# Tailors refusing to put in lapel hole on tuxedo



## Muse (Jan 11, 2010)

We bought a tuxedo for my fiance for our wedding. There was no button hole in the lapel but from what I read online, I thought it would be no problem to have it put in. Apparently that's not so, the tailors we've talked to are refusing to do it, saying that it's very risky and could ruin the silk lapel. One of the tailors said it's because there is no special kind of lining under the silk that would keep it from getting damaged in the process of putting in the button hole. Her suggestion was to just buy a black pin and stick it through the lapel. I find the idea horrific, I think it would permanently damage the lapel, with 100 relatives hugging my groom and tugging on the flower in the process.

I know he could just not wear a boutonnière, but if ever there's a time to be festive and wear one, I think a man's own wedding is it. Plus I'd rather stick a flower through a button hole than pin it on and have the stem showing.

Our other alternative is to send it out and have it done for something like $75 with no guarantee of success.

So, gentlemen, what should we do?


----------



## David Reeves (Dec 19, 2008)

They can put a button hole in. They may need to do it by hand though but a satin lapel can certainly take a button hole, I am looking at one right now.


----------



## Cardcaptor Charlie (Jul 7, 2008)

What utter rubbish! I myself have put a buttonhole in a silk grosgrain lapel by hand successfully so either they are too timid and scared in the skills department or they are not properly trained.


----------



## Shirtmaven (Jan 2, 2004)

it is possible to pull the silk on the facing and then you are screwed!!


----------



## David Reeves (Dec 19, 2008)

Well you could replace the fronts if it pulled but if you didn't go to a top maker or someone with a great deal of pride in there product I doubt they will do this if it gets messed up.


----------



## Blueboy1938 (Aug 17, 2008)

*Applause . . .*

. . . for the tailors! The coat was designed to be without a lapel buttonhole. Your fears about a pin damaging the lapel that you are going to gash a buttonhole through and stitch up with thread that is not going to match the fabric and will probably pucker it, even if done by hand, is a bit ludicrous.

Wedding boutonnieres are usually designed to be pinned on, and that's what you should do with it. End of discussion.


----------



## Sean1982 (Sep 7, 2009)

The customer is always right?


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

*alternative*

My Oxxford peak lapel dinner jacket has a silk thread where the button hole would go. It is attached at the ends and a flower stem can slide behind it. I don't know if it was put on the jacket by the maker or added by the tailor when he did the alterations.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## Sufferable Fob (Aug 26, 2009)

You can also put a flower above the lapel, between the lapel and collar - a small braid of string helps keep it in place.

Someone posted pictures of this in a thread a while back.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

What style lapel is it? I find that most shawl collar jackets don't come with holes and many tailors wouldn't know where to put it. On a notch or peak lapel, the buttonhole has a much more natural position. I have a shawl collar dinner jacket that I'm thinking about having a buttonhole put in, but it doesn't feel as natural to me to have one there.


----------



## Xyst (Jan 17, 2010)

Sean1982 said:


> The customer is always right?


Newbie to the boards? Yes. Newbie to sales? No way.

Very rarely is the customer right. They may think they are but that's the point of a specialist, a true craftsman...some one to tell you you're wrong, but not crazy...there's a better way of doing it, or a different method not considered. Some one to explain the complexities to you and help you make the right decision, but I've known plenty of carpenters, tailors, cobblers, welders, and experienced laborers turn away a client because of the nature of the work. Their reputation is at stake, and if you believe the client won't be happy even if you do what they're asking...it's a sticky situaion! 

<steps down from soap box>

:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

You could always get a false lapel hole. Just be careful sticking the pin through and you should be fine.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Solution: It is entirely traditional for men to wear, especially with formal wear, a tiny bud vase (usually in sterling silver) on their lapel. Do a google search for "lapel vase" and take your pick.

Here is a picture of (fictional character) Hercule Poirot wearing such a vase:









I think this is a particularly sound solution for a shawl-lapel garment. After all, the placement of the lapel buttonhole is ordinarily governed by the theoretical possibility of turning the entire lapel and collar up against the wind/cold/rain and the resulting geometry - the buttonhole goes at the logical location for a final button at the top of the lapels before the collar begins. If there were a button sewn to the rear of the opposite lapel, it would be entirely possible to use the lapel buttonhole in this way.

