# trend of buttoning the lower button on a 2 button jacket



## Bradman (May 28, 2009)

Is it just me or are more people starting to do this? There is a weatherman on the CBS affiliate in Atlanta that does this all the time. I was watching 30 Rock last night and even Alec Baldwin had both buttons buttoned. Not that I look to these guys as fashion icons or anything, but in Alec Baldwin's case, surely some wardrobe person could have set him straight? I personally think it looks awful, but can't avert my eyes when I see it.


----------



## Jake Genezen (May 27, 2010)

Perhaps it's not the case more people are doing it, just that you are noticing it more. I see it a lot of the time too. Especially on portly men.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

My father went around with only the bottom button fastened.

Drove me nuts!!


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Back in the 20's and 30's, this was more commonly seen. The current standard placement of the top button just above the natural waist didn't really become standard, based on the pictures I've seen, until post-WWII. And even after that, some men generally regarded as well-dressed still chose to button the lower button on their jacket. It has become a very powerful convention to only button the top button of a 2b, and never to button the lower button of a 3B, but I question whether it is, in fact, a rule. Basically, if the jacket is cut to permit it, then it's OK, if rarely seen these days. Now, most OTR suits are _not_ cut for it, and buttoning the lower button causes a pull across the hips and/or seat, unless the wearer is decidedly thin-hipped.

For reference, here are pics of JFK and the DoW with lower buttons on their jackets fastened:



















This topic came up in this thread: https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?107172-Couple-of-quick-questions-about-suit


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

Yuck, I think that makes JFK look absolutely horrible


----------



## neskerdoo (Jun 23, 2009)

Scotch&Cigars said:


> Yuck, I think that makes JFK look absolutely horrible


probably due to the goofy pose, no? Were he standing with his arms anywhere other than meeting behind his back, we might be able to judge better...


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

It's not a trend; it's ignorance.

The bottom button isn't designed to be buttoned. If you do, the jacket pulls at that spot.

Weather people are not only ignorant but they don't want their shirt/tie to show from under their jacket when they stand (usually directly in front of the map and numbers so you can't see the weather)!!!


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Scotch&Cigars said:


> Yuck, I think that makes JFK look absolutely horrible


It's only in recent years that historians have uncovered much of what we now know about Kennedy's medical problems, one of which involved the three fractured vertabra in his back. He wore a back brace and was more often than not taking painkilling medication. I can still remember the one time that I saw him in person and at the time I thought there was something odd in the way he was sitting. It just didn't look normal.

I guess it's possible that he had the button buttoned to cover up any visible sign of a brace. Who really knows?










Cruiser


----------



## PJC in NoVa (Jan 23, 2005)

The kind that are meant to be worn w/ both buttons fastened are called paddock coats:

https://asuitablewardrobe.dynend.com/2007/06/jfks-paddock-model-jackets.html

That's what JFK wore. Alec Baldwin? I don't know. The character he plays would certainly have sufficient means to wear bespoke clothing (as does Baldwin himself).

JFK's somewhat awkward posture may have had something to do with his terrible back problems and the brace he had to wear as a result of them.

PS: More here on JFK's medical problems--


----------



## ykurtz (Mar 7, 2007)

I have an unlined paddock style summer navy sportcoat which I enjoy wearing. Looking in a full length mirror, it does make your torso look a bit longer.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Actually, PJC, A Suitable Wardrobe calls _this_ a paddock coat:








(the one on the right).

ASW calls the 2-button-2 jacket a *paddock jacket*. I'm not 100% sold on the correctness of this term, having never seen/read it outside ASW (which is normally very reliable), and having a hard time connecting this button configuration with any special equestrian fitness.

At any rate, there are such things as 2B2 jackets. The much-decried-by-traditionalists upward creep of button stances in the last 5 years has, effectively, turned some OTR jackets into "paddock jackets" (and has them looking like a number of jackets from the interwar era). If the jacket fits well with both buttons done, and the wearer likes the look, then it's not wrong. It is, however, well-calculated to offend those who have a strong, but incomplete, sense of clothing traditions.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Here's another picture from the 1920's that might have some bearing on this thread.










