# So, is the Trad Movement Dead



## tinytim (Jun 13, 2008)

Saw this the other day. It's old and maybe discussed but here goes.

https://www.ivy-style.com/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-ivy-league-look.html


----------



## Enrique Shockwave (Jan 17, 2014)

Of course not! The neo-prep movement might be, but that's a whole different animal.


----------



## Ivygrad71 (Mar 22, 2014)

I do not think of "trad" as a movement, a fashion period or anything like that nor do I believe any TRUE trad thinks of it in those terms. Being "trad" goes so much deeper than what a person wears. It is a lifestyle, plain and simple. I honestly believe you are born and raised that way. I'm not saying that one can't become "trad" but at that point it becomes a conscious choice based on clothing, education or whatever. 
The beauty of trad in my eyes is that it is effortless. It doesn't require any thought. It's just because that is how you were raised, traditional. Over the past several years I have watched traditional become almost a costume for some people, not just limiting it to this forum but in real life as well. I have enjoyed the resurgence of traditional clothing because it has made it more accessible for me. No longer do I have to order exclusively from Eljo's, CCC, Sir Shop or a multitude of others. Gloverall, Barbour, Shetland sweaters and other things that were once fairly well confined to traditionalist's have become well known. 
Again, for me, "trad" has never been about a trend or such. It is who I am and what I identify with, in all areas of my life. The idea of "Most Trad This or That" is asinine. If you have to ask then you aren't one. I know that sounds elitist and I don't mean it to come across that way at all. Just be yourself and give everything you do 100% and stop all the incessant "trad this and trad that". If you enjoy a certain style of clothing, and it happens to fall within what is considered "trad", Ivy League or whatever then embrace it and enjoy it!


----------



## Alleline (Nov 16, 2013)

Business casual is essentially the contemporary extension of the Ivy League look, I think. There is still room within the business casual look for madras and tweed, but it seems beyond argument that the mainstream has moved to open collars and ugly shoes. If the point of the Ivy League look was to be casual and unpretentious, that instinct survives today among the millions of office workers wearing earth-tone trousers, crepe-soled Rockports and button-down patterned shirts. We're a bunch of clothes horses on this forum, we are.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

It's dead. Dead as a door nail. The 50's called and they want their clothes back.

I'm willing to help out. Send all your TNSIL stuff to me and I'll make sure that it is disposed of properly.


----------



## TradThrifter (Oct 22, 2012)

Alleline said:


> Business casual is essentially the contemporary extension of the Ivy League look, I think. There is still room within the business casual look for madras and tweed, but it seems beyond argument that the mainstream has moved to open collars and ugly shoes. If the point of the Ivy League look was to be casual and unpretentious, that instinct survives today among the millions of office workers wearing earth-tone trousers, crepe-soled Rockports and button-down patterned shirts. We're a bunch of clothes horses on this forum, we are.


Agreed. I find trad to really just be business-casual dress in modern times. The majority of the people in my office are wearing button-downs, khakis/grey slacks and some form of loafer as I type this.


----------



## Dieu et les Dames (Jul 18, 2012)

What is this "movement" you speak of?


----------



## boatswaindog (Nov 18, 2010)

By way of my wife, the brains in the family, I do visit Ivy League colleges on an irregular basis. The style is not flourishing. It may have been a fashion trend recently. But the roots are not deep. Back in the day Brooks and JPress would do road shows at prep schools. If you don't recruit your customers as teenagers, it is very hard to capture them when they are older.


----------



## fishertw (Jan 27, 2006)

While it is not dead, many of us with traditional sensibilities are aging and will be gone in the next 20 years. Iconic mens shops are dying on the vine and those nationally known stores (Brooks, Press etc) who were almost exclusively traditional in style are now victims of the likes of Thom Browne and other hip designers.
Just my $.02.
Tom


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

Isn't "trad _movement_" an oxymoron?


----------



## Fiddlermatt (Jul 3, 2013)

There are still some young people who enjoy the "trad" aesthetic and who appreciate traditional values such as longevity versus fashion. I'm the only one my age in know personally who dresses traditionally and eschews the modern style (if it can indeed be called such!) However, there many college aged people I know on this forum, and I am sure there are others who do not post online. My fear is as I grow older traditional clothing will be even harder to find.


----------



## ricardofrancisco (Jan 1, 2013)

I think it will always be around. It's not just a movement or a way of dressing but a way of life in my opinion.


----------



## orange fury (Dec 8, 2013)

I don't think it's a "movement" at all. I'm in my mid-twenties, and I dress the way that I do because it what I've always done. Heck, growing up, every Sunday my parents had me wearing a bow tie to church lol. But my biggest clothing influence growing up was my dad, who really only wore (and still wears) LL Bean, Lands End, and Sperrys. I actually think several pair of his sperrys are as old as I am lol. 

