# In Praise of the Notch-Lapel Tuxedo



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

This won't be a popular position on this board, but I trust any discussion about it will be in good taste. Right?!

Time and again members post about how 'terrible' or even 'dreadful' a NLDJ looks, and misguided members sometimes even speak of how 'incorrect' it is. Typically what one finds is a begrudging acceptance of its existence, whilst denigrating anyone so attired.

And I'm here to say Enough! Notch Lapel Wearers of the World, Unite! C'mon...you know who you are...:icon_smile_big:

You see, I recently purchased a new tuxedo, and was faced with the lapel decision, as Brooks Brothers offers all three. (Gasp!...) Now, I've owned three tuxedoes in my life. The first was a peak lapel because I was in school and it was the only one I could afford. The second was a notch, because it was the only one in stock and I was in a hurry. But this purchase was restricted by neither time nor money, given the identical price of all three choices. And it was an informed choice made long after I began lurking here. So which did I choose? It was quite simple, actually. I went with the best-looking option: the notch. (Let us now pause so that I may don my asbestos boxer sh0rts against the flames.)

When I bought my first, I remember looking at the peak lapels and thinking they were the 'classic' choice, but something just seemed odd about them. First off was the huge expanse of satin across my chest, which I really didn't care for. Second was the overly-sharp angles of the lapel, made even more so by the juxtaposition of fabrics. And lastly was the unavoidable fact that the lapels were pointing away from my face! ("Hey...stop looking over my shoulder!")

As many have posted here, the notch lapel is now the most popular lapel choice. Does this in and of itself make it the best choice? Of course not. Multi-colored accessories are also hugely popular, as are pre-tied bow ties and a whole host of other vulgarities. Too, the tuxedo market is dominated by rentals, so people who don't often wear semi-formal clothes are making choices they might not be comfortable making. But its popularity does give us pause to consider that maybe, just maybe, it could simply be the most pleasing choice to other eyes as well?

Part of what informs my choice, no doubt, is my familiarity and comfort with business dress. I came up in a financial institution in which Casual Fridays meant light starch. And what is more traditional on a business suit than the notch lapel? (Let it also be said that, to my decidedly American tastes, the jetted pockets and ventless hems of the most traditional of tuxedos are terribly effeminate.) But for those who would say that the notch lapel makes the DJ look too much like a business suit, I would ask how many business suits you personally own with grosgrain lapels?

I'll follow this post soon with annotated pictures that illustrate my points, but in the meantime I shall sit back and enjoy the flames!


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> ... and misguided members sometimes even speak of how 'incorrect' it is. Typically what one finds is a begrudging acceptance of its existence, whilst denigrating anyone so attired.


Yikes. I'm happy to leave this debate to rage over the pond. Turn up to an event in London in a notched dinner jacket and the inference that will be drawn is that one doesn't know how to dress (whether because you're a dot.commer who doesn't give a ***t, or an American in his high school prom tuxedo, or for any other reason).:devil:


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

I think they are fine. Sean Connery wore a nice one in Goldfinger and I think in other movies, though Matt S will be able to confirm.

I find the notch lapel DJ far less 'offensive' than colourful bow ties to a formal event or a long black tie worn instead of a bow.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Haffman said:


> I find the notch lapel DJ far less 'offensive' than colourful bow ties to a formal event or a long black tie worn instead of a bow.


That's like arguing that there are so many murderers and armed robbers out there than we should cease to care about thieves.


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

Balfour said:


> That's like arguing that there are so many murderers and armed robbers out there than we should cease to care about thieves.


I like your analogy Balfour but we clearly differ in the magnitude to which we view the 'sartorial crime' of the notch lapel dinner suit. To me its more like jaywalking than theft. With that substitution, your analogy fits my view rather well!


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

From another thread:



JBierly said:


> But a few faux pas like notched lapels {snip} isn't going to be noticed by many as incorrect.





BluePincord said:


> Nor should they be, as they are perfecty acceptable.





Balfour said:


> Piffle. They really aren't, unless you're shooting for the high school prom look.


Nah...I was going for the "Most Powerful Man in the World" look:









:icon_smile_big::icon_smile_big:

All in good humor, remember! :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Haffman said:


> I like your analogy Balfour but we clearly differ in the magnitude to which we view the 'sartorial crime' of the notch lapel dinner suit. To me its more like jaywalking than theft. With that substitution, your analogy fits my view rather well!


Well said and fair enough! We'll agree to differ.:wink2:


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> From another thread:
> 
> Nah...I was going for the "Most Powerful Man in the World" look:
> 
> ...


Very much in good humour, but I'm afraid the current POTUS does not cut it. See, e.g., this post:



brokencycle said:


> Is he not wearing a vest to a white tie event?


The last really well-dressed US President was Bush Snr. 'W' wasn't too bad, but very bland 'CEO' (and no doubt selected by image consultants). HW was geniune trad.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

BluePincord said:


> From another thread:
> 
> Nah...I was going for the "Most Powerful Man in the World" look:
> 
> ...


You want to look like a _politician_??? Ewwww . . . :eek2:

:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

^ Before I get flamed, let me add that I'm not recommending this look for black tie ...









:devil::devil::devil:


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Balfour said:


> ^ Before I get flamed, let me add that I'm not recommending this look for black tie ...
> 
> View attachment 4958
> 
> ...


Hey...at least they're patent leather...:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Young'un, you must be smoking angel dust! You have a nice rap, but you are all wrong, wrong, wrong. 

The notch is the least elegant of the alternatives, and is only available because it is cheaper to make. It demonstrates that one does not know how to dress properly.

Only a misguided, knowledgeable fellow or a fanatic with an axe to grind would make this selection. 

Now, go and sin no more....


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Orsini said:


> Young'un, you must be smoking angel dust! You have a nice rap, but you are all wrong, wrong, wrong.
> 
> The notch is the least elegant of the alternatives, and is only available because it is cheaper to make. It demonstrates that one does not know how to dress properly.
> 
> ...


Orsini, this made me laugh like a banshee, and I appreciate that, trust me!

All kidding aside, however, you look at your pictures of James Bond, of George Clooney, Gregory Peck, Sean Connery and countless others, guys known for *getting it right,* and you'll see they all, at one point in their careers (even fictional), favored the notch lapel.

To paraphrase Chris Rock, "You know they did it, just admit it." :icon_smile_big: :icon_smile_big:


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

My argument was that the shawl should be considered more informal than the notch lapel. Not saying it is but just looks that way to me.

While we are at it how about those French (double cuffs). Single cuff much cooler. But most shirts are French although I do have a single cuff shirt.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

BluePincord said:


> Orsini, this made me laugh like a banshee, and I appreciate that, trust me!
> 
> All kidding aside, however, you look at your pictures of James Bond, of George Clooney, Gregory Peck, Sean Connery and countless others, guys known for *getting it right,* and you'll see they all, at one point in their careers (even fictional), favored the notch lapel.
> 
> To paraphrase Chris Rock, "You know they did it, just admit it." :icon_smile_big: :icon_smile_big:


"E pur si muove." They would look better in peak lapels. I beseech you, don't go over to the dark side.


----------



## dks202 (Jun 20, 2008)

Balfour said:


> ^ Before I get flamed, let me add that I'm not recommending this look for black tie ...
> 
> View attachment 4958


Boots are somewhat common here with tuxedos.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Orsini said:


> "E pur si muove." They would look better in peak lapels. I beseech you, don't go over to the dark side.


You should know that Gallilleo favored notches as well...ic12337: :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

dks202 said:


> Boots are somewhat common here with tuxedos.


These national dress variations are fun. What kind of boots? Patent?


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

Haffman said:


> I think they are fine. Sean Connery wore a nice one in Goldfinger and I think in other movies, though Matt S will be able to confirm.
> 
> I find the notch lapel DJ far less 'offensive' than colourful bow ties to a formal event or a long black tie worn instead of a bow.


Connery wears notch lapel dinner jackets in Goldfinger and Diamonds Are Forever. In Goldfinger it's for a small private dinner. In Diamonds Are Forever he wears one to pay a visit to Willard Whyte. In each case the notch lapel dinner jacket is worn for a small, personal gathering. The example in Goldfinger perfectly shows where a notch lapel dinner jacket is appropriate. Roger Moore does the same in Octopussy, and in For Your Eyes Only he wears one out to dinner. The shawl lapel dinner jacket can function similarly to the notch, though it's still better for a casino or a club than more formal functions where peak lapels are best. The dinner jacket is more formal now than it was 50 years ago, making the notch lapels less appropriate for most functions where one wears a dinner jacket today. If you're going to opening night at the opera or a black tie gala, notch lapels are not correct.

I completely agree on the second part.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

BluePincord said:


> You should know that Gallilleo favored notches as well...ic12337: :icon_smile_big:


Well, that would be pre-neoDOW anyway and I don't see that something so long ago matters -- unless I say so, of course...

This particular subject has been a hot potato around here for years. There has been some serious foaming at the mouth over this.

Actors in a play are not necessarily dressed to look their sartorial best, but rather to contribute to the character and whatever the director wants to communicate. What they wear is not necessarily intended to be correct per the current conventional wisdom but to give the audience cues as to what the character is.

Our redoubtable Texan is presenting himself to be the best Texan ever. Our actor is presenting himself to be a villain in a photoplay. There is a difference in the image you are trying to project.

And this is current trend anyway, and is thus generally to be avoided...


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Matt S said:


> If you're going to opening night at the opera or a black tie gala, notch lapels are not correct.


Okay, then riddle me this: What do the below items come from?

India: Nehru, Notch
Mexico: Notch, Notch
China: Notch, Notch
Germany: Notch, Notch
South Korea: Notch, Notch
England: Shawl, Notch


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

I have come around to the point of view of Blue Pincord. I say it's time to end this prissy iGent condemnation of the notch-lapel dinner jacket/tuxedo. The tuxedo has its origins as a "casual" alternative to the "full fig." The notch lapel was around and an accepted alternative in the early days of the dinner jacket. Yes, I know, its use fell into abeyance in the "Golden Age" of the interwar years, but, hey guys, it's not 1935 anymore. The notch lapel has been back since the late 1950s. It has been worn by many eminent men. (Oh, and I'm sure HRH Prince Phillip would be mistaken for an American in his high school prom tuxedo!) John T. Molloy in the second edition of "Dress for Success" counsels his readers to go with the notch lapel since that was the choice of "most executives"...and that was 25 years ago. Styles do change after all. The notch lapel is here to stay, I'm sure, and given the historical precedents for it and a half-century of widespread usage, at this point I think it is purely reactionary to impute a "wrongness" to the notch-lapel tuxedo, in the same sense that wearing square-toed, rubber-soled shoes with the tuxedo would be wrong. I tend to take the view that, if anything, the shawl lapel, with its kinship to the smoking jacket, is more casual than the notch lapel.

With that out of the way, should the occasion come up for me to get a tuxedo, I would not get a notch-lapel. In all probability, I would get a DB shawl lapel, but then I'm a pretty casual sort of guy!


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

BluePincord said:


> Okay, then riddle me this: What do the below items come from?India: Nehru, NotchMexico: Notch, NotchChina: Notch, NotchGermany: Notch, NotchSouth Korea: Notch, NotchEngland: Shawl, Notch


I don't follow you.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> Okay, then riddle me this: What do the below items come from?
> 
> India: Nehru, Notch
> Mexico: Notch, Notch
> ...





Matt S said:


> I don't follow you.


Those are the six State Dinners which have been held under the current administration. All six were black tie. The first lapel listed is that worn by the executive of the visiting country (or her husband), the second is the lapel worn by the host.

Not a single peak among them, and only a single shawl. Of the twelve 'opportunities' for someone to wear a notch lapel, ten chose to do so. And if we take out Obama, we still have four out of six executives wearing a notch.

So if the notch lapel is not 'correct' for a black-tie gala, how is it somehow the preferred lapel for State Dinners?!! I'm afraid your advice that it is not correct is not correct.


----------



## Youthful Repp-robate (Sep 26, 2011)

BluePincord said:


> Those are the six State Dinners which have been held under the current administration. All six were black tie. The first lapel listed is that worn by the executive of the visiting country (or her husband), the second is the lapel worn by the host.
> 
> Not a single peak among them, and only a single shawl. Of the twelve 'opportunities' for someone to wear a notch lapel, ten chose to do so. And if we take out Obama, we still have four out of six executives wearing a notch.
> 
> So if the notch lapel is not 'correct' for a black-tie gala, how is it somehow the preferred lapel for State Dinners?!! I'm afraid your advice that it is not correct is not correct.


Honestly, I'm not sure it's particularly wise to get an idea of what is "correct" from politicians, especially in terms of dress.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

JLibourel said:


> I have come around to the point of view of Blue Pincord. I say it's time to end this prissy iGent condemnation of the notch-lapel dinner jacket/tuxedo.