(A much larger version of this photo can be found at https://www.shorpy.com/node/8277?size=_original , which makes examining the detail easier.)

Notice that most men have their jackets open (common when men were wearing waistcoats/vests); of those who have their jackets buttoned, _both_ are doing things that most on AAAC would call "wrong." The man at the far right has _only_ the bottom button of his 2B jacket buttoned, while the man second from right has skipped the middle button of his 3B, but buttoned both top and bottom buttons.

Further examination reveals that several of the men are wearing jackets where the second/lower button could easily be buttoned without causing a pull.

Allow me to suggest that the post-WWII consensus on button stance and buttoning conventions is breaking up, for better or worse, and returning us to the state of things in the interwar period, where button configurations and habits were more heterogeneous. I, for one, would welcome some variety on this score.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Here's another of the DoW with both buttons fastened.

And here's one where he has *only* the bottom button fastened.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Too many rides on the Marilyn-go-round.


I fail to see how there could be such a thing as "too many" such rides, crippling after-effects be [email protected]!


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Isn't the style of leaving the bottom button open usually ascribed to some fat English royal (Albert?) who had too much belly to allow it to close?


----------



## Jake Genezen (May 27, 2010)

I believe the crucial factor is the button stance? If positioned 'correctly', having two buttons close or just the bottom one want effect the 'look' of the jacket?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

I'm confident my Dad did not model himself after the DOW!!









Mrs WouldaShoulda and Dad '00.

Did I tell you the story of him stapling his blown out pants together and me finding them in the same state 5 years later still being worn??

I miss him.


----------



## Finian McLonergan (Sep 23, 2009)

CuffDaddy said:


> And here's one where he has *only* the bottom button fastened.


That little beauty is known as a Windsor Cut, a jacket cut as a 2 roll 1.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

The Rambler said:


> Isn't the style of leaving the bottom button open usually ascribed to some fat English royal (Albert?) who had too much belly to allow it to close?


I think that's the story on waistcoats/vests. Buttoning the bottom button on jackets remained commonplace and popular long after HRH Albert had joined his ancestors.


----------



## Checkerboard 13 (Oct 6, 2009)

The Rambler said:


> Isn't the style of leaving the bottom button open usually ascribed to some fat English royal (Albert?) who had too much belly to allow it to close?


Edward VII


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

WouldaShoulda said:


> I'm confident my Dad did not model himself after the DOW!!
> 
> View attachment 2056
> 
> ...


Great photo, Woulda. That buttoning style goes well with Heineken.


----------



## PJC in NoVa (Jan 23, 2005)

CuffDaddy said:


> Actually, PJC, A Suitable Wardrobe calls _this_ a paddock coat:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Right, "jacket" not "coat." My bad.

In more common sartorial usage, a "paddock jacket" (or coat) is indeed one of those quilted things people that actually do wear around horses, so I don't know where Will got the term wrt this context, either. There doesn't seem to be anything intuitive about applying it to a 2-button suit or sport jacket cut so that both buttons are supposed to be fastened.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

I won't contest with y'all when it comes to terminology and history. But I'm sometimes inclined to button both buttons when it's cold, and I can imagine wearing a tweed jacket around the horses on a chilly day, and wanting to button both buttons while maintaining freedom of motion. A high button stance would facilitate that.


----------



## Checkerboard 13 (Oct 6, 2009)

Kurt N said:


> I won't contest with y'all when it comes to terminology and history. But I'm sometimes inclined to button both buttons when it's cold, and I can imagine wearing a tweed jacket around the horses on a chilly day, and wanting to button both buttons while maintaining freedom of motion. A high button stance would facilitate that.


Interesting to note how many tweed jackets are _three _button jackets... Leaving the bottom button unbuttoned on a three-button accomplishes exactly what you describe.


