Scot
Now I am with you. Yes, looks like a green cast to a gray.
M
Apparel Arts and Esquire Images
Michael is right; the 1930s were the most stylish decade. Beforehand, in the 1910s and 20s, clothes were excessively trim. The effect was rigid, formal, and confining, especially when paired with the hard, starched collars of the time. What was tight in appearance was restricting in spirit:
It also gave a curiously boyish look, with a body of smaller proportions. As Michael has pointed out, the Duke of Windsor appeared more diminutive in a narrow shouldered military uniform:
Little do we know that all of our mistakes have been made in the past, but in grander form:
At least in the early 20s, the jackets were the right length.
We now associate the shrunken suit and coat with younger men, but back in the 30s, the rising generation was rebelling against the tightly tailored military uniforms of World War I. They wanted clothes that were looser, more generous in spirit, that draped instead of constricting the body. As the Duke of Windsor wrote, "comfort and freedom were the two principles that underlay the change in male fashions throughout the freer and easier democratic age between the First World War and the Second." The comfortable, draped suits of the 30s made the men of that time look more casually elegant, while the fuller chests and wider shoulders were more masculine. They could move and leap in their clothes:
Thom Browne or the Kuppenheimer boys would tear a seam if they jumped.
The other trend in the 1930s was the return of color, after being dormant from the late 19th to early 20th century. The frock coats and morning suits of the previous decades were black, as in this picture from the Versailles conference:
Men in the 30s were rediscovering the exuberance of color.
The final change was the movement towards softer, textured fabrics from the countryside. Apparel Arts (1934) put it well: "The trend today is moving away from the smooth hard-finished type of clothing and is going in the direction of rougher, more rugged dress. The business man's discovery of leisure is probably the greatest single factor in the swing to rougher fabrics. . . The man in the city going to the country in search of relaxation . . . has found solace in suits of soft Shetlands and tweeds in their more brilliant colorings and patterns."
So when you combine the more comfortable, masculine cut, the sumptuous color, the rich textures of the country fabrics, and the extraordinary craftsmanship of cutters like Scholte and Per Anderson, the 1930s reached the summit of male elegance.
It also gave a curiously boyish look, with a body of smaller proportions. As Michael has pointed out, the Duke of Windsor appeared more diminutive in a narrow shouldered military uniform:
Little do we know that all of our mistakes have been made in the past, but in grander form:
At least in the early 20s, the jackets were the right length.
We now associate the shrunken suit and coat with younger men, but back in the 30s, the rising generation was rebelling against the tightly tailored military uniforms of World War I. They wanted clothes that were looser, more generous in spirit, that draped instead of constricting the body. As the Duke of Windsor wrote, "comfort and freedom were the two principles that underlay the change in male fashions throughout the freer and easier democratic age between the First World War and the Second." The comfortable, draped suits of the 30s made the men of that time look more casually elegant, while the fuller chests and wider shoulders were more masculine. They could move and leap in their clothes:
Thom Browne or the Kuppenheimer boys would tear a seam if they jumped.
The other trend in the 1930s was the return of color, after being dormant from the late 19th to early 20th century. The frock coats and morning suits of the previous decades were black, as in this picture from the Versailles conference:
Men in the 30s were rediscovering the exuberance of color.
The final change was the movement towards softer, textured fabrics from the countryside. Apparel Arts (1934) put it well: "The trend today is moving away from the smooth hard-finished type of clothing and is going in the direction of rougher, more rugged dress. The business man's discovery of leisure is probably the greatest single factor in the swing to rougher fabrics. . . The man in the city going to the country in search of relaxation . . . has found solace in suits of soft Shetlands and tweeds in their more brilliant colorings and patterns."
So when you combine the more comfortable, masculine cut, the sumptuous color, the rich textures of the country fabrics, and the extraordinary craftsmanship of cutters like Scholte and Per Anderson, the 1930s reached the summit of male elegance.
