PDA

View Full Version : What killed the '40s suit?




























Marc Chevalier
07-02-2009, 01:24 AM
.

Short answer: the Ivy League silhouette ... and the Italians. Specifically, the House of Brioni.


Below is an excerpt from an article by G. Bruce Boyer about the Brioni "revolution." Longish, but well worth reading:


"... In 1945, Nazareno Fonticoli, an innovative master of the fine Italian tradition of custom tailoring, founded the Brioni atelier in Rome with Gaetano Savini, a natural talent for public relations. With a great respect for the classic contribution of Savile Row, but a sure feeling that the English had ignored the new attitudes towards men's clothes, Fonticoli and Savini set about to create their revolution.


It was a historic moment. By the late 1940s, most men had more leisure time, disposable income and access to consumer goods than their fathers had ever dreamed of.


In clothing, the English-influenced "drape" look of the prewar period, with its oversized chest and shoulders, had become something of a caricature of itself. Jackets with enormous shoulder pads and inches of extra fabric in the chest and shoulder blade area began to sag and droop under their own weight. Trousers were being cut higher and higher, wider and wider, until they drowned the shoes and covered the torso halfway up the chest. It was a style particularly exaggerated in the United States as far as it could go by Hollywood heroes in the film noir genre and zoot-suited jazz hipsters. Clearly, the idea of drape styling could go no further.


Fonticoli and Savini began to attack most of the 1930s and 1940s ideas of what a suit should be, to systematically change its very line and expression. They cut away at the heavy silhouette that no longer conformed to the body, drastically reducing the bulk and padding. They seem, in retrospect, to have been among the first to realize that contemporary men, who lived in climate-controlled homes and offices, drove cars, and were slimmer and healthier, didn't want or need yards of heavily stiff and padded clothing.


The thinking was to reflect a thoroughly modern sensibility. Fonticoli and Savini began, in contemporary parlance, to "deconstruct" and completely redesign the garment, to emphasize lightness and trimness. But this was not merely a revolution of line and form. There was a decided movement away from the drab and somber uniformity of traditional business gray worsted toward a whole new liberating palate of brilliant colors and untraditional fabrics.


The silhouette they devised eventually came to be thought of in the United States (although not by them) as the Continental Look, and it swept away both the hyperdrapey style that was so prevalent before the war and the sack-cut look of the Ivy League style that was gaining prominence after the war. The result was a pared-down approach to tailoring, with a dash of flamboyant color and texture for good measure. It was indeed a revolution.


Technically, the Brioni jacket of the 1950s sat closer to the body, shoulders were narrowed and the chest tightened and smoothed. The waist was subtly shaped. The skirt (the part of the jacket from the waist down) sat closer to the hips and was imperceptibly cut away in front in two graceful arcs. Backs were either ventless or had short side vents, sleeves were narrowed, pocket flaps were often eliminated in favor of simple besoms, and a two-button stance was raised slightly to provide a longer line.


Trouser legs were trimmed, pleats and cuffs abandoned, and quarter-top pockets were often substituted for on-seam ones. In effect, Brioni experimented with the whole silhouette and all the details until everything worked together to produce a new harmony of slimness and spareness of silhouette, played off against more vibrant colors and a sense of texture.


It was a reaction to the top-heavy, supermuscular look of the past. There was nothing retro or nostalgic about it. The Brioni approach was clothing for a new age. It made a man look slimmer and younger and more vibrant. How could it miss? The shop on the Via Barberini grew from 10 tailors to 50 in its first decade in business. The Brioni look came to define modernism in menswear.


The vibrancy came from the new look in fabric and color advocated by Brioni. Apart from a few tropical worsteds and summer cottons, most men were still wearing the traditional twills, tweeds and flannels that their fathers and grandfathers had worn, and they were wearing them in the same Victorian suiting shades of dark gray, navy and brown--and in the same weights: even summer suits would weigh in at several pounds. A seersucker sports jacket, blue blazer or tan linen suit were the only exceptions to that somber Anglo-Saxon wardrobe.