----------



## Dennis V. (Apr 20, 2010)

I am a great fan of buttoning all the buttons, if the button stance is made for it, like in the interwar era. Something about not buttoning an button rubs me the wrong way, despite it being the standard and has been for a few generations. My vintage collection of clothing sadly doesn't include lounge suits from the pre-war era, so I wear my jackets with the bottom button undone, but my waistcoats are always done all the way, because that's how they are cut. If I were to have a custom suit made I would omit any redundant buttons and buttonholes, convention be damned. With the high-waisted trousers I like I don't think a higher buttonstance on the jacket would look bad anyway.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

On Burton's website, a popular UK suit retailer, nearly all their suits are modelled with one button fastened only https://www.burton.co.uk/
It's the same when I see formal SB suits modelled on Taobao, a Chinese website. https://www.taobao.com/

This looks like the correct way to fasten a SB suit to me. Don't fasten all the buttons, IMO it looks a bit odd.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

the one-button jacket is supremely logical and very rare, almost only a Savile Row thing. Strange.


----------



## phyrpowr (Aug 30, 2009)

I've seen some old photos of JFK with both buttons fastened on a 2button odd jacket, and it looked right. I think it needs a slightly higher button placement, and closed and squarer quarters, though. In a cold breeze, I _will _buton both, but not otherwise


----------



## JerseyJohn (Oct 26, 2007)

If everybody does something and it becomes the standard, there will always be people who imagine they're "hip" by going against the grain. So it's not surprising that people who have noticed that everyone leaves the bottom button undone will start doing it up just to be contrary and show that they're "independent".


----------



## Tim Correll (Jul 18, 2005)

Andy said:


> It's not a trend; it's ignorance.
> 
> The bottom button isn't designed to be buttoned. If you do, the jacket pulls at that spot.
> 
> *Weather people are not only ignorant but they don't want their shirt/tie to show from under their jacket when they stand (usually directly in front of the map and numbers so you can't see the weather)!!!*


Unfortunately, 95% of meteorologists are equally and extremely all of the following: crooked, dishonest, egotistic, fraudulent, ignorant, irresponsible, lazy, overpaid and sleazy. Also, 95% of meteorologists are more of these nine things than everybody else on Earth. 

It is a gargantuan (almost record setting) wonder that meteorologists are rarely, if ever, targets for blackmail, extortion and robbery.


----------



## Dr Kilroy (May 10, 2010)

It really depends on the placement of the button(s). There are some jackets that are meant to be fastened with all buttons:


















Of course they are Duke's. 

Best regards, Dr


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

Dr Kilroy said:


> It really depends on the placement of the button(s). There are some jackets that are meant to be fastened with all buttons:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ROFL.. yes... :icon_smile_big:

Seriously though, who would actually wear an outfit like that? It has to be an Edwardian period movie costume or something.....Bertie Wooster?


----------



## blairrob (Oct 30, 2010)

Audi S5 TC said:


> crooked, dishonest, egotistic, fraudulent, ignorant, irresponsible, lazy, overpaid and sleazy- 95% of _meteorologists are more of these nine things than everybody else on Earth_.


 Apparently you do your own investing.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

MikeDT said:


> ROFL.. yes... :icon_smile_big:
> 
> Seriously though, who would actually wear an outfit like that? It has to be an Edwardian period movie costume or something.....Bertie Wooster?


The jacket isn't outdated. The button stance is actually the same as the trendy 2-button suits of the past few years, though now the bottom button is placed a little lower. The difference here is that when the bottom button is fastened it doesn't pull. I'd buy some of the trendy high-buttoning 2-button jackets if the bottom button could fasten too.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

^^^^^^^^^

The jacket looks ok, but when it's with the short trousers and huge argyle socks. IMO it's just so Jeeves and Wooster.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

MikeDT said:


> ROFL.. yes... :icon_smile_big:
> 
> Seriously though, who would actually wear an outfit like that? It has to be an Edwardian period movie costume or something.....Bertie Wooster?


