# What should I wear for my wedding?!



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

I need some assistance! I will try to spell out the situation without grumbling too much.

I am getting married in September, it's an evening wedding. The father of the bride hates tuxedos, so the attire has been demoted to Cocktail Attire. That would be fine, and all, but my fiancee is having her bridesmaids wear black dresses and the wedding planner wants my groomsmen and I to match them in some way.

She initially said we should wear solid black suits. I personally think solid black suits look stupid and I don't want my groomsmen to waste hundreds of dollars on a something that they can only wear to funerals! (Although, clearly, I would be okay with making my groomsmen waste hundreds of dollars on something that they can only wear to semi-formal evenings :icon_smile_big

The planner and I compromised on charcoal suits with black neckties (planner said no bow ties allowed :mad2. My question is, can I spruce things up a bit so that I look more like I'm going to a wedding and less like I'm going to a board meeting?


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Also, here are some suggestions from the planner. They feel too much like something I would wear to work. Any suggestions? Colorful pocket squares? Boutonnieres?

As a side note, Drake isn't really what I would consider my style icon...


----------



## hookem12387 (Dec 29, 2009)

Black bridesmaids' dresses? That's odd out of the gates. The easiest thing to do would be to have your fiancee's dad suck it up for a night and realize that the evening isn't about him, but alas...

If you want to wear a bowtie and your fiancee is ok with it, then wear them, by the way. The planner sounds too involved. 

As for the suit, I guess a dark charcoal or dark navy, maybe even midnight blue would be a good call. I know what you mean about the repeat-ability of black suits. Whatever you end up with, make sure it's fiancee approved and tell everyone else to take a hike, JMO


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

I would favour navy for an evening lounge suit. But has that ship sailed?

In any event, I would strongly reconsider the black necktie (https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...charcoal-or-navy-suit&highlight=black+necktie). If you stick with charcoal suits - and are favouring a uniform, restrained look across your groomsmen - then navy would be infinitely preferable (IMO). A pocket square could liven things up (a bit).


----------



## leisureclass (Jan 31, 2011)

Don't trust anyone that sends you pictures of Drake as advice...

I got married last fall and here's what I did, even though it may seem ridiculously casual to some people:

1) Groomsmen gift was white OCBDs and #4 Repp ties from Brooks (all made in the states and bought during one of those huge sales) - it was pretty simple and a great starting point for a bunch of guys who didn't know their own shirt sizes.

2) Told them to pick their own navy blazers, medium grey slacks, and brown shoes (preferably longwings and penny loafers). Some went to Ebay, others the thrift store, and others straight to the mall. 

I totally get what you're saying about not wanting to be perscriptive about what the guys wear. When you're getting a group of guys together that are different sizes, with different financial situations, it's tough to say get this suit or this jacket, that costs this much, that's not going to fit all of them the same way at all.

However, at the end of the day no one really cares what the guys wear. Seriously. Everyone, and I mean everyone, will talk about the wedding dress and some people will ask about the bridesmaid dresses, but no one really cares about the guys, so have some fun with it.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

hookem12387 said:


> The easiest thing to do would be to have your fiancee's dad suck it up for a night and realize that the evening isn't about him, but alas...


hahaha, you're funny...

I might be able to swing midnight blue suits. One of the issues is that my fiancee's sister, who is one of the bridesmaids, works for our wedding planner. So we're getting a lot of extra "advice" for "free."

If I stick with charcoal, how about a midnight blue grenadine tie? Perhaps from Paul Winston?


----------



## hookem12387 (Dec 29, 2009)

leisureclass said:


> Don't trust anyone that sends you pictures of Drake as advice...
> 
> I got married last fall and here's what I did, even though it may seem ridiculously casual to some people:
> 
> ...


 Which is how it should be.

How about dark navy suits with white semi-spreads and navy grenadines. White linen squares. Black shoes, well polished.


----------



## Hardiw1 (May 17, 2011)

leisureclass said:


> Don't trust anyone that sends you pictures of Drake as advice...


^This is sound advice



hookem12387 said:


> Which is how it should be.
> 
> How about dark navy suits with white semi-spreads and navy grenadines. White linen squares. Black shoes, well polished.


I like the sound of this. A grey suit instead of navy with everything else mentioned is also an idea.


----------



## Hardiw1 (May 17, 2011)

I was thinking something in the neighborhood of this, as shown by AAAC member Wisco in the WAWT thread from last summer. Perhaps a bit darker suit to appease everyone you mentioned.