"But why shouldn't men be more colorful?" Savini asked. "Why can't a man be elegant without being either dull or foppish? That's what we're interested in." Why, for example, couldn't a man wear a suit of silk shantung, and why couldn't it be in a flattering pastel shade, or rich tobacco brown? Or perhaps a cream-and-chocolate minicheck-houndstooth business suit in a super-lightweight tropical worsted? Why not? ..."


.

Creeping Past
07-02-2009, 02:08 AM
In Britain, and other bits Europe, fabric and resource shortages changed the fashion scene.

Matt Deckard
07-02-2009, 02:51 AM
the 50s

Fletch
07-02-2009, 09:25 AM
The turn away from elegance as no longer compatible with a manly nature.

The 1930s really were an anomaly in the history of masculinity. For the first time that century - and maybe the last - men got to define their identities by something other than work and physicality. Because all of a sudden there was a lot less work and a lot more mass media, which encouraged a flow of images and ideas. Men got the idea they could relax older standards of masculinity and maybe even define it in their own ways.

Being in the military ended that notion for most of us. Your physical body, and your ability to put out as part of a team or organization, were once again the building blocks of your manly nature, and once again it had to be earned, on other men's terms.

This applies mostly to American culture of course. Italian culture was always more open to male elegance, but Brioni clearly was responding to the needs of the postwar executive class - more and more dominated by America as the culture that controlled most of the world's money and all of the means of making it.

I always point to Dick Powell as the classic example of how what worked in the 30s wouldn't work in the 40s. No more tenor singing, no more half-baked plot lines built around bevys of legs and bouncy orchestrations, no more light colored belted-backs with waists up to here. Powell went noir, dressed in solid business greys and learned that his best friend was a gun. His persona had to serve a solid, steel-girded story, with (what was then) a man's logic and and a man's basic motives.

Marc Chevalier
07-02-2009, 10:03 AM
Fletch, your posts are a delight to read. Thank you! :eusa_clap


.

Guttersnipe
07-02-2009, 12:18 PM
I've definitely always been impressed by the light and airy silhouette of the continental look. However, with its lower rises trousers and lack of pleats, I sometimes think it's a look that doesn't really flatter thicker men. What are your thoughts on that?

Hal
07-02-2009, 02:47 PM
... They seem...to have been among the first to realize that contemporary men, who lived in climate-controlled homes and offices, drove cars, and were slimmer and healthier, didn't want or need yards of heavily stiff and padded clothing...The result was a pared-down approach to tailoring, with a dash of flamboyant color and texture for good measure. It was indeed a revolution...a two-button stance was raised slightly to provide a longer line. Trouser legs were trimmed, pleats and cuffs abandoned...everything worked together to produce a new harmony of slimness and spareness of silhouette, played off against more vibrant colors and a sense of texture.
Shouldn't we celebrate this rather than lament it? It was, essentially, an elimination of clutter, much like the interior decoration of the time. To me, a man in pleated trousers looks as if he's wearing a nappy (diaper in American); Hardy Amies writes in this period that those who need pleats in their trousers should take a pleat in their figures.
This is provocative, I know, and it's easy for me to say this, as I'm slim and rather tall (70kg, 180cm); those who like the 1930s and 1940s styles may hate my saying this - but it needs to be said. Another recent thread has documented the change of style from about 1952 to 1955 - the middle and later 1950s would be my ideal style, before the exaggerations of the early 1960s; but that may simply say that I like what I saw during my formative years.

Chasseur
07-02-2009, 05:12 PM
o me, a man in pleated trousers looks as if he's wearing a nappy (diaper in American)

Well... not all men look good in flat front trousers. For the past few years its been hard to find pleated trousers in the US (that's starting to change now), and I can tell you MANY men don't have the body type for flat fronted low-cut trousers that fit like jeans. Unfortunately for a couple of years there that was the bulk of inexpensive trousers sold here...