Yours is an excellent post, and makes some great points I was not aware of either. Particularly Prince Phillip! (Where are you Balfour....get back in here and fight!)


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Youthful Repp-robate said:


> Honestly, I'm not sure it's particularly wise to get an idea of what is "correct" from politicians, especially in terms of dress.


Okay, but who then? First it's actors, because they're playing a role. (Even when dressed outside of the movies, I am to believe.) Now it's politicians, whom I might add typically have protocol officers who dictate much of their dress.

What about captains of industry? Network news anchors? Great musicians? Patrons of the arts? THEY'RE ALL WEARING NOTCHES!! Every black-tie event I go to is literally dominated by notch lapels.

I'm afraid the only people who say 'no to the notch,' at least here in the States, are people on this board and Alan Flusser!

Who, I might remind everyone, dresses like an organ grinder's monkey.


----------



## Youthful Repp-robate (Sep 26, 2011)

BluePincord said:


> Okay, but who then? First it's actors, because they're playing a role. (Even when dressed outside of the movies, I am to believe.) Now it's politicians, whom I might add typically have protocol officers who dictate much of their dress.
> 
> What about captains of industry? Great musicians? Patrons of the arts? THEY'RE ALL WEARING NOTCHES!! Every black-tie event I go to is literally dominated by notch lapels.
> 
> ...


Why determine what's correct based on anybody else's example, at least in black tie? There's not a lot to play with there, so why not combine things as you wish? I, for one, have no beef with including notch lapels in that box, though I think peak and shawl both look better. They are verifiably more traditional, if you're in to that.

Something about the contrast between the collar and the lapel on a notch tux doesn't work for me. I think it must have to do with the texture and sheen, since the same contrast on a velvet-collared tweed jacket doesn't bother me.


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

BluePincord said:


> Those are the six State Dinners which have been held under the current administration. All six were black tie. The first lapel listed is that worn by the executive of the visiting country (or her husband), the second is the lapel worn by the host.
> 
> Not a single peak among them, and only a single shawl. Of the twelve 'opportunities' for someone to wear a notch lapel, ten chose to do so. And if we take out Obama, we still have four out of six executives wearing a notch.
> 
> So if the notch lapel is not 'correct' for a black-tie gala, how is it somehow the preferred lapel for State Dinners?!! I'm afraid your advice that it is not correct is not correct.


You are assuming that these individuals know how to dress. Time and time again they have proven that they don't know what they are doing. I'm about to dig up the video of the POTUS with glass in hand toasting.


----------



## Phileas Fogg (Oct 20, 2008)

There is historical precedent for dinner jackets with step or notch lapels, still this does not mean it looks good or better than the alternatives.
Of course it is a matter of taste and therefore subjective but preference in sartorially happier times went to peak or shawl lapels.

I also would advise to avoid using most contemporary politicians as examples. If one has to go back to politicians I would stop to those active up to the early 60s.
The current President of the United States is rather infamous for his brutal (miss)use of formal clothes.
Yours,

Phileas Fogg


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> (Where are you Balfour....get back in here and fight!)


Asleep.

I've no particular desire to have a fight over this (even a very good humoured one - I should have used more smileys in my posts yesterday ;-)). My suggestion that I would leave the debate to rage across the pond was to acknowledge that the sartorial conventions on this point may differ in different countries (waiting for MikeDT to weigh in here ).

Picking up a few random points (sorry for not including quotes):

Part of me actually likes 'W''s cowboy boots with his black tie rig, on the basis that it's so awful that it ceases to be awful. When meeting Texans, I always enjoyed it when they turned up in business dress plus ten gallon hats!

I agree politicians offer a dangerous precedent (our last Prime Minister - when Chancellor of the Exchequer - turned up more than once to White Tie dinners in a lounge suit). I would certainly not look to the modern crop of Hollywood stars for inspiration, either.

As for HRH the Duke of Edinburgh, fair point well made (although the rules do not really apply to the Royals).


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Matt S said:


> Connery wears notch lapel dinner jackets in Goldfinger and Diamonds Are Forever. In Goldfinger it's for a small private dinner. In Diamonds Are Forever he wears one to pay a visit to Willard Whyte. In each case the notch lapel dinner jacket is worn for a small, personal gathering. The example in Goldfinger perfectly shows where a notch lapel dinner jacket is appropriate. Roger Moore does the same in Octopussy, and in For Your Eyes Only he wears one out to dinner. The shawl lapel dinner jacket can function similarly to the notch, though it's still better for a casino or a club than more formal functions where peak lapels are best. The dinner jacket is more formal now than it was 50 years ago, making the notch lapels less appropriate for most functions where one wears a dinner jacket today. If you're going to opening night at the opera or a black tie gala, notch lapels are not correct.
> 
> I completely agree on the second part.


Your command of Bond ephemera is truly astonishing and a delight! :icon_cheers:


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

Matt S said:


> Connery wears notch lapel dinner jackets in Goldfinger and Diamonds Are Forever. In Goldfinger it's for a small private dinner. In Diamonds Are Forever he wears one to pay a visit to Willard Whyte. In each case the notch lapel dinner jacket is worn for a small, personal gathering. The example in Goldfinger perfectly shows where a notch lapel dinner jacket is appropriate. Roger Moore does the same in Octopussy, and in For Your Eyes Only he wears one out to dinner. The shawl lapel dinner jacket can function similarly to the notch, though it's still better for a casino or a club than more formal functions where peak lapels are best. The dinner jacket is more formal now than it was 50 years ago, making the notch lapels less appropriate for most functions where one wears a dinner jacket today. If you're going to opening night at the opera or a black tie gala, notch lapels are not correct.
> 
> I completely agree on the second part.


As ever, a truly insightful and knowledgable response - thanks


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

BluePincord:

The purpose of this website and The Encyclopedia of Men's Clothes is to eradiate ignorance, but I guess every once in a while we must deal with failure.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Andy said:


> BluePincord:
> 
> The purpose of this website and The Encyclopedia of Men's Clothes is to eradiate ignorance, but I guess every once in a while we must deal with failure.


Andy, I understand that this board was founded and is run by you, and likewise I trust you understand that it is users like me who pay your bills through consumption of ads.

So when snotty replies like yours above drive away users, what do you think that does to your income?


----------



## Gopherguy (Feb 27, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> Andy, I understand that this board was founded and is run by you, and likewise I trust you understand that it is users like me who pay your bills through consumption of ads.
> 
> So when snotty replies like yours above drive away users, what do you think that does to your income?


In defense of Andy.

Here's the point. The people on this forum and those who are most highly regarded in men's dress believe there is a clear hierarchy in DJs. Peaks are the best choice followed by shawl. Notch lapels may have been around for decades, and tens of thousands have worn them, but that doesn't mean they should be worn.

If you want to dress better, dress in peaks. If you don't, then wear notches. The community will never accept notches as the equivalent to peaks just as the community will never accept a DB jacket with anything other than peaks.

If you're confident enough in yourself where you feel you don't need to justify to us that notches are as good as peaks, then by all means go for it. However, needing to convince us that notches are as good as peaks says to me that you're consciously aware that others think you're not dressing well.

Thus, convincing a well-regarded men's dress forum about the virtues of notches would alleviate your sartorial self esteem issues and provide you with a well credentialed riposte in the event someone questions your notches in person.

It's your money. Buy what you want. But don't take offense when you're offered dress advice on a dress forum and you don't like what others think or say.


----------



## Persephone (Jul 17, 2008)

BluePincord:

I don't see where Andy was snotty. I have been a guest on this board for quite a while -- mostly to seek expertise and inspiration on behalf of my husband -- and I have never, please let me repeat, never read a snotty response given by Andy. Tongue-in-cheek, self-deprecating, sarcastic, witty -- yes, snotty, absolutely no. 

Has your sense of humour become a victim of the Midwestern drought?


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

BluePincord said:


> Andy, I understand that this board was founded and is run by you, and likewise I trust you understand that it is users like me who pay your bills through consumption of ads.
> 
> So when snotty replies like yours above drive away users, what do you think that does to your income?


You are going to need a thicker hide than this, old man.

See, your problem is you're just all wrong. And these guys you're getting your advice from -- well, they're all wrong. They may be rich and famous, but they don't know how to dress.

The notch is the crummiest looking of the three and it's associated with staff. There is just no point to pay good money to buy it and look bad.

You got it from BB, didn't you? They guarantee satisfaction. Take it back and tell them you don't like it any more and you want a real one.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Given that this site gets over a million and a quarter hits a year, one member who feels slighted is not terribly significant, especially when he started a thread that he knew full well was going to earn him grief. Go ahead and wear a notched collar dinner jacket if it makes you feel good. Do not expect to convince those with far more experience and expertise than you to follow suit.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Persephone said:


> I don't see where Andy was snotty.


He said, in no uncertain terms, that this board had failed to eradicate my ignorance, and that doesn't come across as snotty to you?


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

No, more wry than anything else.


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

BluePincord said:


> Andy, I understand that this board was founded and is run by you, and likewise I trust you understand that it is users like me who pay your bills through consumption of ads.
> 
> So when snotty replies like yours above drive away users, what do you think that does to your income?


I'm not Andy but my guess is it won't hurt it one bit. My experience over the past year is the dissenting opinions come and go, those with like mind of enlightenment stick around.


----------



## Persephone (Jul 17, 2008)

No, not at all. He also did not write that he failed to eradicate *your *ignorance, he wrote that it is the purpose of the Web site and the encyclopaedia to eradicate ignorance. That's a subtle, but important, difference. Andy's sense of humour can be wry, but I am part English, and we enjoy taking the pi** out of each other. It's a national sport.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

BluePincord, you must bear in mind that iGent-ism (and I am not just singling out the participants in AAAC) is very cult-like, rigid and dogmatic. (I used to be more that way myself some years back, I'll confess.) The iGentry don't cotton much to iconoclasts like you.

Always bear in mind that one of the great rewards of being an Internet Gentleman is to watch the Oscars (or a similar awards show), see a guy who is handsome, talented, enormously popular, filthy rich and accompanied by a drop-dead gorgeous woman and be able to think, "Hah! He's wearing a notch-lapel--the third rater! I may work in a cubicle and make $50K a year, but at least...at least I, for one, know how to turn myself out in proper black tie (or would if I ever got any invitations, which, of course, I don't)."

Similarly, you can look at a presidential inauguration and think, "He may now be the President of the United States, but at least I know better than to wear split-toe bluchers for this august event and would have worn proper black captoes!"


----------



## zzdocxx (Sep 26, 2011)

BluePincord said:


> He said, in no uncertain terms, that this board had failed to eradicate my ignorance, and that doesn't come across as snotty to you?


BP I took that as just light hearted ribbing.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

JLibourel said:


> BluePincord, you must bear in mind that iGent-ism (and I am not just singling out the participants in AAAC) is very cult-like, rigid and dogmatic. (I used to be more that way myself some years back, I'll confess.) The iGentry don't cotton much to iconoclasts like you.
> 
> Always bear in mind that one of the great rewards of being an Internet Gentleman is to watch the Oscars (or a similar awards show), see a guy who is handsome, talented, enormously popular, filthy rich and accompanied by a drop-dead gorgeous woman and be able to think, "Hah! He's wearing a notch-lapel--the third rater! I may work in a cubicle and make $50K a year, but at least...at least I, for one, know how to turn myself out in proper black tie (or would if I ever got any invitations, which, of course, I don't)."
> 
> Similarly, you can look at a presidential inauguration and think, "He may now be the President of the United States, but at least I know better than to wear split-toe bluchers for this august event and would have worn proper black captoes!"


Another excellent post.

What I find hysterical is the sheer volume of members absolutely tripping over themselves to explain away any and all evidence which disproves their 'rules.' Oh no, don't use THAT picture to support your assertion, as I happen to know for a fact that the wearer had just returned from picking up the kids, and if you look at the background, it's clearly a partly cloudy day. Anyone could see wearing a notch on such a day.

What's that, the Queen of England's *husband* posed for an official portrait in a notch?! Oh no, we mustn't look to mere _royalty_ for an example...what could they possibly know! Unless they are the decades-dead Duke of Windsor, that is.

And the leader of the free world dresses ALWAYS in a notch lapel?! Of course, we should only look to the President of the United States of America if we stop at Eisenhower, since after all HE knew what he was doing! After all, what is a mere _fifty years_ in fashion?!!

You guys really, really ought to see yourselves tripping all over God's creation to justify a rule that exists only in your own minds.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

zzdocxx said:


> BP I took that as just light hearted ribbing.


Okay, I'll go with you on that. Perhaps I have over-reacted, and will here offer my apologies to Andy. I don't know his sense of humor as the rest of you do, so mea culpa.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

mrp said:


> I'm not Andy but my guess is it won't hurt it one bit. My experience over the past year is the dissenting opinions come and go, those with like mind of enlightenment stick around.


I find this type of self-congratulatory attitude troubling, but not nearly as much as the fact that you are seemingly unaware of the value of dissent.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

"Like mind of enlightenment"...See what I mean about "groupthink"!


