Hmmmmm - Why keep this going ?
I'll just banish one of you if I must. And I hope from my recent PMs you both know who that will be.
Just drop it & discuss?
With Much Love -
Jim.
If they really care they can go here and argue, if they don't then just fucking move it on please...
http://forums.filmnoirbuff.com/viewtopic.php?id=11595
/\ Yup. Sort it all out there.
You can be as foul as you like there - Check my porn links !
Anyway, talking of Continental Ivy...As well as darts the jackets have always had side vents. Its no big shock. No digging, no bitching, just saying.
Anyway, point being it's as tenuously Ivy related as the chinos. Sure, they may have had an influence from Ivy way way back in the design process and they may have kept a detail or 2 in the final product but I mean we aren't in Kansas anymore Toto.
So, seeing as you boys aren't even going to discuss Ivy, lets draw a line under it? Or take it to the fight club...
But thats the kick on from back in 1954. The silhouette is the same, the details are the same. The only difference is its no longer aimed at at a mid 50s American market. Therefore its no longer called Continental Ivy. Its now aimed at a world market. Without Brioni introducing this style into an American market would it be around today? I'm more interested in the clothes than giving them a marketing spin. As I've said before if I had to give it a spin it'd be "contemporary continental Ivy". Its the same but at a world wide market in modern fabrics. Its never tried to reinvent itself to sell like say Prep nor has it offered a lifestyle. The Italian soft tailoring has sold itself on merit. I'm not sure what merits clothes to be I-gentry as I don't go on other clothing forums but I suspect most men that buy this style around the world don't bother with clothing forums and just buy the gear because they like the lines, its relaxed but still smart and well made. Rob would know more about the type of man that buys this look than though.
Last edited by Liam Mac (2013-01-17 14:42:17)
Is that Italian or American?
I see. I was really talking about Continental Ivy marketing. How it just carried on envolving without reinventing itself. You are right about the shoulders of course, but basically the silhouette is the same. Its not the same as "Ivy" of course in shape, hence the continental spin bit in the marketing. I'm sure you know that though Liam, I think you've just got your wires crossed.
I'm not sure I know what you're getting at, Tony. Sorry, can you reword or explain what you mean?
Ah, I see. Follow you now.
I helped Chens out with his article today. Gave him some info re Vans/Sperry and he went back and changed his Rosemary's Baby article accordingly. As way of thanks he called me a Loony and deleted my comments. What a guy. Ha ha.
I thought the snow would bring us together!
No snow up here.... so you can fuck right off you soft southern basturts.
LOL God love him , he just loves this place
Comment by corey — January 16, 2013 @ 10:44 am
I can’t help but wonder if those are actually Vans. Vans started in 1966, and didn’t have distribution outside of the west coast until the 70’s. Vans were originally designed for boating, adequately preppy/trad, and the slip-ons were a boating shoe. In the Sneaker Freaker article on Vans Steve Van Doren says the company his father worked for prior to Vans had a slip-on shoe, so it stands to reason there were other companies making slip-on boat shoes in the 60’s.
Comment by D.B. McWeeberton — January 16, 2013 @ 10:59 am
Nice apartment, too! With a few flaws…
Comment by Christian — January 16, 2013 @ 11:05 am
They looked like Vans to me when I rewatched the film last week, but one of the loonies at FNB said they’re not. Alas I already sent the DVD back. If anyone can verify, I can either keep that line or cut it.
Yep. That's me. The loony. But I'm only one of many....