The shawl lapel, OTOH, is usually cut in such a way that, even if turned up, the sides would not overlap. Thus, there is not geometric "logic" to a buttonhole. A lapel vase solves the "floating buttonhole" problem beautifully.


----------



## Blueboy1938 (Aug 17, 2008)

*Agreed, indeed!*



Matt S said:


> What style lapel is it? I find that most shawl collar jackets don't come with holes and many tailors wouldn't know where to put it. On a notch or peak lapel, the buttonhole has a much more natural position. I have a shawl collar dinner jacket that I'm thinking about having a buttonhole put in, but it doesn't feel as natural to me to have one there.





CuffDaddy said:


> Solution: It is entirely traditional for men to wear, especially with formal wear, a tiny bud vase (usually in sterling silver) on their lapel. Do a google search for "lapel vase" and take your pick.
> 
> Here is a picture of (fictional character) Hercule Poirot wearing such a vase:
> 
> ...


It's called a "shawl collar" because it is _without lapels_. Lapels are designed, as admirably stated above, to "lap" over one another against the cold, to be secured by a lapel button through a functioning lapel buttonhole. Putting a "lapel buttonhole" into a shawl collar is an oxymoron. It can't be done. That's why it makes one queasy.

Notwithstanding that, putting a buttonhole into a DJ lapel, when the DJ has lapels, simply for the sake of a boutonniere is, as I said prior, ludicrous. It is possible to do it well, but not likely, and it's so unnecessary and superfluous. Just pin the damn thing to the front like it's designed to do - with the pin that the florists supply with it - and have a sleek and beautifully unscathed lapel for all the myriad times you won't be wearing a boutonniere, as designed by the maker. Boutonnieres are silly for black tie events, except for the groom at a wedding, IMO.

What's more, that anecdote about Prince Albert slashing a hole in his lapel is just poppycock! Coats then already had functioning lapel buttonholes and corresponding buttons to use in closing up the coat all the way to the top.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Shawl collars used to have a hole expressly for placing a flower in. It went away as the streamlined look of the '60s took hold, but I'm sure it's still correct to get one. Nonetheless, some modern dinner jackets have it:


----------



## LaoHu (Sep 16, 2006)

Blueboy1938 said:


> It's called a "shawl collar" because it is _without lapels_. Lapels are designed, as admirably stated above, to "lap" over one another against the cold, to be secured by a lapel button through a functioning lapel buttonhole. Putting a "lapel buttonhole" into a shawl collar is an oxymoron. It can't be done. That's why it makes one queasy.
> 
> Notwithstanding that, putting a buttonhole into a DJ lapel, when the DJ has lapels, simply for the sake of a boutonniere is, as I said prior, ludicrous. It is possible to do it well, but not likely, and it's so unnecessary and superfluous. Just pin the damn thing to the front like it's designed to do - with the pin that the florists supply with it - and have a sleek and beautifully unscathed lapel for all the myriad times you won't be wearing a boutonniere, as designed by the maker. Boutonnieres are silly for black tie events, except for the groom at a wedding, IMO.


Your opinion is not shared by all.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

LaoHu said:


> Your opinion is not shared by all.


Now I'm considering the hole again. And I see that a double-breasted jacket with a shawl collar takes two button holes just like a peak lapel on a double-breasted jacket.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

By the way, I too consider "boutonnieres" silly... but only because a single flower placed into the lapel hole looks so much better. That's what men did before the prom and wedding industry set off to destroy good taste in the name of the almighty buck.


----------



## dwebber18 (Jun 5, 2008)

I went a different route. When I got married my wife had the brides maids in a darker pink color. Instead of wearing a florwer that matched, I found a pocket square and wore that. It looked fantastic and set me apart from my groomsmen. Give that idea a thought, it worked out well for me. It was also funny that noone but me thought jabbing a pin through my silk lapel was a bad idea.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Jovan said:


> By the way, I too consider "boutonnieres" silly... but only because a single flower placed into the lapel hole looks so much better. That's what men did before the prom and wedding industry set off to destroy good taste in the name of the almighty buck.


Of course, what turing "boutonnieres" into big floral arrangements for special occassions did was to kill the carnation or other simple flower casually stuck in the lapel for every day wear.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Indeed. Nowadays it's seen as either archaic or... "gay." 

I stuck one in for a dance years back.










