versatile options.

2) What would he wear if travelling to such an institution in the winter, given the limit of packing one or two jackets and one pair of footwear? Would he take along an overcoat given that he would have to pack it in check-in luggage and hence risk losing it?

I'm afraid you need to check some luggage. I don't worry with what I pack in checked luggage, and in 30 years of heavy traveling (up to 3 times a week), I have seen luggage delayed may be four times, but never lost. And even if - a pity of course, but there are more important things to worry about

Cheers, david

[~ Monsieur Xu ~]

I know your problem too well. I'm afraid Brummel still applies, and the dark suit, navy or charcoal, is the perfect thing to wear.

Dear David and members et al,

Somewhat analogous to the "No brown in town" thread, but I'm curious as to when and how this tradition arose. It does seem to be fairly exclusively an Occidental occurence, as I know of no other cultures with a tradition of switching to dark clothing for the evening. Why is a dark suit preferred in the evening; why not the obverse, that of a light suit to contrast with, rather than blend into, the night? We would all be like a constellation of stars in the night sky.

Why not an air force blue flannel suit with a windowpane (Agnelli flannel perhaps?) or a light grey flannel (Minnis 0300?)

The overcoat is de rigueur, I'm afraid. May be things are not stored properly, or even disappear because they please the eye of another client (happened a few weeks ago when I went for dinner at a respected institution in Covent Garden) - such is life, and things are only things

I honestly shudder to imagine this. I may be alone, but I am rather sentimental about certain items of clothing that may carry more profound meaning (the circumstances of its purchase or commission, for example), and especially with bespoke clothing, I cannot imagine losing something which is one of its kind, and that such a cherished object may be purloined by some accursed scoundrel.

The last time I lost an overcoat, it was an RTW Ede & Ravenscroft that cost a not insignificant sum for a university student, and that was gone right from under my nose, on a coathanger in front of me no less. And that was in a Pall Mall pseudo-club. What hope do we have with mere restaurants...

Black tie is too much, unless you attend a première in the opera. If you wear bespoke, you will be better dressed than 99% of other men at most events. Dark blue (preferred) or dark grey are the safe and versatile options.

Again, I question this. I of course do not mean to be obtuse, but perhaps my legal training compels me to enquire as to rational explanations and concrete reasons for an argument. Why indeed is black tie "too much"? Who or what factors determine what is too much in this day and age? Would not my daily dress in London, that of a sportcoat and cords, be considered too much when measured by most standards, even in such a great sartorial city?

I of course would not suggest donning a three-piece dinner suit with a stiff collar to a fine restaurant, but a midnight blue, shawl-collared 4x2 DB is elegant and debonair enough so as to mitigate any allusions of stiffness that semiformal dress entails. Such a DJ is no less comfortable structurally than a normal DB suit. Indeed I have half a mind, once my third dinner suit is completed this summer, precisely to wear it once a week to dinner. It would be such a shame to restrict oneself to wear such a flattering and suave ensemble to only a few occasions a year, if at all. Why not wear the dinner suit for dinner? It is not costume in the same way as wearing a morning suit in place of a lounge is. And I guarantee you will receive more than a few compliments from the ladies (perhaps that is my inner Italian talking).

[rogiercreemers]

However much we might like to live in a world were all gentlemen are indeed gentlemen, and dinner suits are indeed "only" semi-formal, we don't. However, that doesn't mean we can't pay tribute. My personal preference is a homage to the dinner suit consisting of a french blue suit, white shirt and a dark navy Drakes crystal weave bow tie with blue circles. Never out of place, but always a little ahead.

[Manself]

This is a fascinating thread. The reference to Brummell's famous John Bull quote got me thinking, and I concluded that it rings hollow. Brummell dressed in front of an audience every morning, and revolutionised the way men dress; he can hardly have been a stranger to a bit of attention. I recently had the opportunity to put these points to Ian Kelly, author of a magnificent biography of Brummell (if the LL had a reading list, Mr Kelly's biography would deserve a place on it). Mr Kelly emailed me back:

"John Bull did turn to look at Brummell in the street, because he created a perfection that was in revolutionary counterposition to what had been before...its a dandy paradox: wanting to be different but have everyone copy you; the Chairman Mao paradox of perpetual revolution (dress as I do...) He meant, I think, scrap the lace and frou frou and be devastatingly understated; less is more: strict minimalism...don't look like you've tried too hard, by sticking to classical ideals of proportion/manliness."

I'm not suggesting that Mr Xu goes out for dinner in white tie, but I do think that in these dark sartorial days we shouldn't be frightened of dressing up even if it sets us apart from our fellow dinners. Foppery is never a good idea, but going to a good restaurant in the countryside wearing a tweed suit, even if it attracts a few glances, seems reasonable and appropriate. Worrying too much about what other people will think of what we're wearing is surely to be resisted. Because, looking at the world, I feel that if I don't care what people think of the way I dress, then John Bull and I must have at least one thing in common. It's just that for him it's an excuse to dress down, and for me it's an excuse to dress up.

