To add to this thread:


Vintage fashions fit for the stars


"I always had an eye for fashion, I guess," says Chris Duval, a self-described "fashion archaeologist" and owner of Circa, a vintage clothing store in New Bedford. (Jonathan Wiggs/Globe Staff)

By Paul E. Kandarian
Globe Correspondent / July 17, 2008

NEW BEDFORD - You may not notice Hilary Duff's Girl Scout vest, complete with merit badges, in the upcoming film "Greta." Ditto for Sir Ben Kingsley's vintage '50s duds in "Ashecliffe" the thriller based on Dorchester native Dennis Lehane's book, "Shutter Island."

Related
Photos Dressed like a star

But Chris Duval will. That'll be his stuff on the screen, bigger than life and hailing from his vintage clothing store, Circa, tucked into the New Bedford waterfront. Duval, 50, has run the store for 22 years, coming off part-time careers as a pro bicycle racer and a warehouse worker for UPS. Now, with Hollywood types suddenly scouring the area for all kinds of costumes and garb, Circa has quietly become one of the go-to places to outfit the stars.

"I always had an eye for fashion, I guess," shrugs the soft-spoken, wiry Duval, who studied textiles in college. "I'd gone into a vintage store in the early '80s, picked up a grungy pair of men's horned-rim glasses, fixed them up, and said, 'Hey, I can resurrect stuff like this.' "

One New Year's Eve, Duval's then-girlfriend urged him to make a resolution to open a store and call it Circa, thus becoming, as he laughingly calls it, a "fashion archaeologist." The store is a treasure trove of fashion - then, now, and yet-to-be. New York designers routinely snag items from his store to base new designs on, proving once again that what goes around comes around.

"Work clothes like this are big now," Duval said, holding up a pair of patched, grubby work jeans from the 1930s. "These are real character clothes."

In one corner are wall-to-ceiling round hat boxes of yore - Stetson, Melton, Parrot Hatters. On one rack hangs a Sgt. Pepper jacket; on another, '60s minis that cover very little and granny dresses that cover quite a lot.

There is the dashing: men's fedoras, bowlers, the occasional top hat. And the ugly: Will anyone ever take that hideous pale-blue leisure suit? Chances are someone will, or it wouldn't be here.

His business is a more-or-less even split between rentals and purchases. Many customers are local theater groups and museums that rent outfits for shows and events. Valerie Leclasse of Acushnet was looking to rent "Hairspray"-style clothing for a mother-and-daughter act she and her daughter were planning to do in a local show.

"This is perfect, just what I need," she said, holding up a very floral, very tacky, and very "Hairspray"-esque dress. "Chris always has what I need, I follow him around."

Circa was located for many years in downtown Fairhaven, moving to Coggeshall Street in New Bedford before relocating to Circa's current digs on Cove Street about six months ago. It's located in a distant back corner of New England Demolition and Salvage, a cavernous, 80,000-square-foot space full of items that also draw movie people.

"That's why I wanted to be here," Duval said. "It's a good match, the salvage store and I are the ultimate recyclers. Movie people come to see his stuff and come across my store."

Lisa Padovani, assistant costume designer for "Ashecliffe," was referred to Duval by a set director who'd sought period furniture at New England Demolition and Salvage and stumbled upon Circa.

"I found what I needed there, some hats and coats for Ben Kingsley," Padovani said. "We needed very specific clothing from 1954, and he had it."

It was her first trip to Duval's store, but likely not her last.

"I keep vendors on a list to call, and if I need something specific, I tell them to keep an eye out when they're out shopping for inventory," Padovani said.

When he's not working with movie types (set designers from Richard Gere's new movie, "Hachiko: A Dog's Story," filming in Rhode Island, came in for period clothing, Will Ferrell's costume people bought a Marlboro Man-style jacket for "SemiPro," and Leo, as in DiCaprio, had a jacket bought for him for "Ashecliffe"), Duval does a brisk wholesale business selling to retailers as far away as Japan. He stocks up at estate sales and sometimes from old-timers looking to get rid of pieces that are still in top condition. They're often steeped with memories.

"That's what I love the most, talking to elderly people who have such great stories of their clothing," Duval says. He recently sifted through 1,000 dresses in Milton to find some choice items. "I was at a house recently in New Bedford where they had clothes that belonged to the first Cape Verdean lawyer in the country. Amazing stories.

"The stuff is timeless," Duval says, as delighted with the clothing he finds as he is sharing it with the public. "Clothing from 40, 50 years ago is still relevant today. You can wear it with anything. It's classic."

Circa, 73 Cove St., New Bedford, MA, 508-997-9390, myspace.com/circavintagewear. Open Thursday-Saturday, 11 a.m.-5 p.m. and Sunday noon-4 p.m.
.............................

Check out the photo gallery at the URL above!

