Chums,
Anyone doing this?
I got all nostalgic after being vehemently opposed to the monogram. For years.
I'm favoring it again on Brooks boxers (right side leg only). And I'm starting to think I might want to do it on Brooks shirts.
My only experience with the monogrammed shirts is some English shirts I've had made over the years and a few gifts I've gotten.
I used to have it done on the tail. While I could never go cuff, I'm thinking pocket. Why not. Like the ol' photo of Wm F Buckley.
Right on the pocket. Maybe a diamond serif. Large last initial in the middle. White shirt. Blue Monogram.
Counsel?
Don't do it.
Hahaha
"The thong and the short of it..."
No =-- you're wrong. monograms on the boxers. Yes. Though ideally received as a gift. Monograms on shirts. Somewhat questionable. But I'm doing it anyway.
I like monograms. I have a sense they aren’t appreciated here - maybe in the UK…? I had two shirts made at Kamakura and had them monogram the cuffs. I’d do it again if and when I have anything made up. It felt like a fun way to make the shirts special after spending an arm and a leg. In high school, when I went to a place called The Lodge to buy poly-cotton button down shirts, I also had them monogram the chest pocket. My roommates in college the next year didn’t stop making fun of me. They later told me they thought I was rich. If only they could have seen me taking the bus to the mall to have them made. I’d never get a pocket monogram again.
Last edited by Jdemy (2021-12-08 11:12:46)
I had a Brooks shirt with a monogram on the right cuff: belonged to the original owner, though. I see no harm in it whatever so long as it's done with taste and discretion - as you doubtless would Jdemy. Many thanks for reviving this thread.
Not to flog an old stereotype, but I wondered if the American perception of ‘English understatement and restraint’ was a factor in not liking monograms??
Probably not in the 21st century. But think of Edward Gorey and the notion of GTH combined. To put it another way, the English were last understated and restrained around the time Noel Coward was thick with Gertrude Lawrence. Ours is an appalling nation in so many ways. Has been for the majority of my lifetime. But nothing on God's earth would prevent me from visiting a tailor and doing what Horace suggested if I thought it was the right thing to do - any more than convention prevented Evelyn Waugh from dressing like a bookmaker.
It's such a personal issue.
Does a monogram denote consideration in ones clothes or is it naff ? (I know the preppy handbook mentioned monograms.)
In the UK Ivy clothes are more about being subtle than flash. The colour palette is slightly subdued. The clothes are only recognised as having any connotations by the few. The drivers are things that we associate with being American. IE) there are loads of loafers out there but UK made loafers don't typically feature beef rolls and pie-crust hand stitching.
So I guess monograms fall outside of what I would typically want from a shirt. Wouldn't be on my checklist.
^ Alvey may well be voicing a majority UK opinion here, Jdemy. Knowing the aforementioned handbook won't get anyone kudos in England. Ivy in England is more rarified than freemasonry. I believe our Gibson and one or two in London grant one the occasional nod. When I set eyes on Shaun in Nottingham you could have knocked me down with a feather. English Ivy dressing is a bit, well, subdued - subtle, as Alvey says. But in NYC or on Cape Cod? Go for it.
^ Should read 'one another'.
The height of bad taste to me aka how to ruin a shirt.
Monogram shirts are wrong (for me) on so many levels. But each to their own.
And if the shirt has matching collar and cuffs (and to my eternal shame I did once own such a shirt) then well I just don't know......
I don't think a shirt is 'ruined'; possibly 'spoiled' a little by an embellishment that may not seem necessary to the majority. But, there is a 'tyranny of the majority', is there not? I rather liked my Brooks shirt with its monogram: gave it a sense of history and ownership. I also own shirts in which the former owners' names are sewn in on tapes. I like that, too.
RFK and JFK seemed to have tolerated them and that’s good enough for me. (Then again so did DJT…so, you got me there….!)
Gently... but tolerance of any kind of logo or tag or overdone part of a metal zipper is exceptionally limited among the UK Ivy fraternity. Ralph Lauren is preferred minus the pony, Fred Perry the laurel wreath. Nothing much to be done about that stupid crocodile, I suppose, but tags on Grenfell jackets or Paraboot are often removed with a sharp knife. There is some slightly naff stitching on the rear of some khakis I bought from a nice couple in Indiana I could well do without. Oh, heavens, I was forgetting, an exception to this rule is the little red tag on a pair of 501s. The patches on denim don't really count.
English dressing can be very, very precise even if the wearer is as likely to be 'clocked' by another member of the tribe as he is to be rung up for a hot date by a teenage nympho.
^ This would not apply to Yuca, who has to beat them off with clubs.
If only.