Marc Chevalier
07-02-2009, 05:13 PM
Shouldn't we celebrate this rather than lament it?



Dude, I am celebrating it. To me, it was a positive change for the time.



.

Fletch
07-02-2009, 05:32 PM
That was the era, tho, when styles changed and unless you were quite up in years, you had to change along. No choice - it was all socially based, and it would have made things awkward socially (and professionally) in many, many, small ways.

thunderw21
07-02-2009, 05:33 PM
Dude, I am celebrating it. To me, it was a positive change for the time.



.


Preach it! I despise the boxy, top heavy look of the late '40s, especially in double breasted. I guess it'd be the Bold Look:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/more%20stuff/samplecase003.jpg


Marc, would you have a pic or illustration of a '50s suit like those described in this thread, the Continental Look? Would this be the predecessor of the 'Mod' look of the '60s?

Benny Holiday
07-02-2009, 05:37 PM
Very interesting thread, Marc (as always), and a very well-put observation from you, Fletch. I hadn't realised how far back the Continental look's roots went, or even who was responsible for it in the first place.

Viola
07-02-2009, 06:34 PM
Well... not all men look good in flat front trousers. For the past few years its been hard to find pleated trousers in the US (that's starting to change now), and I can tell you MANY men don't have the body type for flat fronted low-cut trousers that fit like jeans. Unfortunately for a couple of years there that was the bulk of inexpensive trousers sold here...

I think flat-fronted trousers often look better on somewhat thick men than pleated trousers do, because they don't need the extra material to draw more attention to their waists, but that's just my two cents and probably on sale half-off at that.

Fletch
07-02-2009, 07:23 PM
Plain fronts persisted into the late 40s but I think they were a stodgy style by then. There was a lot of resistance to anything that had been a wartime conservation measure, and plain front pants definitely were one.

I have 2 suits dated 1950 and '52, both MTM, named and dated, with plain fronts. The cuts of both are a little behind the curve, the 1950 suit a 2B SB peak lapel(!) and the '52 a wide-bladed and shouldered DB reminiscent of the early-mid 40s.

I also find plain fronts look slightly awkward with the "paneled" ties worn in the mid-late 40s, which don't have a repeated design but just one big splashy picture. You need something a little busier down below to balance the tie - especially if you're not wasp waisted. Double pleats do nicely.

Widebrim
07-02-2009, 07:45 PM
Preach it! I despise the boxy, top heavy look of the late '40s, especially in double breasted. I guess it'd be the Bold Look:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/more%20stuff/samplecase003.jpg


Sorry, but I am a dyed-in-the-wool lover of the Bold Look.:eek: Maybe I just had a too-steady diet of post-WWII films when growing up...Having said that, I agree with Hal that mid-to-late-50s "fashion" was the most classic look of the post-WWII era. The jackets, trousers, hats, neckties, even shoes of that brief period generally exhibited balance and moderation, something which went out the window by the early-60s, when minimalism met its match in clothing.

thunderw21
07-02-2009, 08:15 PM
Don't get me wrong, I don't mind the Bold Look. I love SB Bold Look, not a huge fan of DB Bold Look though. That illustration is exaggerated no doubt but captures the spirit of the Bold Look and it just looks 'off' to my eye. Top heavy.

But you're right about the mid to late-'50s: well balanced, sleek and modern. Echoes of the past moderated with a new spirit of style?

reetpleat
07-02-2009, 10:28 PM
For that period, no one did it like Desi Arnaz.


http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080715/emmys-25-1/desi-arnaz_l.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20045108_20045120_20213234_12,00.html&usg=__wCWWsjIqrDgoxUEbSUDq4ABBPZY=&h=400&w=300&sz=23&hl=en&start=51&um=1&tbnid=UqzevJXn9fftAM:&tbnh=124&tbnw=93&prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddezi%2Barnaz%26ndsp%3D21%26hl%3Den%26 client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN%26start%3D42%2 6um%3D1

Dr Doran
07-02-2009, 10:42 PM
I also find plain fronts look slightly awkward with the "paneled" ties worn in the mid-late 40s, which don't have a repeated design but just one big splashy picture. You need something a little busier down below to balance the tie - especially if you're not wasp waisted. Double pleats do nicely.

