I disagree that you dress like Cary Grant. In this thread, I will list some of the ways in which your dress differs and why such important details matter. 🧵
On Twitter and elsewhere, I often notice that people collapse men's style into very broad forms. A suit is just a suit, and pants are just pants. But in fact, tiny differences make a huge impact, and more attention should be paid to silhouette, shape, and detailing.
Let's start with the basics.
A collar gap can appear if your jacket's shoulders don't match the slope of your natural shoulders. Or if the jacket isn't cut right for your posture. Or the jacket is too tight across the chest (the most likely reason for Tristan's collar gap)
You'll notice that Grant's collar always hugs his neck, even when he dances. See this scene from the 1958 film Indiscreet. One reason you want your collar to hug your neck is that the jacket is not only more comfy but will look more natural on you.
The tightness of Tristan's clothes creates other problems. Here we see divots along the sleevehead, pulling at the waist, and trousers that cling to his calves, causing ripples to go down his legs.
No such issues for Cary Grant. His clothes always hang beautifully and smoothly while still giving a distinctive, flattering silhouette.
Tristan also wears low-rise trousers. As a result, his shirt often peeks out from beneath his coat's buttoning point when his coat is fastened, ruining the elegant line and harmonious look that a suit should create. No such issue for Grant because his trousers sit higher.
This is also something Grant sticks with when he's not wearing a jacket. The result is a silhouette that shifts and moves. IMO, it's more elegant.
In fact, going back to an earlier thread where I said people appreciate "shape and drape" even when they don't know it, I think what people like about this outfit (referenced in the original tweet) is how it has shape and drape. The outfit moves.
You can see here that Tristan's overcoat is not as long, so it can't move in the same way. The trousers are also much slimmer than what Grant is wearing in the second photo.
Some of Tristan's suits exhibit a technical tailoring problem. In tailoring, the term "balance" refers to how a coat hangs from the shoulders. There are four dimensions to balance: front-back balance, left-right balance, straightening, and crookening.
Straightening and crookening refer to a technical tailoring issue that's too complicated to discuss here. However, left-right balance refers to how the jacket's hem should hang evenly across the left and right sides when seen from the front. This is correct:
Similarly, front-back balance refers to how the jacket hangs across the front and back when the coat is seen from the side. The front can be lower or level with the back, but it should never be higher. Tristan's coats are sometimes higher at the front because he has a big chest.
Compare this to Grant. His jackets always hang perfectly from the shoulders, creating a balanced hem.
If you have a short front balance, the coat will look like it's riding up on you. This can give you the appearance of a beer gut.
That's why it's ironic that Tristan's style advice is "achieve this body shape." This is not style advice; this is fitness advice
He's also incorrect that King Charles uses his tailor, Huntsman. Charles has never used Huntsman. He has used Kent & Haste, A&S, and Malcolm Plews
Tight, short clothes with heavily pegged trousers actually end up emphasizing your hips, making you look heavier in that area. Tristan has a more muscular figure than Grant, but his silhouette here is wider across the hips.
Historically, the Plantonic male figure in classic Western aesthetics is represented as having shoulders broader than the hips, while the female figure is the reverse (not saying you have to conform to these molds, but this is how they're represented in the arts).
Widening the leg below the knee would help de-emphasize the hips, giving you that Statue of David silhouette. This is something Cary Grant understood.
The central thing about Cary Grant's style is that he always looked elegant, even in To Catch a Thief (1955), where he wore a long-sleeve striped shirt, wide pants, loafers, and a neckerchief.
Comfort is central to elegance because you can not look elegant if you are uncomfortable. Tristan puts darts on everything—even the front of his shirts—because he wants to show off his figure. That's fine if that's your aesthetic, but it's not dressing like Grant.
The last thing I want to note, which I've noted in other threads, is that fitness is different from style. It's fine to be into fitness. But it's not true that you have to be a certain body shape to be stylish or dress well.