As an aside, I work in a white collar career, and though every guy in my office wears a golf shirt and ill-fitting chinos every day (jeans on Friday), I take a bit of pride in ironing an OCBD every night and wearing a tie and jacket (even though it's not required). I'm also lucky enough to work with coworkers that embrace the fact that I wear red pants and seersucker on a regular basis.


----------



## sleepyinsanfran (Oct 24, 2013)

its dead in san francisco for sure. I cant even wear a navy sportcoat and well-shined shoes to work without people asking why I'm so dressed up


----------



## Ivygrad71 (Mar 22, 2014)

Happy to see that some of you echo my own sentiments.


----------



## fishertw (Jan 27, 2006)

sleepyinsanfran said:


> its dead in san francisco for sure. I cant even wear a navy sportcoat and well-shined shoes to work without people asking why I'm so dressed up


Then how does Cable Car Clothiers stay in business?


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Dead as a doornail. We are keepers of the sputtering flame. Postmodernism is about to engulf us all in a tidal wave of inanity and groupthink. Wear ye bowties while ye can, for tomorrow they shall be illegal.


----------



## Fiddlermatt (Jul 3, 2013)

Patrick06790 said:


> Dead as a doornail. We are keepers of the sputtering flame. Postmodernism is about to engulf us all in a tidal wave of inanity and groupthink. Wear ye bowties while ye can, for tomorrow they shall be illegal.


Are you trying to says bows are double-plus ungood?


----------



## Snow Hill Pond (Aug 10, 2011)

As long as BB continues to sell a must-iron traditional-fit OCBD, everything is A-OK.


----------



## gamma68 (Mar 24, 2013)

Snow Hill Pond said:


> As long as BB continues to sell a must-iron traditional-fit OCBD, everything is A-OK.


Every try to purchase one in a BB store? In my experience, they'll most likely have to order one for you. And I wear a 16-33. Not a good sign, in my opinion.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Fiddlermatt said:


> Are you trying to says bows are double-plus ungood?


It's the first thing they'll look for.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Ivygrad71 said:


> I do not think of "trad" as a movement, a fashion period or anything like that nor do I believe any TRUE trad thinks of it in those terms. Being "trad" goes so much deeper than what a person wears. It is a lifestyle, plain and simple. I honestly believe you are born and raised that way. I'm not saying that one can't become "trad" but at that point it becomes a conscious choice based on clothing, education or whatever.
> The beauty of trad in my eyes is that it is effortless. It doesn't require any thought. It's just because that is how you were raised, traditional. Over the past several years I have watched traditional become almost a costume for some people, not just limiting it to this forum but in real life as well. I have enjoyed the resurgence of traditional clothing because it has made it more accessible for me. No longer do I have to order exclusively from Eljo's, CCC, Sir Shop or a multitude of others. Gloverall, Barbour, Shetland sweaters and other things that were once fairly well confined to traditionalist's have become well known.
> Again, for me, "trad" has never been about a trend or such. It is who I am and what I identify with, in all areas of my life. The idea of "Most Trad This or That" is asinine. If you have to ask then you aren't one. I know that sounds elitist and I don't mean it to come across that way at all. Just be yourself and give everything you do 100% and stop all the incessant "trad this and trad that". If you enjoy a certain style of clothing, and it happens to fall within what is considered "trad", Ivy League or whatever then embrace it and enjoy it!


I never understood the lifestyle argument. Granted, it comes with being raised a certain way... but so many other clothing styles could be argued that way. I really doubt all of us go sailing every day or actually attended an Ivy League university. So how then is it a lifestyle more than a clothing style?


----------



## mjo_1 (Oct 2, 2007)

^I realize it has been completely beat to death over the many years I've been reading/posting here, and I've decided I can see it both ways. Yes, they are just clothes. However, the kind of people who appreciate and follow this style are also more likely (I would think) to enjoy classic taste in other areas and possibly have similar hobbies and interests.

The "movement" does appear to be dying, otherwise the goods we enjoy here would be much easier to find. However, I do think that the good stuff will always be available at a small number of specialty shops for a premium. It is heartening that my generation seems to be wanting "authentic" and well made goods that last. Also, I've observed in my own city that the 22-35 crowd seems to be much better dressed than the upper 30s to mid 50s crowd, indicating a renewed interest in looking presentable. Granted, they're not dressing "trad" as is defined here, but it sure beats bad khakis and vendor polo shirts.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I agree. Tired of hearing that my generation is "lost" when there is so much going for it. Never mind that every generation before mine was "hopeless".