I have felt that for a long time, but never articulated it. Thank you.

cookie
07-03-2009, 03:17 AM
Fletch, your posts are a delight to read. Thank you! :eusa_clap


.


+1 Fletch needs to throw that stick he plays away and get writing full time...put that fantastic classical education to work IMHO.

Fletch on Fashion - The Post War World... is the first title of the book...


I think flat-fronted trousers often look better on somewhat thick men than pleated trousers do, because they don't need the extra material to draw more attention to their waists, but that's just my two cents and probably on sale half-off at that.


A point my wife makes about me...cold hearted observant little darling....that she is!

David V
07-03-2009, 06:50 AM
Hardy Amies writes in this period that those who need pleats in their trousers should take a pleat in their figures.


I won't take men's style advise from a dress maker.

Dr Doran
07-03-2009, 08:55 AM
+1 Fletch needs to throw that stick he plays away and get writing full time...put that fantastic classical education to work IMHO.

Fletch on Fashion - The Post War World... is the first title of the book...

I would buy it.

Feraud
07-03-2009, 08:58 AM
For that period, no one did it like Desi Arnaz.


http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080715/emmys-25-1/desi-arnaz_l.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20045108_20045120_20213234_12,00.html&usg=__wCWWsjIqrDgoxUEbSUDq4ABBPZY=&h=400&w=300&sz=23&hl=en&start=51&um=1&tbnid=UqzevJXn9fftAM:&tbnh=124&tbnw=93&prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddezi%2Barnaz%26ndsp%3D21%26hl%3Den%26 client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN%26start%3D42%2 6um%3D1
Desi always looked great!
http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080715/emmys-25-1/desi-arnaz_l.jpg

Fletch
07-03-2009, 09:04 AM
I would buy it.Fletch on Fashion would be one of the shortest books ever, right up there with Great Irish Belly Dancers. Even so, I'd probably blow the advance on some bespoke threads.

John in Covina
07-03-2009, 09:52 AM
What killed the 40's suit?

A repeated theme in fashion you would see certain trends, an idea developed and evolves at some point it moves to exaggerated details. At some point the overuse of the exaggerated stuff creates a backlash and the pendulum swings to the other side. Super wide lapels swings to very slim, etc.

In the late 60's early 70's bell bottom pants come back into style with a period of what was called elephant bells really big bell bottoms. Slowly we moved to straight leg pants and the hippie era lovers have tried to bring back bell bottoms several times.


It is almost a planned change as it seems to repeat a lot. Same in car styling sharp corners get rounder and rounder or vice a versa.

Marc Chevalier
07-03-2009, 11:23 AM
Desi always looked great!
http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080715/emmys-25-1/desi-arnaz_l.jpg




I'd say that Desi Arnaz in I Love Lucy sported the "Mr 'T'" look, and not the "Continental" look.

.

reetpleat
07-03-2009, 02:00 PM
I'd say that Desi Arnaz in I Love Lucy sported the "Mr 'T'" look, and not the "Continental" look.

.


Yes, I think his look was all american. Not sure what you mean by Mr T. Lucy, I pity the fool who doesn't do some splainin.

MisterGrey
07-03-2009, 03:26 PM
A couple of points...

1) I'm surprised by how many people here are saying that not everyone looks good in flat fronts. For me, flats have always been the "standard," with pleated trousers being the extravagance not everyone can pull off. I, myself, very rarely come across a pair of pleated pants that look right/good on me. They've a tendency to wrinkle funny when I sit and make it look as though I'm either hiding a tent or additional stomachs in there.