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> Another excellent post.
> 
> What I find hysterical is the sheer volume of members absolutely tripping over themselves to explain away any and all evidence which disproves their 'rules.' Oh no, don't use THAT picture to support your assertion, as I happen to know for a fact that the wearer had just returned from picking up the kids, and if you look at the background, it's clearly a partly cloudy day. Anyone could see wearing a notch on such a day.
> 
> ...


Against my better judgment, I might add that you seem to be getting the most worked up of anyone here.

Supporting your argument by reference to what Hollywood actors or modern politicians wear is not going to carry much weight with those of us who favour traditional dress. Indeed it was a very revealing comment. As I acknowledged above, the poster who mentioned the Duke of Edinburgh made a fair point. He does dress very well indeed. But it is very unwise simply look at rich / famous / powerful people and conclude that what they wear is appropriate because they wear it.

I enjoyed Mr. Libourel's comments. A good reminder that this - in my mind at least - is only a hobby. Clearly being well-dressed is not an accomplishment that rates as highly as being a great humanitarian or inspirational military leader or brilliant academic. And generosity of spirit, kindness and good manners also count for a lot more than 'being well-dressed'.

Having said that, these are clothing fora where people come to debate their hobby (and many have considerably more knowledge, learning and experience on these matters than either of us).


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Orsini said:


> The notch is the crummiest looking of the three and it's associated with staff.


Staff like heads of state, husbands of monarchs, universally admired actors, captains of industry...


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Against my better judgment, I might add that you seem to be getting the most worked up of anyone here.
> 
> Supporting your argument by reference to what Hollywood actors or modern politicians wear is not going to carry much weight with those of us who favour traditional dress. Indeed it was a very revealing comment. As I acknowledged above, the poster who mentioned the Duke of Edinburgh made a fair point. He does dress very well indeed. But it is very unwise simply look at rich / famous / powerful people and conclude that what they wear is appropriate because they wear it.
> 
> ...


But knowledge and experience can be blinders, too, rendering one incapable of observing the world around to notice its changes.

I remember years ago "learning" the rules that said one shouldn't split an infinitive, nor end a sentence in a preposition. But being an avid reader, I found daily examples of good language which ran roughshod over those rules. Only to find out, years later, that no such rules existed. They were made up out of whole cloth because priggish English teachers thought it best to make English sound more Latinate. So after I started lurking here, I found all the vitriol about notch lapels, and went investigating. And it turns out such rules (at least here in America) have never existed in the first place. They were basically made up by individuals like Alan Flusser who, preferring an earlier period of dress, thought to coin them after the fact. Like Mr. Libourel has opined, they are a way to look down your nose at people more successful than yourself. (Not you, Balfour, but 'you' in a broader sense.)

So having said that, those who speak of a rule can offer no tangible proof, and as such are hereinafter ignored.

I speak of my _*preference*_ for the notch lapel. I think it looks better, as it is more subtle and doesn't have an acute angle, faced in reflective material, that points over my shoulders.

And the majority of the people in America agree.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Whoa! The _majority_ of Americans don't wear tuxedos and the _majority_ of those who do, wear them so seldom they rent them. And since a notch collar tux is cheaper to make, that's what the rental companies carry. Their customers seldom even notice. The single time in my life I wore a tux, it was white because I was getting married before six in the evening and I don't even remember what kind of a collar it had. So that is a specious argument, at best.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Okay, Sarge, you know the argument I really do now have to make:

You have a strong opinion on DJ lapels, but admit you have only once worn one yourself? I have attended dozens and dozens of formal events in my time, and do so two to three times a year now. And the people I see at such events also go on such regular basis as to require purchase of semi-formal wear. And notches always number over 50% at a gala, with the rest being split somewhat evenly by peaks and shawls.

And to say notches are cheaper to make, and are therefore carried by more rental houses, is highly misleading, as pretty much any rental house in America will offer you the choice of dozens of combinations. (Admittedly, most bad.) And yet still more choose notches. I'll agree mine is not a perfect argument here, as I alluded to in a much earlier post, but still the fact remains...someone is choosing notches, and with great frequency.
*
Edit: The first 'argument' above is incorrect, as a quick review of the thread shows Sarge really hasn't expressed a strong opinion at all. My bad.*


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

BluePincord said:


> I find this type of self-congratulatory attitude troubling, but not nearly as much as the fact that you are seemingly unaware of the value of dissent.


I'm a realist, if you pick you your ball and leave the field that game will go on. As to valuing dissent or being self congratulatory you don't know me from Adam. I own a PL Grosgrain faced DJ, made by Oxxford, for the rare occasion that I may have the pleasure of wearing it; some here might not like the dual vents on it but I'm of the opinion that they are functional, so at this point I have not stitched them shut. Dissenting opionions are one thing and you have the right to have one, on the other hand you aren't going to convince this body of users to get in lock step with your opinion on this matter.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Good catch. You are right. I _don't_ live the dj lifestyle nor do any of the people I socialize with. This is Southern California. Hardly any of us do. Personally, if I ever did need one, I'd go with the DB, just because I like it. However, that is unlikely ever to happen. The California Tuxedo, on the other hand . . . that I have and will probably get more iterations thereof. And that's an ensemble where the collar styles are almost uniformly notched on SB jackets.


----------



## OH-CPA (Jun 12, 2008)

BluePincord said:


> And the majority of the people in America agree.


Just because something is the most popular doesn't mean it's the best.

Does McDonalds make the best burgers?

Does Budweiser make the best beer?

Is Walmart the best retail store?

Is Justin Bieber the best musician?

If you believe these companies represent the best in their class that is your right. I will never be convinced that the product/service offered from these companies is best in class. If you wish to argue that I will enjoy a beer from Left Hand, North Coast or Founders while ignoring your rants.

It's you don't like the peak label that is fine. But you are not going to convince many people here of that. Like many of the people on this site, I subscribe to the idea of classic black tie. Of the common deviations from classic black tie, the use of a notch label is probably the least concerning to me. But when I see a person at a black tie event deviating from the standard, I almost always assume they don't know what the standard is. Now some people can break away from the standard and look good because you can tell they know the standard and purposely chose to deviate from it. The best example I can think of is the picture of Carey Grant wearing penny loafers with a Tux. Carey Grant can pull it off, I can't. In fact Carey Grant looks better in that picture than I ever had or ever will. But the fact that Carey Grant can pull it off, doesn't mean that I am going to suggest that Penny Loafers are the preferred or even acceptable footwear for black tie events.

Being a royal does not mean that one is flawless. That being said I think it is safe to assume that Prince Philip knows what the standard is and has chosen to avoid it. Personally I think he would look better in a peak lapel tuxedo, but I assume you believe otherwise, C'est la vie.


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

What part of "this board has failed to eradicate my ignorance" do you fail to understand? It's not "snotty" to point out someone is a slow learner or "special" to use today's politically correct verbiage...


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

cdavant said:


> What part of "this board has failed to eradicate my ignorance" do you fail to understand? It's not "snotty" to point out someone is a slow learner or "special" to use today's politically correct verbiage...


You would do well to read the thread in its entirety before responding to a single post. You might otherwise come off as slow yourself.


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

In defense of BluePincord I think he has made a pretty good argument in favor of the Notch-Lapel - even if he is never going to convince most board members. Moreover, fashion and and even styles do change over time. And to disregard what Politicians and Hollywood types are wearing is a bit disingenuous considering they are the icons that are often referred to when one talks of classic style. So, just when does a style change? Clearly the notched lapel has gained more acceptance. I still think peaked lapels are more proper but I would never buy a shawl - way too casual to my eye. I would rather have a notch over a shawl - at least I look like the rest of those who don't know how to dress properly - just as long is it doesn't have vents...

All in all a good thread.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

OH-CPA said:


> Just because something is the most popular doesn't mean it's the best.
> 
> Does McDonalds make the best burgers?
> 
> ...


Well, I think this is a specious analogy. While they may not be the "best in their class," no one is going to argue that Macs and Bud are not "proper" beers. If you asked me for a beer and burger, and I brought you a Big Mac and a Bud you might be disappointed, but you could not complain of a "wrongness" as you might properly if I brought you a veggie burger and a root beer, for example.



> If you believe these companies represent the best in their class that is your right. I will never be convinced that the product/service offered from these companies is best in class. If you wish to argue that I will enjoy a beer from Left Hand, North Coast or Founders while ignoring your rants.
> 
> It's you don't like the peak label that is fine. But you are not going to convince many people here of that. Like many of the people on this site, I subscribe to the idea of classic black tie. Of the common deviations from classic black tie, the use of a notch label is probably the least concerning to me. But when I see a person at a black tie event deviating from the standard, I almost always assume they don't know what the standard is. Now some people can break away from the standard and look good because you can tell they know the standard and purposely chose to deviate from it. The best example I can think of is the picture of Carey Grant wearing penny loafers with a Tux. Carey Grant can pull it off, I can't. In fact Carey Grant looks better in that picture than I ever had or ever will. But the fact that Carey Grant can pull it off, doesn't mean that I am going to suggest that Penny Loafers are the preferred or even acceptable footwear for black tie events.
> 
> Being a royal does not mean that one is flawless. That being said I think it is safe to assume that Prince Philip knows what the standard is and has chosen to avoid it. Personally I think he would look better in a peak lapel tuxedo, but I assume you believe otherwise, C'est la vie.


Well, I think here again you are loading the argument with the world "classic." Black tie attire has been around for a little over 120 years. For at least a fair portion of the first 30 years of its existence, the notch lapel was an acceptable black tie variant. Its use seems to have fallen into abeyance for the next 40 years or so, but it has been back big-time for the past 50+ years. In all, the notch lapel has enjoyed some vogue for perhaps 2/3 of the total history of black tie. How long, then,. does it take to become "classic"? Admittedly, a good many RTW notch-lapel tuxedo jackets are pretty egregious in other respects when they are cut just like suit coats--two or three buttons, flapped pockets, etc., but that fault is by no means endemic to the notch lapel.

Forum veterans can remember how Sator used to denounce the lounge suit as "beachwear" because it once was such and eventually displaced the frock coat. I find the adamant denunciation of the notch lapel tuxedo somewhat analogous.

BTW, the elegant actor's name is "Cary" Grant.


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

One other point - McDonalds does not make the best burgers. However, one could easily argue they make the best french fries.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

BluePincord said:


> Another excellent post.
> 
> What I find hysterical is the sheer volume of members absolutely tripping over themselves to explain away any and all evidence which disproves their 'rules.' Oh no, don't use THAT picture to support your assertion, as I happen to know for a fact that the wearer had just returned from picking up the kids, and if you look at the background, it's clearly a partly cloudy day. Anyone could see wearing a notch on such a day.
> 
> ...


You are correct in that the long gone Thin White Duke has more influence on Orsini than does Prince Philip -- although he is one of my favorite royals. What he does today may be influential in the medium future.

The sartorial state of the President has been much discussed. I have always advocated a permanent valet section on the White House staff so the the current occupants can be properly dressed if they wish. Possibly the President's prominent ears have something to do with the selection.

The current conventional wisdom or etiquette does change slowly. Fifty years is really not that much in sartorial time. It has taken since the 1850's for the lounge suit to become the default. It may take a similar period for the Star Trek suit to take over.

And no, we are not dreaming this up. You can find this in books about wardrobe written by recognized experts in the field.

If you want notch to take over the world, that's your problem. It doesn't gore my ox. It makes it easier for me to look good. But don't get upset when we don't roll over and play dead.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

JBierly said:


> One other point - McDonalds does not make the best burgers. However, one could easily argue they make the best french fries.



Only to someone who has never been to Belgium where they invented them. Trust me on this. There is not a _pomme frit_ anywhere in the U.S. that compares with those you can get off the street in Antwerp. It is well that we _don't_ cook them the way they do in Belgium because they are an order of magnitude better tasting and we would consume an order of magnitude more of them . . . with the result that Americans would weigh an order of magnitude more! Gawd, but they're good!


----------



## Anthony Charton (May 7, 2012)

JLibourel said:


> Well, I think here again you are loading the argument with the world "classic." Black tie attire has been around for a little over 120 years. For at least a fair portion of the first 30 years of its existence, the notch lapel was an acceptable black tie variant. Its use seems to have fallen into abeyance for the next 40 years or so, but it has been back big-time for the past 50+ years. In all, the notch lapel has enjoyed some vogue for perhaps 2/3 of the total history of black tie. How long, then,. does it take to become "classic"? Admittedly, a good many RTW notch-lapel tuxedo jackets are pretty egregious in other respects when they are cut just like suit coats--two or three buttons, flapped pockets, etc., but that fault is by no means endemic to the notch lapel.


