I genuinely think this is a bad outfit. I'll discuss why and suggest some ways it can be improved. Hopefully this thread includes some ideas that you can use for your own wardrobe.🧵
The more glaring problem with Nick's outfit is the collar gap, which refers to how his jacket lifts off his neck. Good tailoring is all about fit and silhouette. The most fundamental dimension to this is how the collar should always hug your neck, even when you're moving.
The second issue is how his jacket looks like an orphaned suit jacket, which means a suit jacket that's worn without the matching pants. Sometimes, suit jackets can be worn on their own; oftentimes, they can't. When it fails, it looks like your ripped your suit pants.
Your ability to wear a suit jacket as a sport coat hinges on whether your jacket can convincingly pass as a sport coat. Two important dimensions for this: texture and pattern scale. The more texture and the larger the pattern, the more obviously something is a sport coat.
IMO, Nick's fabric is too suit-y. The worsted wool is too fine, smooth, and slick. The pattern's scale is too small. This would look much better as a black/ white puppytooth suit.
Here's an example of a brown puppytooth suit with a similar pattern scale. This one is made from woolen flannel, which has even more texture than Nick's worsted wool. But look at how much better this outfit looks with the matching pants. This is not a sport coat pattern.
Grey sport coats are hard to wear for two reasons: most men wear sport coats with grey pants, which are hard to coordinate with grey jackets. Second, it is easier for a grey sport coat to look like an orphaned suit jacket than more basic colors like brown or navy.
If you get a grey sport coat, try tweed. Tweed has so much texture that no one will mistake it for a suit jacket. Donegal, glen plaid, and herringbone all make for wonderful grey tweed sport coats. Better still if the pattern's scale is large.
Speaking of scale, look at how much better Nick's jacket would have looked if the pattern was bigger. A larger scale would have minimized the risk of this having a moire effect, and it would look more obviously sporty and casual.
Finally, wearing a matching tie and pocket square looks corny. Again, it makes you look like you bought this in a boxed set from one of those stores that supplies students with prom clothes. I also think that solid-colored silk squares look like a magician's cheap trick.
Instead, it's better to wear a pocket square that complements but doesn't directly match your tie. This looks less calculated and suggests that you just threw this random accessory into your pocket, and you happen to look great. Here, we see a blue square complement a brown tie
Everyone starts somewhere, so there's no reason to feel bad if you get some details in an outfit wrong. Plus, it's just clothes. But by paying attention to these details in fit, silhouette, texture, pattern, and color, you can go from pic 1 to pics 2, 3, and 4.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In the 1950s, Irving Penn traveled across London, Paris, and NYC to take portraits of workers in their work clothes. These clothes at the time were not considered glamorous — they would not have shown up on fashion runways — but they demonstrate a simple aesthetic principle 🧵
Consider these outfits. How do you feel about them? Are they charming? Repulsive? Stylish?
If you consider them charming and stylish, as I do, then ask yourself: what makes them charming and stylish? Why are you drawn to the outfits?
As I've mentioned before, I think outfits look better when they have "shape and drape." By shape, I mean the outfit confers a distinctive silhouette. If these men took off their clothes, we can reliably guess their bodies would not be shaped like this:
If you're just dipping your toes into tailored clothing, start with a navy sport coat. This is something you can wear with a button-up shirt and pair of trousers, or something as casual as a t-shirt and some jeans. It's easily the most versatile jacket.
Key is to get something with texture so it doesn't look like an orphaned suit jacket. Spier & Mackay has great semi-affordable tailoring. Their navy hopsack Moro is made from pure wool and a half-canvas to give it shape. Classic proportions and soft natural shoulder
There's a pervasive belief that we no longer produce clothes in the United States. This is not true. In this thread, I will tell you about some great made-in-USA brands — some that run their own factories, while others are US brands contracting with US factories. 🧵
I should first note this thread focuses on well-made, stylish clothes produced in ethical conditions. For me, producing in the US is not enough. It means nothing if the clothes are ugly, crappy, or produced in sweatshop conditions. My article for The Nation below.
JEANS
Gustin produces MiUSA jeans using raw Japanese denim. "Raw" means the fabric hasn't been pre-distressed, allowing it to naturally fade with use, reflecting your actual body and lifestyle. I like their fuller 1968 Vintage Straight fit. They also do lots of other stuff.
Let's first establish good vs bad ways to think about style. The first pic is correct — style is a kind of social language and you have to figure out what type of person you are. The second pic is stupid bc it takes style as disconnected objects ("this is in" vs "this is out").
I should also note here that I'm only talking about style. I'm not here to argue with you about ergonomics, water bottle holders, or whether something accommodates your Dell laptop. I'm am talking about aesthetics.
Watch these two videos. Then answer these two questions:
— Which of the two men is better dressed?
— How does each come off?
I think Carney is better dressed, partly because his clothes fit better. Notice that his jacket collar always hugs his neck, while Pierre Poilievre's jacket collar never touches him.
The level of craftsmanship that goes into a lot of Japanese menswear simply doesn't exist in the United States. You can do this for many categories — suits, jeans, hats, etc.
In this thread, I will show you just one category: men's shoes 🧵
For this comparison, I will focus on Japanese bespoke shoemaking vs. US ready-to-wear. The level of bespoke craftsmanship shown here simply doesn't exist in the US, so a Japanese bespoke vs. US bespoke comparison would be unfair. US bespoke is mostly about orthopedic work.
So instead, I will focus on the best that the US has to offer: ready-to-wear Alden.
On a basic level, top-end Japanese shoes are better because they are handwelted, whereas Alden shoes are Goodyear welted. The first involves more handwork and can be resoled more often.