Bloody Red

[Guest]

So it is quite obvious that the Brits wear red so that, when wounded by musket fire or sword and their blood is freely flowing, they can soldier on without letting others know of their injuries and without (and this is most important) letting their side down.

So the red socks are the vestigial remains of kit for fighting Lilliputians? Or perhaps for the final assault against Monty Python's Black Knight?

[Guest]

I think it has nothing to do with military history. Nor is it a fashion statement per se. The wearing of red socks in particular is really just a badge of the wearer's class, rather like owning a bentley, wearing suits from Saville Row and dinning at the Wolesley for breakfast. I presume that red is worn in preference to the alternatives (pink? light blue?) simply because maroon offers the best contrast with blue and grey suits, and is a great deal more masculine.

[Guest]

Sometimes it's safe to say that dining somewhere is because one is hungry rther than reasons of status.

What does status have to do with dining at Wolseley or some other joint?. It's food, for God's sake.

Any run of the mill bum can dine anywhere these days.

But to wear red socks, well, that is just done in the UK, so leave it for the UK and avoid bright red in your wardrobe at all costs. It is an affront to the senses.

[Guest]

If it was just food, there would be no such thing as a Michellin Guide and waiting lists several months long. I actually think the Wolesley is vastly overrated, but you will not get a table anytime soon if you want dinner between 7 and 11.

Actually, my reference to that particular restaurant was half in jest, because that's where the author of this post encountered the red sock brigade. Anyway, as I say, it has nothing to do with fashion and everything to do with status. You may not like it, but that doesn't mean it's not true!

[Guest]

Are red socks a secret status symbol in the UK?

[Guest]

there is nothing secret about it. come and wander round the City at lunchtime.

[Guest]

What an interesting discussion.
I agree that red goes really well with greys and blues, and with black. I also agree that red is a bit of a beginners technique, precisely because it goes so well with those typical menswear colors. Sometimes I find myself looking snootily at a man with red accessories. But I'm unhappy w/ myself when I do this.

I'm a big fan of advanced techniques, but I'm also a strong believer in the value of the basics. At the peak of his career Michael Jordan attributed his success to the fact that he spent so much time mastering the basics.

That said, there is a greatness to the ability to match seemingly irreconcilable colors and patterns. (My favorite definition of beauty is "harmony of contrast.") But I also think that part of the elegance of Cary Grant and the recent Kilgour lines is a focus on very basic colors with gorgeous, subtle details.

I used to wear bright pink and purple socks my very stylish older sister gave me in high school. This continued (with other additions) through the early part of grad school. But when I became known for them I quit them.

Currently I confine red to the jacket I use when bicycling in the rain or to my umbrella--both of which are for safety more than style. Actually, that's not true. I have a couple of red t-shirts I wear with jeans or shorts and a red v-neck sweater.

I think it would be sad if someone saw me wearing red and looked down on my style based on that one encounter. Isn't there room for both the obvious and the subtle, the basic and the advanced?

Mark T.M.

[Guest]

What makes red socks a status symbol? Only those with power can get away with something so loud?

[Guest]

Bravo Mark, I agree that red accessories are a beginners attempt at heading off in the dandyism direction.

Hopefully, he will soon outgrow the obviousness of bright red.

Subdued reds however are another matter and OK in my book.

[Guest]

The wearing of red socks in particular is really just a badge of the wearer's class.

Red heels did use to be a privilege that distinguished the nobility during 16th and 17th century France, but that stopped in 1789 as it made one an easy candidate to beheading.
What "class" would that be today? Of the wealthy, perhaps? - but that is hardly a class; a "group" at best.
C

[Guest]

I am English and wear red (or other coloured socks) frequently. The reason that I do is a hangover from my time at school. Our uniform was very strict, even limited to the place which you could purchase your shirts from (you could buy your flannels/blazer from anywhere you wished but they had to be within certain boundries as to colour and style).

One area you could run riot in was your socks and the more outlandish the better for upseting the masters. Most of my friends still wear colourful socks, in fact we don't really think about it until someone mentions them. Red is the most popular choice followed buy stripes in pinks/greens etc..... Each house at school (where you lived) has its own set of colours - mine was black and white stripes, others red and black, pink and black etc.... Once you have got used to wearing pink and black rugby socks it seems a shame to go back to something as dull as navy blue, even under your business suit.

I hope this explains why some of us wear them.

J

[Guest]

I must say, I don't see anything wrong with red socks, loud linings, or red handkerchiefs, old chap.

I don't tend toward loud linings but red socks are A+. ( and I'm not English)

[Guest]

I think that "J" above provides some relevant and useful cuiltural insight into this seemingly English penchant for wearing bright socks.

It begins in public school as a creative expression against conformity of dress and then continues into adulthood as an identifier and so becomes a clubby signal. And then perhaps adapted and imitated by others who wish to be part of that club.

This makes sense to me. Otherwise, bright (red) socks just don't look good to me, but when put into some social context, I can better understand why they are being worn by some people.

[Guest]

I'm sorry, but you all have it wrong. There is a very distinct reason that the Brits wear red a great deal and it has nothing to do with fasshion and everything to do with valor and honor.

As you are all aware, the Brits are a proud race of people with a sense of style of manner seen very rarely about the world. THey have always been a war-faring country. So it is quite obvious that the Brits wear red so that, when wounded by musket fire or sword and their blood is freely flowing, they can soldier on without letting others know of their injuries and without (and this is most important) letting their side down. Better to die with your head held high fighting to the last than to allow a little thing like the loss of blood stop them.

So, as you can see, it's valor and honor and tradition that still sees the Brits wearing red..

Quite right, especially the bit about blood from a wound not showing against a crimson background. This also explains why the trousers worn in the French army are brown.

[Guest]

haha well done! I experienced a genuine LOL