I wasn't going to reply but this, as much as I agree with OH, is quite relevant. Unless its formal counterpart (ie white tie), the semi-formal black tie has always evolved and developed considerably over time. The great, great beauty of black tie is that it allows subtle but insightful variants (and I'm not talking about red bow ties of poly swirl waistcoats). Now, Notch lapels may someday be considered 'acceptable' by purists; I don't care much how 'correct' they are now or will be in the future. They look frankly bad and that is worse than anything else.



JBierly said:


> One other point - McDonalds does not make the best burgers. However, one could easily argue they make the best french fries.


The French, too, would like to differ. Aren't they called 'freedom fries' now anyway ?


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

Oldsarge said:


> Only to someone who has never been to Belgium where they invented them. Trust me on this. There is not a _pomme frit_ anywhere in the U.S. that compares with those you can get off the street in Antwerp. It is well that we _don't_ cook them the way they do in Belgium because they are an order of magnitude better tasting and we would consume an order of magnitude more of them . . . with the result that Americans would weigh an order of magnitude more! Gawd, but they're good!


Yes, my fantasy is that fries are actually good for you. Never been to Belgium - I trust you that they are better than McDonalds - nonetheless McDonalds fries are excellent - their burgers very plebeian in comparison. My only point is popular can be very good in some cases.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

I will try and put it a simply as possible. When you get to Europe, some day, if you eat the true fried potatoes, double deep fried in _tallow_, and you come home . . . you will never eat another McDonald's french fry again. It's that bad.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Anthony Charton said:


> They look frankly bad and that is worse than anything else.


Can you give me a cogent aesthetic reason why notch lapels "look frankly bad" on a dinner jacket, yet are the overwhelming choice on contemporary suit coats and odd jackets? Or do you specify peak lapels on all your suits and sport coats as well?


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Indeed. I personally would only specify peak lapels on a suit I intended to do serious corporate battle in. That style fairly snarls of testosterone and under normal circumstances I am really much the mild-mannered sort. Now on a double breasted suit, they are merely patrician, something that I heartily approve of. Maybe suit number three or four . . .


----------



## dba (Oct 22, 2010)

OH-CPA said:


> But when I see a person at a black tie event deviating from the standard, I almost always assume they don't know what the standard is.


Perhaps I'm ignorant but who defined this "standard"? And what great accomplishments have they to their credit that allow them to put limitations on the rest of us?


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

The best argument against the notch lapel dinner jacket: *it's boring*. You have notch lapels on all your single breasted suits (unless you're Andy) so why not set your dinner jacket apart in a way that's completely appropriate?


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

JLibourel said:


> Can you give me a cogent aesthetic reason why notch lapels "look frankly bad" on a dinner jacket, yet are the overwhelming choice on contemporary suit coats and odd jackets? Or do you specify peak lapels on all your suits and sport coats as well?


Because it has negative associations the others do not, it is aesthetically less desirable because it is less elegant, and it smacks of business.

And I covet a navy herringbone SBPL side vent lounge for evening social...


----------



## Anthony Charton (May 7, 2012)

JLibourel said:


> Can you give me a cogent aesthetic reason why notch lapels "look frankly bad" on a dinner jacket, yet are the overwhelming choice on contemporary suit coats and odd jackets?


Yes. Evening wear is a matter of dignified sobriety. It is, unlike day suits and any form of day wear, without pattern and without colour, which greatly emphasises the particular shapes and proportions of the outfit. I am editing this post so that I might emphasise the idea: extreme care should be taken about proportions and fit when aquiring a piece of evening wear. No eyes will be straying on the pattern of the weave or that lovely touch of colour because they will be none. They will, however, immediately perceive the balance (or unbalance) of blacks and white, the collar you are wearing, the shape of the waistcoat, how much exactly your cuffs show, how much of a waist reduction the jacket has, and so on and so forth. Evening wear leaves you completely, sometimes dangerously, exposed to these considerations of balance. And it is fascinating how a well-cut piece of evening wear made of quality fabrics can project ten times more status and aplomb than a day suit. It is no wonder, then, that peaked lapels have imposed themselves as the apex of formality (we're not dealing with formality here, but in this case formality and aesthetics are knit closely together): they _rise. _(Oh, and they also complement the stiff wing collar, which, to me, will remain a black tie essential.) Now, considering the patternlessness and colourlessness of the whole thing, lapels on a night-black dinner jacket cannot be as thin as they might on a day suit. It would throw the whole thing out of proportion. Here they are, thin _peaked_ lapels (oh God oh God oh God): https://www.weddingcentre-wi.com/sh...peak-lapel-tuxedo-coat-909-NF-cropped-750.jpg
I fail to see how this width of lapels might ever begin to render the dashing amplitude that black tie requires. Let's have a look at wider notched lapels: https://www.blacktieguide.com/History/1920s/1929_Popular_Price_Tailoring_Co_catalogue.JPG
On top of looking like a piece of fabric truncated at the top, they fail to achieve what peaked lapels do to a male figure: mirroring the lines of the ideal, hourglass-like male silhouette. Have a look at the two PL outfits : the peak streches towards the shoulders (thin PL cannot physically do this) and narrow gradually before reaching the thinnest point of the torso. Notched lapels break that silhouette and end in a despondent descending line.


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

Anthony Charton said:


> No, considering the patternlessness and colourlessness of the whole thing, lapels on a night-black dinner jacket cannot be as thin as they might on a day suit. It would throw the whole thing out of proportion.


I take it you don't approve of the shawl collar dj either?


----------



## Phileas Fogg (Oct 20, 2008)

As already stated the shape of the lapels of a dinner jacket should be a matter of personal preference. Personally I dislike notch lapels on dinner jackets, but will not lose my sleep over it (just commiserate those who have such jackets, probably planted into their wardrobes by their enemies).

Still, I want to dispute the assertion that the majority of men nowadays do wear dinner jackets with notch lapels. Not where I am from (and I mean Europe), most people (I would assume over 90%) do both own their dinner jackets and wear either peak or shawl lapels (mostly shawl, with a cummerbund). 
The notch lapel is seen mostly on a) foreigners b) people trying to pass off a black suit as a dinner jacket c) people getting married wearing a dinner jacket in the morning.

Yours,

Phileas Fogg


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

I don't think we are going to see eye to eye on this specific issue, and I'm content to agree to disagree if you are.

Picking up a couple of more general points, though:



BluePincord said:


> But knowledge and experience can be blinders, too, rendering one incapable of observing the world around to notice its changes.


Cute point, but the problem is that most people do not bother to acquire knowledge and lack experience. I don't think you are suggesting that the absence of knowledge and experience is a positive thing per se, but some might read this remark as implying that. If you were suggesting that, I don't think we are likely to agree on much.

Of course the world changes, and we must be sensitive to when traditional dress shades into the anachronistic. For example, I know of some judges who would - and this is within the last 20 years - invariably wear a stroller as their Monday to Friday dress (when not robed). Clearly that would be anachronistic now (although I can think of a recent example, although not I should add a member of the judiciary). But my remarks proceeded from my expressly declared classical tastes, and my belief that formal evening dress is an area where adherence to the rules - or, as you appear to object to that term so strongly, adherence to form - is important.



BluePincord said:


> And the majority of the people in America agree.


So what? It's not a plebiscite. Most people in London are dressed in clothes that are badly made and fit poorly. Most of that subcategory have the resources to avoid that at relatively little additional expense, were they to acquire some knowledge and experience.

Can I ask a couple of questions - do you believe in rules at all in matters of dress, and do you favour a more traditional and classic look when you dress in suits or odd jackets? Or are your tastes more fashion-forward? I'm not trying to be snotty here - just trying to gauge whether we have broadly similar tastes and are disagreeing on this specific issue or have wildly differing tastes and are disagreeing more fundamentally?


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

Anthony Charton said:


> Let's have a look at wider notched lapels: https://www.blacktieguide.com/History/1920s/1929_Popular_Price_Tailoring_Co_catalogue.JPG


The sketch says it all.


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

Oldsarge said:


> I will try and put it a simply as possible. When you get to Europe, some day, if you eat the true fried potatoes, double deep fried in _tallow_, and you come home . . . you will never eat another McDonald's french fry again. It's that bad.


Been to Europe maybe 10 times - just never to Belgium - usually France, Spain or Italy. I know I have had French Fries in France (pommes frites) and I guess they weren't that memorable. I will pay better attention the next time.


----------



## Anthony Charton (May 7, 2012)

Haffman said:


> I take it you don't approve of the shawl collar dj either?


 I think it does really work on some people- broader men, mostly. A good friend of mine laughed at me when I shared my reluctance and showed up to an event in a SC dinner jacket: he looked amazing. But he's tall, a 42 shoulder and 34 waist and very nicely built when I'm slender and lean and couldn't pull it off quite as well.


----------



## salgy (May 1, 2009)

Oldsarge said:


> When you get to Europe, some day, if you eat the true fried potatoes, double deep fried in _tallow_


McDonald's _used _to fry all their fries in tallow... until the vegetarians came along & ruined it for the rest of us :icon_pale:


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

Snotty? You should have seen what I would have liked to post!! :icon_smile:

It's not opinion and it's not dogma - it's right vs. wrong.
The notched lapel has its origins in the common business suit and thus is *never, or less* acceptable for formal dress.

Notched lapels appearing on formalwear is an effort by modern manufacturers to profit by using standard daytime jacket forms and simply facing the lapels in satin. ​


----------



## salgy (May 1, 2009)

On topic... i will not admit what type of lapel my DJ has, but BluePincord, you have your answers...



BluePincord said:


> I have attended dozens and dozens of formal events in my time, and do so two to three times a year now. And the people I see at such events also go on such regular basis as to require purchase of semi-formal wear. And notches always number over 50% at a gala, with the rest being split somewhat evenly by peaks and shawls.





BluePincord said:


> I speak of my _*preference*_ for the notch lapel.


If your preference is for a notch, so be it, regardless of who you find pictured wearing a notch, you will not convince a traditionalist of their sartorical value... and you don't need to... as you posted above, when you are in your rig, you are in the _majority _wearing a notch lapel at the functions you are attending... the majority of the attendees where i'm wearing a DJ are wearing vineyard vines cummerbund & bow tie or skull & crossbones, or plaid... i have even seen loafers... doesn't mean i'm going to, but if that's the crowd i'm with, am i going to get all worked up about a lapel?

just my $0.02


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Anthony Charton said:


> Yes. Evening wear is a matter of dignified sobriety. It is, unlike day suits and any form of day wear, without pattern and without colour, which greatly emphasises the particular shapes and proportions of the outfit. I am editing this post so that I might emphasise the idea: extreme care should be taken about proportions and fit when aquiring a piece of evening wear. No eyes will be straying on the pattern of the weave or that lovely touch of colour because they will be none. They will, however, immediately perceive the balance (or unbalance) of blacks and white, the collar you are wearing, the shape of the waistcoat, how much exactly your cuffs show, how much of a waist reduction the jacket has, and so on and so forth. Evening wear leaves you completely, sometimes dangerously, exposed to these considerations of balance. And it is fascinating how a well-cut piece of evening wear made of quality fabrics can project ten times more status and aplomb than a day suit. It is no wonder, then, that peaked lapels have imposed themselves as the apex of formality (we're not dealing with formality here, but in this case formality and aesthetics are knit closely together): they _rise. _(Oh, and they also complement the stiff wing collar, which, to me, will remain a black tie essential.) Now, considering the patternlessness and colourlessness of the whole thing, lapels on a night-black dinner jacket cannot be as thin as they might on a day suit. It would throw the whole thing out of proportion. Here they are, thin _peaked_ lapels (oh God oh God oh God): https://www.weddingcentre-wi.com/sh...peak-lapel-tuxedo-coat-909-NF-cropped-750.jpg
> I fail to see how this width of lapels might ever begin to render the dashing amplitude that black tie requires. Let's have a look at wider notched lapels: https://www.blacktieguide.com/History/1920s/1929_Popular_Price_Tailoring_Co_catalogue.JPG
> On top of looking like a piece of fabric truncated at the top, they fail to achieve what peaked lapels do to a male figure: mirroring the lines of the ideal, hourglass-like male silhouette. Have a look at the two PL outfits : the peak streches towards the shoulders (thin PL cannot physically do this) and narrow gradually before reaching the thinnest point of the torso. Notched lapels break that silhouette and end in a despondent descending line.


An interesting and thoughtful reply. However, it would appear to follow from what you say that peak lapels should, in fact, be preferable on any suit or odd jacket, in which case I shall have to jettison my entire wardrobe! Peak lapels are, I know, pretty much a sine qua non on any double-breasted suit or blazer. However, I have never particularly been impressed by peak lapels on single breasted suit coats and odd jackets. They rather give me the sense that the wearer is trying a little too hard.

And the stiff wing collar is a "black tie essential"? Oh my, back to 1925, are we?