You seem like a good guy.  Don't let the bastards grind you down.

Some of the clothes do not seem to fit you, especially in length. A little tailoring is in order.  

Bow ties make a guy look like he is an annoyance.  Avoid.

I wear a fedora every Saturday, does that make me retro?

I saw a teenage fat girl wearing a Fedora at the grocery store last week and she looked like a fucking idiot.

Quoted: That is the single piece of clothing from our history that I most hope will make a comback.

a big +1

Quoted: You seem like a good guy.  Don't let the bastards grind you down. Some of the clothes do not seem to fit you, especially in length. A little tailoring is in order.   Bow ties make a guy look like he is an annoyance.  Avoid.

Thank you, I don't.  

By modern standards the things I wear are often a bit short.  But that was the style back then, especially the late-1920s to mid-1930s.  Today the rule of thumb is literally a rule of the thumb: the bottoms of suit jackets should come down to the tip of your thumb.  Of course this was different back then.  As long as the jacket skirt covered your rear, you were good.  I go by this second rule.  Actually, the short look is coming back into fashion again.  Look at Thom Browne's hideous stuff and you'll see what I mean.
Though, like you said, some things don't usually fit perfectly.  Vintage clothing that fit me really well is difficult to find.

I dig the bow tie.  

Quoted: To add to this thread: Vintage fashions fit for the stars ...

Thanks for that article.  Looks like an awesome place to visit.

I envy that job.  I've actually started to sell some vintage things on a small scale.  Mainly just hats and suits that don't fit me.  I hope to grow it into a business.
It's always nice to pass quality things along to others who appreciate it.  A piece sitting unused in the closet is a waste.  




Today:




mrlapel.blogspot.com/

I just found this GQ slideshow about leather jackets.  It pretty much tells us that we should stay away from classic jackets and go with something more modern (short, tight, thin, etc.)

men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_7212




Reminds me of the 'Emporer's New Clothes'.  In a few years all those poor modern jackets will be tossed as the fashion changes.  Meanwhile, the A-2 and other classic leather jackets have survived over 60 years.

I have a Stetson very much like the on in the left front in that first pic. Bought it at an estate sale for $2.

These guys can do just about any style you can think of but they ain't cheap.
www.texashatters.com/products.php?id=4


I have an American hat company western hat that was my granddad's. He had it custom made at the factory and it fits me like it was made for me. It's 50+ years old though. Anyone know of a place that can put a new sweatband on it? Needless to say the origional leather one is just about gone.

Quoted: I have a Stetson very much like the on in the left front in that first pic. Bought it at an estate sale for $2. These guys can do just about any style you can think of but they ain't cheap. www.texashatters.com/products.php?id=4 I have an American hat company western hat that was my granddad's. He had it custom made at the factory and it fits me like it was made for me. It's 50+ years old though. Anyone know of a place that can put a new sweatband on it? Needless to say the origional leather one is just about gone.

Your hat is an 'Open Road', I would suspect.  Fine hats, they are.  A steal for $2.

Texas Hatters could probably put on a new sweatband for you.  Expensive, as you said, but probably well worth it since the hat has some history to it.  

You might also try:
www.vintagesilhouettes.com/
www.optimohats.com/
Also, Gus Miller in Cincinnati, though he doesn't seem to have a website.

Locally, pretty much any hat shop that cleans, makes and sells hats can do it for you.  Also try western hat shops.

Fashion strikes again!  Oh gosh, it's horrible.  Nuke it from orbit!


Even the models look embarrassed.


Shorts Crack the Code
By GUY TREBAY
Published: July 31, 2008


FIRST came Casual Fridays, that dread episode in the history of fashion, with their invitation for men to trade in suits for Dockers and to swap a proper shirt and tie for an open neck and a daring flash of masculine décolletage.

Then the bare ankle migrated from country-club Saturdays to meeting-room Mondays and suddenly men, whether shod in wingtips or loafers, were widely seen without socks. Now it appears that, after some stops and starts in recent seasons, the men of the white collar work force are marching into the office in shorts.

It was no more than a moment ago, in the sartorial long view, that a guy who came to work wearing short pants would have been shown the door — or anyway, given the address for human resources at U.P.S. All that appears to be changing.

Consider that an advertising agency in Salt Lake City this summer introduced a no-long-trousers policy. Consider the octogenarian New York lawyer who ditched his seersucker suit for jaunty camouflage shorts on the job. Consider the pack of stylish young men on the streets of Manhattan who find it not only sensible, in thermometer terms, to beat the heat by wearing shorts but also, in style terms, cool.

“We try to have a little bit of fun around here on a regular basis,” said Dave Newbold, the president of Richter7, the Salt Lake City ad agency in question, whose clients include Medtronic and the Chamber of Commerce of Park City, Utah, where wearing long pants outside of ski season is practically a violation of the law.