Mike, it actually [/I]was[/I] the DoW's. Sadly, plus-fours have lost their currency, despite their extreme practicality for outdoor sports, especially golf. Nowadays, one has to be about a 2 handicap or better to cary them off without snide remarks.


----------



## Dr Kilroy (May 10, 2010)

Never insult plus fours in my presence!  I would wear this suit with no concern. 

Best regards, Dr


----------



## Tim Correll (Jul 18, 2005)

blairrob said:


> Apparently you do your own investing.


What is that supposed to mean, blairrob?


----------



## Salieri (Jun 18, 2009)

CuffDaddy said:


> while the man second from right has skipped the middle button of his 3B, but buttoned both top and bottom buttons.


From the photograph it looks to me very much like he's missing the middle button.


----------



## PJC in NoVa (Jan 23, 2005)

MikeDT said:


> ^^^^^^^^^
> 
> The jacket looks ok, but when it's with the short trousers and huge argyle socks. IMO it's just so Jeeves and Wooster.


Thems be plus-fours, methinks.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Audi S5 TC said:


> What is that supposed to mean, blairrob?


It means that the defaming adjectives you applied to weathermen are multiplied and more aptly applied to financial planners.


----------



## Brio1 (May 13, 2010)

The top button (two button model) fell off a jacket that I wore the other day. For a short while, I fastened the bottom button, but as this looked ridiculous I just left it open.


----------



## Tim Correll (Jul 18, 2005)

Peak and Pine said:


> It means that the defaming adjectives you applied to weathermen are multiplied and more aptly applied to financial planners.


Sorry, but I have to disagree with you, Peak and Pine. Financial planners are nowhere near as bad as meteorologists when it comes to being the defaming adjectives that I said meteorologists are.


----------



## blairrob (Oct 30, 2010)

Audi S5 TC said:


> Sorry, but I have to disagree with you, Peak and Pine. Financial planners are nowhere near as bad as meteorologists when it comes to being the defaming adjectives that I said meteorologists are.


New York FP's must live to a higher standard than their Canadian counterparts


----------



## Douglas Brisbane Gray (Jun 7, 2010)

CuffDaddy said:


> Mike, it actually [/I]was[/I] the DoW's. Sadly, plus-fours have lost their currency, despite their extreme practicality for outdoor sports, especially golf. Nowadays, one has to be about a 2 handicap or better to cary them off without snide remarks.


My dad wears them or plus-twos for hillwalking, swears by them.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

DBG, they make a great deal of sense. I keep hoping they will make a meaningful, broad-based comeback.

The best hope is that basketball shorts in America are currently running about the right length. Just make them cinch a bit at the bottom, combine them with tall socks, and _voila_, there you have some oddly colored plus 4's!


----------



## nosajwols (Jan 27, 2010)

Funny, it seems to be a weatherman standard. I notice one of the guys here on CTV always does it and the suit is pulled at that point--looks terrible. What I find odd here is the suits are ususally provided by a local menswear store, have THEY not told them not to do it???

The other people I notice on TV that do this all the time are NFL football announcers, specifically the former players. You would think that there would be someone on staff at the network that would tell them how to dress... (sometimes they are wearing what appears to be a very high end well tailored suit--and tailoring is required for their build, but then they have the bottom button done up!).

As for the logic, I think we are well acquainted with why (History). I never do up the bottom button but at the same time I am annoyed by the fact that "fashion" has dictated that a button and hole be added that we are never supposed to use (I guess the fake buttons on the sleeves are the same), seems all very inefficient and illogical. I think the illogical part is what trips up many on this item, why would they put a button and hole there if I am not supposed to use it.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

I suspect it has caught on among the TV folks because they have been told, or decided on their own, that white shirt or a tie's tip sticking out beneath the buttoned portion of a jacket looks distracting and messy. In light of the low trouser waist cuts popular today*, as well as the standard length of OTR tie creeping towards 60", buttoning the lower button may be the only viable option for avoiding those peeks, especially as they move around. 