I realize that authorities differ on this. For example, Hardy Amies, writing in the "ABC of Men's Fashion" (1964) states, "Basically the cut of a dinner jacket is similar to that of a day suit and will therefore follow the same trends of fashion in regards to length and general style." This would seem to be at least an implicit endorsement of the notch lapel. However, one of America's foremost authorities on men's style--and one I am sure is held in highest regard by all participants in this forum--Carson Kressley is on record as stating that he considers the notch lapel distinctly inferior to the peak or shawl lapel.


----------



## Anthony Charton (May 7, 2012)

Apologies, I did forget to respond to the last part of the question you asked.

Most of my SB day suits and odd jackets have notched lapels. I'd rather keep it that way, because they are day suits and daytime requires, for me, the modestly of NL. I do believe that PL on day suits can look bloody good, yet preferably on 3-piece or 3-button models (or both). Since PL project this sense of dignity, I believe the rest of the suit must accord with it. I used to own a two piece flannel suit with peaked lapels and I sold it quickly. There was something very off with the combination of the formality of PL and the casualness of a two piece. I feel the same discomfort when looking at a dress, jet-black dinner suit with such unpleasantly humble lapels. (I do quite like the shawl when pulled of; its unbroken curve suggests a debonair character which does work in certain situations.)

What it all comes down to is the separation between daytime and evening events. Evening wear is a different world: the then inappropriate or rakish black* or one-button** suits are now the norm. The demureness of notched lapels becomes inadequate for the same reasons that all colours and patterns are dropped.

I really do hope this makes sense. Now in terms of stiff collars: what I said was 'will remain, to me, black tie essentials.' What I mean is that they will remain my own preference; not because they are what men wore in what I see as the most glorious days of evening fashion, simply because I believe they look much, much better. This doesn't mean that I would run after a gentleman wearing a turndown after 6 o'clok to throw down my gauntlet and challenge him to a pistol duel.

*I'm sure the matter of black suits has been discussed at length here. I do not mean to effect yet another fiery debate.
** Francis Bown's words, not mine, and for once in my life I tend to agree.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Some very thoughtful comments there, Anthony. You are certainly a welcome new presence in this forum. Amusing you should mention a "pistol duel." I was just getting ready to head off the range and put a couple hundred rounds through some beloved revolvers when I re-checked this thread..


----------



## Anthony Charton (May 7, 2012)

Many thanks. I do appreciate. It has been a stimulating debate, and I hope I will cause no more of these weapon-related urges !


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Well, yesterday was the Glorious Thirteenth, after all. And with autumn coming on, tweeds and weapons related urges are just around the corner.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

It's "Glorious Twelfth," Sarge! Porter & Harding makes a nice faux tweed fabric called the "Glorious Twelfth."


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Normally, yes. But this year the Twelfth was on a Sunday and shooting on Sunday is illegal so every seven years it's the Glorious Thirteenth. I know, I know, you're a handgunner and can't be expected to keep up with such things . . . :icon_smile_big:


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Oldsarge said:


> Normally, yes. But this year the Twelfth was on a Sunday and shooting on Sunday is illegal so every seven years it's the Glorious Thirteenth. I know, I know, you're a handgunner and can't be expected to keep up with such things . . . :icon_smile_big:


Figured you might have an explanation like that up your sleeve!


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

JLibourel said:


> I have come around to the point of view of Blue Pincord. I say it's time to end this prissy iGent condemnation of the notch-lapel dinner jacket/tuxedo. The tuxedo has its origins as a "casual" alternative to the "full fig." The notch lapel was around and an accepted alternative in the early days of the dinner jacket. Yes, I know, its use fell into abeyance in the "Golden Age" of the interwar years, but, hey guys, it's not 1935 anymore. The notch lapel has been back since the late 1950s. It has been worn by many eminent men. (Oh, and I'm sure HRH Prince Phillip would be mistaken for an American in his high school prom tuxedo!) John T. Molloy in the second edition of "Dress for Success" counsels his readers to go with the notch lapel since that was the choice of "most executives"...and that was 25 years ago. Styles do change after all. The notch lapel is here to stay, I'm sure, and given the historical precedents for it and a half-century of widespread usage, at this point I think it is purely reactionary to impute a "wrongness" to the notch-lapel tuxedo, in the same sense that wearing square-toed, rubber-soled shoes with the tuxedo would be wrong. I tend to take the view that, if anything, the shawl lapel, with its kinship to the smoking jacket, is more casual than the notch lapel.
> 
> With that out of the way, should the occasion come up for me to get a tuxedo, I would not get a notch-lapel. In all probability, I would get a DB shawl lapel, but then I'm a pretty casual sort of guy!


I have been on vacation the last few days and missed all the fun this thread has thus far occasioned. I had long been of the opinion that, notwithstanding that they were worn a hundred years ago, today the notch lapel is not correct. Over the last few years the strength of my opinion has weakened and Dr.L's post has been the straw that has broken the back of that opinion. I now find myself agreeing that "it is purely reactionary to impute a 'wrongness' to the notch lapel..."

It is not Dr. Libourel's opinion as a "sartorialist" that carries weight with me, but his opinion as a historian and former professor of ancient history does carry weight. In the last century there has been a continuous pattern of increased informality. Where once white tie was worn, now one finds black tie; where black tie was worn, now one finds lounge suits; where suits were worn, one now finds business casual. That this is the trend must be accepted, but at the same time acceptance that a trend exists does not equate with approval. Nor does the fact that a trend exists mean that one must follow it. That rock and roll is here to stay does not mean that one must give up string quartets.

At the beginning of the transition from white tie to black tie, when putting on black tie men continued to wear their white vests. After the introduction of black vests some men continued to wear their white vests. As they died off white vests were seen less and less. While today a white vest is rare, almost but not yet an anachronism, it is nonetheless elegant. Those men who began wearing black tie after the introduction of black vests bought them and continued to wear them after cummerbunds came into general use. Today while black vests (the correct low cut U shape) are rare they are more elegant than a cummerbund.

Acceptance of the proposition that notch lapels are not "wrong" is not the same as accepting the OP's premise that notch lapels are to be praised. Today, those of us who have peak lapel jackets will continue to wear them irrespective of the increasing number of notch lapels. I do not mean to equate those who wear notch lapels with barbarians, but, as I am sure Dr. L can confirm, some Romans continued to wear togas until the toga, like civilization, went extinct.


----------



## OH-CPA (Jun 12, 2008)

JLibourel said:


> If you asked me for a beer and burger, and I brought you a Big Mac and a Bud you might be disappointed, but you could not complain of a "wrongness" as you might properly if I brought you a veggie burger and a root beer, for example.


While I admit that I would still drink the Bud, given a choice I would choose the root beer. In my not so humble opinion the veggie burger is only slightly more wrong than Big Mac. Given the "quality" of the "beef" used at McDonald's if forced to choose between the two I would choose the veggie burger.


----------



## OH-CPA (Jun 12, 2008)

dba said:


> Perhaps I'm ignorant but who defined this "standard"? And what great accomplishments have they to their credit that allow them to put limitations on the rest of us?


A good place to look for the standard for formal & semi-formal wear would be blacktieguide.com. While I am unaware of the creditinials of the creators of this site, Their advise on proper dress is consistent with other guides and style manuals that I have come across. My statement did not state that one could not deviate from the standard. But there is in fact a standard. I am sure that if you organized a black tie event, you would not expect people to come dressed like this:

https://dumbanddumbertuxedo.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/AustinDumbJC-300x253.jpg

Obviously that is an extreme example, but I am going to go out on a limb here and say that you and most people would feel that the dumb and dumber tuxes are not preferred for semi-formal dress.

There are many menswear expects who say a notch lapel is not an appropriate or preferred style of lapel.

In _Dressing the Man_, Alan writes, "The whole idea of a formal suit [i.e. tuxedo] is to distinguish itself from the notch-lapel business suit, not replicate it." Flusser declares that a dinner jacket with notched lapels is nothing short of a "sartorial oxymoron, convoluting both the form's aesthetic logic and its promise of timeless elegance."

Blacktieguide.com states:

"Although the notched lapel is by far the most popular style today and proponents point out that it has made occasional appearances since Victorian times, the style's derivation from the common lounge suit has traditionally limited it to a fashion-forward alternative. It was not until the late 1970s that etiquette and style experts began to consider it to be correct for formal attire and even then its acceptance was limited. "

The Maurer School of Law states the following in there Black Tie 101 guide in connection with their Barrister Ball.

"Thus two options - Peak or Shawl Lapels. 
•The Peak Lapel is the more formal of the two, but either is acceptable. 
•Peak Lapels are rarely seen on business suits, while Shawl Lapels (e.g., like a robe), are never seen on business suits. 
•Together, these two options thus stress the "special" nature of formal, since both differ from the notched lapels used for regular business suits. 
Peak"

The fact that there are multiple clothing experts out there that state a negative opinion of the notch lapel on a tuxedo does imply that there is a standard that does not included notch lapels.. Of course the validity of their statements can be debated, but to imply that there is not standard is wrong! What is a dress code if there is no standard?


----------



## zzdocxx (Sep 26, 2011)

^

OK I'm convinced now, everyone can stop arguing.

Couldn't we spend a little time on the question I posed:

Is there an order of formalness of weaves: eg. pindot, nailhead, birdseye, sharkskin, fresco, basket weave, etc., etc.?

Just going to get my first grey suit made.

Thank you, here is the thread:

https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...118912-Fabric-Weaves-Formal-to-Informal-Scale

:icon_viking:


----------



## dba (Oct 22, 2010)

OH-CPA said:


> but to imply that there is not standard is wrong! What is a dress code if there is no standard?


I don't recall saying there is no standard. There seems to be many arbiters of said standard and not all of them agree.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

dba said:


> I don't recall saying there is no standard. There seems to be many arbiters of said standard and not all of them agree.


But if you compare sources, there is a lot of commonality.

Actually, this is a good source, too -- https://mypage.iu.edu/~dongjerd/documents/aesthetics of the tuxedo.jan 3.2012.pdf


----------



## dks202 (Jun 20, 2008)

I just bought my first tuxedo. Brooks Bros, worn only once, 45L x 39L. 

Got it on eBay for less than $26 shipped. As I have been shopping on eBay for years, and it is the first tuxedo to come along in my size, proper or not, it's the only one I will ever own. I'll take the notch lapels.

Now I just require invitations to local affairs.......


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

Oldsarge said:


> Whoa!* The majority of Americans don't wear tuxedos and the majority of those who do, wear them so seldom they rent them.* And since a notch collar tux is cheaper to make, that's what the rental companies carry. Their customers seldom even notice. The single time in my life I wore a tux, it was white because I was getting married before six in the evening and I don't even remember what kind of a collar it had. So that is a specious argument, at best.


I don't think the majority of anyone has worn, let alone own a tux these days. I've never worn one, having never been to the sort of functions, banquets or events that might require one. TBH I'm sure the only times I seen many people wearing them, is on TV, movies and at some weddings.

My father only owned a tux once for a few weeks, for a cruise. It was a cheap British Home Stores one. He gave it to Salvation Army after the cruise. Can't remember what shape the lapels where or if it was important or not. Well not until reading this lengthy and interesting thread.

I see that Asda/Walmart do a George tuxedo suit for 40 quid, jacket and trousers. Finest polyester of course and has notched lapels. I'm sure if the majority of people needed a tux for a special one-off occasion or a cruise. They probably wouldn't even bother renting, when they can get a new one very cheaply from the local supermarket.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

> Okay, then riddle me this: What do the below items come from?
> 
> China(Hong Kong and Macao SARs): Notch, Notch
> China(Mainland, PRC): Black-tie is decadent, imperialist and bourgeoisie.


FTFY.

Although I'm sure there are private black-tie functions held in the Mainland. Brooks Brothers in Beijing and Shanghai do sell tuxedos. However you'll never see Hu Jintao or Wen Jiabao donning a DJ. They always wear western business suits with ties. Which were adopted in the early 80s, in place of the blue Zhongshan suit as standard CPC government attire.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

Balfour said:


> Asleep.
> 
> I've no particular desire to have a fight over this (even a very good humoured one - I should have used more smileys in my posts yesterday ;-)). My suggestion that I would leave the debate to rage across the pond was to acknowledge that the sartorial conventions on this point may differ in different countries *(waiting for MikeDT to weigh in here ).*


Heh... I just did.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

MikeDT said:


> FTFY.
> 
> However I'm sure there are private black-tie functions held in the Mainland. Brooks Brothers in Beijing and Shanghai do sell tuxedos. However you'll never see Hu Jintao or Wen Jiabao donning a DJ. They always wear western business suits with ties. Which were adopted in the early 80s, in place of the blue Zhongshan suit as standard CPC government attire.


You have added words to a post of mine without removing the attribution, thereby effectively putting words in my mouth.

Please remove the attribution.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

BluePincord said:


> You have added words to a post of mine without removing the attribution, thereby effectively putting words in my mouth.
> 
> Please remove the attribution.


Done.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

MikeDT said:


> Done.


Thanks.

