# Three Questions about Lapel Decoration on a Tuxedo



## goody14 (Mar 7, 2008)

Sartorialists,
I have a few questions about wearing things on the lapel of my soon to be purchased tuxedo.

1) First, I know that peak-lapelled tuxedo jackets have a buttonhole for the purposes of a boutonnière. Is the same true, or appropriate, for a shawl-lapelled tuxedo jacket? I think I read somewhere that a shawl-lapelled jacket will never have a buttonhole. Something about the uninterrupted sweep of the lapel.

2) Next, about that boutonnière. Is it appropriate to have a color to match a date's dress. Assuming all other aspects of classic black tie were observed, would a purple flower matching a date's purple dress be too far outside the realm of acceptability? A red carnation on the lapel comes to mind. Assuming a buttonhole on a shawl-lapelled jacket is not appropriate, then a boutonnière is not appropriate with any shawl-lapelled jacket? If it would be appropriate, then where would it be hung if not through the non-existent buttonhole?

3) Finally, is it ever appropriate to wear any sort of lapel pin with a tuxedo? Perhaps a military or civilian decoration? It would seem appropriate that, given the military foundation for black tie dress, that a military award or lapel pin would be acceptable. 

As always, thank you all in advance for your wise counsel.


----------



## Bird's One View (Dec 31, 2007)

I would call buttonholes on shawl lapels "uncommon" rather than "inappropriate".

I believe actual military medals are okay to wear with black tie, but any other thing in that vein seems like a bad idea to me. (American flag lapel pin, anyone?)

Personally I would prefer a white flower to some other color. However the flower seems the best (least offensive) choice if you wish to match some item to your date's dress.


----------



## zarathustra (Aug 24, 2006)

As per number two: It depends on the relationship with the opposite sex! If it will cause you to sleep on the couch for a week --- then wear whatever flower she says, assuming all of the other black tie rules are followed.


----------



## dfloyd (May 7, 2006)

*Do not wear a flower with a shawl lapel....*

dinner jacket. Do not wear any medals or flags on any dinner jacket except a military mess jacket. A tuxedo is not a uniform. Follow Fred Astaire's example and only wear a white carnation. Wear only the carnation, no greenery behind it. Men do not wear corsages. You can wear a pocket square with the carnation if you can pull it off as Astaire did.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

dfloyd said:


> dinner jacket. Do not wear any medals or flags on any dinner jacket except a military mess jacket. A tuxedo is not a uniform.


True, but it also isn't some sacred cow that must be worshipped or treated like something that one must fear. I see it as nothing more than clothing that I wear to social functions. While I don't routinely wear lapel pins with anything, when I do so I don't do it as a fashion accessory but rather to symbolize something that is important to me. More important than some "rule" associated with wearing a dinner jacket. Just another opinion, nothing more.

Cruiser


----------



## etp777 (Nov 27, 2007)

I am NOT a fan of lapel pins. But if I see a man wearing DJ with the miniature Medal of honor, silver star, etc on his lapel, I'm sure as hell not going to correct him on that. May shake his hand and thank him for his service, but sure not going to tell him it is incorrect.

Now if you're just wearing a fraternity pin or something, then I'd say to take that crap off your ajcket!!


----------



## Aaron in Allentown (Oct 26, 2007)

Actually, it's perfectly acceptable to wear miniature military medals on a dinner jacket.

If an invitation says "Black tie with decorations", you can wear them.

Here is a list of things I've worn and/or seen worn at events that call for black tie with decorations:

Miniature military medals
Miniature insignia for hereditary societies
Neck insigniafor hereditary societies and orders of chivalry (e.g., SMOTJ, of which I am a member)
"Breast Star" insignia for various orders of chivalry, fraternal orders (e.g., Royal Order of Scotland) or hereditary societies
Here is a link to a page that gives advice on how to wear heredity insignia. This source is very well-regarded.

When I attend a "black tie with decorations" event, I generally wear the miniature insignia of the three hereditary societies to which I belong, my SMOTJ neck jewel and possibly my Royal Order of Scotland breast star.