All this points up the benefits of sticking with classic, rather than "modern" or "updated," proportions in tailoring. Different elements inter-relate, and changes to one often demand offsetting/compensating changes to another. You might have a taste for one change, but unless you like all the corresponding additional changes, the end result will be displeasing. 

* Even middle-age men increasingly expect their propper pants to fit like jeans.


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

I have also noticed the increasing trend of doing up all the buttons, and I really believe I've seen more of it in the last 1-2 years...

As well as general ignorance of the custom, I wondered if it was something to do with guys being unhappy with the tie/shirt/belt poking out below the jacket buttons look that also seems more common these days when the jacket is done up


----------



## Tim Correll (Jul 18, 2005)

blairrob said:


> New York FP's must live to a higher standard than their Canadian counterparts


But even the Canadian financial planners are much superior to the 95% of meteorologists that are supreme low life pigs.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Here's another picture of a famously well-dressed man wearing a 2B with both buttons done:


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

CuffDaddy said:


> Here's another picture of a famously well-dressed man wearing a 2B with both buttons done:


It's a great look but it can't be compared to today's 2-button jacket. It's like a 3-button jacket without the bottom button and the quarters are further cutaway like on a 1-button jacket. It's the same style as the Duke of Windsor's single-breasted jackets, though in his later years opted to leave the top button open.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Quite right, Matt. But my point, as earlier in the thread, is that there is no _per se_ rule that jackets with 2 buttons only be buttoned at the top. The real rule is that buttons that are not intended to be buttoned, and/or that cannot be buttoned without strain/pulling, should not be buttoned.

As for "today's 2-button jacket," I think the higher buttoning points that are currently in fashion mean that some of them may indeed be suitable for double-buttoning.


----------



## triklops55 (May 14, 2010)

CuffDaddy said:


> Here's another picture of a famously well-dressed man wearing a 2B with both buttons done:


He'd look better with the bottom button undone.


----------



## PJC in NoVa (Jan 23, 2005)

triklops55 said:


> He'd look better with the bottom button undone.


I don't think the coat is designed to be worn that way. Note how the top button of Eden's coat is placed higher on the torso that would be the top button of one of today's ordinary 2btn suits (where only the top button is meant to be fastened).


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

PJC in NoVa said:


> I don't think the coat is designed to be worn that way. Note how the top button of Eden's coat is placed higher on the torso that would be the top button of one of today's ordinary 2btn suits (where only the top button is meant to be fastened).


+1. I think the jacket might look better if the top button was left open. There's a lot of stress on that button, but not on the bottom button.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

CuffDaddy said:


> Quite right, Matt. But my point, as earlier in the thread, is that there is no _per se_ rule that jackets with 2 buttons only be buttoned at the top. The real rule is that buttons that are not intended to be buttoned, and/or that cannot be buttoned without strain/pulling, should not be buttoned.
> 
> As for "today's 2-button jacket," I think the higher buttoning points that are currently in fashion mean that some of them may indeed be suitable for double-buttoning.


Most of the high-buttoning 2-button jackets will still pull at the bottom when both buttons are fastened. The bottom button on these jackets is usually placed at it's traditional height whilst the top button is placed too high. I don't see a purpose in their design.
The rule for buttoning jackets should be don't fasten button below your waist. This rule works for both normal button stances and Anthony Eden's 2-button high 2-button. The only problem with saying that is most people these days don't know where their waist is.


----------



## triklops55 (May 14, 2010)

PJC in NoVa said:


> I don't think the coat is designed to be worn that way. Note how the top button of Eden's coat is placed higher on the torso that would be the top button of one of today's ordinary 2btn suits (where only the top button is meant to be fastened).


I didn't say this coat was made to be worn one way or the other. I said he would look better with the bottom button undone. Doing that would give him a better silhouette.

Does everyone here think that tailors make jackets in a way where the bottom button has to be left undone? I though jackets were made the same way they have always been made and wearers just figured out it looks better and is more comfortable to leave the bottom undone. I don't know. Any suitmakers here that can verify either way?