Although, with the black brides maid dresses, a navy tie will be tricky. Black and blue don't usually play well together IMO, but it can be done.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Navy suits were vetoed, but I've been given some wiggle room with the ties. Apparently the wedding planner thinks that charcoal is "close enough" to black and is willing to let me wear a non-black tie, but navy is not allowed because "black and navy together are a fashion faux pas."

Any suggestions for ties, gentlemen? I'm really liking the idea of ordering some grenadine ties for my groomsmen. What color would be best for the evening?


----------



## Hardiw1 (May 17, 2011)

I like burgundy.


----------



## hookem12387 (Dec 29, 2009)

Dark green looks really nice on grenadines.

Your wedding planner is an idiot.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

hookem12387 said:


> Your wedding planner is an idiot.


Hahahahaha. I know.

I have to say, I love green ties with grey suits. My very first suit in college was a dark grey (not quite charcoal) suit by Palm Beach. I had a dark green paisley tie that I found in a thrift store and I used to love to wear them together.


----------



## K Street (Dec 4, 2007)

L-feld said:


> Navy suits were vetoed, but I've been given some wiggle room with the ties. Apparently the wedding planner thinks that charcoal is "close enough" to black and is willing to let me wear a non-black tie, but navy is not allowed because "black and navy together are a fashion faux pas."
> 
> Any suggestions for ties, gentlemen? I'm really liking the idea of ordering some grenadine ties for my groomsmen. What color would be best for the evening?


This is what you get when you put too much faith in a "planner." These people don't know $%&* about what to wear when, what looks right with what, etc.

Forgive me if I am being too blunt but it sounds to me like you have a pretty good idea of what you'd like to wear to your own wedding (a tuxedo) but you are allowing yourself to be hounded--bullied, even-- by your passive-aggressive father-in-law and a representative of the wedding-industrial complex (who supposedly works for you) into a wholly unnecessary conflict over the subtlest and, arguably, stupidest details.

Like you, I can't think of anything more appropriate than a white gown and a black tuxedo. But clearly you're the rare man who actually cares what he wears to his wedding, and that seems to be making everyone unnecessarily defensive. If you were proposing to wear one of those ghastly powder blue "tuxedos" with puffy pirate shirts, I might concede your "planner" had a point. But you aren't.

Unless I've misread, you seem to favor a simple black tuxedo for yourself and the groomsmen, which in my judgment (granted, I am not a wedding planner) would be perfectly appropriate. Why not just say as much and be done with it? If you must have a "planner," let her focus on the flowers or something.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

"Wedding-Industrial Complex" - I have to remember that one.

Unfortunately, the father of the bride controls the purse strings and, well, you know.

Weddings make me grumpy.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

Is the father of the bride paying for what you and your groomsmen are wearing? Are your parents, by any chance, Barbra Streisand and Dustin Hoffman?

The big benefit of tuxedos is that you don't have to figure out what you're going to wear. There's no matching, no coordinating, no seeing what color goes well with what. It's a no-brainer outfit for a formal evening event. It's all, quite literally, black and white.

That said, how about a charcoal grey suit and a silver tie? James Franco isn't my idea of a style icon either, but this look could work:


----------



## Thom Browne's Schooldays (Jul 29, 2007)

hookem12387 said:


> Your wedding planner is an idiot.


Seriously, I was just going to post this.

Her terrible style ideas aside, you don't give such harsh ultimatums to the client, especially when they're entirely reasonable, as yours are.

I worked briefly in the wedding industry and never encountered any planner like that.

My own opinion is that trying to approximate something close to black tie, without any actual black tie elements can look odd and cheap.

I'd suggest a nice navy suit and a POW check or similar wedding tie:









Anyways, best of luck. 
Remember just to take it easy and have fun, more than any other element your attitudes set the tone for the day. 
I've been to a great wedding where the PA system broke leaving us without music, and nobody noticed because we were all so immersed in our after dinner conversations.
And I've been to a wedding where the bride was freaking out about every little detail and was so uptight nobody wanted to be near her.
In the end, even if you're wearing a snorkel just relax and have a good time.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

Thom Browne's Schooldays said:


> And I've been to a wedding where the bride was freaking out about every little detail and was so uptight nobody wanted to be near her.


