They just don't compare

[Mr. Rover]

Well the fit of that jacket (Is that Menjou?) is only really typical for the earlier 30s, which has been rarer to find and my personal favorite period. The later 30s and throughout the early 50s, I see more and more drape suits, which aren't all that fitted in the chest at all, giving the appearance of a fuller chest and smaller waist. And being that he is a celebrity, chances are he is wearing a bespoke suit himself.
I would also say that bespoke or atleast more customized MTM is really the only way to go now for a great fit, but getting it isn't impossible. I was browsing the 30s Style web-site with the suits made by Okisaka and they are really quite beautiful suits, even the ones using modern fabrics (some are made of vintage).
Lighter fabrics lend themselves to certain looks, a la the Continental look. It's difficult to get that beautiful clean drape for a long time if that same fabric were used in full-cut 30s pants, which I have found with my linen suit that I got made last year.

The one problem I do have with fit is that since the armholes are lower and uncomfortable for any sort of desk work, people tend to wear them without jackets. Well, seeing as the fit model for many rtw designer suits are for skinnier, fit people, they design the pants to be a lower rise because, honestly, they look good on tall, thin people. Sans jacket and with a fitted shirt, it's a very slimming, flattering line for someone who is fit to begin with. But if you put on a jacket it will always seem to flare at the bottom, separating the top and bottom of the body in fit. Thats why the 30s-40s line is very clean; fitted jacket flowing straight into the pants, where the change in silhouette is from the shoulders to the hips and clean from the hips downward. The suit is really one object.
So, keeping that in mind, I'm sure a lot of designers are creating a great look for a shirt/pant combination, and the jacket sort of ruins the silhouette. You really need a shorter, tighter jacket to keep the silhouette clean so that the jacket really ends closer to the hip than mid-thigh, which seems to be what Thom Browne has done, or make the jacket longer i.e. tails or a morning coat.
But if you're trying to do reconstructive surgery to the person's body from the outside, which is why a lot of people turn to bespoke, you're out of luck with bespoke. It's just going to look like a barrel on two twigs. Since I'm a stick to begin with, aside from armholes, I think the new suit I bought from Ralph Lauren is gorgeous with a medium weight wool flannel (in the neighborhood of 11 to 13 oz. I think), even with the narrow trousers and lower rise.
I don't really understand the dislike of Thom Browne here- he makes a close-fitting, high-armholed jacket and high rise pants. You don't have to wear it like he does. If I could have the pants long enough to cover my socks but still have no break, and sleeves that hit my wristbones, I would wear Thom Browne's suits, and I think many people here could probably pull off that silhouette-it's made for a particular body type. Fletch should understandably not like Thom Browne- Thom Browne wasn't making it for him, he was making them for people that are shaped similarly to him.

 

[Mr. Rover]

Where are the tailors that can do this? Why don't they use the fabrics that lay like this?

Tailor can, and do. Designers don't. Tailoring well with thin fabrics takes considerably more skill. I believe Baron Kurtz mentioned that in many of his British demob suits, the stitching is horrendous, but the fit is probably still substantially better than anything OTR right now because it's of a heavier wool (probably between 13-16 oz. or more based on the demob suit I bought off out him). I don't know why designers haven't caught onto this- better at drawing sketches than making garments, I guess? Although if you look back to ads from the mid-Century, selling lighter-weight or lighter feeling clothes has always been a high-selling point of advertisements. Lighter weight hats, Palm Beach suits, polyester, gabardine, the ubiquity of cotton, etc. I have an ad from a 40s Pacific Worsted Woolens- the selling point? "You scarcely feel it!" It's really about find the balance between a nice drape, durability, and comfort.

 

[Justdog]

Fit

Edited a lot


Thats why the 30s-40s line is very clean; fitted jacket flowing straight into the pants, where the change in silhouette is from the shoulders to the hips and clean from the hips downward. The suit is really one object.

Very well said and described

 

[Mr. Rover]

Sorry- just ranting. I'll clean that up later.

 

[Matt Deckard]

I also said times are changing and that companies are using heavier fabrics in some cases...

When i ask where are the tailors that make suits like they did in the old days i mean WHERE ARE THEY? I want them showcased. Our friend in Japan is doing a good job and so are a few others.... but when suits like that blue windowpane job are shown in comparison to what was worn in Hollywoods past... well Hollywoods past still wins because the fabric does those suits justice while that blue suit is a wrinkle waiting to happen, just like the suits on craig.