----------



## Checkerboard 13 (Oct 6, 2009)

triklops55 said:


> Does everyone here think that tailors make jackets in a way where the bottom button has to be left undone?


Yes, of course. It is the style that is held to (in most instances) with suit or sport jackets and unless intended to be buttoned on the bottom (rare) a well-made jacket will be designed and cut to give the best drape and most flattering appearance (including button stance and quarters) when worn this way. 
Often buttoning a bottom button that was not intended to be buttoned will cause pulling, poor drape and otherwise undesirable factors (beside the obvious fact that only the uninformed would button that button in the first place.)


----------



## PJC in NoVa (Jan 23, 2005)

triklops55 said:


> I didn't say this coat was made to be worn one way or the other. I said he would look better with the bottom button undone. Doing that would give him a better silhouette.
> 
> Does everyone here think that tailors make jackets in a way where the bottom button has to be left undone? I though jackets were made the same way they have always been made and wearers just figured out it looks better and is more comfortable to leave the bottom undone. I don't know. Any suitmakers here that can verify either way?


Look at how the quarters angle away from the lower button. With that button undone, the line would be awkward, and also too long b/c it would extend all the way from the top button, which looks to be almost up near the bottom of his sternum rather than down near his navel like the top button on a modern 2btn coat.

As to the question: Yes, most modern OTR 2btn coats are designed never to have the lower button fastened. That's why it "looks better" to wear them that way.


----------



## hockeyinsider (May 8, 2006)

I have often noticed older Hollywood movies and what not from the 30s and 40s showing men with just the bottom button fastened while the top (and in the case of a three-button, middle) button is left undone. I suspect, as others have suggested, there was a counter-culture then or a different cut of jackets. I would agree that most jackets today, especially off-the-rack, are not cut in a manner to allow it.

On a side note, the Duke of Windsor's jackets look about the size of a teenager's suit.


----------



## triklops55 (May 14, 2010)

PJC in NoVa said:


> Look at how the quarters angle away from the lower button. With that button undone, the line would be awkward, and also too long b/c it would extend all the way from the top button, which looks to be almost up near the bottom of his sternum rather than down near his navel like the top button on a modern 2btn coat.
> 
> As to the question: Yes, most modern OTR 2btn coats are designed never to have the lower button fastened. That's why it "looks better" to wear them that way.


What kind of jackets are you buying that the top button's at the navel? Those from 1991?  Most bottom buttons on jackets I've tried on have the lower button just bellow the navel, at the natural waist. The placement of the top button varies on the style and age of the jacket, since it moves up and down with the times.

Both buttons on the guy in the picture's jacket are high, but that's the style of the day. The waist on his pants is also pretty high.

I wanted to hear from a suitmaker. It seams to me like those who actually make the suits design them so you can button any button you please. If buttom buttons were made to never be buttoned, wouldn't they have become dummy buttons like those on the sleeves of most jackets?

I don't fasten the bottom button of my jackets. However, when I try on any jacket, I fasten the buttom button to ensure a good fit. If it looks too tight with that bottom button done up, then it's not a good fit.

If you notice, most bottom buttons on modern jackets overlap the buttonhole anyway even when left undone. The front of jakcets where the two buttons are is also straight and not curved away either. A man's body should also be straigt from wais to hip, and not curvy like women. So how could it be that jackets are specifically designed to not be buttoned?

Stylewise we don't do the bottom button because it looks better and we're told that's the way we should do it. I don't think jackets are crafted differently on purpose so that the buttom button HAS to be left undone. That wouldn't make any sense. In that case, why not just have one button?

I'm not advocating for fastening the bottom button. I'm just asking you to consider the reasons why we leave them unfastened, besides just thinking: "It has to be done that way because that's what the style rules say."


----------



## PJC in NoVa (Jan 23, 2005)

I said near, not at the navel, by which I meant "closer to the navel than the sternum." I should have been clearer about that.