----------



## WillBr (Dec 15, 2009)

Fraser Tartan said:


> It's almost always completely dead. Been that way for many years. They downscaled to much smaller premises a few years ago. I think that it's been run mostly as a hobby for a long time. I don't see how they could have even remotely covered their rent at their previous location.
> 
> I think if they slashed prices to somewhere around full retail at least, that would help.


I've never been able to find anything I actually wanted to buy in CCC. The real gem in SF is The Hound about three doors down. Bill's galore (and they'll email ya about the trunk sales), Talbott and Gitman shirts, Talbott ties, Samuelsohn suits and jacktes, etc. and a great crew of gents who genuinely want to help.

DISCLAIMER - I've only been in SF for three years (transferred from NYC), so it's possible CCC has changed their aesthetic over the years. They also seem to dedicate a large portion of their space to hats, which seem to be their thing.


----------



## Ivygrad71 (Mar 22, 2014)

Jovan said:


> I never understood the lifestyle argument. Granted, it comes with being raised a certain way... but so many other clothing styles could be argued that way. I really doubt all of us go sailing every day or actually attended an Ivy League university. So how then is it a lifestyle more than a clothing style?


It's all I have known. Along with many others I am certain. Traditional, doesn't have to include sailing or attending an Ivy League school. Again it's what you know. Not to be snarky but if you have to ask, then you are not one. 
The "movement" as its been referred to doesn't matter to traditionalist's. Fads come and fads go. For the true traditional guys we have maintained the same style before the fad, during the fad and will continue to do so long after it has passed. Some of you ride the winds of change and that's fine. I wouldn't expect everyone to be Ivy Leage. But, having said that, please don't pass off advice and thoughts like you own the trad style. For some of you its a costume to be worn 5,6,7 years and then you move on. 
As far as the lifestyle, it's hard to make someone that wasn't raised in that manner understand what I am attempting to convey. Those that were raised in it know exactly what I am referencing. Sorry I can't explain it. Maybe it isn't a tangible quality.


----------



## mjo_1 (Oct 2, 2007)

At least their website looks much better than when I last visited it over a year ago. I've got a tan poplin suit from them that I bought because of a PSA thread here for ~40% off. There's no way I'd buy anything else unless they were to run that sale again. 

$1528 for a regular Southwick suit?? I could take to elevator to the bottom of my building right now and get the same thing for $900, or even a Samuelsohn for maybe $1100 - 1200. No wonder they're not doing much business.


----------



## Ivygrad71 (Mar 22, 2014)

CCC has always been a little out there in terms of their pricing. They have become a little eccentric in the last decade. Maybe it's a left coast thing! ;-)


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

Is trad dead?

Only in the sense and to the extent that people think it is. Just like God.


----------



## Ivygrad71 (Mar 22, 2014)

Jovan said:


> I never understood the lifestyle argument. Granted, it comes with being raised a certain way... but so many other clothing styles could be argued that way. I really doubt all of us go _*sailing every day or actually attended an Ivy League university*_. So how then is it a lifestyle more than a clothing style?


The more I think about this comment the more offended that I am. It is a stereotypical dissection that just absolutely grates me. A comment that smacks of a certain type of prejudice. 
If you're on the traditional/Ivy League/preppy train and you feel it has run its course then jump off. As I stated previously those of us that have never lived outside of it will plod along another 20 years or so until it comes back around and trust me it will, that train is never late. It's called traditional for a reason.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

See, I don't think a majority of those who wear traditional American men's clothing ever had a "Movement." So how can something that never existed die?

Now, perhaps there was, or is, a movement of fellas who liked the way traditional American men's clothing looks so much that they began to set "Rules" as to what traditional American men's clothing was/is, and they called it "Trad." Maybe that's dying,...(Kind of like the York Street crowd over at J. Press)

In my opinion this group is mostly posers anyway,.... (The most extreme example of this is the manor in which some Japanese "Trad" groups put themselves together.) It's as though they long for and glorify a way of life that that never existed in the United States. A sort of caricature of what they believe we used to live and dress like in the U.S. If what I just described is dying perhaps there's good reason and we should not resuscitate.


----------



## Fading Fast (Aug 22, 2012)

The Trad-is-more-than-clothing idea makes sense to me in a historic context as the clothes and style evolved on Ivy college campuses throughout the first six decades of the 20th Century when (especially pre-WWII) those who attended Ivy schools came from a small segment of our society. The clothes / style came about from a combination of practicality (many of the clothes were cutting edge technology at the time, especially for the athletic pursuits), social-class distinction and the quirky, piquancy of young men wanting to stand out, do something a bit different, have fun. If, as Ivygrad71 did, you grew up in that world, it was just "what you did" without thinking about it and it feels part of a fully developed tradition / culture. If, like me, you did not grow up in that world, but came of age when those were the clothes many in America was wearing, then they were just the clothes you wore that, back then, I had no idea had come out of a smaller subculture of our society.