You also don't have to wear tailoring. My friend @DavidLaneDesign, who posts under the name bigfits1 on Instagram, is super stylish because he knows how to dress for his body type and how to use clothes as social language. There are lots of great casual looks on his Instagram
IMO, Tristan—and many of the people who follow him—associate style too much with having a certain body type (muscular), living a certain lifestyle, driving fast cars, and having a lot of wealth.
I think style is more about knowledge and developing your eye. My friend Tim thrifts most of his clothes or shops from affordable brands like Spier & Mackay. The blazer and grey trousers you see here were things his mom bought from Ralph Lauren when he was 16
IG thefoxtooth
Grant had a level of style few will ever reach. But I think Tim and David get closer to it—despite not following Tristan's style advice—because they employ certain ideas. Meanwhile, Tristan lacks Grant's elegance because he doesn't pay enough attention to the details.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I can tell you who goes to cobblers. And a bit about the trade. 🧵
In the 18th century, men got shoes from two types of people. The upper classes went to cordwainers, who measured feet and made shoes from scratch. The lower working-classes went to cobblers, who cobbled together shoes using scraps from salvaged pre-owned footwear.
A cobbler was also someone who repaired footwear. Hence the Middle English term cobeler ("mender of shoes") deriving from an early form of cobble ("to mend roughly, patch"). In shoemaking, cordwainers and cobblers were considered distinct trades. Cobbler was lower on the ladder.
An offhand comment about how Prince Harry doesn't dress very well seems to have stirred up his fans. So here's a thread on how both Harry and William don't dress well when compared to the older men in their family — and how this represents a broader decline in taste. 🧵
I should say at the outset that I don't care about the drama surrounding the Royal family. I don't care if you're Team Markle or Team Middleton or Team whatever. I am simply talking about clothes. The following is also not meant to be personal jabs; just an honest review.
The first thing to understand is that select members of royal family were incredible dressers. Most notable is Edward VIII, the Duke of Windsor. For a time, whatever he wore, others followed. He popularized cuffed trousers, belts, and a tailoring style known as the "drape cut."
When we zoom in on the wallet, we see the label "Saint Laurent Paris," a French luxury fashion house that became popular about ten years ago when Kanye started wearing the label. This was also when Hedi Slimane was at the company's creative helm.
For many young men at the time, Saint Laurent was their entry into designer fashion, partly because the designs were conceptually approachable (LA rocker, Hot Topic), while the Kanye co-sign made them cool and the prices signaled status (and for the uninformed, suggested quality)
When I was on a menswear forum, navy trousers were of great controversy. Discussions about them lasted many years, resulting in long-lasting rivalries. Sometimes people refrained from speaking about them out of fear of dredging up old debates.
First, I should state at the outset that there's no way to have this conversation without, in some way, speaking crudely about certain classes of people. I make no judgements about their worth or dignity. I am only describing the semiotics of men's dress.
Second, everything depends on your goals. Dress is not a science, so there are no overriding laws. Everything is contextual to culture. More on this later
Before we start, here are two outfits involving green sport coats. Which do you like better? Please choose before moving on.
I get this question a lot. I don't have strong views on how transmasc people should dress, but since I often get the question, I've thought about it a bit. Will share some thoughts in this thread. 🧵
My general feeling is that this question often approaches the idea of style from a perspective I don't share. I don't believe in approaching dress first from the perspective of body type. For instance, there are a lot of guides online that break down body types like this.
I disagree with this perspective because they always seem to be about forcing the person into one narrow ideal. So if you're short, they tell you how to wear certain things to give the illusion of height. Or if you're heavy, they say how you can dress to hide your weight.
I don't think people such as Hegesth are intentionally choosing to dress like this to signal they're "not like the swamp." I think we're simply in a generational change in terms of taste. Will show some examples. 🧵
A hundred years ago, men's dress was governed by time, place, and occasion (TPO). If you were of a certain social position and had to do a certain thing, you were expected to wear certain outfits. If you didn't know these rules, a tailor would tell you.
Over the course of the 20th century, these rules loosened, partly because society became more accepting of different social groups and their lifestyles (which is a good thing). By the close of the 20th century, the rise of business casual swept tailoring out of offices