I don't know who Milo is talking about here, but since he has expressed pride in British culture, here are the ways in which his outfit violates British traditions. 🧵
The first and most obvious is that Milo has fastened the bottom-most button on his jacket, something that British men have known not to do since King Edward VI supposedly left his undone (and his courtiers followed). This button is a vestigial detail—not meant to be used.
The second is that the jacket is entirely too small. Look at this suit by Anthony Sinclair, a legendary British tailor who created a pared-down style known as the "Conduit Cut" (called so bc Sinclair was located on Conduit Street when he tailored for Connery). Note clean lines.
A distinguishing mark of quality British tailoring—and, indeed, tailoring all over the world—is that the jacket doesn't pull, particularly around the buttons. Caine can comfortably fit his hand into his coat, but Milo's coat barely contains him.
Milo's outfit violates another basic principle of British dress. Here, he's wearing a brown tweed with navy chinos.
As I've noted many times in the past, our understanding of traditional tailoring largely derives from British culture, particularly that period in which men had wardrobes divided between city and country. Every detail conveyed something. Navy was city; brown country.
Anyone familiar with British culture knows that brown tweeds should be worn with things such as taupe trousers cut from rustic materials such as cavalry twill or whipcord. Not blue chinos.
Similarly, button-down collars are an Americanism. The more British choice here would be a semi-spread collar shirt. Milo's shirt collar is especially bad because the collar points are small and dinky. The buttonholes are also made with contrast thread—a mark of bad taste.
His jacket also demonstrates a lack of familiarity with British culture in that it has peak lapels and three patch pockets—two at the hips and one at the breast.
In traditional British tailoring, every detail has meaning. Peak lapels are a formal detail primarily reserved for dinner suits, business suits, and "city attire." Patch pockets are a casual detail typically reserved for country and leisure clothes.
English actor Edward Fox understood this. See how his grey worsted suit with cloth-covered buttons has peak lapels (all formal details) while his rustic tweed has notch lapels. Certainly, he wouldn't be ignorant enough to put peak lapels on a triple-patch pocket jacket.
There's also the tie. In British culture, regimental striped ties typically denote membership in some organization, often a school or part of the military. For example, The tie below signals that the wearer is part of The Rifles, an infantry regiment of the British Army.
In the early 1900s, Brooks Brothers introduced their version of regimental stripes, which are purely decorative. Not wanting to copy the British, they flipped the direction of the stripes. See how they run in the opposite direction.
Milo here is wearing a faux regimental stripe that runs in the American direction. It is an odd choice for a British patriot, but it may also be the only option if no British organization will have you.
In any case, I write this as a non-white immigrant living in an English-speaking country. However, I love British tailoring and American culture. I hope this shows that immigrants can offer something to native-born citizens.
Here are some photos of British men who know about traditional British dress practices. I hope Milo can absorb the information presented in these photos.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First, let's do an experiment. Here are two relatively similar outfits: a blue shirt with a pair of dark blue jeans.
Which do you like better? Reply to this tweet with your answer. This way, people can see how the majority of people "voted."
If you said the right, then we have the same taste. This is despite the outfit on the left following this exact guide — and the outfit on the right not appearing in the guide at all.
I both agree and disagree that it's subjective. Like with anything, my views on tailoring stems from a "first principle." That principle is that men wore tailored clothing better in the past (specifically the period from about the 1930s through 80s). 🧵
If we agree on this, then there are certain ideas that naturally flow from this principle, partly because men's dress during this period was governed by time, place, and occasion. As stated before, one such idea was city vs country clothing.
Another such idea was resort or evening wear. Or summer vs winter wear. And so forth.
One can carry these ideas forward into today's age without it look like historical cosplay. Just like how we are currently using words to communicate, some from the early 1900s.
Twitter has a character limit, so I assume (intelligent) people will read context and know I'm talking about interior design and fashion, which today are coded as "gay interests" for men. Not painting or architecture, which carry no such stigma.
IMO, it's absolutely true that American Protestants were uniquely against certain forms of ornamentation, including fashion. For instance, the Quakers deliberately shunned adornment and extravagance in dress, stressing the importance of simplicity.
In his book "The Suit," Christopher Breward writes about how Quakers would talk about "troubling lapses into self-fashionableness by wayward members" during meetings. However, the Quakers were small in number and often seen as unusual by their fellow non-Quaker community members
I believe this jacket is from Dobell, a company that produces their tailoring in Turkey. I'll show you some telltale signs of quality and where you can buy a tailored jacket made in Britain. 🧵
I don't think there's anything wrong with buying clothes made abroad (I believe in free trade). However, I think it's strange when people rail against "globalism" and free trade, while benefitting from these things. Talk is cheap; one should put their money where their mouth is.
I asked Lee where he bought his jacket, but have thus far received no word. However, we can guess whether this is a high-end or low-end garment from two things.
I disagree that this is an aesthetically pleasing photo. Tristan's outfit ruins it and I'll tell you why. 🧵
I'll assume Tristan is telling the truth when he says he used Photoshop and not AI. If so, this is a very impressive Photoshop job. By removing the scaffold tarp, you reveal more of the building. By removing the other cars, you also achieve more aesthetic coherence.
What is aesthetic coherence? It's the idea that things based on shared history or spirit go together. For instance, I've long said that the Cybertruck could look very cool if you wore certain outfits (futuristic techwear) and lived in a Brutalist home.
Some people are incredulous that you can wear certain shoes without socks, such as leather loafers. Much depends on your body and climate. But I'll tell you one reason why you find this difficult to believe: you buy low quality footwear. 🧵
It's absolutely possible to wear certain shoes without socks. As mentioned in an earlier thread, men have been doing this for over a hundred years. Going sockless makes sense if the outfit is semi-casual (not business clothes).
In fact, if you wear socks with certain footwear styles, such as espadrilles, you will look like you don't know what you're doing.