You all know i like the heavier fabrics because they lay better... where are the tailors that speak up for this asset of long wearing goods and where are the tailors that know that nape to scye measurement?

Ranting is good... gets us all thinking.

I think fit got lost after the war then came back for a stint in the late 50's to early 60's, then ran away again. That's Why connery wears his jackets in a fight and the bonds that followed tend to remove theirs... they just don't move with the actors, they move around the actors.

 

[Justdog]

Fit

Sorry- just ranting. I'll clean that up later.

I wanted to quote that particular passage as it very well describes a suit fit.
Your other observations were very visualizing as well.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

(Is that Menjou?) .

Looks like 'im.

Unlikely not to be bespoke.

4 patch pockets! I'd love to see the back of that suit! I think i have. But i dont have a solid recollection.

bk

 

[Matt Deckard]

What we need is someone who can take stills off of Transatlantic Mary-go-round. Now that's a film with some really good looking suits.

In regards to fit, I think the 20's were the beginning of the end, a time when men began to stop looking at suits as a utilitarian garment. Fit isn't as important when it comes to clothing that is worn once in while by the general public, so it turns into fashion and only fashion... in the past fashion elements were tacked on to well fitted clothes, today they are the clothes and the fit and fabric take the hit because durability isn't chic.

in regards to fabric, I think the whole year round suit idea was a bad one since none of the materials that claim to be year around work for any season and tend to be lighter than any summer fabric ever was back in the days when seasons were in.

 

[Mr. Rover]

See how the jacket ends just past the hip? A longer (even by 1/2"-1") jacket's skirt would appear to flare. From Paul Stuart's "Phineas Cole" line, which looks pretty good to me Paul Stuart Phineas Lookbook

 

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

It's a matter of style, ability and fabrics, isnt' it? Or let's split up style into looks and fit, for lack of better terms right now. (Or laziness to think.)

I.1.A.a.α) Ability: Chances are tailors are as able as 70 years ago, as such. I don't buy the overall idea that everything was better and is gone forever. But importantly, today's tailors have learned other things, and scye measurement and the like doesn't seem to be among those. Also, this excludes all non-bespoke suits, though not necessarily the modern forms of "online bespoke", especially if a trained person will measure you. If there's enough money in a niche market - I don't see the mass market change any time soon - then even MTM would be possible, at least with a higher number of parameters.

So, you'd have to find a tailor who's technically able and gets what you want. Optimistically speaking, I think they cut n sew no worse than back in the day.

Technically, it's easier with all the modern machinery, much easier, from measuring to cutting to sewing. (Wait, that was I.1.A.a.β already, wasn't it?)


Style: Obviously, this is not about the number of sleeve buttons. It's already difficult to convey how wide you want the legs and the sleeves at what point, more difficult concerning trousers' waist height and jackets' waists and button stances, and very difficult if you start with armholes. But even mere "look" issues aren't easy - lapels, for instance, are about form as much as about width, or you're caught in a slope between the 60's and the 70's.


Fabrics: Might be a matter of price, but there seem to be some available. I've seen pleasing contemporary tweeds myself, and there seem to be others, too. I haven't gone into that at all, though - maybe there are sources of fabrics, and they're even cheaper because they're not super 320s.


Still, all of this is more troublesome than ordering from Sears or Army & Navy, much more expensive, and maybe not better.

 

[Jovan]

don't really understand the dislike of Thom Browne here- he makes a close-fitting, high-armholed jacket and high rise pants. You don't have to wear it like he does. If I could have the pants long enough to cover my socks but still have no break, and sleeves that hit my wristbones, I would wear Thom Browne's suits, and I think many people here could probably pull off that silhouette-it's made for a particular body type. Fletch should understandably not like Thom Browne- Thom Browne wasn't making it for him, he was making them for people that are shaped similarly to him.

:arated:

 

[CharlesB]

:arated:

+1= +2

 

[MrBern]

I don't really understand the dislike of Thom Browne here- he makes a close-fitting, high-armholed jacket and high rise pants. You don't have to wear it like he does. If I could have the pants long enough to cover my socks but still have no break, and sleeves that hit my wristbones, I would wear Thom Browne's suits, and I think many people here could probably pull off that silhouette-it's made for a particular body type. Fletch should understandably not like Thom Browne- Thom Browne wasn't making it for him, he was making them for people that are shaped similarly to him.