At "white tie with decorations" events, I'll wear all of that, plus a few extra breast stars.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Now see that Cruiser? If you had just waited to pull your usual trigger on telling everyone what hogwash "the rules" are, you would have seen "the rules" actually are on your side this time.

So...care to recant and say never wear anything at all costs on your lapel? :devil:


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Now see that Cruiser? If you had just waited to pull your usual trigger on telling everyone what hogwash "the rules" are, you would have seen "the rules" actually are on your side this time.
> 
> So...care to recant and say never wear anything at all costs on your lapel? :devil:


Of course not. If you will look at my post more closely you should be able to see that I was referring to a "rule" in a somewhat sarcastic manner on the basis of how this was phrased in the post to which I was referring. Obviously there are no rules, either way, and that was my point.

Now if you will excuse me I'm going to go pin my Good Conduct Medal on my dinner jacket lapel. :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Cruiser said:


> Of course not. If you will look at my post more closely you should be able to see that I was referring to a "rule" in a somewhat sarcastic manner on the basis of how this was phrased in the post to which I was referring. *Obviously there are no rules, either way, and that was my point.*
> 
> Now if you will excuse me I'm going to go pin my Good Conduct Medal on my dinner jacket lapel. :icon_smile_big:
> 
> Cruiser


No, there does seem to be rules. You just want to stick you finger in the eyes of anyone mentioning them. That is your constant point. But hey, it was fun doing that when I was three.


----------



## goody14 (Mar 7, 2008)

*Okay, but*

In the case of mini-medals, wouldn't you typically wear those above your chest pocket rather than on a lapel as per military regulations? I can't see how the chest candy would fit on a lapel...


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> You just want to stick you finger in the eyes of anyone mentioning them. That is your constant point. But hey, it was fun doing that when I was three.


It's even more fun when you are 59. Now I'm just waiting for that point in life where I am old enough that I can sit naked on the front porch and all the neighbors just shake their heads and say that it's "just that crazy old man who lives down the stree. He's harmless." :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## M6Classic (Feb 15, 2008)

dfloyd said:


> <<snip>>A tuxedo is not a uniform. Follow Fred Astaire's example and only wear a white *carnation*. Wear only the carnation, no greenery behind it. Men do not wear corsages. You can wear a pocket square with the carnation if you can pull it off as Astaire did.


I find carnations a tad banal...make that cheap. I prefer another discrete white blossom, say a small rose.

Buzz


----------



## Aaron in Allentown (Oct 26, 2007)

goody14 said:


> In the case of mini-medals, wouldn't you typically wear those above your chest pocket rather than on a lapel as per military regulations? I can't see how the chest candy would fit on a lapel...


It depends upon the number of miniature medals. I've seen people wearing three of them in a row on a lapel. In fact, that's how they're worn on some mess uniforms as well.


----------



## goody14 (Mar 7, 2008)

*That's true*

Aaron, you're right. On the lapel for Mess Dress, over the pocket for other formal uniforms (dinner dress, chokers etc.) I also agree that it would be appropriate to wear the medals only if the ceremony were either military related (Veteran's Day ceremony) or if the invitation specified "Black Tie with Decorations."
As an active duty naval officer, I can say that wearing mini medals without being invited to do so would definitely not pass the smell test.


----------



## Aaron in Allentown (Oct 26, 2007)

goody14 said:


> As an active duty naval officer, I can say that wearing mini medals without being invited to do so would definitely not pass the smell test.


Yes, showing up with a bunch of chest candy on your dinner jacket when it isn't called for would be ostentatious.

However, an active duty naval officer is perfectly within his right to wear a mess uniform to a black tie affair.

Similarly, it is perfectly acceptable to wear formal "national dress" to a black tie affair, the most obvious example being a kilt.


----------



## goody14 (Mar 7, 2008)

*This is interesting*

Actually, I was asked to not wear a uniform. I would've immediately gone for choker whites, but the wedding is taking place in San Francisco and the bride (one of my oldest and dearest friends) asked me to please wear tuxedo only. The groom's family is VERY liberal and she didn't want to cause any bad feelings on their part. This is a whole other topic of conversation, for another board I'm sure.


----------



## Aaron in Allentown (Oct 26, 2007)

You are a gentleman for "going with the flow" in order to make your friend more comfortable on her wedding day.