(I've since grown out of the cheap mail-order suit and have much better control over my mane.)


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

Jovan said:


> Indeed. Nowadays it's seen as either archaic or... "gay."
> 
> I stuck one in for a dance years back.
> 
> ...


When was this? The suit actually looks like it fits you really well. The style doesn't look dated, and neither does your date. Not too many people dress like that at that age. I tried.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Four or five years ago now, I think. It was then that I discovered Style Forum and started wanting to dress better. The three piece was from online tailor Baron Boutique. Not too bad, but not _perfect_. My waist was three inches smaller and I had an inch less in my height back then.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

Jovan said:


> Four or five years ago now, I think. It was then that I discovered Style Forum and started wanting to dress better. The three piece was from online tailor Baron Boutique. Not too bad, but not _perfect_. My waist was three inches smaller and I had an inch less in my height back then.


At least you really won't have much to regret when looking back at the picture in the future.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Every once in a while during the spring, I'll throw a flower in the lapel _only_ if I'm walking through the neighborhood on the way to/from taking the train to work (as opposed to driving, as I usually do). The flower comes out before I get on the train, though. I lack the courage to ride the subway with it in...


----------



## Blueboy1938 (Aug 17, 2008)

*The example . . .*



LaoHu said:


> Your opinion is not shared by all.


. . . was one of the silliest men to walk on the face of the earth! He gave up the throne to become "Mr. Wallis Simpson", flirted with Hitler in hopes of getting his old job back, then spent the rest of his life living in an ersatz English townhouse in Paris, dressing for dinner, attending others' parties, and walking pugs two paces behind is wife.

Apparently, a second buttonhole has been gashed into the other side of his shawl collar for "symmetry's sake" - so why isn't he wearing a second carnation in that one?

Those holes can't be called "lapel buttonholes" because - as I said in my prior post - a shawl _collar_ has _no lapels_.

By the way, anyone else notice that he is not wearing a wedding band?


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

What does all that have to do with his style sense? We're not discussing his personal life here.

Nobody is arguing that they are LAPEL holes per se, just that they did (and do) in fact exist on shawl collars. Look at my example of Daniel Craig.


----------



## LaoHu (Sep 16, 2006)

*Argumenta ad personam, hyperbole, and a question*



Blueboy1938 said:


> . . . was one of the silliest men to walk on the face of the earth! He gave up the throne to become "Mr. Wallis Simpson", flirted with Hitler in hopes of getting his old job back, then spent the rest of his life living in an ersatz English townhouse in Paris, dressing for dinner, attending others' parties, and walking pugs two paces behind is wife.
> 
> ...........
> 
> By the way, anyone else notice that he is not wearing a wedding band?


An argument_ ad personam (or ad hominem_ abusive) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions. (Paraphrasing Wikipedia)



Blueboy1938 said:


> Apparently, a second buttonhole has been gashed into the other side of his shawl collar for "symmetry's sake"


Does the term "gashed" or "carefully handsewn" more accurately describe what is seen in the picture?



Blueboy1938 said:


> Those holes can't be called "lapel buttonholes" because - as I said in my prior post - a shawl _collar_ has _no lapels_.


You yourself referred to "a second buttonhole." As to the use of the word "lapel," again, your opinion is not shared by all. Consider manton made last June discussing a DB shawl DJ. He states, "I am going to do a buttonhole on the left lapel, cut straight."



Blueboy1938 said:


> so why isn't he wearing a second carnation in that one?


I can only speculate that to do so would offend the DoW's sense of sartorial style, much admired and emulated during his life and still discussed by notable writers on men's style nearly 40 years after his death.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

Blueboy1938 said:


> Apparently, a second buttonhole has been gashed into the other side of his shawl collar for "symmetry's sake" - so why isn't he wearing a second carnation in that one?


Double-breasted suits properly have a buttonhole in each lapel, so naturally if you want a buttonhole in your double-breasted shawl collar dinner jacket, there should be one on each side. I think it as proper that the DOW has two holes in his collar.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Edward VIII died for our sartorial sins. His father was always belittling his attire as a young man... it definitely broke with tradition and was more "fashionable" than a lot of royalty were. If you look at a picture of him _from 1919_, you'd be surprised to see pleated and cuffed trousers during that era. He innovated many things that are taken for granted now, such as turn down collars with dinner jackets and the backless marcella waistcoat with white tie.