----------



## Ivygrad71 (Mar 22, 2014)

The last two postings by 127 and Fading, are spot on.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

In south Georgia it certainly seems alive and well. I never sailed a yacht and ultimately decided against Yale, but I've been hunting quail and riding horses since I could walk and attend the oldest land grant university in the United States. My first dog was a shorthaired pointer and my second was an English lab. My Barbour's seen me through many brisk early mornings tacking the horses and I looked forward to Easter more for the seersucker and pastels than any hardboiled eggs or candy. 

I learned early on that business-casual didn't mean non-functional, as I watched my father shooting birds in heavy chinos, a tattersall buttondown, Russells, and a tweed gilet. He'd taken the afternoon off from his practice and hadn't bothered to change before coming out. Is this "ivy"? Probably not, but it definitely qualifies as a version of "trad".


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

A far cry from here, Reuben. I am the only one I know of that wears much of a Trad look in this city -- which is a good amount of the time, but not as much as others on this forum as can be seen from my WAYWT postings.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

Jovan said:


> A far cry from here, Reuben. I am the only one I know of that wears much of a Trad look in this city -- which is a good amount of the time, but not as much as others on this forum as can be seen from my WAYWT postings.


My condolences. I just had to deal with the CMT version of Jersey shore invading my favorite men's store (open bar and a fantastic selection of bow ties).


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Who started this Trad Movement?


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

Cancel my subscription to the resurrection.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Reuben said:


> My condolences. I just had to deal with the CMT version of Jersey shore invading my favorite men's store (open bar and a fantastic selection of bow ties).


It's not all that bad here. While almost nobody (maybe our own RM Bantista?) here wears Trad, a good number actually do pay attention to their clothing. There's at least three locally-owned haberdasheries and, for better or worse, a decent amount of guys our age getting suited up at J. Crew. Not my style with the slim fit suits and all, but it's better than wearing t-shirts or polos with jeans, sneakers, and baseball cap to nice restaurants here.


----------



## zzdocxx (Sep 26, 2011)

WillBr said:


> I've never been able to find anything I actually wanted to buy in CCC. The real gem in SF is The Hound about three doors down. Bill's galore (and they'll email ya about the trunk sales), Talbott and Gitman shirts, Talbott ties, Samuelsohn suits and jacktes, etc. and a great crew of gents who genuinely want to help.
> 
> DISCLAIMER - I've only been in SF for three years (transferred from NYC), so it's possible CCC has changed their aesthetic over the years. They also seem to dedicate a large portion of their space to hats, which seem to be their thing.


What do you think of that store, "Wingtip"? It was recommended by the lady who answered the phone at Bills when I called, as a place in California where they are stocked.

OK just wondering, next time I am up there I will have to try this Hounds place.


----------



## katon (Dec 25, 2006)

It's not dead... it is having a bit of trouble with its bones, though. If you look at vintage Ivy League clothing, two things that show up again and again are British fabrics and the ACWA tag that indicated unionized American manufacturing. The British textile industry has been shrinking and consolidating, and I don't really think there are too many union shops left in the American men's clothing business... 

Maybe this doesn't matter -- Portuguese flannel wasn't always considered a worthwhile fabric (in the 1960s, it went into department store children's clothing), but over the years it was able to become so. Maybe Penfabric in Malaysia (Brooks Brothers' shirt fabric supplier, I think) will be able to match that achievement? 

I guess it comes down to the same argument that some people use with wines... if you grow the same grapes in a different place, can they make the same wine? I don't really know the answer. I do think it would be nice to have a comprehensive list of the remaining British fabric mills and unionized American clothing factories, though.

As far as the style in general, I wouldn't worry too much about business casual. Things may shift away from Brooks Brothers and toward L.L. Bean, but it's all still Trad.


----------



## efdll (Sep 11, 2008)

Thanks for the link. It's a great piece of cultural history. Some of the comments, however, take the whole thing too seriously, as if there were something intrinsically sacred in this particular style (I don't care for "movement" either), which translates into there being something sacred to belonging to a social class. I suppose there will always be such distasteful attitudes. To dismiss anything but trad is to dismiss eclecticism, which, I would argue, is at the core of American culture. And to chide, say, the Japanese for a fascination with trad is to dismiss the ludic aspect of dress, although it's likely that such dismissal is rooted in an old Protestant/Puritan notion that if something is fun it's no damn good -- indeed, it might damn you! There is a difference between digging into cultural history, the good and the bad, while reveling in wearing the style that evolved from that history and believing that such style is nothing less than priestly, the vestments of a holy caste.
As for the hipster take on trad, I have come to realize that it's not such a bad thing. (I wouldn't wear it, since, for one, I'm too damn old.) For this mode has found a way to reconcile contemporary fashion -- and fashion is not going away -- with tradition. So what if the jackets are too short and show shirt below the jacket button, the pants too low-slung and high-water (although high-water is old-school trad), and the bow ties and fedoras ironic? It's cool that young folk are wearing jackets and ties, and, wonder of wonders, the shoes remain the tradliest imaginable. To expect that they would not put their spin on it is unreasonable. To see that they're not aping the slovenliness of their parents is wonderful. As long as stylishness, of any kind, is alive, I'm for it. As for those who think only our kind of people, dear, understand trad, I would say there is a difference between being elegant and being desiccated.


----------



## Snow Hill Pond (Aug 10, 2011)

gamma68 said:


> Every try to purchase one in a BB store?


Yes, I have, and on more than one occasion, the salesman has looked at me like I was giving him a pop quiz.


----------



## Snow Hill Pond (Aug 10, 2011)

Alleline said:


> Business casual is essentially the contemporary extension of the Ivy League look, I think. There is still room within the business casual look for madras and tweed, but it seems beyond argument that the mainstream has moved to open collars and ugly shoes. If the point of the Ivy League look was to be casual and unpretentious, that instinct survives today among the millions of office workers wearing earth-tone trousers, crepe-soled Rockports and button-down patterned shirts. We're a bunch of clothes horses on this forum, we are.


Interesting angle, but I have to disagree somewhat.

The one element that is missing from this thesis is "fit". The current business casual direction towards tight-fitting shirts, pants, and jackets divorces the style from the Ivy look, IMO. It's not all about the fabrics (madras, corduroy, tweed, etc.). It has to have a comfortable fit as well.


----------



## Alleline (Nov 16, 2013)

Snow Hill Pond said:


> Interesting angle, but I have to disagree somewhat.
> 
> The one element that is missing from this thesis is "fit". The current business casual direction towards tight-fitting shirts, pants, and jackets divorces the style from the Ivy look, IMO. It's not all about the fabrics (madras, corduroy, tweed, etc.). It has to have a comfortable fit as well.


Okay, don't take this the wrong way. I'm just bored right now, listening to a conference call. I'm not really heavily invested in this dispute. Here's my counterpoint:

"Trad," as we discuss it in this forum is driven by quite different instincts than those that led mid-20th century undergraduate men to wear understated clothes that did not call undue attention to themselves or their social status, as discussed in the "Ivy League Look" article linked by the OP on this thread.

If "Trad" necessarily implies the quasi-religious adoption of drawstring BB boxer underwear, shell cordovan loafers and mid-20th century fabrics such as madras, seersucker and patchwork, then of necessity it will eventually die. Morning coats and striped trousers are dead (outside of weddings), evening dress is largely dead. The loggers in the north woods gave up thick wool pants for thinsulate 30 years ago. It's hard to get a pair of those old felt trousers now, and as far as I know, none mourn them.

If, however, Trad can continue to grow and develop to meet a current need - business dress that is understated and not especially expensive - while tying today's styles back to earlier generations, it can be said to endure. New styles will of course require abandoning some of the original elements. Some will fade because technology improves (manmade soles replace leather as the wearability improves), some because tastes change (men allowed to show off their physiques with tighter clothes), and some because supply levels change (shell cordovan leather becoming a specialty item used by only a handful of manufacturers).


----------



## Fading Fast (Aug 22, 2012)

Alleline said:


> Okay, don't take this the wrong way. I'm just bored right now, listening to a conference call. I'm not really heavily invested in this dispute. Here's my counterpoint:
> 
> "Trad," as we discuss it in this forum is driven by quite different instincts than those that led mid-20th century undergraduate men to wear understated clothes that did not call undue attention to themselves or their social status, as discussed in the "Ivy League Look" article linked by the OP on this thread.
> 
> ...


I enjoyed your post and it got me to thinking harder about a few random thoughts that have been floating around in my head recently. While there are still many stores that sell Ivy / Trad clothes today, the change that I've seen in thirty years (and even fifteen) in dress has been stunning - leading to the demise of many of the traditional stores. Suits and ties that were once required - and in a so absolute way that no one questioned or thought about it - in almost any business environment or formal occasion (wedding, funeral, even fine restaurant) are now only sometimes required and many times not. And that has seen a slippage down the line where, for example, less formal restaurants rarely see anyone in suits and ties anymore and forget ballgames, airplanes and other situations where a lot of people once would have dressed. Hence, where are we in another fifteen or thirty years?

Yes, today, there seems to be a blip of interests from the twenty-year olds in suits and ties, but is that just a fad that goes anyway when it becomes "tired" and they are on to the next thing? If so, where is the support for suits and ties (using it as a shorthand for all that Trad / Ivy dressing is about)? If the downward trajectory that I've seen continues - and the young generation's recent interest fades - the economics of suits and ties might take a dramatic downward spin.