Under these circumstances, it probably makes sense to to wear nothing on your lapel or chest.

I would avoid wearing a flower so that no one confuses you with a member of the wedding party.

A pocket square is probably the best way to express some individuality, should you desire to do so.


----------



## Simon Myerson (Nov 8, 2007)

+1 - although it's an interesting definition of 'liberal' (a label I proudly apply to myself). I thought we were pro-allowing people to do what seems right to them. I might be inclined to wear my mess uniform and no medals if I were you, but I suspect you are kinder


----------



## goody14 (Mar 7, 2008)

*One of the groom's aunts...*

is an outspoken member of Code Pink, the organization that was protesting outside the Marine Recruiting Office in Berkeley. I'm going to be showing a lot of restraint on a variety of fronts at this event. I promised the bride that I'd play nice and keep my head down, although an open bar tends to erode my power to hold my tongue. If there are fireworks, I'll let the aunt fire the first salvo.


----------



## Aaron in Allentown (Oct 26, 2007)

I would just avoid fireworks entirely.

It should be the groom, and, more especially, bride's special, memorable occasion.

You should do everything in your power to contribute to everyone having a good time.

If the aunt, or anyone else, wants to pick a fight with you, tell them you'd be happy to discuss it at breakfast the following morning.


----------



## wgb (Mar 2, 2007)

Aaron in Allentown said:


> I would just avoid fireworks entirely.
> It should be the groom, and, more especially, bride's special, memorable occasion. You should do everything in your power to contribute to everyone having a good time. If the aunt, or anyone else, wants to pick a fight with you, tell them you'd be happy to discuss it at breakfast the following morning.


+1 As Sun-Tzu said, pick your terrain. The wedding surely isn't it.


----------



## Lookingforaclue (Nov 10, 2005)

I've given the bouttonierre question a lot of thought, even have worn one with a tux a couple of years ago. However, IMHO, the bouttonierre rarely improves the appearance of either the escort or his lady, and somewhat detracts from or competes with the pocket square (an adornment to be preferred).

I expect 60% of folks will disagree.  

SRW


----------



## Cordovan (Feb 1, 2008)

Count me as one to disagree. It's a chance for subtle flair and done well, looks rather dashing. 

I would skip any pins.

However, I do feel that a shawl lapel can and should have a button hole for the boutonnière. And yes, color is permissible.

Cordovan


----------



## SkySov (Mar 17, 2008)

True liberals aren't offended by people who serve in the military but by the civilians that command them. 

I just started reading the forum here and like Cruiser's posts regarding "rules." Though I came here to learn about the rules I like knowing there are people who don't care so much if people break them. For example, I never look down upon people who wear a navy sportcoat with grey pants, but after reading posts here I quit doing it because now I'm afriad of what people are saying about me in that "uniform."


----------



## Cordovan (Feb 1, 2008)

SkySov said:


> I just started reading the forum here and like Cruiser's posts regarding "rules." Though I came here to learn about the rules I like knowing there are people who don't care so much if people break them.


Sorry for the digression here people - but - SkySov, if you wish to read about rules galore, have a look here. Others have seen this before, but I know that whenever I see it again, I get a kick out of it. It is very informative. One day, when you have several hours to burn, go through the thread.

Cordovan


----------



## wgb (Mar 2, 2007)

SkySov said:


> I just started reading the forum here and like Cruiser's posts regarding "rules." Though I came here to learn about the rules I like knowing there are people who don't care so much if people break them. For example, I never look down upon people who wear a navy sportcoat with grey pants, but after reading posts here I quit doing it because now I'm afriad of what people are saying about me in that "uniform."


I think that some folks take umbrage at the "rules" bacause we've colloquially called them "rules." They are not "rules" -- no one will rip that blue blazer off your back and cut the buttons off like they used to do when drumming someone out of the corps if they come upon you the in street while you're wearing gray slacks and a blazer.

