I don't recognise this 'Trad' label as a term of abuse, only as a style of jazz which I don't care for too much. But, if I saw a guy wearing one of these in London or Stratford-upon-Avon - maybe with a straw hat, dark glasses and kilties - I'd just peg him as an American doing the European rounds, and I wouldn't be envious. I once had a jacket with all the right detailing - the off-centre vent, lapped seams etc. - but I just knew, after wearing it a couple of times, that it wasn't right. Madras now seems a bit of a turn-off, unless it's a halfway decent shirt that'll bleed - mine seem reluctant, nice though they otherwise are - or shorts. L.L. Bean do a nice flat-fronted pair I like on a scorching day. The jacket I have hanging in the wardrobe presents a problem: I neither want to wear it or part with it.
I don't think this is 'Ivy'. A lot of American tailoring, isn't though, is it? Esquire saw it as a style, not the be all and end all. I think they'd have closed their eyes and swallowed hard over this one.
The details are all there for TNSIL. It's a bit loud for me, maybe it being from Kentucky could explain that? Don't know. It seems rather heavy-handed somehow. A bit too 'look at me'?
Wonder what date it is?
Nah.
It won't work the way other madras jackets will, and the pastelly colours are problematical. It would fit in with Brooks current offerings. One strictly for the tennis club.
My guess is 80s, 90s. You don't see the 3 to 2 roll often on earlier jackets.
I think you do, but it's probably the other details that makes you think it's 80s/90s, colours, pattern... It's on one of those loud fun things, GTH, whatever... I have trouble with most of this...
Chums,
In the ol US of A,, that jacket was/is IVY LEAGUE. Very 1960s country club, GTH.
As to the date of the ol jacket,, hard to tell. The Indian Madras tag looks old,, but perchance not. Madras was actually big in the 1950s. http://thetrad.blogspot.com/2009/08/madras-blazer.html But me thinks that patch madras did not take off until well into the 60s??
The pastels do look a bit more 80s in nature,, and the medium lapel width may support that period as well. In yet,, far too subtle for Trad-GTH-ery.
As to the ol 3/2 comments,, I rarely see or remember jackets that were not 3/2 as per this ol Langrock specimen. http://www.vintage70sclothing.com/Mens/Jackets/11319a.htm
As the iGents say,, wear it in good health.
Cheerio.
Trip perhaps points up the deep, subtle and interesting divisions between the home of Ivy and the English/European take on it. All right, the English take on it. I think one or two on here wouldn't be seen dead in seersucker - though I love it. I guess the answer is: you can look too American. On the streets of an English city you sometimes have to be a little circumspect. Sorry, Trip, this probably misses the point by a mile; I just think we're different here.
Hank and RRP,
No worries. My comment was to the original poster's question. RRP hits the mark as to the difference with US (dare I say original Ivy,, though it borrowed freely from the UK) and the Brit adaptation. Nothing wrong with basic no-frills Ivy,, and in fact, I shall profer that one needs to master basic Ivy before donning such a jacket (which is often Russell's point around here, eh).
Cheerio.
I dislike the patch approach, period. Loud is fine, though. Remember Lindsey Nelson!
Aye. I can look at shirts on a rail - even with my poor eyesight - at a few feet away and pick out what I might be interested in: pale blue, tattersall, university stripe, white. Rarely a green nowadays. Same with knitwear: navy, dark greens, grey, maroon. All very muted.