The Rock's suit is interesting because it illustrates the limits of made-to-measure. 🧵
Broadly speaking, there are three types of clothes
1. Ready to wear: what you find at your local shop
2. Bespoke: a tailor, such as the one below, creates a new garment for you completely from scratch
3. Made-to-measure: a company adjusts a block pattern for you.
A pattern is like a garment's architectural blueprint. It determines how something fits you. In bespoke, this pattern is theoretically drafted from scratch and by hand using various drafting formulas. But in made-to-measure, a company starts with a pre-designed block.
This pre-designed pattern is then adjusted according to your measurements using a computer-aided design program (CAD). This system can work reasonably well if you're within a certain distance from the block. But if you are not, then you will need a totally new pattern.
Made-to-measure companies will not draft you a totally new pattern because this is laborious and will significantly increase their costs. If they're honest, they should just turn away your business. But many will make the garment anyway, so you wind up with something like this:
Here, we see the outbreast pocket almost at the armhole. Maybe the person adjusting this block just added more material to the front edge and wasn't able to move the pocket to its correct placement.
The areas around the armholes are collapsing on both sides. This may be because the block is designed for someone with squarer shoulders. If The Rock lifted both of his shoulders, I imagine this fold would go away. He needs the pattern adjusted for a more sloped shoulder.
A lot of pulling around the front of his legs. This should be an easy adjustment; not sure why it was not made.
By comparison, here is Arnold, who has a similar figure. Guys who are very muscular often think they look better in tighter suits. I have no opinion on whether a tight suit makes you look more muscular, but I think all of the pulling looks bad. This looks much better to me
I often get comments from fitness guys who say that fat people don't look good in clothes. That's absolutely not true. But it is true that certain body types will have a harder time finding ready-made clothes that fit. That applies to muscular builds!
I prefer this framing in the book The Modern Tailor, Outfitter, and Clohthier, edited by AA Whife. This was published in 1918, well before the term "woke" became a thing. This frames things not as "ideal" or "bad" body types but what is "standard" given a market.
Notably, some clothing markets don't even cater to the "standard" figure anymore, but that's another conversation.
However, framing it in this way allows us to better understand what we may need when shopping for a garment.
Most people should at least try ready-to-wear, as there's a good chance there's something on the market that will fit. And if not, you can always put things back on the rack. No loss.
Some people, such as The Rock, will need bespoke because they have an atypical figure.
Some people may be within batting distance of a company's block pattern. With a good company, they may be able to get a better fit through made-to-measure. Your chances of success increase if you're able to try on a ready-made suit produced in the block pattern
This way, you and the fitter can see what needs to be adjusted. A little adjustment here or there—no problem. But if you find yourself like The Rock and can't even squeeze into the suit, you should move on. The more you have to adjust, the more risk you take.
This is also why cheap and/ or online made-to-measure companies (for things like suits, not shirts) can be risky. Cheap companies often rely on trendy blocks (read: very slim, short jackets that don't fit anyone). Online MTM companies also don't have fitters or sample garments.
Don't assume that MTM is automatically better than RTW. Think of it like the editors of that 1918 tailoring book: getting the right fit is like figuring out how to solve a problem. Some need bespoke or MTM; others are fine with RTW. Also good RTW is better than bad MTM/ bespoke
• • •
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.