2) I've thought a lot about this, especially in a college history course I took that examined American History from 1900 to 1990 through the perspective of its popular culture. I think that pop culture repeats itself, essentially, every 30 years. This is especially true for fashion. The 20s begat the 50s begat the 80s. The method of delivery may be slightly different, but the style is essentially the same. Think of the lesiure suit of the 70s as the direct descendant of the zoot suit of the 1940s and you'll get my gist.

Marc Chevalier
07-03-2009, 03:58 PM
Not sure what you mean by Mr T. Lucy, I pity the fool who doesn't do some 'splainin.




From Esquire magazine, 1950:

Mr. T, introduced in Esquire last month, has been booming across the country. In every major store in every community, hes right on target and will stay there throughout 1951. This man has everything the American male has been wanting in his wardrobe- from tapered hat to trim shoes, a strictly new and masculine closetful of clothes. Around the clock, twelve months a year, the Mr. T idea is to make a man look taller, trimmer, and always in perfect taste. Mr. T has that comfortable, custom look that youve been waiting for in your apparel: straight-hanging lines; restrained colors; fresh, new designs. Examine our man at the left; hes Mr. T personified. Everything he wears is right in the T-formula: Tremont hat ( snap brim, tapered pinch crown ), pinpoint collar shirt (fastened with a pin), tartan checked tie, Tower model suit (three button notched lapel jacket), and trim, straight-tipped shoes.


.

cookie
07-03-2009, 09:33 PM
Fletch on Fashion would be one of the shortest books ever, right up there with Great Irish Belly Dancers.

That was the title of you next book... ho hummm... no secrets in the literary world eh what?

Hal
07-04-2009, 01:28 AM
...flats have always been the "standard" ...I, myself, very rarely come across a pair of pleated pants that look right/good on me. They've a tendency to...make it look as though I'm either hiding a tent or additional stomachs in there.
Exactly! You bear out the point I made earlier. I cannot recall seeing pleated trousers before 1980, though they must have been usual before the early 1950s.

zetwal
07-04-2009, 06:44 AM
Fletch on Fashion would be one of the shortest books ever, right up there with Great Irish Belly Dancers. Even so, I'd probably blow the advance on some bespoke threads.

Not as rare as you may think Fletch. Perhaps you can carve out that career in fashion publishing after all -

http://www.irishbellydancing.com

Widebrim
07-05-2009, 09:47 PM
Exactly! You bear out the point I made earlier. I cannot recall seeing pleated trousers before 1980, though they must have been usual before the early 1950s.

Pleats were common during the 1930s, generally left the scene between 1942-45, then were in style again until the mid-1950s.

cookie
07-07-2009, 05:07 AM
I used to get a lot of stuff made in BKK during the 80s and I seem to remember alweays getting double pleated pants with those finished pockets (besom?) that close.

Widebrim
07-09-2009, 10:52 AM
I've noticed that '40s-early-'50s pleats drape longer than modern ones, but that they hold their "shape" better while one is seated. I would attribute the latter to thicker material, though.

John in Covina
07-09-2009, 11:00 AM
I think that there are a couple of ways to sew and construct pleats, there is a chance that the old way was better but more complicated. Costs always pushes for simplicity in construction.

jamespowers
07-09-2009, 12:15 PM
I think that there are a couple of ways to sew and construct pleats, there is a chance that the old way was better but more complicated. Costs always pushes for simplicity in construction.

Particularly if you are talking about inverted pleats on trousers. I love that look. I have a suit from 1955 that has inverted pleats.
I won't wear anything but pleated. The flat front stuff reminds me of work pants one buys at Ben Davis.
http://www.gorillagear.com/images/product_images/pants794.jpg
Pleated fronts take on a more formal look I suppose. Tuxedos, suits etc benfit from the extra flair of the pleated pants.

Lauren
07-09-2009, 04:03 PM
the 50s

HA! That's what I was going to say.