-
Miles Messervy
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:31 pm
- Contact:
The photo of the Duke in military dress above reminded me of a Brazilian WWII lieutenant tunic I once saw: it wouldn't fit a 12 year old boy today. I wonder how much genetics and nutrition have changed our proportions since the second half of the 20th century.
What do you mean by "tight, restricted, tailored cut"? If you mean the figure-hugging designer creations that hardly button and barely cover what is necessary, then who could not agree? They look awful on anybody. But if you mean the structured tailoring that is the stock in trade of most Savile Row tailors then I must contend that you are wrong. Why would a skinny man think he looked good in a baggy suit, as opposed to a clean, swelled, chest, with solid shoulders and a nipped waist? The truth is that both styles of tailoring can look staggeringly good when well executed. And both can look bloody terrible.the draped, loose and generous cut will always trump the tight, restricted, tailored cut in my view.
The drapists can seem a bit evangelical at times. I am reminded of the theological contention that the opposite of faith is doubt. In fact the opposite of faith is certainty, and there's a lot of it about.
Scot
To Minh's original point, I do not think you will find many, if any tailors today on Savile Row, making clothing that are "tight and restricted" in the way they were very much so in the Edwardian period. Emily Post in her 1922 essay "The Clothes of the Gentleman" already sounds the alarm:
"..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."
The plaster tightness, we see only in the fashion world today, lost its vogue among the well dressed and whether its Huntsman or A&S, clothes today are more comfortable, forgiving and "generous" than they were way back when. And the revolution that sparked the move towards more liveable and breathable clothing occurred in the 30s, the period we now call the "Golden Age of Masculine Elegance" as so very well illustrated by Minh in this article.
The glow from this revolution is still emitting minute particles of light thanks to the remaining institutions and individual craftsmen who are preserving the vestiges of elegant dress and the men who are their followers in someways just as much as clients. We are all part of that same glimmering light in the distance, drapists and structured customers. These are, after all, only personal preferences that can be revealed as "staggeringly good" or pitiful depending on all the varied factors and detail we like to discuss here in the LL. But the torch itself has been passed. We are all a part of that action. And we are doing our best to kick the flickering torch forward to the next generation so it won't be lost.
Cheers
Michael
To Minh's original point, I do not think you will find many, if any tailors today on Savile Row, making clothing that are "tight and restricted" in the way they were very much so in the Edwardian period. Emily Post in her 1922 essay "The Clothes of the Gentleman" already sounds the alarm:
"..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."
The plaster tightness, we see only in the fashion world today, lost its vogue among the well dressed and whether its Huntsman or A&S, clothes today are more comfortable, forgiving and "generous" than they were way back when. And the revolution that sparked the move towards more liveable and breathable clothing occurred in the 30s, the period we now call the "Golden Age of Masculine Elegance" as so very well illustrated by Minh in this article.
The glow from this revolution is still emitting minute particles of light thanks to the remaining institutions and individual craftsmen who are preserving the vestiges of elegant dress and the men who are their followers in someways just as much as clients. We are all part of that same glimmering light in the distance, drapists and structured customers. These are, after all, only personal preferences that can be revealed as "staggeringly good" or pitiful depending on all the varied factors and detail we like to discuss here in the LL. But the torch itself has been passed. We are all a part of that action. And we are doing our best to kick the flickering torch forward to the next generation so it won't be lost.