Even though it is funny as hell, I've gotta admit... :biggrin2:


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

Got to keep this going until BluePincord gets to 100 posts...


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

I'm hoping PC sticks around, I'm surprised La3 didn't get in on this one.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

I'll clear up a couple points, then probably leave this thread for the ages.



Balfour said:


> I don't think we are going to see eye to eye on this specific issue, and I'm content to agree to disagree if you are.


Of course I am.



Balfour said:


> Cute point, but the problem is that most people do not bother to acquire knowledge and lack experience. I don't think you are suggesting that the absence of knowledge and experience is a positive thing per se, but some might read this remark as implying that.


Your first thought is spot on. I am suggesting that knowledge and experience must also be informed by the present-day world around, else they lead to rigidity where such isn't merited.



Balfour said:


> Can I ask a couple of questions - do you believe in rules at all in matters of dress, and do you favour a more traditional and classic look when you dress in suits or odd jackets? Or are your tastes more fashion-forward?


I do believe in absolute rules, but mine are things like no belt with braces, or short sleeves with jackets. Very basic stuff. Quick story: Years ago, in a music-theory class, the teacher assigned us a small composition exercise in four voices, to be played in class, using the rules of Haydn's time (no parallel fifths, hidden octaves, etc.). With the brashness of my then youth, I handed in a number of measures that only slightly bent the rules, but sounded like...well...like someone dug up Haydn then threw his coffin down a flight of stairs. Upon hearing my reasoning, the teacher stepped from the piano, handed it back and said "Way to go Beethoven. When you can demonstrate you understand the rules, you are free to break them. Not until." Bam. Talk about your good lessons. Beethoven, Haydn's pupil, broke plenty of 'rules,' but not until later in life, long after he had mastered them all. Here? I've heard of the 'rule,' lived it for ten years, and dismissed it as lacking.

So am I classic or forward? Easy--I'm very, very classically forward. The rule says button your coat upon standing, but my rule is 'button your coat in the wind.' In these days of casual clothes, I can get away with a suit or jacket by virtue of relaxing it and unbuttoning. To do otherwise might make me look like a stuffed shirt. But I can guarantee I am the most conservatively dressed person in most any room. (The very fact that state dinners are all black tie now really pisses me off.)



mrp said:


> Dissenting opinions are one thing and you have the right to have one, on the other hand you aren't going to convince this body of users to get in lock step with your opinion on this matter.


Have I ever expressed this intent? Of course not. It would be wrong-headed and pompous beyond all belief.



JBierly said:


> And to disregard what Politicians and Hollywood types are wearing is a bit disingenuous considering they are the icons that are often referred to when one talks of classic style.


Good point which merits repeating. One need only read the thousands of threads on this board alone praising and picturing the likes of the DoW, Cary Grant, et al. to see this theory in action.



Orsini said:


> If you want notch to take over the world, that's your problem. It doesn't gore my ox. It makes it easier for me to look good. But don't get upset when we don't roll over and play dead.


See my above response to mrp.



Matt S said:


> The best argument against the notch lapel dinner jacket: it's boring.


Interesting point, and a very good one. However, where you see boredom in a notch lapel, I see subtlety and charm. And where others see elegance and tradition in a peak, I see starkness and angularity. These are elements of style we may never agree on, and isn't that nice?

I think so.

.


----------



## dks202 (Jun 20, 2008)

BluePincord said:


> ....... Talk about your good lessons. Beethoven, Haydn's pupil, broke plenty of 'rules,' but not until later in life, long after he had mastered them all.....


Good story and lesson.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

JLibourel said:


> BluePincord, you must bear in mind that iGent-ism (and I am not just singling out the participants in AAAC) is very cult-like, rigid and dogmatic. (I used to be more that way myself some years back, I'll confess.) The iGentry don't cotton much to iconoclasts like you.


can we take this as an admission that you were once an iGent? I chuckle fondly whilst imagining your response to any post which might have accused you of this, back then. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

It's hard to imagine any southern Californian being a iGent, except possibly in self defense against the Cult of Casual that has been the mark of the area since at least the turn of the XX Century and probably well before. Perhaps up in San Francisco, (a city which has long fancied itself as more New York than even New York can be) one might locate a colony of them but here? Difficult, sir, most difficult.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Shaver said:


> can we take this as an admission that you were once an iGent? I chuckle fondly whilst imagining your response to any post which might have accused you of this, back then. :icon_smile_wink:


Well, I certainly adhered more to iGent orthodoxy five or six years ago than I do now. Yeah, I was pretty iGent-ish back then, all right! I have become more of maverick and heretic since then, as evidenced by my role in this thread.


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

I learned a new work IGent.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=iGent
and it even has a handbook
https://www.styleforum.net/t/88881/the-official-igent-handbook

Is there a secret handshake as well?


----------



## Douglas Brisbane Gray (Jun 7, 2010)

BluePincord said:


> Okay, then riddle me this: What do the below items come from?
> 
> India: Nehru, Notch
> Mexico: Notch, Notch
> ...


It wasn't England was it?
It was the UK of which England is one "state".


----------



## TomS (Mar 29, 2010)

Douglas Brisbane Gray said:


> It wasn't England was it?
> It was the UK of which England is one "state".


I imagine he refers to our Old Etonian PM, in which case England is correct but not comprehensive. For all his manifold flaws, Mr Cameron does know how to read a dress code.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

mrp said:


> I learned a new work IGent.
> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=iGent
> and it even has a handbook
> https://www.styleforum.net/t/88881/the-official-igent-handbook
> ...


Well, blow me!

I had presumed (I know, I know, a concededly grievous flaw) that iGent would be nomenclature predicated upon and thus applicable to _bearing_ *not *_clothing_.

You might dress a monkey in bespoke apparel and still it would remain a monkey. A gentleman, however, would continue to be such even if forced into a pair of *shudder* jogging pants.

Gentlemanliness is a trait exclusive of garments and it seemed logical to expect that an iGent would be similarly equipped.

This being so I had presumed that excessive and unnecessary courtesy and 'tally-ho' stylings and whatnot were the tell-tale indications of iGentrification.

Alas and alack, less knowledge but more understanding was required to prevent my error.


----------



## Douglas Brisbane Gray (Jun 7, 2010)

TomS said:


> I imagine he refers to our Old Etonian PM, in which case England is correct but not comprehensive. For all his manifold flaws, Mr Cameron does know how to read a dress code.


He was representing the UK of which he is the PM was he not? I imagine he wore a shawl collar as he didn't want to upstage the hosts too much.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Shaver said:


> Well, blow me!
> 
> I had presumed (I know, I know, a concededly grievous flaw) that iGent would be nomenclature predicated upon and thus applicable to _bearing_ *not *_clothing_.
> 
> ...


Well, now you know, Shaver. In an i-gentrified world, clothes make the man. Polonius' sartorial advice is not the rambling of a tedious old fool, but the fountain of wisdom. The rules to live by have little to do with honor, dignity, and fair play, and everything to do with the lapels on your dinner jacket.

Thanks for digging out that thread from the style forum, started by Manton. I laughed and laughed.


----------



## dba (Oct 22, 2010)

Anthony Charton said:


> (I do quite like the shawl when pulled of; its unbroken curve suggests a debonair character which does work in certain situations.)


Like this situation?


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

dba said:


> Like this situation?
> 
> View attachment 4988


Exactly, the curve of his lapel goes perfectly with the curve of his no hair hairline as well as the curve of the necklace and accouterments of his comely accessory.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

arkirshner said:


> Exactly, the curve of his lapel goes perfectly with the curve of his no hair hairline as well as the curve of the necklace and accouterments of his comely accessory.


Comely? That appears to me as perhaps the unfortunate handiwork of a particularly incompetent plastic surgeon. We have a rather quaint, albeit terribly vulgar, epithet of some dubious currency extant in dear old Blighty which relates to a face as mirroring the qualities of a bulldog's when licking urine from a nettle. I apologise for disseminating this cruel and unbecoming phrase but it strikes me as potentially appropriate, hopefully humorous, on this occasion. Is this person someone who is famous?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

The Rambler said:


> Well, now you know, Shaver. In an i-gentrified world, clothes make the man. Polonius' sartorial advice is not the rambling of a tedious old fool, but the fountain of wisdom.


whilst my ultimate signature quote is Conrade (Much Ado About Nothing) The Tragedy of the Prince of Denmark is my favoured play, as attributed to the Bard. Is Polonius a rambling tedious old fool? The soliloquy is often played for the laugh yet unneccesarily so to my mind. Polonius may be devious with his words barbed and yet in appearance sententious but motivation abounds. Or am I totally missing your point?



The Rambler said:


> The rules to live by have little to do with honor, dignity, and fair play, and everything to do with the lapels on your dinner jacket.


100% agreement with honour, dignity and fair play over lapels though. Although it could be (_will_ be, doubtless) argued that this is outside of scope for the thread. This point made by me whilst discussing WS *ahem*


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

Ah, Shakespeare! "These tedious old fools" is what Hamlet says, listening to Polonius. He's very insightful about such things..

Post 181, on that thread on the other forum points out the difference, opposition really, between "gents" and "gentlemen."


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

The Rambler said:


> Ah, Shakespeare! "These tedious old fools" is what Hamlet says, listening to Polonius. He's very insightful about such things..


we might be asked to quit this particular discourse soon I imagine, but isn't one of the central themes of the play that Hamlet has no tangible insight? He is a demonstrably conflicted character whose belief tends to oscillate. This I particularly appreciate, however, being drawn toward the unreliable narrators of literature.

Cat will mew and dog will have his day. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

cdavant said:


> Got to keep this going until BluePincord gets to 100 posts...


I don't want to sleep! I don't want to miss it!


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Impudent rascal! 

What the blazes does this guy want out of us? If he cannot even tolerate us not immediately swearing allegiance to his premise, than what exactly will satisfy this fellow? Have us all change our names to "Devotee of BP?" Sign over our paychecks every week? What?


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

cdavant said:


> Got to keep this going until BluePincord gets to 100 posts...





Orsini said:


> I don't want to sleep! I don't want to miss it!


What happens when I get to 100 posts...do I become even *more *omniscient?


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

BluePincord said:


> What happens when I get to 100 posts...do I become even *more *omniscient?


No, that train has long since left the station. We decide whether to cast a spell on you or...or...or...


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Well, this makes 100 right here, so get to casting!

:icon_smile_big: :icon_smile_big:


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Hey...I'm at 100, HOW DO I GET MY SECRET DECODER RING?!


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

Go to the Clubhouse--you can see it now--and apply for your BB discount card. You'll save a bundle on a peak lapel...


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

I'm sorry. I expected someone to chime in in a couple minutes. At 100 you get the BB card. See the "Club House." 

And only the moderators may cast spells. 

Sorry, old man. Didn't mean to leave you hanging all night.


----------



## RandyP (Jun 19, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> Thanks.
> 
> Even though it is funny as hell, I've gotta admit... :biggrin2:


Note that he prefaced the amendment with "FTFY" - which is a standard internet tongue-in-cheek acronym for "FIXED THAT FOR YOU" and is always followed by a textual alteration that retains attribution. To object to this humorous convention either evidences hypersensitivity or a lack of contextual acculturation. On the other hand, I suppose one could object to the use of "FTFY" as an unfortunate example of traditional groupthink not unlike the consensual objections to DJ notched lapels. :biggrin:


----------



## RandyP (Jun 19, 2012)

By the way, FTFY... (I live in Utah.)



BluePincord said:


> Thanks. Even though it is funny as heck, I've gotta admit... :biggrin2:


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

*Example of a Savile Row Dinner Jacket*

Notch Lapels - Flap pockets.









Hmmmm.......


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

JBierly said:


> Notch Lapels - Flap pockets.
> 
> View attachment 5647
> 
> ...


How much time must pass before a new member who speaks in favour of this item can be derided with cries of 'you, sir, are the ghost of BluePincord'?


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

JBierly said:


> Notch Lapels - Flap pockets.
> 
> View attachment 5647
> 
> ...


Which house?

I don't think this advances the debate much, though. Some things that come out of the Row are ghastly. H Huntsman has this on their website, for instance:








Prices for odd jackets start at £3616.:icon_pale:

This will be made to impeccable standards and fit like a glove. But under no conceivable circumstances would I ever wear it (apart from on Halloween, perhaps, assuming I couldn't lay my hands on a black suit).


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Which house?
> 
> I don't think this advances the debate much, though. Some things that come out of the Row are ghastly. H Huntsman has this on their website, for instance:
> View attachment 5659
> ...


There is some advance surely? The normal pattern of this debate is that such items are provided by tacky tuxedo rental emporia or cut-rate department stores.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Shaver said:


> There is some advance surely? The normal pattern of this debate is that such items are provided by tacky tuxedo rental emporia or cut-rate department stores.


