Last edited by Alex Roest (2007-08-17 09:57:48)

Can’t resist piping up any longer.  Jeans do look like hell they way most people wear them, but they can be worn quite attractively; and because they are done so badly by most, when done right they can stand out, in there own way, almost as much as a quality, well-fitting suit does from the masses of suits out there.  Moreover, their functionality is unassailable, and I’d never want to do without them just because most folks do so badly with them.

I have been wearing jeans as long as I can remember (but no longer than is necessary for a slight break at my footwear).  In my childhood and adolescence from the late 1940s through the 1950s, I was aware of only one cut for jeans, whether Levis, Wrangler, or Lee, the brands I knew.  The waistband sat just below the natural waist (for me, about an inch below my navel), there was some room, but no bagginess, in the seat and thighs, and the legs were straight to the knee with just a bit of taper from knee to ankle and a bottom opening of about 16 inches.  Though it has not always been easy to find them, that is the cut I’ve stayed with throughout, with a slight slip into boot cut legs in the 1970s.  Forgive me, but the lapels and vents on my jackets were a bit exaggerated then as well.

In the early years, I started out a new pair unwashed, as that was the only way they came, and wore them until they frayed beyond use.  Since they became available, however, I’ve purchased them washed enough for softness and a little overall fading, but never with any of the tricky washes or ersatz wear/fraying/rips.  These jeans have served well for everything from heavy construction work with steel toed logging boots to wear with a well-tailored sport coat and good leather soled slip ons or city or western boots as called for by the occasion.  I keep about 10 pairs in my rotation and replace the oldest as they become worn beyond use.  A pair generally lasts about 5-6 years.

The key to wearing jeans well, I think, is to find a cut that flatters the physique and does not jar the eye.  For the vast majority of folks, jeans that are skinny, baggy, low-rise, stove pipe, flared, stacked, noticeably washed, artificially aged, decorated beyond simple rear pocket stitching, etc., all work against looking well in them.  Yet one or more, usually more, of those sad characteristics, is seen on the vast majority of jeans wearers.  When the pitfalls are avoided, however, jeans have a character and utility that makes them almost as classic as the properly bespoken, MTM, or RTW suit we all so admire.

Anyone know on the vintage Levi 501s whether the coin pocket shapes ever changed?  Also, I've noticed on one pair, that everything looked great, but one pair I was set to buy had an inside fabric care tag that was perfect except it said "rumble dry" instead of "tumble dry".  Also looks like there's orange <and> yellow threads.   I wonder if this was counterfeit or what?

Last edited by Horace (2007-08-28 13:50:48)

Well, I received the Lands End "47 Indigo" Japanese denim jeans today (Dipped in indigo 47 times) with mixed results.  I ordered them in two sizes, 34x32 and 34x34, in what they characterize as 5-year distressing.  The 34x32 jeans are "pre-hemmed" at the factory while anything longer, such as the 34x34, are hemmed by LE.  The 34x32 jeans look great, in my neophyte eyes, at least, with uniform distressing from top to bottom.  Not so with the 34x34 jeans, which are rather inconsistent in the distressing toward the bottom of the legs.  Apparenty, the factory does not go through the full distressing process at the legs with those jeans that are shipped to LE for hemming.  I suppose the factory feels it's a waste of effort since they will be further hemmed.  The consequence is they look really shitty and amateurish; 5 year distressing at the top half of the jean, maybe a few months wear at the leg.

One thing I've noticed about some well-fitting jeans is that their fit is actually elegant in a way--the line is sleek and there's an element of insouciance in say, the wide cuffs.

One note, though, is that this tends to be limited to the vintage-styled jeans.

Last edited by Incroyable (2007-08-30 14:40:01)