They are, however, guidelines that inform us of what has been conventionally agreed upon by practice over time. In some cases, the guidelines represent usage that has persisted over years (e.g., the distinctions between black-tie and white tie). In that sense, feel free to do something unconventional if you choose-- it's not necessarily "wrong", although in certain situations it will be terribly gauche, but understand that while deviating from the guidelines is an element of personal style, it's better to know the guidelines and then deviate, rather than deviate out of ignorance. Many of us don't have the innate fashion sense of the Duke of Windsor or Fred Astaire, and not all "style" looks good to (or on) everyone.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

wgb said:


> I think that some folks take umbrage at the "rules" bacause we've colloquially called them "rules." They are not "rules" .


I think that a problem though, at least a problem I have, is when someone presents these things as absolutes. For example, "If you wear xxxx you will look like crap" when in fact whether or not one will look like crap wearing that is extremely subjective and perhaps not at all representative of the opinions of most people. Such declarations could involve anything from wearing black pants to wearing a notch lapel dinner jacket. While these two examples are certainly not held in high esteem in AAAC, in the general public at large (at least in the U.S.) these are very common items of clothing and not looked down upon at all.

If I were going to an office everyday populated by the esteemed members of this forum I would most likely dress different than I do now. Why? Because I like to fit in. I probably wouldn't wear black pants if I thought everyone was talking about how bad it looks. But since I spend my days with a vast majority of people who don't have this negative connotation, I have no hesitation in wearing them if I personally like it. It's comforting to know that folks around me are judging my looks on whether they personally think I look good or don't look good, all the while having little or no knowledge of these unwritten "rules" about such matters.

In some ways this provides a sense of freedom that I might not feel if I felt compelled to select my clothing on the basis of what a very small group thinks is appropriate or looks good; however, as a person with a certain amount of intellectual curiosity and what I consider to be an open mind, I do like to hear what others think whether I agree with them or not. But it does rankle me when something that is very subjective is presented as an absolute.

This is nothing more than my personal thoughts on the subject. Please don't tell me it will start another dust up. That's not my intention. :icon_smile:

Cruiser


----------



## wgb (Mar 2, 2007)

No dust up from me. IIRC, you indicated that you preferred a notch lapel DJ. Nothing wrong with that, you've made a conscious decision. Black suits, etc. are a bit more problematic since, in daylight, black doesn't look good on most men unless they're dark complected (the contrast tends to accentuate their pale coloring and "drain" color away from their faces); however, to each their own. If they've tried navy or charcoal or whatever and still prefer black, well, it's no skin off my nose. If they're wearing black because it's trendy or whatever, well, that's OK too -- it's their disposable income, not mine. Leaves more navy and gray suits for me chose from. 

In my case, I have a SBPL DJ and since I'm tall and thin (well, mostly) the peak lapels look better on me than notch. I wear a laydown collar, however, so even I'm deviating ever so slightly from the "absolute." I can't stand the lousy attached wing collars and I'm not going the detached collar route for the one time a year I wear evening clothes.

I do think that the whole notch lapel dinner jacket thing is a result of most American men's unfamiliarity with semi-formal wear, particularly in contrast to the UK: I was in Sym's the other day and although they had literally racks and racks of dinner jackets (it is prom season), they didn't have a single peak lapel or shawl one (or my favorite, a DB, either). If I needed one and hadn't followed this forum and Style Forum, I'd probably get a notch lapel DJ because that's what they had. 

At least they didn't try to sell me a black lounge suit.


----------



## goody14 (Mar 7, 2008)

For me, the issue is not whether I'm following the "rules" or not, but rather if there is a way that is more historically correct, or more pleasing to the eye. In my stage in life, its more about learning the foundations of modern and classical dress, so that I can choose what rules I want break in order to find my own sense of style. I need to know what I don't know.
The interesting thing for me is that there are historical reasons that some jackets have two or three buttons, that some have peaked or notched lapels, single or double breasts. I'm a participant of this forum because I want to be able to say why these things are as they are, and to be able to choose the clothes I wear to reflect my own values, rather than then cost-cutting efforts of some suit maker or the marketing excellence of some fashion house. I want to be able to go into a store and take two $1500 suits, one with Oxxford on the label and the other with Armani, and be able to tell which is which by the feel and the cut and the obvious quality differences. Studying the advice of the members of this forum will allow me to do that.