[hectorm]

....I do think that in these dark sartorial days we shouldn't be frightened of dressing up even if it sets us apart from our fellow dinners. Foppery is never a good idea, but going to a good restaurant in the countryside wearing a tweed suit, even if it attracts a few glances, seems reasonable and appropriate.

I agree that a tweed suit is reasonable and appropriate for a good countryside restaurant but only if it is lunch time. If it´s for dinner, and you are the kind of sartorially oriented gentleman who already wears a tweed suit for the countryside, then you should know better, be consistent, and change into something finer and more formal for the evening (at least for going along with your wife, who I´m sure would be changing into something different and nicer for dinner at the restaurant).

[culverwood]

Would a good blazer be so out of place especially at lunch time, with light or dark trouser depending on the season?

[Berwick]

I see Helene Darroze is at the Connaught. Does it have a dress code?

I have never been to a restaurant where it would have been appropriate to wear black tie, but I suppose one or two might exist. The only one I am aware of even with a dress code is the Ritz where you must wear a jacket and tie and no jeans.

I would feel uncomfortable in black or white tie at a restaurant if I was the only one dressed in that way. I would also of course feel uncomfortable if I was one of the few not in black or white tie.

Interesting question, as I have dined in some of the world's best restaurants. I suppose I must gravitate towards less formal ones.

[hectorm]

Would a good blazer be so out of place especially at lunch time, with light or dark trouser depending on the season?

I think the blazer would be more appropriate for the country club or an informal gathering. For dinner at a really good restaurant it would make you look as you came unprepared for the occasion.

[~ Monsieur Xu ~]

This is a fascinating thread. The reference to Brummell's famous John Bull quote got me thinking, and I concluded that it rings hollow. Brummell dressed in front of an audience every morning, and revolutionised the way men dress; he can hardly have been a stranger to a bit of attention. I recently had the opportunity to put these points to Ian Kelly, author of a magnificent biography of Brummell (if the LL had a reading list, Mr Kelly's biography would deserve a place on it). Mr Kelly emailed me back:

"John Bull did turn to look at Brummell in the street, because he created a perfection that was in revolutionary counterposition to what had been before...its a dandy paradox: wanting to be different but have everyone copy you; the Chairman Mao paradox of perpetual revolution (dress as I do...) He meant, I think, scrap the lace and frou frou and be devastatingly understated; less is more: strict minimalism...don't look like you've tried too hard, by sticking to classical ideals of proportion/manliness."

I fully agree with this - Brummell could never have not stood out among his contemporaries, in choosing to don a duotone, fitted ensemble, in great contrast with the extravagant raiment of the other members of the bon ton. The anecdote of him discarding any unsatisfactorily tied cravat puts paid to any such notion that he cared not to outdress his peers, in a way which modern eyes would see as in fact underdressing them.

I'm not suggesting that Mr Xu goes out for dinner in white tie, but I do think that in these dark sartorial days we shouldn't be frightened of dressing up even if it sets us apart from our fellow dinners.

I would not desire to pop out to dinner in full fig either in London or any city on Earth. What I suggested was rather a pared down, simple and elegantly louche black tie ensemble, and moreover at the casual end of the semiformal dress spectrum (DB 4x1 shawl collared with turndown collared shirt). Wearing white tie out to dinner willy nilly would have been considered overdressing even around the time of the Second World War, let alone today.

Foppery is never a good idea, but going to a good restaurant in the countryside wearing a tweed suit, even if it attracts a few glances, seems reasonable and appropriate. Worrying too much about what other people will think of what we're wearing is surely to be resisted. Because, looking at the world, I feel that if I don't care what people think of the way I dress, then John Bull and I must have at least one thing in common. It's just that for him it's an excuse to dress down, and for me it's an excuse to dress up.

Fully agreed, and indeed I very much support the idea of wearing a tweed suit or jacket and cords/moleskins to a countryside restaurant (eg in Britain, Maison aux Quat Saisons or the Fat Duck). As one who enjoys rus in urbe and the wearing of country clothing in the city as casual dress, I constantly lament how fellow diners are content to keep on their dour and ill-fitting City pinstripes even in the deepest parts of the countryside (as a lunch at a castle in Sussex a few years ago proved).

[~ Monsieur Xu ~]

I agree that a tweed suit is reasonable and appropriate for a good countryside restaurant but only if it is lunch time. If it´s for dinner, and you are the kind of sartorially oriented gentleman who already wears a tweed suit for the countryside, then you should know better, be consistent, and change into something finer and more formal for the evening (at least for going along with your wife, who I´m sure would be changing into something different and nicer for dinner at the restaurant).

Agreed. In which case, I would imagine you would go with a dark, solid or solid-ish suit? Brown or black shoes?