I've been to a wedding where the bride was a control freak with no organizational skills and a sense of entitlement better suited to a daughter of a Middle Eastern dictator. She was forty-five minutes late to the ceremony in a park with no facilities (and five miles from the reception site). Curiously, none of the same people attended her subsequent wedding three years later.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

Man up.


----------



## K Street (Dec 4, 2007)

L-feld said:


> "Wedding-Industrial Complex" - I have to remember that one.
> 
> Unfortunately, the father of the bride controls the purse strings and, well, you know.
> 
> Weddings make me grumpy.


My friend, this is none of my business don't feel obligated to abide my two cents. I know you're eager to go along and get along, but think about it-- these people are trying to micromanage what you wear to your own wedding. That's not cool, and your language suggests you know it.

It is an extremely generous gift for parents to pay for a wedding. When that gift comes with such restrictions, however, it can quickly escalate into a battle for control. Not of a wedding, but of your life. These people will not stop meddling when the reception ends. They will continue to pull these stunts--over where you choose to live, what you choose to name your children, how you choose to raise them, etc.--until either you assert yourself or they die.

You need to have a frank discussion with your fiance. Tell her you've decided it IS up to you what you wear to your own wedding and you need her support. Then, you present a polite--and united-- front to the parents: "Dad, the men are going to wear black tuxedos. We'd love you to join us, but if you don't want to we're sure you'll choose something nice for yourself."

Let the parents threaten to yank the financing. You can scale down, postpone, or even go to the judge; it won't matter. If your fiance is willing to stand with you and assert yourselves together as independent adults, you'll have the beginning of a terrific marriage. If not, well, ask yourself if this is really the life you want.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

I've been to plenty of weddings where the groomsmen wore tuxedos and other men just wore suits. I think that's pretty standard, really. That's the easiest way to get a uniform and formal look anyway. Also, look at the bright side - I once went to an Indian wedding and had to dress "appropriately" for it or else face being turned away at the door.


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

K Street said:


> My friend, this is none of my business don't feel obligated to abide my two cents. I know you're eager to go along and get along, but think about it-- these people are trying to micromanage what you wear to your own wedding. That's not cool, and your language suggests you know it.
> 
> It is an extremely generous gift for parents to pay for a wedding. When that gift comes with such restrictions, however, it can quickly escalate into a battle for control. Not of a wedding, but of your life. These people will not stop meddling when the reception ends. They will continue to pull these stunts--over where you choose to live, what you choose to name your children, how you choose to raise them, etc.--until either you assert yourself or they die.
> 
> ...


^ This. And, remember...you aren't just marrying a woman, you're marrying into her family, too.

"Hates tuxedos." That's just...weird.


----------



## Orgetorix (May 20, 2005)

I agree with a lot of the sentiments expressed here, L-feld, though I think some wisdom is called for, and a familial blowup might not be worth the payoff.

Still, have you talked about this enough with your bride that she understands you really do care, and you really do have an opinion? Most guys don't, so if you haven't talked, it's understandable that she and the powers-that-be might assume you're willing to go along with whatever. If you *have* talked about it, and she cares more about her dad's opinion than yours, I'd be concerned about that.

It _is_ your wedding day, and while it's appropriate to defer to your fiancee to some degree, it is also appropriate for you to be in control of what you and your attendants wear. Talk about it with her, and then you can courteously let everyone know that you've decided you're going to wear black tie. The FotB is welcome to join you, but not being a member of the wedding party he doesn't have to match and can wear a nice dark suit if he prefers.

The key to all this is to be gracious. And wise - if this is likely to cause a huge rift in your marriage or your relationship with your in-laws, it probably isn't worth it.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

L-feld said:


> Apparently the wedding planner thinks that charcoal is "close enough" to black and is willing to let me wear a non-black tie, but navy is not allowed because "black and navy together are a fashion faux pas."


err....Fashion faux pas?....so is a black tie with a charcoal suit!!! Your wedding planner clearly knows jack about men's attire.

My advice to you
DO NOT wear a black suit
DO NOT wear a black tie

And finally, FFS!!! Be a man, speak to your wife to be, get her support then put your foot down and tell the rest of them what YOU want to wear. It's YOUR wedding, not the wedding planner's, not your father in law's, not the bridesmaid's...YOURS!!!