Cheers
Michael
Gentlemen, for your holiday viewing enjoyment, Esquire September 1934:
The fabric picture for country wear:
The fabric picture for commuting wear:
The fall trend for the business man:
The fall trend for the man who rides:
The fall trend for the outdoors man:
One of the most astonishing of all for contemporary eyes, the fall trend for the undergraduate:
The double-breasted waistcoat:
The tattersall check vest:
A double-breasted cashmere overcoat, reminiscent of the navy blue overcoat in Michael's Everest cashmere that Karl Matthews made so beautifully:
The fabric picture for country wear:
The fabric picture for commuting wear:
The fall trend for the business man:
The fall trend for the man who rides:
The fall trend for the outdoors man:
One of the most astonishing of all for contemporary eyes, the fall trend for the undergraduate:
The double-breasted waistcoat:
The tattersall check vest:
A double-breasted cashmere overcoat, reminiscent of the navy blue overcoat in Michael's Everest cashmere that Karl Matthews made so beautifully:
I know that illustrators have to emphasize texture to convey herringbones, etc., but those cloths did have much more character than (most) today. The herringbones, in particular, were much larger and more expressive and I would like to find some like the October 1934 illustrations, with nice fuzzy texture. The CC test is a really nice step in that direction.
And thanks for your comments Michael, on the trousers! Ninety-nine out of a hundred men are wearing styles that are cut with no sense of line, but even if you forgive all that, they just can't even seem to get them hemmed at an appropriate length.
Joel
And thanks for your comments Michael, on the trousers! Ninety-nine out of a hundred men are wearing styles that are cut with no sense of line, but even if you forgive all that, they just can't even seem to get them hemmed at an appropriate length.
Joel
Dear Minh,
many thanks indeed - your pictures are an inspiration!
Cheers, David
many thanks indeed - your pictures are an inspiration!
Cheers, David
Indeed, thanks, Minh. These are adding significantly to our online repository of AA / Esky images from the '30s—a perennial inspiration, as David says.
I note with interest the undergraduate wearing a white formal waistcoat with his dinner suit. It pushes the outfit in a dressier direction than the more relaxed DB style Michael advocates so ably for, but I must say there's something to be said for the less dark overall effect, as compared to a black waistcoat or a DB jacket, especially at a festive occasion. I wonder whether today one could successfully pair a turn-down collar with a white dress waistcoat in a similar black-tie ensemble. Might require a plain starched-front shirt rather than pleated or marcella, especially if the waistcoat was in marcella . . . .
I note with interest the undergraduate wearing a white formal waistcoat with his dinner suit. It pushes the outfit in a dressier direction than the more relaxed DB style Michael advocates so ably for, but I must say there's something to be said for the less dark overall effect, as compared to a black waistcoat or a DB jacket, especially at a festive occasion. I wonder whether today one could successfully pair a turn-down collar with a white dress waistcoat in a similar black-tie ensemble. Might require a plain starched-front shirt rather than pleated or marcella, especially if the waistcoat was in marcella . . . .
These images are fantastic. Thank you Minh. Please continue 
.
.The 12 days of Christmas continues for my friends on the London Lounge with the November 1934 issue of Esquire.
This grey herringbone overcoat is stunning (and one that might appeal to jb):
The December 1934 issue of Esquire begins with a gift guide in color:
Ideas for what to do with the LL Everest cashmere in navy blue:
This grey herringbone overcoat is stunning (and one that might appeal to jb):
The December 1934 issue of Esquire begins with a gift guide in color:
Ideas for what to do with the LL Everest cashmere in navy blue:
Great stuff Minh. What a superb Christmas gift!
Now I just have to figure out how to make this overcoat! Its kind of a Prince, but in an overcoat. Goodness! I am working on it already.
Cheers
Now I just have to figure out how to make this overcoat! Its kind of a Prince, but in an overcoat. Goodness! I am working on it already.
Cheers
Dear Minh ,
thank You very much for these beautiful images. I would like to ask the following question as the AA and Esquire issues are directly available to You: do the "fabric Pictures" show real pieces of fabrics assembled ,like in a collage, on underlying drawings or only drawn pieces of paper showing fabric patterns also attached as above?
Thanks again,
Angelo
thank You very much for these beautiful images. I would like to ask the following question as the AA and Esquire issues are directly available to You: do the "fabric Pictures" show real pieces of fabrics assembled ,like in a collage, on underlying drawings or only drawn pieces of paper showing fabric patterns also attached as above?
Thanks again,
Angelo
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests