The clothes have had so many meanings over time that you can pick your own meaning to ascribe to them:

Elite?

Democratic?

Hip?

Subversive?

Old Money?

Middle Class?

Everyman?

But at the end of the day the clothes are just... the clothes.


Trad stressed one interpretation and one take on the style, insisting that they represented the tradition. Most people now know better.
Call an OCBD 'Trad' and you link it & yourself to all the things you mention above: The Internet world of iGents and faux Curriculums. Your choice.


I'm with you, FWIW, I just like that relaxed Classic American style. Called 'Ivy League' in the past & when it's been written about being discused by many authors.

I saw no reason for new names & new 'rules' to be made up. Especially when the 'Trad' agenda made the rose smell nowhere near as sweet by its new name.


Best -

... And it was all so silly & riddled with mistakes like Harris' famous Ben Silver (A brand he 'knew before Brooks') catalogues on the old coffee table before they existed...

It did get the interest of the iGents though and help build up a network of online fans, but at what a cost!

If you're into the clothes then be into the clothes - They belong to everyone. Call them 'Trad' and you've moved beyond the clothes and into a very specific interpretation of them in the West online. The world of the Curriculum that never was.

Last edited by heikki k (2009-11-24 10:23:20)

There's no reason why Trad shouldn't transform itself into something valid. I do suspect that the iGent nature of the thing will make that tough though. Plus they'll have a lot to recant...

^ Kinda my point that the clothes are the clothes. They're only 'Trad' when you buy into an Internet theory. Some do, some don't.

These threads are always interesting, because they present differing views based on geography, and chronology.

My guess is that the chronology of when we became interested in men's clothing may have a lot to do with differing opinions. It is much like the metaphor regarding the perception of five blind men, trying to describe an elephant, based on where they are standing in relation to the elephant. Five different descriptions, and all valid from the point of view of the person describing what his touch tells him.

If may be that those of us (like Mr Meyer and me) that became conscious of TNSIL a long time ago have views that are different from one that became conscious of the subject through the OPH in the '80s, or "Dress for Success" in an earlier era, etc.

For example, for the few of us that were alive in the US, that lived through the end of the depression, and WWII, TNSIL was essentially the only game in town. Not much money around, the things that we had were inexpensive, and had to wear for a long time. Thus, OCBD, Bass, white Wigwam socks, one navy blazer pretty was much the "fashion".

There was no such thing as the men's fashion industry. What we wore was the clothing equivalent of what is referred to as "comfort food" in the US, today. Meat loaf, canned peas, mashed potatoes, etc. Nothing fancy, and inexpensive.

There were no implications of social status, lineage, etc. Look at pictures from US baseball games in the 50s, or class photos of that era. We all were similarly attired.

WWII veterans were the start of "campus style". Anyone that was a veteran, through the GI Bill, could go to any US university that they could be admitted to. The "blue blood" ivy league image was then mixed from guys from all walks of life. They started the khaki trouser phase of our heritage, because they had them, and didn't have enough money to splurge on clothing. Bill Thomas discovered these again, 40 years later.

Thus, today, many of us started wearing the equivalent of clothing "comfort food" as teenagers, that's who we were. There never seemed to be a valid reason to change, and it was natural to move into BB offerings, starting with 3/2 suits in the University Shop, and moving up to "346" when possible.

The guy that entered the loop at a later date,  has an entirely different take, and yet, all are probably correct. The "class" and aspirational strivings came later, and were probably a result of merchandising, like RL, etc. Ergo, trad, preppy, TNSIL, etc. It's just clothing, what you call it, is up to you. Still an interesting subject, for some reason.

Or so it seems.

And God bless that ass!

(I'm revving up for Thanksgiving Day...)