----------



## ipse dixit (Apr 11, 2012)

MTFU. If you let your in-laws dictate the details of your wedding then you are setting a bad precedent for the the rest of your life. I would fire the wedding planner and then politely explain to the would-be father in law that it is your wedding and you will dress yourself for it. Maybe buy him an Alan Flusser book or two. 

Black tie is the right choice for an evening wedding. Wearing a black suit will look like you couldn't figure out black tie. Put "Black Tie Optional" on the invitations, and people will get the idea.

If you must wear something else, a blue suit would be best. Charcoal is OK too, but I think it is more of a business suit. Definitely no pin stripes for a social event in the evening. I'd go with solid grenadine ties, maybe in maroon or dark green. White linen pocket squares with the fold of your choice are a must. For shoes I suggest well-polished black cap toes or wingtips.

BTW, I got married at 11:00 a.m. in New York City in the fall of 2000. We wore morning coats with hickory striped trousers.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

I'm going to step back and remind myself how lucky I am to have a fiancée who defers to me for men's style (though she may not always agree), is considering my opinion on every turn, and to have future in-laws who are happy to write a check and let us have the wedding we want (which is a strict black tie affair).


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

The choice of anything black for a wedding is very odd. Traditionally black was not acceptable for weddings. Is the wedding planner trained?

You might want to refer to the *AskAndy Wedding Guide*!


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Andy said:


> Is the wedding planner trained?


Potty trained ?!


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

I just re-read - the bridesmaids are wearing black and the planner expects the groomsmen AND THE GROOM to coordinate.

Because, clearly, they're all accessories to the bride. Of no relevance whatsoever after the event.


----------



## TomS (Mar 29, 2010)

Black bridesmaid dresses? Is someone repressing their latent love for heavy metal?


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Miket61 said:


> Because, clearly, they're all accessories to the bride. Of no relevance whatsoever after the event.


Well, duh.


----------



## Wales (Jun 9, 2012)

I think, for starters, you should direct the "wedding planner" and father to this thread.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

L-feld said:


> Well, duh.


That included you, sir.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Miket61 said:


> That included you, sir.


Hahaha, I know. It's really more than my fiancee and I are accessories to her socialite father, if you want the truth. Of the 300 guests, probably 150 or more will be his acquaintances and business associates.


----------



## ipse dixit (Apr 11, 2012)

Seems odd that someone who can be described as a socialite hates the dinner jacket.


----------



## Canadian (Jan 17, 2008)

If he's against a traditional tuxedo, see if he'll permit you to wear a velvet jacket with a bow tie and black-tie appropriate slacks. Blue or black. It will show off the bride while being formal enough for a fancy wedding.

Last wedding I went to, I wore a plaid jacket and Timberlands. I was the least well dressed person, save an uncle who showed up in his company golf shirt and slacks.



Tom


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

Take it a step further and go with Canadian's advice, but also with the wedding planner's. Black crushed velvet suit with a black crushed velvet tie. Bingo. See how she likes them apples. I even found you one on sale: https://www.contemposuits.com/stacy-adams-mens-new-black-velvet-3-pc-dress-suit-velour-suit.html


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Not to highjack this thread, but what are people's thoughts on a white dinner jacket with a bow tie/cummerbund set - in some color other than black - for a June wedding? I've only ever seen a black bow tie/cummerbund worn with white dinner jackets, but the fiancee has suggested a white DJ with a seersucker pattern in the same color as the bridesmaids' dresses. Sounds interesting but I've never seen a combo like this before.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

D&S said:


> Not to highjack this thread, but what are people's thoughts on a white dinner jacket with a bow tie/cummerbund set - in some color other than black - for a June wedding? I've only ever seen a black bow tie/cummerbund worn with white dinner jackets, but the fiancee has suggested a white DJ with a seersucker pattern in the same color as the bridesmaids' dresses. Sounds interesting but I've never seen a combo like this before.


You've got my support!


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tilton said:


> Take it a step further and go with Canadian's advice, but also with the wedding planner's. Black crushed velvet suit with a black crushed velvet tie. Bingo. See how she likes them apples. I even found you one on sale: https://www.contemposuits.com/stacy-adams-mens-new-black-velvet-3-pc-dress-suit-velour-suit.html


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That would look good with some gators, a fedora with a big ol feather, and I could request that the band play "Jungle Love" for our first dance!


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

ipse dixit said:


> Seems odd that someone who can be described as a socialite hates the dinner jacket.


He goes to at least one black tie charity event a month, so his rationale is that he wants a break from all that.