Anthony Eden (the "guy in the picture") is wearing a somewhat higher-button-stance version of what Will Boehlke of "A Suitable Wardrobe" calls the "paddock model" 2-button jacket. More here:

https://asuitablewardrobe.dynend.com/2007/06/jfks-paddock-model-jackets.html

Why not just have a one-button front, indeed? That is the style of a proper single-breasted dinner jacket, and Huntsman of Savile Row specializes in that style as a bespoke offering. But it's never caught on as a mainstream feature of RTW suits and jackets, though your guess is as good as mine as to why that's been the case.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

PJC in NoVa said:


> Why not just have a one-button front, indeed? That is the style of a proper single-breasted dinner jacket, and Huntsman of Savile Row specializes in that style as a bespoke offering. But it's never caught on as a mainstream feature of RTW suits and jackets, though your guess is as good as mine as to why that's been the case.


One of the men's lifestyle mags, don't remember which one, has declared in it's current issue that if you are going to buy a suit this year it should be a one button model.

Cruiser


----------



## PJC in NoVa (Jan 23, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> One of the men's lifestyle mags, don't remember which one, has declared in it's current issue that if you are going to buy a suit this year it should be a one button model.
> 
> Cruiser


Hmmm . . . interesting. These mags aim at a much younger and trendier demographic than the one I'm in, but if I see such suits start to crop up on the racks at Brooks I'll surely post about it. Come to think of it, wasn't there a 1btn Black Fleece suit a couple of seasons ago or something? (Just to mention another line that's not my speed.)


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

PJC in NoVa said:


> Hmmm . . . interesting. These mags aim at a much younger and trendier demographic than the one I'm in, but if I see such suits start to crop up on the racks at Brooks I'll surely post about it. Come to think of it, wasn't there a 1btn Black Fleece suit a couple of seasons ago or something? (Just to mention another line that's not my speed.)


I've seen 1-button jackets here and there, but made by fashion brands that are 4 inches too short and poorly constructed. About a year ago I saw an Armani 1-button suit that was meant to be a more serious suit, though since it was Armani I didn't think about it again until now.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Here's another picture, this time an illustration from an early 1920's catalog, showing the lower - and *only* the lower - button done up on a 2b jacket.










Obviously, this button placement is not what we consider standard today. Nevertheless, it illustrates that the "never button the lower button" guidance is based on how most jackets are cut today, not any inherent rule against doing them up. If one can find, or have made, a jacket cut to have the lower button fastened, and you like the look, there's little reason not to indulge. (I don't care much for it myself, but people should know they could have the option.)


----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

https://www.blogohblog.com/wp-content/pop/2008/06/winner-theme.gif



CuffDaddy said:


> I suspect it has caught on among the TV folks because they have been told, or decided on their own, that white shirt or a tie's tip sticking out beneath the buttoned portion of a jacket looks distracting and messy. In light of the low trouser waist cuts popular today*, as well as the standard length of OTR tie creeping towards 60", buttoning the lower button may be the only viable option for avoiding those peeks, especially as they move around...


----------



## Blueboy1938 (Aug 17, 2008)

*Heresy, you say?*

Obviously, the DoW was beyond rigid rules and dressed how he felt he should dress. If a coat is tailored so that the bottom button cannot be buttoned without disturbing the drape, then by all means it should not be buttoned, as Andy says. However, if the coat is tailored so that button can be engaged, and a person wishes to avoid the dreaded white triangle, especially when gesticulating during weather reports, then I for one do not see the need to regard that person as a cretin.

Of course, my preference would be for all SB coats to have only one button. And I don't just mean for front closure. Cuff buttons should go as well, being of absolutely no purpose, adding cost, and interfering with sleeve length alteration. Buttons that are forbidden to be buttoned are vestigial anachronisms and should be banned:icon_headagainstwal


----------



## rbstc123 (Jun 13, 2007)

CuffDaddy said:


> And here's one where he has *only* the bottom button fastened.