Ray, most people cant visualize w/o a mockup, they can only be shown an example & react to that.
So when the FL sees the ThomBrowne fashion shows...it sets off warning bells. WFT? A MAN SHOULDNT LOOK LIKE THAT.
Even in the early article son TB, people were reacting & trying not to wear the suit so short,...and at the same time not destroy the look.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/fashion/19THOM.html

 

[Mr. Rover]

I see very little wrong with these two examples from Black Fleece:

Yes, the fabrics are lighter weight, but from what I've heard, he has used thicker, heavier fabrics in the past.

 

[Mr. Rover]

Ray, most people cant visualize w/o a mockup, they can only be shown an example & react to that.
So when the FL sees the ThomBrowne fashion shows...it sets off warning bells. WFT? A MAN SHOULDNT LOOK LIKE THAT.
Even in the early article son TB, people were reacting & trying not to wear the suit so short,...and at the same time not destroy the look.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/fashion/19THOM.html

Like we've said about him before when out and about in Manhattan, his shows are intended to be theater pieces. I saw a video about his latest fashion show based on a circus- just that concept would turn me off if I was looking for style inspiration, but all these fashion shows are theatrical presentations to him, rooted from being an actor, he says.

 

[MrBern]

Like we've said about him before when out and about in Manhattan, his shows are intended to be theater pieces. I saw a video about his latest fashion show based on a circus- just that concept would turn me off if I was looking for style inspiration, but all these fashion shows are theatrical presentations to him, rooted from being an actor, he says.

yes, we've spoken about this.
Bu t the average person on the FL is perhaps not th target demographic & doesnt get it. And so its a turnoff.

Also, the TB look is closer to a `60s aesthetic, w/ a bit of campy drag. A bit removed from the `30s style preferred on the FL.
So even tho you & I understand it, & see its place, the average FL reaction is closer to "HEY JohnWayne wouldnt wear that!!!!"

 

[Matt Deckard]

And a theatre pieces they are, turning men's fashion into women's fashion that is weekly made and quickly discarded after a few seasons.

 

[Mr. Rover]

Is menswear really so different in its trends compared to back then? The details and options really haven't changed much, but the silhouettes and "ideal" fashionable proportions changed drastically from mid-decade to mid-decade gradually. It's pretty similar now still- looking at the trends from 2000 to 2008, we started with baggy fitting suits, natural waist baggy pants with a full sloppy break and a full Windsor knot, which transitioned to skinny jean hipster culture as the mainstream, skinny suit pants with the same ill-fitting jackets, and now fitted jackets with fitted pants, skinny lapels, and narrow ties. I doubt it was really much different transitioning from fitted pants in 1924 or so to the wide-legged pants and drape jackets by 1934 or whatever the year was that Marc cited as when Esquire introduced the British blade drape suit (which I believe was reported to be a marketing move to increase suit purchases as the Depression was wearing on). My suits from 1933 have the wide-legged pants and a fitted, non-drape jacket, seemingly a transitional style.
Halted by war in the 1940s, Esquire created the "bold look" through the late 40s. And then by the mid-Fifties, men had to have their lapels and ties narrowed because of the new Continental look. In terms of the gradual changing of trends, I see no difference. In 5-7 years, there's some sort of aesthetic leap. As of right now, we've made a leap from the power suits of the 80s and 90s back to the narrower look of the late 50s/early 60s. Men just have their own part of fashion week now and who designs the clothes matter more- more importantly, who is influencing the trends. Well, in the 20s and 30s, it happend to be the Duke of Windsor and his tailors. Now it happens to be Thom Browne and his. I happen to think they should've stopped altering anything with the silhouette from 1935-1939 because they nailed down the proportions so perfectly, but y'know what? People get bored and want something new. Esquire now isn't created the trends so much as analyzing what they see people doing and projecting where they are going with them, just as they were in the 1930s with collegiate style. It just happens that none of you like the present state of collegiate clothing (and I would sincerely agree with you there).

 

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

And a theatre pieces they are, turning men's fashion into women's fashion that is weekly made and quickly discarded after a few seasons.

Your fingers jumped ahead of your mind there, but this is indeed a good summary: Fashion is made weakly and weekly.

 

[Jovan]

Real men wearing Thom Browne