When the hockey star Sean Avery took an internship at Vogue earlier this summer, the work uniform that the fashion-besotted left wing chose included a shorts suit that showcased his athletic calves.

“Why go to work and be hot?” he asked last week, adding that there was no compelling business reason to look modest and dull on the job. “You can look good and not have that boring-type look,” said Mr. Avery, who signed with the Dallas Stars this summer after several seasons with the Rangers. “Why are women allowed to do it and not men?”

The willingness of men to expand the amount of skin they are inclined to display can be gauged by the short-sleeved shirts Senator Barack Obama has lately favored; the muscle T-shirts Anderson Cooper wears on CNN assignment; and the Armani billboard in which David Beckham, the soccer star, appears nearly nude.

Not a few designers are pushing men to expose more of the bodies that they have spent so much time perfecting at the gym. “We have all these self-imposed restrictions” about our dress, said Ben Clawson, the sales director for the designer Michael Bastian. “As men’s wear continues to evolve and becomes a little more casual without becoming grungy, it’s not impossible anymore to be dressed up in shorts.”

While Mr. Bastian is a designer of what essentially amounts to updates on preppy classics, even he has pushed for greater latitude in exposing men’s bodies to view.

“Michael is a big fan of the third button,” said Mr. Clawson, referring to the neckline plunge that has somehow evolved beyond its cheesier Tom Ford (by way of Tom Jones) associations. “For women, legs are a sex symbol, where for men legs are more private.”

Yet for Mr. Avery, a man in a shorts suit is no more startling than a woman in a miniskirt. “Women have the option of wearing a dress,” he said with the assurance of someone who can hip-check those who fail to share his opinion.

“I haven’t asked them, but I’m sure women like looking at a man’s calves, or if a man has them, nice ankles,” Mr. Avery said.

That may be. Yet none of the New York City banks, law firms, stock brokerages or hospitals contacted by a reporter last week considered shorts an acceptable part of a work uniform, and for reasons that varied from the need to preserve institutional decorum to hygiene (imagine a hairy leg in an O.R.)

Still, it is probably worth remembering that there was a time when politicians were seldom seen, even out of the office, without their decorous suit coats, and never in short pants (Nixon famously wore shoes on the beach). And it was only a short while ago that news anchors who ventured out on combat assignment did so in more protective khaki than a Victorian ornithologist braving the wilds of Borneo.

Is Mr. Cooper more or less serious because he chooses to showcase the pneumatic biceps so obviously a part of his appeal? Are the folks behind Calvin Klein yet again on to some cultural shift with the underwear campaign that made its debut this week, featuring the model Garrett Neff bunching his unworn skivvies in front of his crotch?

“The idea of being threatened by the objectified male body has gone, the process is complete,” explained Aaron Hicklin, the editor in chief of Out magazine. “Men are the same as women now.”

Perhaps it is simpler than that. A relaxed approach to sexual display played a role in the policy at Richter7, the Salt Lake City agency, but so did a long stretch of days when temperatures routinely closed in on 100 degrees. “It’s so hot here in mid-July and August that we wanted to combine the two issues” of comfort and fashion, Mr. Newbold said. For client meetings, he pointed out, account executives are expected to “dress to the level of presentation that looks credible and respectable.”

A question arises, though, of what respectability looks like when underwear is routinely worn as outerwear and people travel in get-ups that look like onesies and the combined effects of a cosmetic surgery boom and an epidemic of obesity have given us all an uncommon level of intimacy with the contours of one another’s bodies.

Fifteen years ago, when Hyman Gross, a real estate lawyer in Manhattan, proposed wearing shorts in summer, his boss responded that the firm was not a beach club.

“It’s a pretty strait-laced office, and I quickly retreated from that position,” said Mr. Gross, who is in his ninth decade. Last year, though, looking at office workers of both sexes disporting themselves seminaked on the streets of the city, he concluded it was time for shorts. “It seems so strange on an over-90-degree day to subject yourself to sartorial rigidity,” he said.

And so there was Mr. Gross taking a break at Bryant Park, nattily attired in a black polo shirt from Target, a pair of sandy-colored camouflage shorts he bought in a shop in a subway arcade and a Panama topper from Arnold Hatters.

“I travel to and fro in shorts,” said Mr. Gross, who also wears his short pants to the ballet and the opera. “No one has ever spoken to me about it. And if anyone decides they don’t like it or they won’t take me, it’s their loss.”

Increasingly, said Andrew Bolton of the Costume Institute at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the “zones in which this kind of exposure is accepted are permeable.”

Seminudity, of the sort proposed by Miuccia Prada or Dsquared in the recent men’s collections, holds little appeal for someone like Kwesi Blair, a branding adviser whose shorts and blazer look became a wardrobe default during a recent sweltering spell.

Wearing a shorts suit, Mr. Blair explained, is not only more comfortable than the alternative, but a way to road test your own self-invention.