And here is the other random thought - there is nothing replacing it. In past generations, as one generation's style faded, there seemed to be another style behind it - maybe it was lamented by the older generation, but there still were standards and social dress requirements. Today, the next thing is nothing - sweats and backward baseball caps, "comfortable" clothes and jeans all the time, no rules, no standards, nothing - just a hodgepodge of clothes. If that is what the majority wants, that is what we will be left with by economic default.

I hope I'm wrong, but we could quickly (in a matter of five or ten years) see the economics of the clothing companies that we care about take a meaningful turn for the worst and, something that seems without historical precedent, there will not be a new style behind it - just casual wear of no particular cohesiveness worn all the time, everywhere.


----------



## WillBr (Dec 15, 2009)

zzdocxx said:


> What do you think of that store, "Wingtip"? It was recommended by the lady who answered the phone at Bills when I called, as a place in California where they are stocked.
> 
> OK just wondering, next time I am up there I will have to try this Hounds place.


Wingtip is great...very new and very nice...skews a bit younger than The Hound. The Hound is decidedly old fashioned.


----------



## Alleline (Nov 16, 2013)

Fading Fast said:


> . . . [T]here is nothing replacing it. In past generations, as one generation's style faded, there seemed to be another style behind it - maybe it was lamented by the older generation, but there still were standards and social dress requirements. Today, the next thing is nothing - sweats and backward baseball caps, "comfortable" clothes and jeans all the time, no rules, no standards, nothing - just a hodgepodge of clothes. If that is what the majority wants, that is what we will be left with by economic default.
> 
> I hope I'm wrong, but we could quickly (in a matter of five or ten years) see the economics of the clothing companies that we care about take a meaningful turn for the worst and, something that seems without historical precedent, there will not be a new style behind it - just casual wear of no particular cohesiveness worn all the time, everywhere.


I'm in a big eastern city for a conference today, and ate lunch at a steakhouse similar to Smith & Wollensky. My table wore business casual - blazers and button-downs but only one man wearing a tie. This has been the dress for this conference as for most healthcare conference I attend.

The next table was all male and dressed very differently. Four men wore dark hooded sweatshirts over jeans, and two wore lumberjack plaids untucked over jeans. It was clearly a business affair. My initial assumption, based on the clothes, was that they were businessmen overseeing the building trades. From the snatches of conversation I could overhear, however, I came to wonder whether they could be bankers of some sort.

If so, it would be a radical departure from the wardrobe I am familiar with from NYC up to 2002. We had already enjoyed the internet revolution that brought skater threads into the boardroom, but the I.T. guys were the only one who completely gave in to denim and jersey cloth. If bankers have moved from L.L. Bean polos to hoodies in the past fifteen years, it is truly remarkable. Does anyone know? I live in a backwater these days and am completely out of touch.


----------



## godan (Feb 10, 2010)

Fading Fast said:


> I enjoyed your post and it got me to thinking harder about a few random thoughts that have been floating around in my head recently. While there are still many stores that sell Ivy / Trad clothes today, the change that I've seen in thirty years (and even fifteen) in dress has been stunning - leading to the demise of many of the traditional stores. Suits and ties that were once required - and in a so absolute way that no one questioned or thought about it - in almost any business environment or formal occasion (wedding, funeral, even fine restaurant) are now only sometimes required and many times not. And that has seen a slippage down the line where, for example, less formal restaurants rarely see anyone in suits and ties anymore and forget ballgames, airplanes and other situations where a lot of people once would have dressed. Hence, where are we in another fifteen or thirty years?
> 
> Yes, today, there seems to be a blip of interests from the twenty-year olds in suits and ties, but is that just a fad that goes anyway when it becomes "tired" and they are on to the next thing? If so, where is the support for suits and ties (using it as a shorthand for all that Trad / Ivy dressing is about)? If the downward trajectory that I've seen continues - and the young generation's recent interest fades - the economics of suits and ties might take a dramatic downward spin.
> 
> ...


This is thought-provoking, as indeed is Alleline's post to which it refers. There is no question that the suit and tie mode of dress is declining, and we see much discussion here about how to strike the right (top) end of business casual. We might agree that business casual is more complex to manage than a suit and tie. A "hodgepoge of clothes" and "casual wear of no particular cohesiveness" are fair descriptions of what most of us see most of the time. However, here in the West, I can certainly discern people who dress well in the context of what is worn in their social environment. A few times a year, I am at livestock auctions, where people dressing toward the top end of "Western wear" have quality boots, very well made Native American belt buckles, Wranglers, Stetsons, Rolexes and, quite often, leather jackets that I recognize as being in the $1K range. In another location and social situation, in urban areas and mountain towns, there are what I term the "Volvotarians" on Saturday mornings at Whole Fools Market dressed in a virtual uniform of jeans, turtlenecks, puffy or fleece vests and ball caps with good cause logos. Think what you may about these Western specifics, my point is that within the non-suit levels of dress that are now nearly ubiquitous there are people reaching toward style. I think they are doing the same elsewhere. So, while much is lost, not all is lost, and some folks are organizing their appearance with a concern for quality, attention to detail and ideas about how it all comes together.