Maybe I should just go with it and then once I'm his son-in-law, I can go to those events in his place, so I get some use out of my tux.


----------



## coreysyms (Jun 17, 2012)

I didn't want my groomsmen to spend money on new suits, nor did I want anyone to have to rent a terribly fitting tux for fear of my wedding party looking like a junior prom. I wanted a tux to own so I went to Macy's and got a steal of a deal Tommy Hillfiger tux for less then 200 bones. So if you do come full circle back to tuxs go that route. What I did was ask my guys to wear their black suits since most men have that suit. But to spruce it up I asked them to purchase black bowties and black suspenders, total cost. 30 bucks. I wore a white bowtie and white suspenders. Ended up looking classic and worked just fine. Accessories can really change a suit. Hope that helps a little.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

coreysyms said:


> I didn't want my groomsmen to spend money on new suits, nor did I want anyone to have to rent a terribly fitting tux for fear of my wedding party looking like a junior prom. I wanted a tux to own so I went to Macy's and got a steal of a deal Tommy Hillfiger tux for less then 200 bones. So if you do come full circle back to tuxs go that route. What I did was ask my guys to wear their black suits since most men have that suit. But to spruce it up I asked them to purchase black bowties and black suspenders, total cost. 30 bucks. I wore a white bowtie and white suspenders. Ended up looking classic and worked just fine. Accessories can really change a suit. Hope that helps a little.


I don't doubt, as you say, it worked just fine, nevertheless it was NOT classic. A "classic", in clothing, as in for example literature, is that which is timeless, not subject to the vagaries of current fashion. White tie and black tie are classic ensembles, each comprised of specific garments and accessories, that have stood the test of time for generations. While you wore black and white pieces, when put together neither your, nor your attendants were classically dressed.

I see this is only your second post. I welcome you to this forum and hope my comment does not offend you. It is just that every field, and every group, has its own vocabulary, in the sense that some words and terms have meanings more specific than they would have when used outside the field or group. It simply takes a while to pick up the terminology.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

D&S said:


> Not to highjack this thread, but what are people's thoughts on a white dinner jacket with a bow tie/cummerbund set - in some color other than black - for a June wedding? I've only ever seen a black bow tie/cummerbund worn with white dinner jackets, but the fiancee has suggested a white DJ with a seersucker pattern in the same color as the bridesmaids' dresses. Sounds interesting but I've never seen a combo like this before.


A seersucker,(which is about the least formal cloth), tie and cummerbund certainly would be interesting but the reason you have not seen it before is that semi-formal evening wear is traditional in the sense that its form does not change over time. To flip gender for a moment, should your bride wear a seersucker veil, it might be interesting but not traditional. This is not to say that you should not wear a seersucker tie and cummerbund, after all it is your wedding.

Whatever you choose to wear, I wish you and your bride many happy years together.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

arkirshner said:


> A seersucker,(which is about the least formal cloth), tie and cummerbund certainly would be interesting but the reason you have not seen it before is that semi-formal evening wear is traditional in the sense that its form does not change over time. To flip gender for a moment, should your bride wear a seersucker veil, it might be interesting but not traditional. This is not to say that you should not wear a seersucker tie and cummerbund, after all it is your wedding.
> 
> Whatever you choose to wear, I wish you and your bride many happy years together.


First off - thanks!

Second - my thought was that it isn't traditional either. The seersucker material she has in mind has a satin-like finish, though, which I suppose is more formal than "normal" seersucker. The bridesmaids' dresses themselves aren't seersucker; the colored stripe of seersucker would just match the (solid) color of the bridesmaids' dresses. No seersucker veils are in the cards to my knowledge.

She (and I) like the idea of seersucker bow ties and cummerbunds to make the wedding a little less stuffy. Her thought was that white dinner jackets would make the occasion even more relaxed and seasonally appropriate, but she's also taken with the idea of incorporating seersucker. (Full-on seersucker suits are out because the wedding is at 6 p.m., so satin-seersucker bow ties and cummerbunds seem like a good compromise.) My thoughts are that we should choose one or the other - white DJ and black bow ties/cummerbunds OR traditional black tie with the more colorful seersucker.

She'll defer to my judgment on this, but I'm still not sure what my judgment is.


----------



## coreysyms (Jun 17, 2012)

arkirshner said:


> While you wore black and white pieces, when put together neither your, nor your attendants were classically dressed.