John in Covina
07-09-2009, 07:00 PM
What killed the guy in the 40's suit? In the movies it was 38's, 45's or some dame with a little automatic smilin' as she shot him!

jamespowers
07-10-2009, 09:50 AM
What killed the guy in the 40's suit? In the movies it was 38's, 45's or some dame with a little automatic smilin' as she shot him!

lol lol lol lol lol lol lol

Widebrim
07-10-2009, 09:55 AM
Particularly if you are talking about inverted pleats on trousers. I love that look. I have a suit from 1955 that has inverted pleats.
I won't wear anything but pleated. The flat front stuff reminds me of work pants one buys at Ben Davis.
http://www.gorillagear.com/images/product_images/pants794.jpg
Pleated fronts take on a more formal look I suppose. Tuxedos, suits etc benfit from the extra flair of the pleated pants.

Thank you! :eusa_clap

Jay
08-01-2009, 07:10 PM
What's a quarter top pocket?

Solid Citizen
08-01-2009, 07:23 PM
You've got some SPLANIN to do on this look!
http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080715/emmys-25-1/desi-arnaz_l.jpg

Solid Citizen lol

GoldenEraFan
08-01-2009, 08:16 PM
Think of the lesiure suit of the 70s as the direct descendant of the zoot suit of the 1940s and you'll get my gist.

I'd say the '70s leisure suit is also a descendant from the '40s leisure jacket, only the '40s and '50s versions look better and were made of wool instead of polyester.

Mr. Rover
08-09-2009, 08:21 PM
Preach it! I despise the boxy, top heavy look of the late '40s, especially in double breasted. I guess it'd be the Bold Look:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/more%20stuff/samplecase003.jpg




I've had 3 or 4 suits like that with the shoulders and low button stance...resold all of them!

EL COLORADO
08-20-2009, 07:45 PM
Evolution!
The itchy wool 40's had their day, it was time to step down to make way and take it to the next level, loosen up them 'spenders and plain just get GONE!
For all the knocked out pastel colors, flecks, pleats, two tones and buttery gabs and rayons of the spectra-color 1950's.
http://icons-p1.imeem.com/large/QxZPlFla.jpg

David Conwill
01-04-2011, 07:07 PM
From Esquire magazine, 1950:

Mr. T, introduced in Esquire last month, has been booming across the country. In every major store in every community, hes right on target and will stay there throughout 1951. This man has everything the American male has been wanting in his wardrobe- from tapered hat to trim shoes, a strictly new and masculine closetful of clothes. Around the clock, twelve months a year, the Mr. T idea is to make a man look taller, trimmer, and always in perfect taste. Mr. T has that comfortable, custom look that youve been waiting for in your apparel: straight-hanging lines; restrained colors; fresh, new designs. Examine our man at the left; hes Mr. T personified. Everything he wears is right in the T-formula: Tremont hat ( snap brim, tapered pinch crown ), pinpoint collar shirt (fastened with a pin), tartan checked tie, Tower model suit (three button notched lapel jacket), and trim, straight-tipped shoes.


.

I would love to see a post detailing the Mr. T look. I see it referenced so often, but have never really grasped what it means. Obviously, Googling it is no help.

-Dave

resortes805
01-04-2011, 08:48 PM
Mr. T is a trimmed down version of the bold look...like this:
http://wearitagainsamvintage.com/shop/images/grey1.jpg

or this:
http://wearitagainsamvintage.com/shop/images/mst104-1.jpg

Compare to a bold look suit, also from the early '50s:
http://www.americanvintageclassics.com/picsr/rm6228.jpg]

David Conwill
01-05-2011, 04:12 AM
Thanks!

-Dave

fluteplayer07
01-10-2011, 06:31 PM
This is what I know as a 40's bold look DB. (Hope Anon doesn't mind me stealing this from his Etsy modeling.) I'm not quite seeing the exaggerated top-heavy profile in it, or is that silhouette more typical to the later 40's?

http://ny-image3.etsy.com/il_fullxfull.121575119.jpg

Fletch
01-10-2011, 07:37 PM
Those lapels are actually pretty dramatic - they cover a lot of territory, almost all the way to the shoulder.