Traditionally gentlemen would change into semiformal dress or black tie for dinner in the country. Of course this was technically fairly casual dress compared to the stricter code of white tie in the metropolis. So in our time, would one follow the letter of the law religiously, or adapt it? In which case, doesn't the common consensus of a dark suit veer too dangerously close to business dress, which black tie most certainly does not? And would not such sobriety conflict with the gaiety of the evening?

So perhaps a smoking jacket then, or some sort of adaptation thereof?

And we could go further and question the need for dark clothing in the first place...

Would a good blazer be so out of place especially at lunch time, with light or dark trouser depending on the season?

I think the blazer would be more appropriate for the country club or an informal gathering. For dinner at a really good restaurant it would make you look as you came unprepared for the occasion.

I happen to think a blazer is fine for lunch at a country restaurant, particularly one with a nautical association or seaside setting. It would indeed be slightly too sporty for a candlelit dinner at a grand establishment.

[~ Monsieur Xu ~]

I see Helene Darroze is at the Connaught. Does it have a dress code?

I have never been to a restaurant where it would have been appropriate to wear black tie, but I suppose one or two might exist. The only one I am aware of even with a dress code is the Ritz where you must wear a jacket and tie and no jeans.

I would feel uncomfortable in black or white tie at a restaurant if I was the only one dressed in that way. I would also of course feel uncomfortable if I was one of the few not in black or white tie.

Interesting question, as I have dined in some of the world's best restaurants. I suppose I must gravitate towards less formal ones.

Helene Darroze in London is at the Connaught. It remains in my opinion the restaurant with among the grandest stemware (Baccarat tumblers), linen (all Frette) and crockery/cutlery (Hermes porcelain and Christofle silverware) that I've dined at. And the cuisine is not too bad either, but its prices are a step higher than comparable and better London outfits. The one thing that stuck was the sheer expense of decking out the entire restaurant. And they do have the finest Armagnac selection of any restaurant in the UK.

I dined at the original Helene Darroze in Paris last year, which was a most interesting experience as the cuisine was much better than the London outpost and came as a surprise since the service and ambience (cramped seating, in need of renovation) left much to be desired. The cooking is simpler and more modern/tapas-oriented than London's, but in my opinion superior and more memorable. The funny fact is how the two restaurants are practically polar opposites of each other (eg the environment and flatware in Paris are despondent and are a world away from the refined grandeur of the Connaught's). Unforgivably, they made no mention of the Armagnac trolley, which sat sheepishly in the corner, ignored by all and sundry.

I simply abhor dress codes, and the notion that people must be compelled and indeed browbeaten into dressing decently and respectably. But I do suppose they are a necessary evil (and evil is the word) in our age of vulgarity and vulgarism. And the Ritz London is an abominable restaurant, with equally laughable food and service that is atrocious even for London.

From what I have seen, perhaps Louis XV in Monaco might be worthy of one's cravate noir.

To conclude, I shall post what I wore on a gastro-trip to the Black Forest last week - while decidedly rustic and casual, I felt the tweeds were fine in the 3 star Restaurant Bareiss and Schwarzwaldstube given their own rustic setting and the general leisure-orientedness of the area. The DB tweed overcoat/Ulster hybrid was on its first outing and was truly a joy to wear in the snow and rain as well.

6.jpg

7.jpg

8.JPG

[Noble Savage]

There's nothing wrong with showing up to a restaurant in black tie while the other patrons aren't so dressed. I'd only do it, however, if every man in your group was also dressed in black tie.

[Berwick]

Thank you for the warning about the Ritz. I will continue to avoid it!

My most recent memorable meal was at The Tasting Room in Franschhoek in South Africa which has an informal ambience.

[hectorm]

...be consistent, and change into something finer and more formal for the evening (at least for going along with your wife, who I´m sure would be changing into something different and nicer for dinner at the restaurant).

Agreed. In which case, I would imagine you would go with a dark, solid or solid-ish suit? Brown or black shoes?

Definitely dark, Monsieur Xu, but definitely not a solid blue or charcoal business suit either. Much better, a non-traditional "dinner" jacket worn with a long necktie and dark trousers and sometimes a vest. You´d look great without looking out of place or as you are being rushed out of the office.
In my particular case I want to believe that I have solved this issue (both for nice restaurants up country or in the city) with a few jackets in very dark brown velvet, midnight blue mohair and black cashmere. I can combine them with many trousers (the mohair jacket is for summer and it´s the trickiest for the pants).
Regarding your question about the shoes: IMO you could play with them depending on the occasion. In some of my favorite combinations, the brown velvet I wear with modern Italian almost black espresso shoes, the black cashmere (if with gray flannels) with dark gray Phillip II by John Lobb , the midnight blue mohair always with highly polished black captoe oxfords. I have also tried black suede loafers for the more relaxed environments.
BTW: that is quite an umbrella!