How on earth would you even know if I was "classically" dressed or not? So thanks for saying I didn't look classic at my wedding.

For the record: Black tux, slim cut. White twill french cuff shirt, white satan bow tie and pocket square, white suspenders.

For the record 2: I said ended up "looking" classic, as in for the pictures, because that is what you will be looking back at.

For the record 3: Saying "I hope my comment doesn't offend you" when you spend 2 paragraphs doing that doesn't make it OK. So get off your high horse and spend your time helping out the guy who asked the question.

And since you are such a stickler for terminology "get off your high horse" in my circles is a request to someone to stop behaving in a haughty and self-righteous manner.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

coreysyms said:


> How on earth would you even know if I was "classically" dressed or not? So thanks for saying I didn't look classic at my wedding.
> 
> For the record: Black tux, slim cut. White twill french cuff shirt, white satan bow tie and pocket square, white suspenders.
> 
> ...


Don't want to get too involved but...

Classic does not necessarily mean "not well-dressed." I think what arkirshner meant was that "classic" implies strict/near strict conformance with the "rules." The "rule" for black tie is a black jacket, with a shawl collar or peak lapel in satin, black satin bow tie and cummerbund, pleated shirt, non-cuffed black pants with a horizontal satin stripe, and patent leather shoes. The "rule" for white tie is a top coat (cut differently from a tuxedo jacket) with tails and no cummerbund, but otherwise as described for black tie (substituting a white bow tie for a black bow tie).

So as soon as you substitute a black suit for a true tuxedo, or wear a white bow tie with clothes that are otherwise "black tie-appropriate," you've bent the "rules." Therefore, not "classic." Doesn't mean not well-dressed, and doesn't mean that the "rules" are beyond reproach. Just means that you've stepped outside the box of what's considered "classic."

Hope that helps clear up what I think was meant - no haughtiness/self-righteousness intended.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

L-feld said:


> He goes to at least one black tie charity event a month, so his rationale is that he wants a break from all that.
> 
> Maybe I should just go with it and then once I'm his son-in-law, I can go to those events in his place, so I get some use out of my tux.


Excellent idea. The father of the bride is not one of the groom's attendants; he should take his wardrobe cues from the guests, not the groomsmen.

Be sure when attending events in your father-in-law's stead that your wife's name is listed with her maiden name in the middle. He'll still want people to know that the family was represented.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

D&S said:


> Don't want to get too involved but...
> 
> Classic does not necessarily mean "not well-dressed." I think what arkirshner meant was that "classic" implies strict/near strict conformance with the "rules." The "rule" for black tie is a black jacket, with a shawl collar or peak lapel in satin, black satin bow tie and cummerbund, pleated shirt, non-cuffed black pants with a horizontal satin stripe, and patent leather shoes. The "rule" for white tie is a top coat (cut differently from a tuxedo jacket) with tails and no cummerbund, but otherwise as described for black tie (substituting a white bow tie for a black bow tie).
> 
> ...


Exactly what I meant. You said it better than I did.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

L-feld said:


> He goes to at least one black tie charity event a month, so his rationale is that he wants a break from all that.
> 
> Maybe I should just go with it and then once I'm his son-in-law, I can go to those events in his place, so I get some use out of my tux.


One might think that a daughter's wedding is a more formal occasion than a once a month charity event. We are strange creatures. By the way, my experience both as a son in law and a father in law taught me that while it is important to be a good son in law the most important thing is to be a good husband. I am sure you will be both.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

coreysyms said:


> How on earth would you even know if I was "classically" dressed or not? So thanks for saying I didn't look classic at my wedding.
> 
> For the record: Black tux, slim cut. White twill french cuff shirt, white satan bow tie and pocket square, white suspenders.
> 
> ...


We know you were not classically dressed because you described it. The groomsmen's black suits were many things -- classic is not one of them. And wearing a white tie with a tuxedo is hardly classic. No offense is intended here, but one really should study up on a subject before giving advice on it. I'll bet my first couple hundred posts on this forum were to present questions, and I probably visited a thousand times before I was knowledgeable enough to start giving advice.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

D&S said:


> Don't want to get too involved but...
> 
> Classic does not necessarily mean "not well-dressed." I think what arkirshner meant was that "classic" implies strict/near strict conformance with the "rules." The "rule" for black tie is a black jacket, with a shawl collar or peak lapel in satin, black satin bow tie and cummerbund, pleated shirt, non-cuffed black pants with a horizontal satin stripe, and patent leather shoes. The "rule" for white tie is a top coat (cut differently from a tuxedo jacket) with tails and no cummerbund, but otherwise as described for black tie (substituting a white bow tie for a black bow tie).
> 
> ...