“I get a lot of looks and remarks,” said Mr. Blair, whose wardrobe runs to conservative labels — a Polo blazer, shirt and tie, a pair of J. Crew shorts. “On the street, people are like, ‘That’s a bold move.’ But, honestly, I’m just tapping into my own sense of style and sensibility and putting it out there. It’s not like I’m looking for acceptance.”

www.nytimes.com/2008/07/31/fashion/31shorts.html?ex=1375243200&en=43254ddc642b1ac8&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink



Of course, this new fad is anything new.  Check out these Apparel Arts illustrations from the 1930s:




Though, the shorts-wearing men in these pictures are at the beach rather than the business meeting.  That is the difference.  Men should know what to wear when.  The modern men look like little kids on a play date; the vintage men are refined even while relaxing.

Shorts at the beach: perfectly fine
Shorts at the meeting: style suicide

Lately, fashion has been feminizing the male.  Sad but true.

Recently acquired 3 Sears, Roebucks catalogs from the WW2 period.  They are spring/summer 1943; fall/winter 1944-1945; fall/winter 1945-1946.


My scanner died so I had to use my camera.  Pardon the quality but you should be able to read most of the descriptions.

Spring/Summer 1943
Boys first:
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/003-6.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/004-4.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/005-3.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/006-5.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/007-4.jpg

Men's shoes:
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/001-6.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/002-6.jpg

Men's suits and trenchcoats:
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/008-5.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/009-4.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/010-4.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/011-4.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/012-4.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/013.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/014-2.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/015-2.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/016.jpg
i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/017-2.jpg

More to come.

-1970s jacket and vest
-1930s tie, a recent Goodwill find
-1950s boater
-modern linen trousers
-socks from the GAP
-modern Florsheim shoes










I also wore this for a short time today.  I got this jacket for free from a guy I know and am quite happy with it.  The color is awesome and the lapels have very nice hand stitching along the edge.  It's from the late-1940s.

this is a strange thread

Quoted: this is a strange thread

If by strange you mean awesome, then yes.  

Quoted: Quoted: You seem like a good guy.  Don't let the bastards grind you down. Some of the clothes do not seem to fit you, especially in length. A little tailoring is in order.   Bow ties make a guy look like he is an annoyance.  Avoid. Thank you, I don't.   By modern standards the things I wear are often a bit short.  But that was the style back then, especially the late-1920s to mid-1930s.  Today the rule of thumb is literally a rule of the thumb: the bottoms of suit jackets should come down to the tip of your thumb.  Of course this was different back then.  As long as the jacket skirt covered your rear, you were good.  I go by this second rule.  Actually, the short look is coming back into fashion again.  Look at Thom Browne's hideous stuff and you'll see what I mean. Though, like you said, some things don't usually fit perfectly.  Vintage clothing that fit me really well is difficult to find. I dig the bow tie.

Thom Browne stuff isnt hideous, just avant-garde,
Yes he plays with porportions a little too much some times, and his runway shows feature items of clothing that are unwearable in a practical sense, but the stuff that actually gets bought up by the buyers is really quite nice.

Quoted: Quoted: this is a strange thread If by strange you mean awesome, then yes.

Sure you didn't mean "fabulous" instead of "awesome"?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: this is a strange thread If by strange you mean awesome, then yes.   Sure you didn't mean "fabulous" instead of "awesome"?

Quoted: this is a strange thread

Not all of us wear wifebeaters and bellbottoms w/ a wallet on a belt chain, pal.

Quoted: Thom Browne stuff isnt hideous, just avant-garde, Yes he plays with porportions a little too much some times, and his runway shows feature items of clothing that are unwearable in a practical sense, but the stuff that actually gets bought up by the buyers is really quite nice.

His early stuff was alright, though I'd never be caught dead in it.

Done somewhat well:


Browne himself.  This is a nice look from the waist up.  Jacket seems super short but that's the style now.  Browne is very influenced by the 1960s.



The stuff below is horrible.  Of course, as you said, we must remember that most of this stuff will only be seen on the runway (thankfully) and is meant to be shocking, but still, horrible:

Even the zombies are getting into fashion.








Now this look is actually very classic collegiate, though, as you said, the proportions are messed with.  Lengthen the jacket, sleeves and trousers, make them (trousers) a little fuller and you got a very stylish and timeless look.



Of course, some of the bad stuff does trickle down into the mainstream:


Frankly, if Thom Browne's sense of aesthetics is right, I want to be wrong.

This is a great thread. But is starting to lean to the ghey side. Good to see one taking pride in his appearence.

