Look at the Filson Mackinaw, coming from Japan, on Ebay.

To take this to a slight extreme, think of John Simons statement to our Gibson, that Weejuns are virtually slippers.  Furthermore, The Guv'Nor was known to wear, whilst pacing the floor at Russell Street, a loafer with so thin a sole they could have passed as slippers.  So, what are you going to wear with your costly Mackinaw?  Red Wings?  Something even more functional?  You're thus instantly transported from the world of the beef-roll loafer to that of the hipster who has spent far too much of his time recently thinking about Marlon Brando in 'On The Waterfront'.

It's a fad, a fetish, I hope will fade.  Chore jackets, duck hunting gear (including little Elmer Fudd-style hats with ear-flaps and those horrid boots), garage mechanics uniforms, even those proletarian-looking bowling shirts (Hey, Chuck here was telling me how his old man voted three times for Nixon after Watergate...  Another Bud and rye, toots...)  'Generic Americana' it might be, on offer once upon a time at Russell Street it might have been, on sale at Chiltern Street it might be from time to time now...  but I never paid anything like that for my Filson Mackinaw, believe me.  Nor, I shouldn't have thought, was it on my back very often.  Even some Pendleton proved to be unsatisfactory: something with popper buttons for instance.

AFS,
I think that time has a lot to do with this.
Say, for example, it's 1988 in Russell Street and John Simons is selling Filson and Carhartt. It links to J Simons as the best place to buy American clothes be it Alden loafers, heavy duty sweatshirts by Russell or Sero OCBD's. Most people who visit the store are grabbing individual items because they're different from Cecil Gee or Wodehouse. If you shop there long enough you will end up looking slightly different but in an exceptionally subtle way.

Move onto now and reproduction clothing, be it military leathers, replica jeans or Great Depression suits by RRL is a whole separate scene. You have Mens File magazine and Clutch Cafe. The clothes cost a lot more and I would guess that for some that's the attraction. The brands are often about accuracy to the original template rather than specifiacally country of origin.

Occasionally, something crosses over to Ivy but I would say it's limited to very few things like sweatshirts.

Chiltern Street is a different proposition. Due to a number of well known factors there is less Made In the USA items. Nothing wrong with that and some of the things for sale are really exciting. For an exceptionally small shop it punches well above it's weight. It has no pretensions of being fashion forward but is still highly relevant.

Appropriated Ivy. By the 70s it was full-blown in the form of Tom Wolfe style "Funky Chic", but it was also a thing to some degree in earlier eras. One strain was sincere, like the poorly-hidden desire of visiting outdoorsman to look like the backcountry locals rather than like the tourists they were, and one was ironic, like the Princeton "beer suit" fad where undergrads would put painters' clothes on over their usual clothes to go out drinking to avoid spilling beer on them.

Tom Wolfe had a very good eye for this, in that he noted it wasn't *all* workwear that was desired, it was workwear through an Ivy League lens, often creating a look that an actual blue-collar worker from the present would find unpleasant, the "Down-and-Out, bib overalls, Down Home, I'm Gonna Send You Back to Georgia" look.

Last edited by katon (2021-12-18 12:24:17)

In my early purist years I would have aggressively rejected any idea of compatibility between Ivy and workwear. In the mid 80s when John Simons began importing Carhartt I questioned his reasoning, his response - "John, I tell you, you can make these jackets Ivy. You wash them a few times, they soften and they fit in with the look". I was a definite sceptic, and John had other non-Ivy elements as part of the mix - work books, jeans (some still have an issue with Ivy and jeans), chunky knits. But I have come to realise it is all part of a spectrum - what makes Ivy is the colour palate, the fit, the textures. Red wing boots and a sack jacket - it can work, I've done it often. Jeans with rockabilly turn-ups? Yep. At this point, more than 50 years since Ivy was a viable, popular, cogent style, you just can't think along strict lines, it's all an invention, a work of imagination. Ralph was a trailblazer in this respect - mixing elements of Americana, he, or his designers, could see how they melded together - plaid with denim, seersucker, flannel, corduroy, linen, tweed, good leather and suede, certain silhouettes and patterns that recur through Americana/trad dressing. I think John Simons grasped this early on too, though I wonder how much he was influenced by Ralph? I've never asked him this.

Last edited by Tworussellstreet (2021-12-19 12:23:52)

In the 1970’s, in America, painter’s pants became all the rage for high school kids. They were made of a heavy canvas-y fabric, had hammer loops and were mostly off-white. I haven’t thought of them in a while.

A slightly odd thing about 'generic Americana' (for want of a better phrase), I never felt excited about going into 'American Classics' in the way I did walking through the door at Russell Street.  Even now I don't look upon 501s (for instance) with great enthusiasm.  Maybe I've been wearing Levis for too long.  I got far more pleasure wearing the chocolate pincord Bean last week, with white Makers OCBD and that heather-coloured Paine slipover.

I seem to remember chaps at Cold Blow Lane sporting some odd gear, Robbie, including Covid-type masks.  Not to mention the polo necks and lacy cardigans favoured by Harry The Dog etc.  Waders, too? 
I think donkey jackets were seen elsewhere. 
Interesting that by around - 1981/2 - would it be? - London boys were going for that softer look that became known as 'Casual'.

AFS, i´m quite sure that softer London Casual look started much earlier. Maybe around 1976? Think that the term "Casual" started to get used in the very early 80s. There´s evidence that especially south of the river there´s been a kind of "Dresser" scene. US or Italian loafers, Fiorucci jeans (or real American Levis), Lacoste polos, Scottish knitwear. Even blazers and button-downs. And Burberry / Acquascutum rain coats. Interesting.

Oh, crikey, I must set aside my duffle coat and tweed jacket forthwith and see about getting some of those painter pants - preferably with some authentic 1970s paint spattered across them.
Come off it, Woof.  Of course our Gibson's post was a pre-Christmas cracker (I'm already working on 'The Wit And Wisdom Of Toffeeman'), but (you'll be surprised to hear) just because that Saint John said it and the other Saint John stocked it it doesn't mean I have any intention of wearing it. 
In fact, at sixty two with a full head of cropped grey hair, I feel that I'm really too old to be wearing even Levis.  A big part of me feels I really ought to have taken Yuca's advice and invested in a couple of pairs of O'Connell's cords instead of buying more inexpensive bits and pieces.  But I once had a conversation with Jeff Garet over some rather expensive John Lobb shoes I'd bought and he shook his head in disbelief and said they weren't good value for money.  It's a slightly difficult one. 
I suppose my look now is just as 'considered' as twelve to fifteen years ago.  Much before that I'd say it was somewhat self-conscious.  Now, though, I want to be, once dressed, 'oblivious' to my look.
I do still miss Jimbo and wonder what his take on this might have been.

A serious question: where is Carhartt being made nowadays?  I saw a chap wearing one of their jackets just the other day.  Out with the wife, very much 'used to go to the caravan at Skegness, now thinking of moving to Spain' types, talking about a nice settee for the 'connie'.  They both looked, well, badly dressed.
Die work wear!