I agree - with one exception - with most of what you say.

A few observations on the black tie advice (which are matters of personal preference only):

- Lapel: peaked, grosgrain (not satin).
- Shirt: Marcella would be my personal preference, but pleated is fine.
- Bowtie: Marcella.
- Covering the waist: My preference is for an evening waistcoat (my recollection is that the cummerbund was adopted as a more informal alternative to the evening waistcoat in colonial India, but my preference is more because I find the waistcoat the more elegant option).

On white tie, you omit to mention an evening waistcoat in white marcella (which is essential).

I disagree only with the statement I have put in bold: I'm afraid formal dress is one area where I regard the rules as pretty inflexible. With lounge suits or odd jackets people proclaim lots of different so-called rules (about patterns, etc.), most of which are codswallop or at least should be our servants not our masters (they may provide good guidance to those starting out as to how to avoid traps for the unwary). Formal dress is different - it is meant to be a uniform, with adherence to certain rules. Non-adherence to the rules risks producing an ugly patische, not commendable sprezzatura.

As has been mentioned in recent posts in another thread, people are free to dress in chicken suits or as pirate captains if they want. But we should not encourage people to think that a half-assed approximation of black tie is appropriate.

EDIT:

I forgot to mention, on shirts: The collar for black tie should be an ordinary flat collar. For white tie, a detatchable stiff 'wing' collar. Far too many people wear the latter for black tie (usually showing the hooks of a pre-tied bowtie in the process ...).


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Mike Petrik said:


> We know you were not classically dressed because you described it. The groomsmen's black suits were many things -- classic is not one of them. And wearing a white tie with a tuxedo is hardly classic. No offense is intended here, but one really should study up on a subject before giving advice on it. I'll bet my first couple hundred posts on this forum were to present questions, and I probably visited a thousand times before I was knowledgeable enough to start giving advice.


One of the things that distinguishes AAAC from what our friend upr crust calls That Other Website is that here responses get what is in effect a peer review. At AAAC inaccuracies get corrected, I know I have been corrected a number of times especially by Anthony Jordan who is a great expert on the history of UK men's wear. At That Other Website it seems that thread after thread goes something like, "I like A" , "I wear B" , "I like X" etc. In other words, a wide variety of responses, quite a few of which are just off the wall. If a reader doesn't already know the subject it is not easy to distinguish valid from invalid responses. This anything goes culture is probably the reason That Other Website's threads have more responses. This is not to disparage That Other Website, just an observation which goes to explain why I am more comfortable here.


----------



## Mox (May 30, 2012)

Well put. I read threads at TOW, but can find it frustrating for someone new to the world of men's clothing. I'm glad the site exists, however. There are also some useful practical threads that go beyond style.

As to the word "classic", I'm a strong proponent of using consistent definitions. Most people immersed in the world of automobiles will use the term to designate a car that is 20 to 45 years old: that currently includes 80's vehicles. Having been in high school during the 80's and bemoaning the abhorrent car design of the time, I have a very hard time calling a 1982 Pontiac 6000 a classic—but if I want to speak the language of car collectors to car collectors, that's exactly what it is.

L-feld, I don't have any useful advice, but congratulations, and I wish you a joyful wedding.


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Mox said:


> As to the word "classic", I'm a strong proponent of using consistent definitions. Most people immersed in the world of automobiles will use the term to designate a car that is 20 to 45 years old: that currently includes 80's vehicles. Having been in high school during the 80's and bemoaning the abhorrent car design of the time, I have a very hard time calling a 1982 Pontiac 6000 a classic-but if I want to speak the language of car collectors to car collectors, that's exactly what it is.


No, even among car collectors, a 1982 Pontiac 6000 is just a used car. You'd find more agreement among car collectors that a 1998 McLaren F1 is a classic, even though the model went out of production only 14 years ago. "Classic" is subjective, although there are some things that are so universally accepted that they almost become a rule. Accordingly, the rule with regard to Pontiac 6000's among car enthusiasts is that they are used cars, not classics. This can be analogized to clothing pretty easily, I think.


----------