Quoted: Quoted: Thom Browne stuff isnt hideous, just avant-garde, Yes he plays with porportions a little too much some times, and his runway shows feature items of clothing that are unwearable in a practical sense, but the stuff that actually gets bought up by the buyers is really quite nice. His early stuff was alright, though I'd never be caught dead in it. Done somewhat well: i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/013-4.jpg Browne himself.  This is a nice look from the waist up.  Jacket seems super short but that's the style now.  Browne is very influenced by the 1960s. i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/011-5.jpg The stuff below is horrible.  Of course, as you said, we must remember that most of this stuff will only be seen on the runway (thankfully) and is meant to be shocking, but still, horrible: Even the zombies are getting into fashion. i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/001-7.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/002-7.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/006-6.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/007-5.jpg Now this look is actually very classic collegiate, though, as you said, the proportions are messed with.  Lengthen the jacket, sleeves and trousers, make them (trousers) a little fuller and you got a very stylish and timeless look. i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/004-5.jpg Of course, some of the bad stuff does trickle down into the mainstream: i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/015-3.jpg Frankly, if Thom Browne's sense of aesthetics is right, I want to be wrong.

    I do agree with you that his run way shows are rather rediculous. The clothes are completely unwearable, and as you said, are intended to be shocking. His runway shows dont reflect his retail line at all, especially his trademark cropped suits. Yes his runway and retail both feature plays with porportions, but the show is intended to be just that, a show, especially his F/W 08, which was a circus theme.

  His suits though, are amazing, if you appreciate his aesthetic. I happen to very much enjoy his youthful play on suiting. Its a nod to the classics while still maintaing a "fashion forward" outlook. I understand that with your personal style, his stuff doesnt work.

You might enjoy his Black Fleece Collection for Brooks Brothers, which is a toned down Thom-light for the retail market.

Black Fleece

rappers have tried with little success

Quoted: I make a motion we stay with the vintage motiff and can the Gay crap! btw....I wore a 40's swing tie to Church today. along with my new goatee. SMOKIN'

Seconded.

Pics, man, we must have pics!


At the range today after church:


It was over 90 with high humidity and I had a flaming hot barrel. Burned my hand before putting the gloves on.  
I have a rather classic 'adventurer' look going on with my vintage Portis fedora, Wal-Mart khaki shirt and khaki shorts.  And, of course, the vintage Garand.

Quoted:     I do agree with you that his run way shows are rather rediculous. The clothes are completely unwearable, and as you said, are intended to be shocking. His runway shows dont reflect his retail line at all, especially his trademark cropped suits. Yes his runway and retail both feature plays with porportions, but the show is intended to be just that, a show, especially his F/W 08, which was a circus theme.   His suits though, are amazing, if you appreciate his aesthetic. I happen to very much enjoy his youthful play on suiting. Its a nod to the classics while still maintaing a "fashion forward" outlook. I understand that with your personal style, his stuff doesnt work. You might enjoy his Black Fleece Collection for Brooks Brothers, which is a toned down Thom-light for the retail market. Black Fleece

Yes, I do enjoy browsing his Black Fleece collection though, as I said before, I wouldn't be caught dead in a lot of his stuff.  I would like to get some seperate pieces that are rather nice.  It's good to see some old-fashioned looking stuff like the Edwardian style frock coat and suits.  
I'd also like to see more of his interpretation of fedoras and such.  Might be an interesting fashion indeed.

Cheers

Quoted: (snip) The stuff below is horrible.  Of course, as you said, we must remember that most of this stuff will only be seen on the runway (thankfully) and is meant to be shocking, but still, horrible: Even the zombies are getting into fashion. i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/001-7.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/002-7.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/006-6.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/007-5.jpg Now this look is actually very classic collegiate, though, as you said, the proportions are messed with.  Lengthen the jacket, sleeves and trousers, make them (trousers) a little fuller and you got a very stylish and timeless look. i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/004-5.jpg Of course, some of the bad stuff does trickle down into the mainstream: i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/015-3.jpg Frankly, if Thom Browne's sense of aesthetics is right, I want to be wrong.

Ehhhh...this stuff is gayonic. If this is the future of menswear, I think I'll be hunting around old clothes shops looking for classic REAL mens' clothes, too. Sheesh!

I would like to find some clothing like what Mal wore in Firefly.

Quoted: Quoted: (snip) The stuff below is horrible.  Of course, as you said, we must remember that most of this stuff will only be seen on the runway (thankfully) and is meant to be shocking, but still, horrible: Even the zombies are getting into fashion. i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/001-7.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/002-7.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/006-6.jpg i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/007-5.jpg Now this look is actually very classic collegiate, though, as you said, the proportions are messed with.  Lengthen the jacket, sleeves and trousers, make them (trousers) a little fuller and you got a very stylish and timeless look. i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/004-5.jpg Of course, some of the bad stuff does trickle down into the mainstream: i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/015-3.jpg Frankly, if Thom Browne's sense of aesthetics is right, I want to be wrong. Ehhhh...this stuff is gayonic. If this is the future of menswear, I think I'll be hunting around old clothes shops looking for classic REAL mens' clothes, too. Sheesh!

Indeed.  The feminization of the male side of the species.  It seems most designers would prefer to take inspiration from the golden age of clothing (1930s-1960s) and twist it into the ugly, shocking and tasteless instead of creating another golden age by sticking to the basics.  
But only the shocking and tasteless sell today.

Another Goodwill find from today.  What a crazy '40s tie!  

The colors are much more vibrant than the pic shows.

Quoted: This thread is branching out into more than just hats and I think that's a good thing. Okay, here are some pictures from old advertisements dating from the early to late 1930s.  Note that in some that some things are exaggerated, such as the pinched waist and wide trouser legs (specifically on #762).   i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/AA004.jpg Note that all of the trousers have no taper but are wide at the leg cuff.  This was a normal feature of 1930s-1940s trousers, even into the 1950s.  Also notice every pair of trousers have cuffs at the bottom of the leg, usually around 1 1/2"-2" wide.

#762 may not be an exaggeration.  We have a picture of my European grandfather (quite good looking, and apparently a ladies' man) standing with two of his buddies.  There is no doubt his trouser's pant legs are big - maybe somewhat wider than than even those of #762.  I'm going to go out on a limb, here, and suggest that it was a valid style for the young, single guys who had the balls to wear something stylish, and wanted the different look to attract the ladies.  

I remember thinking, upon seeing the picture of my grandfather, that the big-pants fad that was around a few years ago really wasn't the first time it had happened.  

My grandfather's trousers were darker.  I would guess the pictures was from the late 1930's or very early 1940's.

Quoted: Quoted: This thread is branching out into more than just hats and I think that's a good thing. Okay, here are some pictures from old advertisements dating from the early to late 1930s.  Note that in some that some things are exaggerated, such as the pinched waist and wide trouser legs (specifically on #762).   i23.photobucket.com/albums/b367/thunderw21/AA004.jpg Note that all of the trousers have no taper but are wide at the leg cuff.  This was a normal feature of 1930s-1940s trousers, even into the 1950s.  Also notice every pair of trousers have cuffs at the bottom of the leg, usually around 1 1/2"-2" wide.   #762 may not be an exaggeration.  We have a picture of my European grandfather (quite good looking, and apparently a ladies' man) standing with two of his buddies.  There is no doubt his trouser's pant legs are big - maybe somewhat wider than than even those of #762.  I'm going to go out on a limb, here, and suggest that it was a valid style for the young, single guys who had the balls to wear something stylish, and wanted the different look to attract the ladies.   I remember thinking, upon seeing the picture of my grandfather, that the big-pants fad that was around a few years ago really wasn't the first time it had happened.   My grandfather's trousers were darker.  I would guess the pictures was from the late 1930's or very early 1940's.

You're right about that, the wide trouser legs were a big style among the young men looking for a lady, especially in Europe.  
'Oxford Bags' are what these trousers are called.  The Europeans often went to outrageous extremes (in particular the French) with these bags while the Americans kept it on the low down.  To most people back in the day they were much hated, just like extremely baggy and saggy jeans are hated today.  

I wouldn't be surprised if your grandfather did wear huge trousers like this, it was somewhat common over there.
Could you post the pic on here?


I recently did some research about these types of trousers and found some excellent pictures and illustrations.

Catalog ad from 1942:





And, like I said, Europe took this style to the extreme, especially the French.

This Frenchman seems to be swimming in his:


What's the point of Oxford Bags if you don't need two women to hold them up?

Bought this 2-piece tweed suit yesterday.  It has a '39 union tag, indicating it was probably made in the early to mid-1940s.  
It fits very well, though I had to take down the cuffs on the trousers and the arms need to be taken down a tad as well.  Otherwise it's a perfect fit.
A real beauty.  40R, 32x32 trousers with the cuffs let down.

It's hard to see any detail in this picture because of the tweed.




The tweed or, as my roomate calls it, "barf fabric".

I thought I'd show you another piece I picked up at the same place as the above suit.

It has a '36 union tag, dating it between 1936 and 1939 since '39 is the year a new union tag came out, and is my first vintage belted back.  The fit of this thing is amazing, even the arms are long enough for me!  :eek:  I paid $26.

At first before I really examined it I thought it was a 1970s jacket, though they don't have such angled chest pockets or pleated backs.  The fabric is great.  It's solid dark blue but there is a woven glen plaid pattern to it.  I think I captured it well in a couple pictures.  