----------



## katon (Dec 25, 2006)

Fading Fast said:


> And here is the other random thought - there is nothing replacing it. In past generations, as one generation's style faded, there seemed to be another style behind it - maybe it was lamented by the older generation, but there still were standards and social dress requirements. Today, the next thing is nothing - sweats and backward baseball caps, "comfortable" clothes and jeans all the time, no rules, no standards, nothing - just a hodgepodge of clothes. If that is what the majority wants, that is what we will be left with by economic default.


I think that there are two main variants of the Ivy look that seem like likely replacements, although I think it will still be quite a while before the old straight-ahead natural shoulder style vanishes.

In 1974, Tom Wolfe noticed a new trend at Yale, that he mockingly called "Funky Chic" -- basically a mixture of the WWII surplus, L.L. Bean-heavy backwoodsman look of Dartmouth and the Depression-era workwear, solidarity-with-the-working-class look of Columbia University. He wrote about it for Rolling Stone Magazine in an article called, "The Denim Affair: Funky Chic":



Tom Wolfe said:


> Twenty years ago, at Elm and York, there was a concentration of men's custom-tailoring shops that seemed to outnumber all the tailors on Fifth Avenue and Fifty-seventh Street put together. They were jammed in like pearls in a box. Yale was still the capital of collegiate smart dressing. Yale was, after all, the place where the jeunesse doree of America were being groomed, in every sense of the word, to inherit the world; the world, of course, being Wall Street and Madison Avenue. Five out of every seven Yale undergraduates could tell whether the button-down Oxford-cloth shirt you had on was from Fenn-Feinstein, J. Press, or Brooks Brothers from a single glance at your shirt front; Fenn-Feinstein: plain breast pocket; J. Press: breast pocket with buttoned flap; Brooks Brothers: no breast pocket at all. Today J. Press is still on the case, but others of the heavenly host are shipping out. Today a sane businessman would sooner open a souvlaki takeout counter at Elm and York than a tailor shop, for reasons any fool could see. On the other side of the grand concourse, lollygagging up against Brooks Health and Beauty Aids, Whitlock's, and the Yale Co-op, are the new Sons of Eli. They are from the same families as before, averaging about $37,500 gross income per annum among the non-scholarship students. But there is nobody out there checking breast pockets or jacket vents or any of the rest of it. The unvarying style at Yale today is best described as Late Army Surplus. Broadway Army & Navy enters heaven! Sons in Levi's, break through that line! that is the sign we hail! Visible at Elm and York are more olive-green ponchos, clodhoppers, and parachute boots, more leaky-dye blue turtlenecks, pea jackets, ski hats, long-distance trucker warms, sheepherder's coats, fisherman's slickers, down-home tenant-farmer bib overalls, coal-stoker strap undershirts, fringed cowpoke jerkins, strike-hall blue workshirts, lumberjack plaids, forest-ranger mackinaws, Australian bushrider mackintoshes, Cong sandals, bike leathers, and more jeans, jeans, jeans, jeans, jeans, more prole gear of every description than you ever saw or read of in a hundred novels by Jack London Jack Conroy, Maxim Gorky, Clara Weatherwax, and any who came before or after.


This variant of the Ivy look has been alive and well since then, and I think is probably one of the candidates for what will replace the old-line look.

The other variant I think has a chance is the "Southern collegiate" look that you still find at places like the University of Virginia. This seems like a cousin to the standard Ivy style, and also seems to be heading along at its own pace, adding new items here and there.


----------



## Alleline (Nov 16, 2013)

nicely put, katon. And thanks, godan, for adding the Western perspective. I have also noticed that theree is a definite style among ranchers that adopts the traditional elements of western style and moves them upmarket. I own two pair of Lucchese classics myself.


----------



## godan (Feb 10, 2010)

Alleline said:


> nicely put, katon. And thanks, godan, for adding the Western perspective. I have also noticed that theree is a definite style among ranchers that adopts the traditional elements of western style and moves them upmarket. I own two pair of Lucchese classics myself.


