Mel Brooks in 'High Anxiety' does it well.
Pinned collar, 3 piece US cut suit, English shoes. It's that grown up Brooksian look.
Worth a kick around?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki_UcRmELvs
It's not Mad Men. It's that Anglo American look.
Whaddaya think, Buddy?
J.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enku7uAHJBU&feature=related
Wonder who did the wardrobe? They're on the West Coast, but Mel's character comes from the East...
Kevin Rowland on the cover of 'Don't Stand Me Down'?
I once went for a version of this look while working at J.Simons one day. It felt great for half an hour but after polishing the shoe display and refolding the shirts (both jobs I adored of course - I couldn't believe they PAID me for this) I felt a tad, ahem, damp and not very Wall Street...
GG
The Madison Ave. look used to be the man in the conservative grey flannel suit. Madison Ave., for many years, was home to the advertising industry, and, the conservative/Ivy mode of dress of ad executives became synonymous with Madison Ave. IIRC, Cary Grant played a NY ad executive in North By Northwest, and, his iconic suit, though not grey flannel, was typical of the Madison Ave look. I believe Gregory Peck also played an ad exec. in the film, "The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit". Didn't hurt that conservative clothing stores such as Brooks Brothers, Press, Paul Stuart, etc. were situated on Madison Ave, too.
I visit your all links... have you any more links for new season..
Great user name - Welcome !
We should do a Spring Ivy thread round about now shouldn't we? That change from Shetlands to cotton knits & long sleeve to half sleeve shirts...
Kick it off if you want -
Seems like a good time to bump this. The look has been (more or less) alluded to in a number of previous threads. I imagine the likes of Burt Lancaster doing something close to this in movies like 'The Sweet Smell Of Success'. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. It was a very 'mature adult male' look, as far removed from what you'll see around you now as it's possible to imagine. It was KingstonIan, I think, who once referred on here to the 'shell suit granddad' look. That's evolved into something even odder where I live: granddad walking the dog whilst wearing a thermal jacket and shorts.
Watch a few old British movies. 'Hue And Cry'. The bombsite boys are all in jackets and ties. Even suits.
Clean living under very difficult circumstances.
Madison Avenue ‘style’ I don’t know much about. Mad Men didn’t hold my attention for more than ten minutes for some reason. Rightly or wrongly I’ve always suspected that in some way it helped open the door to black suits, braces and shoulder pads. Triple pleat trousers. How far is Madison from Wall?
That Grant/Peck thing though. What a look. Chairing meetings in the morning. Running from assailants or shooting rabid dogs by the afternoon. Back home to teach the kids some table manners. No change of clothes required.
It’s a long, long way from shorts, padded jackets, hoodies etc. Slovenly, my grandparents would have called it.
Of course we mustn’t forget that jeans have a very big part to play in us collectively sleepwalking from one extreme to the other.
Slovenly, yes, an excellent, precise word. S, you're absolutely bang on the money about jeans, too, I think. They were seen as a bit 'off' when I was growing up in the 60s. In the end, though, even my grandmother succumbed to wearing them. My father, who had once gone in for the 'Italian' look as a young jazz fan, ended his days in either Levis or tracksuit bottoms.
Grant/Peck (and others): an unstated elegance that came naturally to them. The key: a collar and tie and a shine on their shoes.
I'd guess the 'Madison'/'Mad Men' collar would rule out the look for virtually anyone posting on here: too stiff in appearance, too flat, too starchy. A kind of almost 'monochrome' look, is it not, ruling out any sense of playfulness? Inflexible but very in tune with those times perhaps.
And that satisfying ‘snap’ around the ankle that seems to only come from a well fitting, well cut trouser worn with confidence and purpose.
If my wife was intrigued/concerned enough to view my browsing history, I wonder what she’d make of ‘Cary Grant’s pants’?
Of course those guys wore them slightly fuller then perhaps we would. Often with a pleat and turn ups. But I still aspire to it.
Yeah that collar’s out for me. Too ‘my wife buys my shirts from Next’.
I might have investigated if I’d ever been office bound. They’re not ever for casual are they? Thankfully it’s not something I ever had to think about
Last edited by Spendthrift (2022-01-11 10:08:54)
I first posted this quote in another thread back in 2012 but it seems more at home here:
“Madison Avenue, U.S.A.?? by Martin Mayer was first published in 1958 and has this to say about how ad men dress:
“The standard of dress is high, for both men and women, and many men do seek to make an effect with their clothes – an effect that might be described as colorful conservatism. (The women want to look efficiently pretty, and, if single potentially sexy) Grey flannel was never really popular on Madison Avenue, and has scarcely been worn since the publication of Sloan Wilson’s novel about the man who wore it (and he was in public relations rather than advertising, anyway); Brooks Brothers is on Madison Avenue, but its pink shirts are more likely to be seen in law offices than in the advertising business. Certainly there is no uniform, and the advertising man’s habitual avoidance of clothing that might seem flamboyant denies him the role of leader of fashion.