*Late-1930s belted back jacket
*Modern 'fitted' Van Heusen shirt
*1930s tie
*Modern trousers
*Modern Bostonian spectators
*Modern Stetson Open Road panama
*Marigold

About a month ago I sent this beautiful early to mid-1940s suit to a fellow I know in England:



Look at that amazing fabric pattern:


Unfortunately it was just a bit too small for me but my friend thought it would fit him well.  It does.  So, I sent him that suit and he sent me this one:





It's a mid-1940s dark gray flannel double breasted suit and it fits almost perfectly, though the arms need to be taken down a tad.  Vintage flannel suits are hard to come by so this is a real treat.
I date it from the mid-1940s because it has a 1939 union tag (placing it between 1939 and 1949, when a new version union tag came out) as well as so called "Gripper Snaps" on the trousers.



These Gripper Snaps were only seen in the mid-1940s and are excellent for dating suits.  Also, zippers first started being used on trousers in the mid- to late-1930s so that helped date it as well, though the Grippers were more important.

I can't wait for Fall.  

Hey folkses.

Remember that "Esquire Best Dressed Man in American" contest I entered several months ago?

Well....
I didn't win.  
But another vintage afficionado and friend did (also a member of the Fedora Lounge, a site I've highly praised in the past).  He is now one of five finalists shown below.

Hmm, which one is he?  



The winner will be picked from these five sometime this month on NBC's Today show, so keep an eye open.

Here's the link to Esquire, be sure to look through the photo slideshow:
www.esquire.com/style/best-dressed-real-men-0908

Cheers!

Picked up this U.S. Navy uniform for a song.

Jacket is in good condition, has an anchor patch.  Don't really know if the patch is Navy issue or just added afterwards (guessing it's not issue).  What do you think, keep it or cut it?
Also seems the buttons were replace at on point with some cheap smooth ones.  I'll replace them somewhere down the road.
It's fully lined, fabric is gabardine.  Nice lazy peaked lapels.  Need to take the arms down (how I hate that).

The trousers have a hole in one leg and a fade line where it's been hanging on a wire hanger forever, so they aren't wearable.  But the jacket will look nice with some khaki trousers.

I don't know the date for sure but I place it around the late-1930s through the late-1940s.



Lazy apels:




Very high-waisted trousers:

Here's the U.S. Navy Patch from the above uniform:


And each button has one of these behind it.  They say 'Dyno' on them, very much in 1930s/early 1940s style:  
It would seem that the buttons are removable, much like the WW2 U.S. officer's summer tunic.

Quoted: The trousers have a hole in one leg and a fade line where it's been hanging on a wire hanger forever, so they aren't wearable.

I take this back, they are wearable.

After a good brushing the 'fading' just turned out to be dust that easily came out.  I also stitched up the hole.  It's not perfect but it's a lot less noticable.




Ok, today I wore the jacket with some white trousers to get that nautical look going.  Though the sleeves are a tad short I wore cuff links to it's fine if they're short.


Ready for a day on the yacht.  



I wore these old military button cuff links since the jacket is ex-military.

September 23, 1944.





On September 23, 1944, 'Operation Market Garden' had failed and was coming to an end.

This is a cool jacket and I had to share it.

This came from Goodwill for $6.  It's a modern western-style short jacket originally from the GAP.  I get good vintage vibes from it and think of it as my rough-and-tumble 'swashbuckling sky pirate' jacket.  Very thick and heavy suede leather.  Nice silhouette too.





Who else can't wait for cooler weather?  

Well, I'll give you credit. You are tenacious. Keeping this going takes commitment. I would never put the work into clothing you do but I appreciate hard work. Now, find some stuff at those prices in 48 XL and send it this way!

Quoted: Well, I'll give you credit. You are tenacious. Keeping this going takes commitment. I would never put the work into clothing you do but I appreciate hard work.

I'm a bit stubborn.     When it's something I think is important I'll work to keep it up.  5 years ago I never would have thought I'd be this 'nuts' about clothing, but here we are.  Just part of my fascination with the era.  And the ladies truly do love a man who not only can dress well, but has the manners and personality to go along with his apparel.

Now, find some stuff at those prices in 48 XL and send it this way!

Will do.  