----------



## Atlanta Fop (Feb 4, 2008)

*T-bars?*

Allow me to pose a question - aside from the decorations that have been mentioned (medals, pins, etc.), what about a T-bar for my pocket watch when wearing my peak lapel SB tuxedo jacket? I sport that look occasion, but have never worn it with my tuxedo. Any thoughts?

Thanks,

C


----------



## wgb (Mar 2, 2007)

Historically, it was considered gauche to wear even a watch with black or white tie -- it was considered rude to the host/hostess to even consider what time it might be in the midst of the frivolity. That's probably not the case today, but a pocket watch might be pushing the evelope. Also, the whole concept of formal wear is its elegant simplicity, which the t bar would break up.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Cruiser said:


> I think that a problem though, at least a problem I have, is when someone presents these things as absolutes.


Back when you were growing up, around say, 1969, you guys didn't respect any rules. Because of your counter-rules efforts, people are walking around like doofuses these days. And you're just waiting to sit naked on the porch under a tree, eh?


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Bogdanoff said:


> Back when you were growing up, around say, 1969, you guys didn't respect any rules.


In 1969 I was in the U.S. Navy where I was following, and respecting, more rules than I have ever followed in my life.



> Because of your counter-rules efforts, people are walking around like doofuses these days.


Every generation of young people engage in some type of counter culture. Not every single person, but the generation as a whole. My generation's coming of age was, in many respects, like any other. Go back to the late 50's and you will find the beatniks with their coffee houses and bongos. A much smaller movement than the 60's, but there nonetheless.

The 60's exploded in the way it did because so much was going on. The U.S. was involved in a long, bloody war. Segregation was on it's way out and society was becoming integrated, but not before leaders were assassinated and cities were burned. Folk music had turned into rock and roll and then into rock with the British invasion of the Beatles, Stones, etc. Almost four decades have gone by since then and I haven't seen anything even close to what times were like then. The manner of dress of many young people back then was nothing more than a by-product of everything else that was going on.



> And you're just waiting to sit naked on the porch under a tree, eh?


Actually, that is called a joke. But hey, if I could get away with it I could save a lot of money on clothes. :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## gng8 (Aug 5, 2005)

goody14 said:


> I want to be able to go into a store and take two $1500 suits, one with Oxxford on the label and the other with Armani, and be able to tell which is which by the feel and the cut and the obvious quality differences. Studying the advice of the members of this forum will allow me to do that.


I like your approach and I can assure you that it takes less than a minute to tell the differences between an Oxxford and an Armani suit. Try a Neiman Markus store. Many times they will carry both brands in the same section. Now about finding Oxxford for $1,500....


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

SkySov said:


> True liberals aren't offended by people who serve in the military but by the civilians that command them.
> 
> I just started reading the forum here and like Cruiser's posts regarding "rules." Though I came here to learn about the rules I like knowing there are people who don't care so much if people break them. For example, I never look down upon people who wear a navy sportcoat with grey pants, but after reading posts here I quit doing it because now I'm afriad of what people are saying about me in that "uniform."


Just for the record, a navy blazer paired with gray trousers is very appropriate and traditional, violating no rules. Some fashionistas may consider it boring, but if the trousers and jacket are well tailored the look can be quite handsome, if not smashing. Anyone who would look down upon someone for wearing a navy coat with gray trousers is both ill-informed and a jerk.


----------



## Lookingforaclue (Nov 10, 2005)

gng8 said:


> Now about finding Oxxford for $1,500....


Filene's Basement on Connecticut Ave. in DC usually has some Oxxford at a good price - as I recall $800 or so during sales, $200 higher other times, but I may be a little off.

They will hold an order for the sale price if you are buying just before the sale. I always seem to be in DC a week early!

SRW


----------



## goody14 (Mar 7, 2008)

I've seen the Oxxfords at Filene's Basement, but as was mentioned in an earlier thread, it seems like if an Oxxford suit survives the trickle down of the discount stores and ends up there for $800, its typically for a reason. In this case, it seems that the colors are a little too fashion forward for conservative tastes. Although putting Oxxford and fashion forward seems an oxymoron (oxxfordmoron?)


----------