I'm only guilty of one pair of old-style Lucchese boots, and I had the local guy put on walking heels so I could show them off to creatures with fewer than four legs. Further on upmarked Western dress, my consulting practice is around water rights, so I sometimes present to boards of rural irrigation districts. Some members may drive trucks, but they are new, competent 4WD's, and it is not at all unusual to be at a table with Montblanc pens, Rolex watches, Zuni belt buckles (and occasionally bolos) Stetsons and, of course, Lucchese and Justin boots. There is definitely some deliberate style and the resources to have the best.


----------



## Snow Hill Pond (Aug 10, 2011)

Alleline said:


> If, however, Trad can continue to grow and develop to meet a current need - business dress that is understated and not especially expensive - while tying today's styles back to earlier generations, it can be said to endure.


I understand your point and agree that an obsession over some of the finer points of trad is not what we're talking about. But I still have to come back to the notion that understated inexpensive clothing must also be designed to fit comfortably...or at the very least not be designed to fit uncomfortably. Over the last 5-10 years, I've not been blind to the growing movement towards (gasp) fashion from various purveyors of traditional clothing. Now that's not bad. To each his own. However, I have a hard time linking most of what men wear today back to trad.

I just think that once an article of clothing is intentionally designed to be uncomfortable and dysfunctional (ie, low-rise tight chinos, slim-fit sport coat, slim-fit shirt, etc.) its link back to the 1950's ideal is in name only.


----------



## Alleline (Nov 16, 2013)

Snow Hill Pond said:


> But I still have to come back to the notion that understated inexpensive clothing must also be designed to fit comfortably...or at the very least not be designed to fit uncomfortably. Over the last 5-10 years, I've not been blind to the growing movement towards (gasp) fashion from various purveyors of traditional clothing. Now that's not bad. To each his own. However, I have a hard time linking most of what men wear today back to trad.
> 
> I just think that once an article of clothing is intentionally designed to be uncomfortable and dysfunctional (ie, low-rise tight chinos, slim-fit sport coat, slim-fit shirt, etc.) its link back to the 1950's ideal is in name only.


Snow Hill Pond, I have found what you are looking for! I give you Normcore: https://www.slate.com/articles/life...ore_the_new_fashion_trend_and_its_perils.html


----------



## Snow Hill Pond (Aug 10, 2011)

Alleline said:


> Snow Hill Pond, I have found what you are looking for! I give you Normcore: https://www.slate.com/articles/life...ore_the_new_fashion_trend_and_its_perils.html


Well, this discussion has gone down a road I wasn't anticipating. I'm turning around and getting back on the main road.


----------



## halbydurzell (Aug 19, 2012)

In terms of what's being marketed in the stores and blogs, yes. There's been an abrupt turn from the "heritage" movement of the last five years back towards "expensive,odd looking, European clothes" which the fashion industry has always been the most comfortable with anyway. 

But as others have said, the cat has been let out of the bag. People even slightly aware of men's clothing now know what an oxford shirt and a shetland sweater are. And here in NY, though they often make me side-eye super hard at their preciousness, the trend of "locally made" specialty shops shows no sign of slowing. Learning about well-constructed vintage wear and lamenting its scarcity today no doubt opened some people's eyes (mine included) to clothing's place in society and its ties to manufacturing and the economy. I'd like to think that though people may put their Redwings away and start wearing zebra print jogging pants, they'll at least try to buy those pants from a local shop or fair-trade business. If that's the take-away from five years of of guys running around in skinny jeans and bow ties, I'll take it.

To the original poster, I'm generally curious what a "traditional" lifestyle is? I know you adopted the straight edge "if you're not now, you never were" credo on this but, seriously, explain some aspects of it?


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

If the current trad or ivy league fashion cycle is dead, then who cares? It was always a hustle and a sham led and fed by hipsters and dumbsters, and second-rate journalists. Chensvold is hardly an arbiter of anything anyway. If you like "classic" clothes, wear them. Just don't be one of those people who fantasizes about being Chet Harvard III and don't be a reactionary socially.


----------



## Biff Loman (Mar 5, 2014)

As a 38 year old Englishman I don't think I'm really qualified to pass judgment, but I know what suits me and what I enjoy wearing - much of which could be described as trad/Ivy. As I've commented elsewhere today, it's a classic, timeless look. I take pride in my appearance and dress appropriately for my age and the season/weather, unlike many of the people I see on a daily basis.


----------



## Captain America (Aug 28, 2012)

Doctor Damage said:


> If the current trad or ivy league fashion cycle is dead, then who cares? It was always a hustle and a sham led and fed by hipsters and dumbsters, and second-rate journalists. Chensvold is hardly an arbiter of anything anyway. If you like "classic" clothes, wear them. Just don't be one of those people who fantasizes about being Chet Harvard III and don't be a reactionary socially.


Much of what you say is right and true, except the last knock on "reactionary socially;" many bad social trends out there, some of which shouldn't be in place, many of which are personally and socially destructive. Let's change for the better, not the worse.


----------

