Drapes look nicer on curtain rods hanging in the living room.   Admittedly, talk about "drape" is mostly confined to the message board fora community as few men in the outside world genuinely care to adopt a look originated three-quarters of a century ago by a rather obscure tailor in England.  Similarly, few men have an over-powering desire to wear Zoot suits, which were sort of an Americanized adaptation.  A properly-made suit will allow for ample room in the chest and shoulder blade areas for the purpose of freedom of movement of one's arms and shoulders.  Anything more is excess cloth and unattractive, at least in my view, in that it doesn't flatter the human form.

Another discussion of drape, referencing this board as well as styleforum.

http://thelondonlounge.net/gl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6265

How do people stay awake reading the LL threads? The pompousness of the posters is only surpassed by their meaningless long winded diatribes. If you do not own a drape suit, you can not comment on it. Please. Lets apply that to all things, movies cars etc. And what is all this movement that people are doing which they cannot do in a more form fitting suit? My jackets have no drape, yet I am able to grap onto a subway pole, hail a taxi, tie my shoes etc with the jacket buttoned. Are these gentlemen using shovels or pick axes in their daily line of work?


FNB, to answer your question, don't know, don't care.

Last edited by edmorel (2006-11-06 10:57:06)

As contributions by non-experts were solicited, I shall contribute what meager thoughts I have.  It seems remarkable that this elusive "drape" cannot even be adequately described, unless I missed something on the SF thread.  Whatever it is, it appears to be very hard do well, or even passably; thus, it has small utility for those who do not, as FNB noted, live in a fitting room.  It also appears that if one even hopes to obtain the perfect drape, one must be as thin as a stick, if not as gaunt as an ascetic who survives on crusts and tepid tea.  The garments  displayed that all agreed were properly "draped" were as affected as a Zoot Suit, another observation of FNB's, and about as useful.    In sum, I believe FNB summed the matter up well: whatever its antique virtue, "drape" has seen its day.  However, the thread was qute interesting.

But what do I know?

Last edited by Voltaire's Bastard (2006-11-06 12:37:40)

Last edited by Voltaire's Bastard (2006-11-06 13:45:05)

Fortunately, the StyleForum thread has cleared up my confusion. Illustrations are really worth a thousand words. But it seems to me that the "drape suit" is actually a "suit with drape characteristics", since the focus of the drape is the upper chest just to either side of the armholes. Does the drape affect more than that? The photos posted by iammatt(?) on StyleForum suggest that the suit is rather ordinary in shape, except for the drape.

Last edited by Marc Grayson (2006-11-06 17:47:22)

At the risk of committing MB heresy, Scholte was overrated.  I had the opportunity to inspect the Duke's Scholte-made clothes up close and personal at Sothebys some years ago and was really underwhelmed by what I had seen, especially the crude, poorly executed, uneven stitching, devoid of any artistry.  My own tailor would never accept such sub-standard workmanship.  The whole drape thing is much ado about nothing, really.  In fact, filling the chest and blade areas with excessive cloth in order to create the illusion of fullness and muscularity is kind of amateurish.  Achieving the same effects with proper balance, and without having the client swimming in cloth, is far more challenging, requiring an elevated level of tailoring skills.

Edit: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01EFDE153DF935A35751C0A96E958260&sec=&pagewanted=print

Last edited by Marc Grayson (2006-11-06 23:56:40)