Hence Alan Fusser's  'permanent fashion'?

I would have thought theres a world of difference between a poly mix in 68 and ones made today. No one is going to look at my LVCs and say their a 1957 cut. Casual styling is very different to dressy style. No one is going to look at my 64 Spikes and say they look like trousers made in the 60s, the cut is fashionable today, it it was a pair of 74 Levi flares I'd look a right one. You can't ignore fashion with casual stuff unless your prepared to stick out like a sore thumb. Would you wear a penny collar shirt from 73? Of course not. You can wear an old fashioned style of suit jacket as long as its well made in a good cloth and the trousers are not a huge flare. And of course you have the right body type. The extremes of the 70s and zoot suits being the exceptions. Really I think its down to the quality of "product" and persona of the wearer. Quality clothing tends to give the wearer confidence.

Which, going back to the comedy Mod thing, is maybe why a lot of middled men don't even dress like that away from mod nights, weekends or scooter rallies.

Gianni Agnelli dressed in 60s like he dressed in late 30s.
He have ever ignored fashion.
For the most was the same for Douglas Fairbanks Jr,Fred Astaire,The Duke of Windsor.
Ralph Lauren said that when he worked for Brooks Brothers in early 60s was fascinated by Fairbanks Jr:
In those times all wore skinny black or navy ties, Fairbanks Jr with his gourgeous double breasteds wore classic size ties with Windsor knot,often with large houndstooth pattern.

Fashion is an element of  style. It's the degree that it is part of the dressing mix. I do my own thing but I keep an eye on fashion. however, whatever the prevailing mood, I will strive to select something unique and do it better than everyone else.

I notice that people whom believe in never changing fashions for men are generally:

1. Reactionary pols who associate clothing choice with the golden era and haven't much of an interest in fit, quality, construction etc...

2. Very cheap men

3. Men who never learned about clothes and are afraid to learn because it means they didn't always know everything.



Fashion cannot freeze for anyone but for men it moves slowly and it requires a replacement which is hard to come by because men react very violently to even small flourishes. Clothing does indeed carry political and social charges which reflect the zeitgeist of the time.

Currently, we are seeing a lot of culture clash because the young are getting into tailored clothing that the Boomers spent a lifetime getting out of. That means that mens clothes have had a break with politics but not with mood; they reflect the upheavals that have shaken the world. However, the forms and styles have remained the same but with a riot of color and pattern both intrinsic to the items and in overall outfit combination.

It is definitely possible to be a clothing purist, operating outside of the current zeitgiest of fashion: the Capone kids and all those who dress in period golden age style, including Ivy (if you are doing it in strict discipline to the boom period look) then you have definitely removed yourself from the vagaries of the here and now. But you are still operating within a style and a fashion of a period, but I agree this is more "pure" than being a fashionista.

I suppose the only thing that stops such people being freaks and looking antiquated or silly, well, the Capone kids and others are, is that men's fashion is slow to change and does indeed have classical elements that have not changed for 60+ years. Ladies fashion has not been so kind.