New post on my blog: mrlapel.blogspot.com

The Bold Look "Richard Diamond," a 1940s radio series, describes the Bold Look: ...DIAMOND: Hello there, this is Diamond. If you happen to wake up some morning and spot something walking in front of your house and it looks like Santa Claus with jaundice, don't turn the hose on him, he's not on fire. He's just wearing the newest thing in men's fashions. They call it the Bold Look, and it's supposed to be the masculine answer to Dior's New Look for women. It's an answer, all right. Like walking up to your best girlfriend and slicing her down the middle with a broadsword. Now, if you haven't see it yet, just close your eyes and try and picture yourself in the Bold Look. Imagine, walking down 5th Avenue, very casual, decked out in a new bright purple non-shrinking suit, pastel shirt, yellow maybe, hand-painted tie, and argyle socks.Got it? What do you think? Pretty bad. About the only thing I can think of that's more gruesome is that little murder I got mixed up in last week... Richard Diamond, Private Detective "Mrs. William Baker, Klepto" Aired September3, 1949 The "Bold Look". What was this, according to 'Diamond', gruesome spectacle? Quite simply, it was a new fashion in men's clothing beginning in the early to mid-1940s before being recognized as the dominant style in 1947 and 1948 by 'Apparel Arts' and 'Esquire', respectively. The Bold Look hailed lower button stance, lower gorge, wide ties with broad stripes and wild patterns as well as loose fitting suit jackets. The Bold Look is thought to have come about mainly because of a change from the well-fitted, wasp-silhouette-giving suits of the 1920s and 1930s to looser, baggier suits in the 1940s. It also didn't help that returning servicemen, after the Second World War, demanded a break from the tight military uniforms and flocked to the new Bold Look. Knowing this, one would have expected a similar movement to loose-fitting suits after the Great War. As it turns out, quite the opposite happened. Suit makers, as the Great War was coming to a close, wrongly thought that the returning Doughboys would demand tight, well-fitting suits just like the uniforms they had worn during the war. To the suit makers' horror and dismay the returning heros did not flock to the tight style. What a surprise! But suit makers of the Second World War era learned a valuable lesson from their earlier counterparts. Thus the Bold Look was born. Perhaps postwar men were also trying to seperate themselves from the prewar era by wearing a style very different from those styles of the past. From the April, 1948 issue of Esquire, page 79: "Notice something new about American men? Well-groomed American men, that is -- the kind you always notice? They have a new look. We call it the BOLD LOOK. You see it wherever you see Americans today. Walking down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington. Coming out of our embassy in Moscow. Sitting around a conference table on Long Island, Entering the court of St. James in London. Or crossing Main Street in Peoria. There’s a new look about them. It’s a self confident look and it’s as distinctive as it is distinguished. It’s a virile as football, as masculine as the Marine Corps -- as American as the Sunday comics. And new as it is, it’s as mature as the country itself, because it’s grown with the country. ...The newest styles that are appearing wherever the leaders of fashion gather exemplify the BOLD LOOK. Ties, shirts, socks: they’re designed with the accent on authority. They’re unrestrained; they use wide borders, big patterns, bold colors -- more colors. They have a look of definite good taste. Wear them, and you’ll have that look too. The new shirts for example, are made with the "Command collar." This is a wide-spread collar with bold stitching a half-inch in from the edge rather than the usual eighth of an inch. The same bold treatment is given to the center pleat and the stitching on the cuffs. This is the first new shirt fashion in years and it’s especially styled for wear with the Windsor tie. Neckties, in design and in color, are clear, sharp, bold. Checks are bigger, stripes are wider. Figures are bolder and more widely spaced. And the new polka dots are three-eighths of an inch in diameter. There’s a new hat too. It’s a snap-brim in a rich cinnamon brown with a black band and gunmetal grey binding. The binding is barely visible on the top of the brim, but very prominent on the underside; Seen from the side and the rear it’s a wide band of color. And there’s more definite design in socks. Ribbing is wider, clocks are broader. The BOLD LOOK in shoes is massive. And jewelry gives a man a chance to go to town with confidence. Tie clasps are wide slabs of gold. Cufflinks are larger and heavier to match. Heavy gold-link keychains follow the trend. ...Those are some of the characteristics of the new BOLD LOOK, a look of self-confidence, good taste. Like as not, you yourself have been approaching the Bold Look with the Windsor knot and the spread collar. Those were just the first signs though - these newest fashions take up where they left off." While I prefer the prewar look of well-fitted suits the Bold Look does have a certain element that makes it attractive. Perhaps it's the bright colors, the wild ties or the smooth, clean lines. Here's my take on the Bold Look. Both the tie and jacket are of the Bold period. The jacket is made of a herringbone gabardine fabric that is almost electric in color under the right light, as the below photo shows. It has a 1949 union tag, pinning it right in the middle of the Bold Look era that lasted well into the 1950s. Note the low button stance and the low lapel gorge that was characteristic of the Bold Look.

btt

Getting ready to say goodbye to the summer heat and hello to the cool autumn.

*Claiborne western-style travel jacket
*1940s tie
*George brand linen trousers
*Allen Edmond shoes
*GAP socks
*Vintage Stetson Open Road

Your suits, your hats should show the serious business side of you.



Let your socks convey the life of the party.

More ads.



Fashion Park

March 31, 1923:




March 27, 1926:






I recently examined a 3-piece 'Fashion Park' suit from the late-1920s/early-1930s.  Fantastic quality.



Hart Schaffner & Marx

March 2, 1918:




October 24, 1949:






Kirschbaum Clothing:
This is a 3 1/2' by 2' haberdashery sign from the late-teens/early-1920s.




Chevrolet ad, May 25, 1929.




Oldsmobile ad, March 25, 1933

Tag for more time