Well, if you want to pay four figures to wear something that has features akin with tacky tuxedo rental emporia tuxedos (love that expression, by the way), you will have the best-fitted tacky tuxedo for your prom!:wink2:

As I said earlier in the thread, the fact that the Duke of Edinburgh has a notch lapel dinner jacket is a reasonable good example of the exception that proves the rule. No-one would expect his dinner jacket to be poor quality. But, no, I don't think the fact that Savile Row produces something by definition makes it appropriate, as illustrated by my Huntsman example.

But I'd still like to know which house produced it (the attachment has a rather odd file name as well: "Blazer6"!).

By the way, Shaver, are you the ghost of BluePincord?

Just kidding.:icon_smile_wink:


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Which house?


Richard Anderson


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

Shaver said:


> There is some advance surely? The normal pattern of this debate is that such items are provided by tacky tuxedo rental emporia or cut-rate department stores.


I agree - it is in the RTW collection so not a "one off" situation. More of a "house style" I presume - "The Richard Anderson Dinner Jacket"


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Now this is how it's done - check out the single-breasted dinner jacket:

Doesn't have ugly satin lapels either (I wouldn't go as far as to say that this is wrong, but it is definitely unattractive in my view).

EDIT: Or here: https://www.henrypoole.com/?id=14&pid=2 (but I prefer the A&S).

Or here, for something less expensive and OTR but in impeccable taste (warning - link to pdf): https://www.edeandravenscroft.co.uk...s/ER_menswear_brochure-spring_summer_2012.pdf.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Now this is how it's done - check out the single-breasted dinner jacket:
> 
> Doesn't have ugly satin lapels either (I wouldn't go as far as to say that this is wrong, but it is definitely unattractive in my view).


I do not disagree with you and personally prefer the example you have given. I was more musing that the contra argument often allows that an alternative choice is simply declasse and for those who do not know any better. Presumably Saville Row (despite any garments that do not meet our individual taste) is not declasse and does know better.

oh and 'whoooooo' (is that the noise a ghost makes?) :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Shaver said:


> I do not disagree with you and personally prefer the example you have given. I was more musing that the contra argument often allows that an alternative choice is simply declasse and for those who do not know any better. Presumably Saville Row (despite any garments that do not meet our individual taste) is not declasse and does know better.
> 
> oh and 'whoooooo' (is that the noise a ghost makes?) :icon_smile_wink:


Or that Savile Row is comprised of businesses, and wish to sell their MTM / OTR lines to those who are declasse and do not know better?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Or that Savile Row is comprised of businesses, and wish to sell their MTM / OTR lines to those who are declasse and do not know better?


A fair point but simultaneously it does rather have the whiff of a circular argument to it.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Shaver said:


> A fair point but simultaneously it does rather have the whiff of a circular argument to it.


Care to expand on why?

I think it is an equally tenable explanation of why one of the newer Savile Row houses offers a (frankly hideous) OTR dinner jacket in this particular style.

Your argument is a false syllogism:

First premise: Savile Row houses understand the forms and traditions that apply to formal evening dress.
Second premise: Savile Row houses produce formal evening dress.
False conclusion: All formal evening dress produced by Savile Row houses conforms to the forms and traditions of formal evening dress.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

By the way, if someone pops up to comment that my last post is wrong because a dinner jacket is semi-formal, I may have a sense of humour failure!:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Care to expand on why?
> 
> I think it is an equally tenable explanation of why one of the newer Savile Row houses offers a (frankly hideous) OTR dinner jacket in this particular style.
> 
> ...


It's only a loose notion, decidedly not to be set into stone, but couldn't we decry anything that we don't approve of - regardless of provenance - by asserting 'well, of course, in that _particular_ instance they were pandering to the mob'?

No false syllogism as I do not reach your proposed conclusion (all formal evening dress produced etc).

It's doubtless the lawyer in you trying to shepherd me into a corner from which there is no way of escape. :icon_smile:


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Shaver said:


> It's only a loose notion, decidedly not to be set into stone, but couldn't we decry anything that we don't approve of - regardless of provenance - by asserting 'well, of course, in that _particular_ instance they were pandering to the mob'?


Well clearly one could, but that's a very double-edged argument in itself, no? Just because any alleged "deviation" could be attacked as mob pandering does not establish that mob pandering does not occur.

That's why my original response was that I didn't think it advanced the debate much. If one were going to make the case for a change in the convention that I and others in this thread believe applies,(*) then Savile Row practice would indeed be weighty evidence. But one would need to survey a range of different houses and seek their advice on what is appropriate to establish Savile Row practice pointing in favour of a change in the convention.

(*) At least in discerning circles, fully accepting that the vast majority of the population doesn't dress in formal evening dress and some of those who do will not care about the forms and traditions that apply to it.


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

I don't think the fact that you can get a notch lapel flap pocket dinner suit on the Row tells us anything more than that there is a demand for notch lapel dinner suits and we knew that already... for the majority of guys notch lapel suits are all they know and all they will ever know. 

I think the consensus on this forum is that the notch lapel dinner suit is an unimaginative choice and a less stylish one. But of course there is room for aesthetic debate, why not?

The argument about whether or not it is 'correct' depends entirely on the circles it will be worn in. In most circles, most people won't notice or care but again we knew that already.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Well clearly one could, but that's a very double-edged argument in itself, no? Just because any alleged "deviation" could be attacked as mob pandering does not establish that mob pandering does not occur.
> 
> That's why my original response was that I didn't think it advanced the debate much. If one were going to make the case for a change in the convention that I and others in this thread believe applies,(*) then Savile Row practice would indeed be weighty evidence. But one would need to survey a range of different houses and seek their advice on what is appropriate to establish Savile Row practice pointing in favour of a change in the convention.
> 
> (*) At least in discerning circles, fully accepting that the vast majority of the population don't dress in formal evening dress and some of those who do will not care about the forms and traditions that apply to it.


I'll be honest Mr B I do not have a dog in this race and was merely idly speculating, which I trust you will find an unobjectionable pursuit.

This is a debate which is intrinsically given to going around and around but I feel that more room could be allowed for preference without recourse to the disputations of alleged convention, even if that preference looks quite appalling to you and I.

I'm beginning to feel that perhaps I *am* being possessed by BP's spirit here. Thus I reassert my own nature and in so doing take my leave of the thread, not meaning to imply (but you may infer) my submission. :redface:


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Shaver said:


> I'll be honest Mr B I do not have a dog in this race and was merely idly speculating, which I trust you will find an unobjectionable pursuit.


Of course not; quite the reverse.



Shaver said:


> This is a debate which is intrinsically given to going around and around but I feel that more room could be allowed for preference without recourse to the disputations of alleged convention, even if that preference looks quite appalling to you and I.


Here, I'm afraid, I remain of my view that the convention is clear.



Shaver said:


> I'm beginning to feel that perhaps I *am* being possessed by BP's spirit here.









Shaver said:


> Thus I reassert my own nature and in so doing take my leave of the thread, not meaning to imply (but you may infer) my submission. :redface:


To infer any such thing would be scurrilous.


----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

Exhibit A


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Shaver said:


> How much time must pass before a new member who speaks in favour of this item can be derided with cries of 'you, sir, are the ghost of BluePincord'?





Balfour said:


> Which house?
> 
> I don't think this advances the debate much, though. Some things that come out of the Row are ghastly. H Huntsman has this on their website, for instance:
> View attachment 5659
> ...





Shaver said:


> There is some advance surely? The normal pattern of this debate is that such items are provided by tacky tuxedo rental emporia or cut-rate department stores.





Balfour said:


> Well, if you want to pay four figures to wear something that has features akin with tacky tuxedo rental emporia tuxedos (love that expression, by the way), you will have the best-fitted tacky tuxedo for your prom!:wink2:
> 
> As I said earlier in the thread, the fact that the Duke of Edinburgh has a notch lapel dinner jacket is a reasonable good example of the exception that proves the rule. No-one would expect his dinner jacket to be poor quality. But, no, I don't think the fact that Savile Row produces something by definition makes it appropriate, as illustrated by my Huntsman example.
> 
> ...





Balfour said:


> Now this is how it's done - check out the single-breasted dinner jacket:
> 
> Doesn't have ugly satin lapels either (I wouldn't go as far as to say that this is wrong, but it is definitely unattractive in my view).
> 
> ...





Shaver said:


> I do not disagree with you and personally prefer the example you have given. I was more musing that the contra argument often allows that an alternative choice is simply declasse and for those who do not know any better. Presumably Saville Row (despite any garments that do not meet our individual taste) is not declasse and does know better.
> 
> oh and 'whoooooo' (is that the noise a ghost makes?) :icon_smile_wink:





Balfour said:


> Or that Savile Row is comprised of businesses, and wish to sell their MTM / OTR lines to those who are declasse and do not know better?





Shaver said:


> A fair point but simultaneously it does rather have the whiff of a circular argument to it.





Balfour said:


> Care to expand on why?
> 
> I think it is an equally tenable explanation of why one of the newer Savile Row houses offers a (frankly hideous) OTR dinner jacket in this particular style.
> 
> ...





Balfour said:


> By the way, if someone pops up to comment that my last post is wrong because a dinner jacket is semi-formal, I may have a sense of humour failure!:icon_smile_big:





Shaver said:


> It's only a loose notion, decidedly not to be set into stone, but couldn't we decry anything that we don't approve of - regardless of provenance - by asserting 'well, of course, in that _particular_ instance they were pandering to the mob'?
> 
> No false syllogism as I do not reach your proposed conclusion (all formal evening dress produced etc).
> 
> It's doubtless the lawyer in you trying to shepherd me into a corner from which there is no way of escape. :icon_smile:





Balfour said:


> Well clearly one could, but that's a very double-edged argument in itself, no? Just because any alleged "deviation" could be attacked as mob pandering does not establish that mob pandering does not occur.
> 
> That's why my original response was that I didn't think it advanced the debate much. If one were going to make the case for a change in the convention that I and others in this thread believe applies,(*) then Savile Row practice would indeed be weighty evidence. But one would need to survey a range of different houses and seek their advice on what is appropriate to establish Savile Row practice pointing in favour of a change in the convention.
> 
> (*) At least in discerning circles, fully accepting that the vast majority of the population doesn't dress in formal evening dress and some of those who do will not care about the forms and traditions that apply to it.





Shaver said:


> I'll be honest Mr B I do not have a dog in this race and was merely idly speculating, which I trust you will find an unobjectionable pursuit.
> 
> This is a debate which is intrinsically given to going around and around but I feel that more room could be allowed for preference without recourse to the disputations of alleged convention, even if that preference looks quite appalling to you and I.
> 
> I'm beginning to feel that perhaps I *am* being possessed by BP's spirit here. Thus I reassert my own nature and in so doing take my leave of the thread, not meaning to imply (but you may infer) my submission. :redface:





Balfour said:


> Of course not; quite the reverse.
> 
> Here, I'm afraid, I remain of my view that the convention is clear.
> 
> ...


 With a demonstration of skill sadly in short supply on this side of the pond, a dialogue between gentlemen; informed, logical, polite, and witty. Lerner and Loewe notwithstanding, the English certainly have learned to speak.

Regards from your coarse American friend,

Alan


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

arkirshner said:


> With a demonstration of skill sadly in short supply on this side of the pond, a dialogue between gentlemen; informed, logical, polite, and witty. Lerner and Loewe notwithstanding, the English certainly have learned to speak.
> 
> Regards from your coarse American friend,
> 
> Alan


A compliment from one of the most civlised, knowledgeable and gentlemanly chaps on the fora is a compliment indeed, thank you!


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> A compliment from one of the most civlised, knowledgeable and gentlemanly chaps on the fora is a compliment indeed, thank you!


+1 :icon_smile:


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

JBierly said:


> Notch Lapels - Flap pockets.
> 
> View attachment 5647
> 
> ...


Come gather 'round people, wherever you roam...


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> Come gather 'round people, wherever you roam...


Idiot wind blowing every time you move your mouth ...


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Well Mack the Finger said to Louie the King
I got forty notch lapel dinner jacket things
And a thousand patent bluchers to bring
Do you know where I can get rid of these things
And Louie the King said let me think for a minute son
And he said yes I think it can be easily done
Just take everything down to Highway 61.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Well Mack the Finger said to Louie the King
> I got forty notch lapel dinner jacket things
> And a thousand patent bluchers to bring
> Do you know where I can get rid of these things
> ...


:icon_hailthee:


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Well Mack the Finger said to Louie the King
> I got forty notch lapel dinner jacket things
> And a thousand patent bluchers to bring
> Do you know where I can get rid of these things
> ...


Wow...a lyric from his 'electric' era...how terribly progressive of you... :icon_smile_big:

.


----------



## phyrpowr (Aug 30, 2009)

No time to be too witty, furnace man is here to vacuum my wallet, but...