I'm going to guess that the shoulders are seriously padded, too, maybe as much as 1" deep at the sleevehead.

fluteplayer07
01-10-2011, 08:10 PM
I own it now - the shoulders are pretty heavy on it. The wool is quite heavy, also. Skeleton lining, and it doesn't have any vents. I still am missing the top heavy boxy look; it has a fairly even hourglass distribution in my opinion.

And a general question to those of you more educated in the clothing field than hats: Does it appear to be an orphaned jacket (as I have always assumed), or was it made as a sport coat?

Widebrim
01-10-2011, 08:21 PM
This is what I know as a 40's bold look DB. (Hope Anon doesn't mind me stealing this from his Etsy modeling.) I'm not quite seeing the exaggerated top-heavy profile in it, or is that silhouette more typical to the later 40's?


It's a bit hard to determine, due to the distortion of the photograph, but that is a Bold Look jacket, and top-heavy was dominant from about '45 to '51. I does look like it was part of a suit, and not a sport coat.

resortes805
01-10-2011, 10:24 PM
This is what I know as a 40's bold look DB. (Hope Anon doesn't mind me stealing this from his Etsy modeling.) I'm not quite seeing the exaggerated top-heavy profile in it, or is that silhouette more typical to the later 40's?

http://ny-image3.etsy.com/il_fullxfull.121575119.jpg

I wouldn't consider that 100% bold look. Below is a better example.
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs785.ash1/167513_1805581386329_1443727967_32001811_4318798_n .jpg

Fletch
01-10-2011, 10:41 PM
I does look like it was part of a suit, and not a sport coat.AIUI, sport coats were almost never double-breasted during the 40s and early 50s. The blazer look was out of style except where it was required, such as at club functions.

Widebrim
01-10-2011, 10:43 PM
AIUI, sport coats were almost never double-breasted during the 40s and early 50s. The blazer look was out of style except where it was required, such as at club functions.

Correct.

fluteplayer07
01-12-2011, 06:59 PM
Thanks guys. :)

anon`
01-12-2011, 07:21 PM
This is what I know as a 40's bold look DB. (Hope Anon doesn't mind me stealing this from his Etsy modeling.) I'm not quite seeing the exaggerated top-heavy profile in it, or is that silhouette more typical to the later 40's?
Woo! I'm almost internet-famous! Didn't realise that anyone else here knew that was me ;)

(And, being other other one here to have sported that coat, I'm of the distinct opinion that it's not a sport coat. Just an orphaned suit coat.)

1961MJS
01-12-2011, 07:30 PM
Hi, I don't know if it's been mentioned, but the double breasted look was out because it took more wool. Same reason for getting rid of the zoot suits. There's a war on you know!

Later

Chas
01-13-2011, 01:04 AM
But they were around briefly after the war, where austerity was not an issue.

I think that it was because suits became something that men worked in, rather than went out in. Single breast w/ lighter materials were in demand.

fluteplayer07
01-15-2011, 08:31 PM
Woo! I'm almost internet-famous! Didn't realise that anyone else here knew that was me ;)

:offtopic:

lol pdxvintagette mentioned you as the model a while ago... I think it was on the Lounge, or in a PM. [huh]

I really like her Etsy shop; there's actually a lot of great things that pass through the men's department. That green varsity sweater (the one with that huge 'S') is one of my favorite pieces. Just waiting to get it freshened up at the dry cleaners. :D


Cheers,

anon`
01-15-2011, 09:24 PM
Haha! One of the two most ridiculous shots I've ever done for her shop. Glad that went to a Lounger! ;)

roadierfl
01-15-2011, 10:49 PM
Watching the Steelers vs Ravens game today, the pre-show talking heads had one former footballer in a 40's style chalk-line suit, and another segment with a Fedora-wearing former pro. On PBS the other evening, the Tavis Smiley show (found while channel surfing) had someone called El Debarge (never heard of him) wearing a zoot suit. Some aspects are coming back, at least in some circles