So, ya know... don't casually dismiss him.


----------



## Blueboy1938 (Aug 17, 2008)

*Suddenly . . .*



LaoHu said:


> An argument_ ad personam (or ad hominem_ abusive) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions. (Paraphrasing Wikipedia)


. . . I see clearly that I didn't make any reference to the person advancing the DoW as an example of bi-lateral boutonniere holes. Not a peep.



LaoHu said:


> Does the term "gashed" or "carefully handsewn" more accurately describe what is seen in the picture?


Before the careful hand sewing comes the gashing. Adding superfluous holes, whatever they are called, especially to a shawl collared DJ is silly.



LaoHu said:


> You yourself referred to "a second buttonhole." As to the use of the word "lapel," again, your opinion is not shared by all. Consider manton made last June discussing a DB shawl DJ. He states, "I am going to do a buttonhole on the left lapel, cut straight."
> 
> 
> > The fact that I surrounded the entire term "lapel buttonhole" in quotes does not change the fact that there is no lapel on, in, over, under, or anywhere about a shawl collar. It is, by definition, a continuous collar having no lapels, manton notwithstanding. His complete quote, BTW, is: "I am going to do a buttonhole on the left lapel, cut straight. _I just am._" [Emphasis added.]
> ...


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Blueboy1938 said:


> . . . I see clearly that I didn't make any reference to the person advancing the DoW as an example of bi-lateral boutonniere holes. Not a peep.


No matter. The DoW's personal foibles and failings have nothing to do with whether he was well-dressed, a style icon, and a fairly reliable arbiter of taste. Simply irrelevant.

Notwithstanding that, and as I said before, I think a lapel vase is the preferable solution for shawl-whatever-ed jackets.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

CuffDaddy said:


> Every once in a while during the spring, I'll throw a flower in the lapel _only_ if I'm walking through the neighborhood on the way to/from taking the train to work (as opposed to driving, as I usually do). The flower comes out before I get on the train, though. I lack the courage to ride the subway with it in...


A lapel flower is only appropriate if you have trees in bloom in your path, pluck a flower, put in lapel, and continue your stroll.

The flower-lapel purist would never think of getting a store bought flower, it implies a lack of orchard, hence, only a mean sort of man (who wouldn't frequent these fora of course) resorts to buying flowers in a store.

A masculine flower always has a hard stem, so stay away from the types of flowers used for bouquets, only flowering trees will do. Apple trees or cherry trees are preferred.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Bog said:


> A lapel flower is only appropriate if you have trees in bloom in your path, pluck a flower, put in lapel, and continue your stroll.
> 
> The flower-lapel purist would never think of getting a store bought flower, it implies a lack of orchard, hence, only a mean sort of man (who wouldn't frequent these fora of course) resorts to buying flowers in a store.
> 
> A masculine flower always has a hard stem, so stay away from the types of flowers used for bouquets, only flowering trees will do. Apple trees or cherry trees are preferred.


Bog, I am lucky enough to live in a neighborhood with lots of flowers, and my wife has adorned our yard with a number of flowering plants. The last time I _paid _for a flower in my lapel was when I got married more than a decade ago.

I will confess that I do not stick (pun intended) rigidly (the rarely-seen double consecutive pun!) to the hard-stem rule, mostly because the small blue floret of a hydrangea is sometimes too much to resist.


----------



## LaoHu (Sep 16, 2006)

Blueboy1938 said:


> ...there is no lapel on, in, over, under, or anywhere about a shawl collar. It is, by definition, a continuous collar having no lapels, manton notwithstanding.


Manton notwithstanding. Got it.

Will notwithstanding. Got it.

Sator notwithstanding. Got it.

Flusser notwithstanding. Got it.

Thank you.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

It is appropriate to call it a lapel hole as it was originally a feature of LAPELS and all...


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

CuffDaddy said:


> Bog, I am lucky enough to live in a neighborhood with lots of flowers, and my wife has adorned our yard with a number of flowering plants. The last time I _paid _for a flower in my lapel was when I got married more than a decade ago.
> 
> I will confess that I do not stick (pun intended) rigidly (the rarely-seen double consecutive pun!) to the hard-stem rule, mostly because the small blue floret of a hydrangea is sometimes too much to resist.


Nicely done.


----------