Isn't part of the idea of a "dinner jacket", "tuxedo", whatever you wish to call it, that it is not only more formal but _different _from simply a black suit with shiny lapels? I think we all agree that trying to do a black suit/pleated shirt/black bowtie as a tux is an absolute _faux pas, _and IMO a notch lapel & flap pocket DJ is barely a step above that.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

phyrpowr said:


> No time to be too witty, furnace man is here to vacuum my wallet, but...
> 
> Isn't part of the idea of a "dinner jacket", "tuxedo", whatever you wish to call it, that it is not only more formal but _different _from simply a black suit with shiny lapels? I think we all agree that trying to do a black suit/pleated shirt/black bowtie as a tux is an absolute _faux pas, _and IMO a notch lapel & flap pocket DJ is barely a step above that.


Yep...

Just a tad boring as well.


----------



## blairrob (Oct 30, 2010)

phyrpowr said:


> No time to be too witty, furnace man is here to vacuum my wallet, but...


 he must visit daily. 'ta dum'



phyrpowr said:


> Isn't part of the idea of a "dinner jacket", "tuxedo", whatever you wish to call it, that it is not only more formal but _different _from simply a black suit with shiny lapels...


and purposely similar to the dress of the other men present.


----------



## filfoster (Aug 23, 2011)

So many better posts on this thread won't stop me from piling on. I bought my BB notched collar dinner jacket nearly 20 years ago, in blissful ignorance of the hierarchy of acceptance. I was eventually 'schooled' in the Trad forum here. 
A month ago, I left my peaked lapel SB and my peaked lapel DB in the clothes press and donned the long-neglected SB notched collar rig. We attended a charity fundraiser attended by the local swells, freely conceding their social superiority. I'd guess 80+% of the men attending wore these damned things. 

I am confident a fair number of our prosperous menfolk here know better but they have embraced them or just don't give a damn.


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

filfoster said:


> or just don't give a damn.


Correct.


----------



## tda003 (Aug 16, 2009)

Probably "coals to Newcastle" at this point...
It's your money buy whatever you want. However, those who know fashion will think you've committed a sartorial faux pas in a notched. However, as gentlemen, they won't say anything. However, I suspect that those who know are decreasing in such numbers that the majority in attendance won't know or care. I try to avoid asking advice when I don't intend to listen to it. Let me know your size, I have a once-worn notch in the closet which is in perfect condition in spite of having hung there for 40 years.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

tda003 said:


> Probably "coals to Newcastle" at this point...
> It's your money buy whatever you want. However, those *who know fashion *will think you've committed a sartorial faux pas in a notched.


It's not about fashion. The fashionistas promote stuff like the notch lapel dinner jacket and the black suit.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

tda003 said:


> Probably "coals to Newcastle" at this point...
> It's your money buy whatever you want. However, those who know fashion will think you've committed a sartorial faux pas in a notched. However, as gentlemen, they won't say anything. However, I suspect that those who know are decreasing in such numbers that the majority in attendance won't know or care. I try to avoid asking advice when I don't intend to listen to it. Let me know your size, I have a once-worn notch in the closet which is in perfect condition in spite of having hung there for 40 years.





Balfour said:


> It's not about fashion. The fashionistas promote stuff like the notch lapel dinner jacket and the black suit.


I suspect the two of you are on the same page. As I read it, tda is using the word "fashion" as a synonym to what on this forum is generally termed, "classic style".


----------



## Mr. A. (Aug 30, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> familiarity and comfort with business dress.


When did a dinner suit become business dress?

I suppose short sleeve, button down (collar) shirts and gym shoes are okay as well?


----------



## Mr. A. (Aug 30, 2012)

filfoster said:


> I am confident a fair number of our prosperous menfolk here know better but they have embraced them or just don't give a damn.


I've had two dinner suits made in my adult life, a one button black shawl collar with corded silk facing and a two button black peak lapel with silk satin facing and of resent have been plotting a two button midnight blue peak lapel diner suit with corded silk facing. I also prefer a vest to a cummerbund.

I have neither embraced the notch collar diner jack nor stopped caring, yet it's hard giving advice when it has not been asked for, at least for me.

It seems to me, the real trouble is that most younger men just don't give a damn about tradition or in the words of my son "Old School" style. A two button, three piece suit is a 1920's gangster costume in his eyes.


----------



## BluePincord (May 14, 2012)

```

```



Mr. A. said:


> When did a dinner suit become business dress?
> 
> I suppose short sleeve, button down (collar) shirts and gym shoes are okay as well?


English is not your first language, is it?


----------



## Mr. A. (Aug 30, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> English is not your first language, is it?


cosa?, qu'est-ce que ça peut faire?', ¿qué quieres decir?, Ce? Nu te aud.

As a matter of fact it is, I graduated from high school at 15. Seeing as you did not understand my query, it is my opine... the problem lies on you end of the conversation, not my grammatical use of language. Please feel free to elaborate and expound upon your assumption that I lack a mastery of English.


----------



## Mr. A. (Aug 30, 2012)

BluePincord said:


> I've owned three tuxedoes in my life.


So what... you've bought one a year since senior prom?


----------



## Mr. A. (Aug 30, 2012)

I truly am sorry! I should not allow the posted opinion of others, to bring my replies down.


----------



## Hitch (Apr 25, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Well Mack the Finger said to Louie the King
> I got forty notch lapel dinner jacket things
> And a thousand patent bluchers to bring
> Do you know where I can get rid of these things
> ...


You got a lotta nerve.


----------



## Mr. A. (Aug 30, 2012)

There are many things I'd like to say Blue. But it is after hours and I'm well into a bottle of single malt so I will hold my tongue... just one question, how old are you, really?


----------



## g3dahl (Aug 26, 2011)

Mr. A. said:


> But it is after hours and I'm well into a bottle of single malt...


AAAC and single malt for me tonight as well...Ardbeg Corryvreckan here. What's in your glass?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

I have long suspected that some AAAC members post whilst in their cups. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

"A dark-blue double or single breasted suit, worn with a black bow tie, can pass very comfortably as a dinner suit. I travel constantly with one." - Hardy Amies.


----------



## Mr. A. (Aug 30, 2012)

g3dahl said:


> AAAC and single malt for me tonight as well...Ardbeg Corryvreckan here. What's in your glass?


18yo Glenmorangie. I'm old enough to know better than to drink and post.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

I suspect I may not be alone in wishing that Mr. A. had not sensibly restrained himself from posting, especially in response to the churlish post he received from our protagonist. But it sounds like his taste in formal evening wear is up to the standards of his taste in single malt!


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

Shaver said:


> I have long suspected that some AAAC members post whilst in their cups. :icon_smile_wink:


We need an appropriate emoticon for that eventuality...


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

FYI *BluePincord* has once again been suspended. He just doesn't know how to play with others and I'll bet he runs with scissors too!


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Haffman said:


> We need an appropriate emoticon for that eventuality...


























No prizes for guessing which discussion board they came from ...


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

Balfour said:


> No prizes for guessing which discussion board they came from ...


Always knew you were a classy guy, Balfour! :biggrin:


----------



## mingus2112 (Dec 6, 2011)

g3dahl said:


> AAAC and single malt for me tonight as well...Ardbeg Corryvreckan here. What's in your glass?


An excellent dram! Bowmore Tempest (2nd batch) for me tonight!


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

As a physician I can't overstate the dangers of having too much blood in your alcohol system...


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

cdavant said:


> As a physician I can't overstate the dangers of having too much blood in your alcohol system...


Churchill syndrome!?


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

I believe Sir Winston's level of blood in his alcohol system was pretty constant both during and after the war, possibly higher when he dined with Lady Astor.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

cdavant said:


> I believe Sir Winston's level of blood in his alcohol system was pretty constant both during and after the war, possibly higher when he dined with Lady Astor.


Like the oblique reference to one of his witticisms! I imagine we can all think of some people whose company is likely to reduce the level of blood in the alcohol system (and not in a good way)!


----------



## El_Abogado (Apr 21, 2009)

arkirshner said:


> I have been on vacation the last few days and missed all the fun this thread has thus far occasioned. I had long been of the opinion that, notwithstanding that they were worn a hundred years ago, today the notch lapel is not correct. Over the last few years the strength of my opinion has weakened and Dr.L's post has been the straw that has broken the back of that opinion. I now find myself agreeing that "it is purely reactionary to impute a 'wrongness' to the notch lapel..."
> 
> It is not Dr. Libourel's opinion as a "sartorialist" that carries weight with me, but his opinion as a historian and former professor of ancient history does carry weight. In the last century there has been a continuous pattern of increased informality. Where once white tie was worn, now one finds black tie; where black tie was worn, now one finds lounge suits; where suits were worn, one now finds business casual. That this is the trend must be accepted, but at the same time acceptance that a trend exists does not equate with approval. Nor does the fact that a trend exists mean that one must follow it. That rock and roll is here to stay does not mean that one must give up string quartets.
> 
> ...


If one were to read only two posts from this thread, they should be the one above and JLibourel's, to which akirshner responded. Thoughtful.


----------



## Wimsey (Jan 28, 2006)

It's clear that the notch lapel tuxedo has been worn, not inappropriately, for a long time. It existed peacefully along its peaked and shawled brothers, and was - likely - a less formal version of the tuxedo. (This was, of course, back in the days where people wore tuxedos a lot and gradations of formality, even in a tuxedo, made sense).

I'm uncomfortable with the notched lapel tuxedo nowadays for two reasons. The first reason...and really, the less important reason...is that most people only wear tuxedos now for the most formal occasions. For most people, the days of wearing a tuxedo out to dinner with friends are *long* gone. So for that reason, there isn't really a place for a less formal tuxedo. Which is why I think peaked lapels are a better choice.

The second, and more important reason, that I object to notch lapels is because their prevalence isn't due to any choice on the part of consumers who have decided that it's just too stuffy to wear a peaked lapel and they will identify with the masses by wearing a notched lapel tuxedo. I would have no problem with that development. But that's not what happened; what has happened is that manufacturers are looking to save a few bucks by using the same industrial processes they use to make business suits to make tuxedos. Just with black fabric - and then slap on some satin at the end of fabrication. (I suppose I should be happy about that).

It's this last bit that I really object to - that notch lapeled, flap-pocketed, single-vented tuxedos are being passed off to the unknowing not as an alternative to a more formal tuxedo, but simply as a tuxedo. 

If everyone were wearing peaked-lapel tuxedos and someone had their tailor make them a notched one, I would have no problem with that at all.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

A thistle by any other name: NLDJ = black lounge suit in my opinion. 

As Balfour said, you colonials may argue about it. Thankfully, over here in the civilised world I've never actually seen anyone face to face wearing one. I've only seen them on TV at american awards shows


----------



## LoneWolf (Apr 20, 2006)

Since this thread is still going after 7 pages and since I'm procrastinating on the next item on today's to-do list, I'll weigh in.

When I was looking to buy my tuxedo I hadn't yet found AAAC and I wasn't really aware of the variation in lapels of tuxedos, or for that matter, business suits. I did know that I wanted my tux to be as different as possible from the suits that I wear on a daily basis, so I went with a shawl lapel. 

Even though I've become a bit more edumacated since then (I bought my tux circa 2007, although over the years I've supplemented it with a detachable collar shirt, opera pumps, white pique' vest and bow tie, etc.), I'm still happy enough with that decision that I don't feel the need to buy a new tuxedo just to get the most formal kind of lapels. However, if something happened to this one that couldn't be repaired and I had to replace it, I'd probably go with peaks (and midnight blue color). 

All that said, I don't find notch lapel tuxes offensive. In fact, each year I attend at least 4 formal events plus a cruise with 2 formal nights, and unless there's something distinctive about the rest of their rig (usually if they're wearing a self-tie bowtie), probably half the time I don't even notice other guys' lapels/collar/shoes etc. If I took the time to think about it, my assumption would be that someone in a notch lapel tux doesn't care or (more likely) isn't aware of the different kind of lapels available or (most likely) the gradations of formality associated therewith. And for me, that's where it ends. I think I have a pretty good sense of what I like for myself, but I'm not going to judge anybody else on what they're wearing (especially something as generic as a tux can be, with all the rentals available) any more than I would on the color of their eyes. One (to me) is as relevant as the other.

Okay, back to work.


----------



## Mr. A. (Aug 30, 2012)

Wimsey said:


> what has happened is that manufacturers are looking to save a few bucks by using the same industrial processes they use to make business suits to make tuxedos. Just with black fabric - and then slap on some satin at the end of fabrication. (I suppose I should be happy about that).
> 
> It's this last bit that I really object to - that notch lapeled, flap-pocketed, single-vented tuxedos are being passed off to the unknowing not as an alternative to a more formal tuxedo, but simply as a tuxedo.
> 
> If everyone were wearing peaked-lapel tuxedos and someone had their tailor make them a notched one, I would have no problem with that at all.


+1 The clothing industry has taken to using a standard suit pattern and changed the facing of the lapel to save money and time. Where I to ask one of the tailors I use to make a notch lapel Dinner suit, he would likely try talking me out of it.


----------