I was watching a Cary Grant movie the other night and there were several scenes where Cary dons only the bottom button buttoned. He was wearing different jackets when he did this as well so I assume it was intentional. I can't remember if it was Bringing Up Baby, Monkey Business, or Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House.

I want to say it was Monkey Business.

Thoughts?...


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

Dr Kilroy said:


> It really depends on the placement of the button(s). There are some jackets that are meant to be fastened with all buttons:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Paddock Coat in action.


----------



## MRR (Nov 19, 2009)

As I'm sure was mentioned;
Bottom buttons are not buttoned because jackets are not designed for that
Jackets are not designed for that because fashion trend is to leave it unbuttoned (That's circular enough)
Fashion trend is to leave it unbuttoned because that is tradition from a long time ago
It is tradition from a long time ago because some fat king was unable to button it and everyone else went along despite common sense saying otherwise (like lisping Spanish or drinking Starbucks)

If people keep buttoning the bottom button, perhaps the jackets will start to be cut accordingly (and maybe ten-gauge electrical lines with black, white, and copper (count them, three) will be called 10/3 instead of 10/2)
Probably not, though.



CuffDaddy said:


>


To my eye, the above jacket seems cut incorrectly to have only the top button buttoned (too high). It does not seem to incorrectly pucker from having two buttoned. Looks more like a three-button jacket that had the lowest button removed.

EDIT: Or were we addressing the one on the left? Hard to tell buttons and holes in a black and white photo.


----------



## ggosch (Aug 15, 2014)

I think either is OK, but better off leaving the bottom unbuttoned as more people will see this as appropriate.


----------



## Quetzal (Jul 25, 2014)

It's nothing new, but I don't think that it was really "acceptable"; it was always preferable to fasten the topmost button. When men still wore culottes and vests that equate the length of a modern suit coat, they wouldn't have thought of fastening the bottom button (I dare someone to try to fasten the 12th button); rather, the top few buttons would be fastened (in essence, a predecessor to the "Bermuda Triangle", or the exposed waist; as the days of Beau Brummell passed, it was still fashionable to have an exposed vest beneath the fastened double-breasted tails, this trend briefly returning in American-cut tailcoats in the 1920s). By the time that suits took their somewhat modern form, the top of the typical four buttons would have been the only fastened button, partly displaying the vest. It must be noted, however, that the wearing of two-piece suits without a vest (usually, a contrasting vest would have been worn) became acceptable in the late Victorian period, particularly for the summertime, and all four or the then-new three buttons were meant to be fastened.

In the Edwardian period and the 1920s, you can see ads, pictures, and film showing men fastening their coats (the four-button was dead along with black suits; three-button were the most common, two-button still in their infancy) in a variety of ways; for three button, all except the top, or just the bottom, just as with two-button suits, or perhaps all buttons. One must also remember that it works (more or less) with suits in this era because of the higher, more coat-like cut (remember that suits were still garments that would have been worn for nearly ANY purpose, and I mean ANY, which is why I believe that suits were DESIGNED to be broken up and worn casually for cold weather before the introduction of jackets in the 1930s). It also seemed to be a period of transition; in the 1930s, with the introduction of the drape and very fitted shape, it would look very odd and break the suit's transition if all of the buttons were fastened; this may be where "rolls" came from for three-button coats, and the "bottom button" rule has remained to today, unless, of course, if it were a casual suit (like the Duke's) or a suit with buttons very highly placed (what is that type of coat called?); again, primarily for dandies. As old suit coats were no longer worn for actual outerwear but only for dressy occasions, the button placement for the average suit lowered to today's standard, and hence the "rule" was set in stone.

Naturally, there have always been those that "break" these rules (I once read a print from 1947 showing men, particularly returning soldiers, the correct way to wear a suit; no belt with a vested suit, the then-new Windsor knot, the correct height for a trouser cuff, the proper length for a tie, and the correct way to wear a hat), but not as bad as today's Average Joe.

-Quetzal


----------

