I get this sort of comment a lot and it seems to stem from the presupposition that fashion images should be dominated by white men, and any deviation from this is some sort of woke DEI project. 🧵
With rare exceptions, I've never considered someone's ethnicity when posting a photo of a good or bad outfit. One exception that comes to mind is when I was critiquing Steve Harvey's suggestion that you can wear suit jackets as sport coats.
Some suggested that this is Black culture. IMO, it's more of a generational divide, so I took the opportunity to highlight two Black men I think are exceptionally stylish and know the difference between suit jackets and sport coats.
It's not surprising to me that, if you base it purely on merit, you will wind up with a lot of photos of well-dressed men who are not white. Even if we're just talking about tailoring. First, the majority of the world is non-white. Second, Asia has a great fashion scene.
For instance, Japan still has a lot of great independent print media, most of which is orientated towards hobbyists. For menswear, there's Popeye, 2nd, Go Out, Leon, Men’s Ex, Men’s Club, and many more. Here's one magazine dedicated to just classic shoes!
Here's some photos from Men's Ex (very dangerous title, as one misplaced space and the meaning totally changes). This shows how a suit should fit. Does it look familiar? That's because it's very similar to the info I tweet here. Again, very orientated towards hobbyists.
Here's one of my favorite publications, albeit now defunct. Free & Easy covered classic tailoring, Americana, and workwear. They really dug into the details. One spread got into like the tiny ways different military fatigues fit. Very nerdy stuff.
American fashion media is different. It's relatively more focused on celebrities. Often, over half of each print publication is not even about clothes, but things like sports, movies, or music. Lots of lifestyle stuff. These Japanese magazines are only about menswear.
Along with better education, you also have a different market environment. One of my shoemakers is a Philadelphia transplant who now works as a bespoke shoemaker in Tokyo. He tells me that he's able to make bespoke shoes in Tokyo bc cost of living is lower than in NYC or San Fran
Since Tokyo has walkable neighborhoods and low rent, he can afford to pursue his dream as a shoemaker. He doesn't need to sell hundreds of shoes per year to do this; he only needs to sell maybe a couple of dozen. Affordable rent is a big part of this equation!
Japan has an incredibly rich fashion scene with many different aesthetics. And through geographical proximity, you see some Japanese influence in nearby countries such as China, South Korea, and Thailand.
For example, here's MotivMfg, an independent design and production studio in Beijing that takes ideas from traditional menswear (often workwear) and reimagines them as futuristic pieces.
Here's Rosen-X, which is designed by @the_rosenrot. The company is based in Shanghai and does what I would roughly describe as "futuristic unisex fashion." Gracia runs a blog (The Rosenrot) about avant-garde fashion, so you see many of these ideas in her designs.
The same can be said of any number of countries or traditions. There are a lot of US brands right now using Indian workshops, which are full of craft skills such as hand block printing. Stoffa, Kardo, Karu Research, and Harago among them.
In the US, even the most traditional aesthetic, such as what you'll find at Brooks Brothers or Ralph Lauren, was shaped by ethnic minorities. Traditional American style was formed by Jewish tailors and made cool by Black jazz musicians.
It's not surprising to me that many Black men wear tailoring well because tailoring is still part of the Black church. And if you're serious about craft, you'll learn of Black tailors such as Andrew Ramroop and Oswald Boateng on Savile Row.
I realize the OP is an explicitly racist account. But I am responding bc I often get this sort of comment (e.g., "why do you post so many photos of Asian people" or "you think you're slick by posting photos of Black men.")
IMO, if this looks strange to you, I think you should consider that there was once a DEI policy in the other direction (sometimes explicitly stated, such as the case of Abercrombie and Fitch, and sometimes implicit bias).
Despite there being a more diverse set of stylish people (such as what Robert Frank captured in his book The Americans; pic 1), a lot of fashion content centered on a very specific group (often WASP; pic 2).
In any case, with rare exceptions, I never consider someone's ethnicity when posting photos. You are simply too easily triggered. When I suggest how men can dress better, a section of Twitter replies with "I don't want to look gay." Only so much I can do. 🤷♂️
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is incorrect and shows how little the average person knows about garment manufacturing. 🧵
First, some context. This person imagines that Bad Clothing is made in low-cost countries like China and Mexico; Good Clothing is made in the US. So by putting up tariffs, we simply eliminate "cheap treats and slop."
Cheap t-shirts are already available in the US, they say.
My guess is that this person Googled "made in USA t-shirt" and screenshot the result. "Look how easy!"
But behind these country-of-origin tags, common mislabeling, and internet environment full of misinformation, there's a much more complex story.
The question is in response to a tweet where I said I think Chris Evans would look better in a larger and longer overcoat. This person is wondering whether a larger overcoat would work for their shorter frame. Good question!
When you are looking at clothes online, I encourage you to try to identify what exactly you like or dislike about an outfit. If we are talking about the silhouette, then identify the shape(s). I like long overcoats bc they create very long vertical lines. Shape is rectangular.
IMO, most men shouldn't pair a sport coat with jeans because they probably don't have an eye for it. However, the good news is that it's pretty easy to develop this eye. 🧵
First, which of these two outfits look better to you? Would you say that one is bad? And another is good? Or would you say they're both the same?
Please decide before reading on.
If you think the outfit on the right is good and left is bad, then we have the same aesthetics. In this case, we've at least established that it's possible to wear a sport coat with jeans. The question is figuring out which principles allow for more successful combinations.
In 1942, at the height of the Second World War, Alfred Eisenstaedt photographed sweethearts bidding each other farewell before the men depart for war, not knowin if the'd ever return.
Look at their clothes. 🧵
We can safely assume that most of these people were of average socio-economic class. So, not extravagantly rich. Yet, look at these details.
This woman's overcoat has flapped envelope pockets, a ticket pocket, and four rows of stitching at the hem.
Today, you'll find envelope pockets on high-end men's outerwear, such as polo coats. The four rows of stitching (sometimes done as five) is something that's put onto country outerwear to reinforce areas that might get pulled by bramble or brush. Such detail takes effort to make.
What is meant by traditional or conservative? What is meant by postmodern? To have a meaningful discussion of this, we must first go back, once again, to the turn of the 20th century.
In her book The Lost Art of Dress, Linda Przybyszewski writes about the army of women she calls the Dress Doctors, who helped everyday Americans learn how to dress better. This was revolutionary at the time bc some still believed good taste was exclusive to the upper classes.
Very fair critique. I shouldn't be comparing the dress of different social classes. I should also note that I don't actually think the suit's rise is purely about British imperialism (that's too simple), but rather forces later described as liberalism. 🧵
The elaborate dress you see on monarchs in portraits was a talisman for power. The point was to create an otherworldly image and convey a powerful, imposing presence, which helped legitimize both their role on the throne and the institution of monarchy itself.
But as you enter the 1600s, you see more people across England oppose absolute monarchy. Instead, they support constitutional monarchism, parliamentary government, and Protestantism. The royals were increasingly seen as clumsy, corrupt, and vice-loving.