Interesting. I wonder why ‘The advertising man’ would consciously avoid flamboyant clothes? What (then) would have been available that would have been considered ‘too much’ apart from pink shirt?
‘Colourful conservatism’ - love that
Then, in England, in London, we are told about the John Simons 'vision': building upon that of Austin (certainly) and Gee (probably): aiming to sell to some hybrid smart young executive/creative/artistic type. High prices all round. The focus is, again, a hybrid: Madison Avenue, the East Village: NYC at a particular moment (perhaps): bringing that 'vibe' back to certain parts of London. Modern jazz, modern art and architecture. Advances in eating habits. Cheaper air tickets.
'Colourful conservatism' - often denied or dismissed in an English context. Yet it remains.
Spendrift, the reason why we avoid flamboyant clothes is you want to remembered for the quality of what you presented not what you were wearing. It's also about subtlety.Too flash you might be confused with a salesman rather than a respected advisor. The cost of great advertising isn't for the faint hearted. Clients have to feel that it's about substance as much as style.
I think colourful conservatism is about looking considered but still within the cannon of traditionally business accepted attire.For example, a pocket square in an interesting print, maybe a knitted tie with stripes, suits in soft fabrics like flannel and cord. David Ogilvy would wear red braces with everything from suits to cords. One guy I worked with dressed like he lived in the country with beautifully cut tweed suits and brogues.
Personally, I would be mortified if someone thought I dressed like I worked in the City.
A creative I once worked said I dressed like a college Professor - Keydge tweed, chambray shirt, knitted tie. I looked at him in his carpenter pants, doc martins and sweatshirt and asked when he was going to get off his arse and repair the roof.
AFS,
As usual you're bang on with your views. If you work in a creative industry you're exposed to lots of different influences, aware of the cultural zeitgeist and need to be relevant.
In '86 when I started in advertising it was all about beautiful design.Everything from Tizio lights, Mont Blanc pens, Corbusier armchairs and Dieter Rams.
John Simons vision linking modern art, music and clothes was still relevant and had been updated.
Thanks Alvey. Looks like I’ve been guilty of lumping ‘sales’ and ‘marketing’ too closely to each other. What you say makes perfect sense.
Imagine people power dressing now. I read a news item in the last couple of days that said that Biden had announced the end of formal dress in the office. I was amazed that the US president would bother with such detail, but then when I re-examined I saw that it was actually Boden, the owner of the British clothing label of the same name, so a somewhat lesser figure. But I wonder how it’s going to turn out with the rise of homeworking, CEOs and senior politicians abandoning the tie and even the suit in some cases. Burnham makes a point of being interviewed in his shirt sleeves whenever possible. There’s a societal and therefore a commercial pressure to abandon formality and appear relaxed, friendly and accessible, shop assistants who wear a collar and tie seem to be threatening. I suspect and hope that it will go full circle, but it will take a generation or two so I won’t see it.
^ Interesting posting. The inexorable rise of informality (and more) links to what Spendthrift was saying about the wearing of jeans.
My late father was never seen tieless at work - until his firm decided, around 1984, to have 'Dress Down Friday'. Utter nonsense. After retiring, however, almost all formal clothing was set aside as he threw himself into his fishing and studies of Napoleon and his campaigns.
Working at a posh school I naturally dressed in Brooks suits and wingtips, generally with a repp tie. (Or should that be 'rep'? I'm never entirely sure). Eyebrows were raised.
In the West, now, no-one seems to dress as if they mean business. KingstonIan was onto this years ago.
The 'confusion' between Biden and Boden made me smile, but, after George Bush and his off-duty cowhand look, nothing would surprise me.
@Woof, I work for pretty much a billion dollar company and I've never seen our CEO in a suit and tie (even when we have important visitors), always in terrible looking jeans pointy shoes and Gant BD's.
Perhaps the only well-dressed men in the world today are members of the CCP. They, of course, can afford to splash out.
I don't really have a problem with 'informal' dress at work. Or anywhere. Informal attitude I don't like; "You okay there, Buddy?"
I seem to remember reading somewhere Re Ivy League clothing (vs Italian vs English) "...........the American will not dress uncomfortably" And that is a truly great thing about 'The Look'. It has so many facets that you can generally adapt it to most scenarios you find yourself in. Whether you want or need to wear a suit to work or not. But at least you've put the effort in - even if only for yourself.
But it does seem that everyone's losing perspective on appropriateness. If I watch a news report from some war torn corner of the world I don't expect him to be wearing a suit and tie - but if he's standing outside a library on Tooting High Street he shouldn't be wearing jeans and an anorak. I can't get my head around the thought process. "I'm presenting myself to millions of people on television. I've got something important to say. And they're going to be interested. I'll probably wear jeans and that old Trespass Jacket"