Yuca
For many years I thought as Barbour as country wannabes clothing.
I was wrong.The practicality of their wax cotton jackets combined with superb quality makes them a must for living in the UK where it’s mild but increasingly wet.
I can bundle the coat up, use it as a picnic rug and it still looks great.
Maybe not Ivy but one hell of a coat.
Highly recommended.
I also like tassel loafers.

Thanks for the astute summary Katon, on this and other threads. I think college years are a distant memory for most of the regular contributors on here so there’s no need to spend too much time puzzling over Prep v Ivy … but it’s fun talking about it. As Alvey says, if Barbour jackets work for you then buy a good one and wear it.

'Yuca
For many years I thought as Barbour as country wannabes clothing.
I was wrong.The practicality of their wax cotton jackets combined with superb quality makes them a must for living in the UK where it’s mild but increasingly wet.
I can bundle the coat up, use it as a picnic rug and it still looks great.
Maybe not Ivy but one hell of a coat.
Highly recommended.
I also like tassel loafers.'

Barbours are ivy as far as I know (albeit a later addition to the canon - I don't think they became popular in ivy circles until the 80s) and I have no doubts as to their practical advantages. But I detest them nonetheless.

Last edited by Yuca (2022-02-23 03:59:30)

I would suggest that, in the UK at least, 'preppie' has little or no meaning or relevance, the closest to it being that kind of nauseating Tim-Nice-But-Dim Rugger-Bugger look so (understandably) despised by chaps like TRS.  To wear 'American prep' takes a bit more thinking about.  I have dabbled - with mostly unsatisfactory results.  Is Ralph Lauren a kind of 'crossover' brand?  As for, say, anything from Murray's Toggery I say, if by water and the mood takes you, indulge yourself.  I've seen Bretons wearing them to good effect.  Where I live, however, well, they don't quite go, I suppose.  I did have a pair of Reds - also a polo shirt and socks, brought back by my wife in 2012.  Only the socks remain.
But Lily Pulitzer and Vera Bradley are nice for the ladies.

I don't think 'preppy' as a way of dressing, is thought about too much by people generally  in the UK. I suppose the most obvious elements of it (polo shirt. Boat shoes) is the closest we've got to what may be considered classic or timeless? Safe? Certainly more than a few retailers haven't strayed too far from it. Walk around any healthy high street or shopping centre and you'll see Crew Clothing, Tommy etc. Of course Gap until recently. It gets thicker on the ground the closer you get to a fairly affluent coastal area.

Ralph Lauren is a crossover brand. Purely because rightly or wrongly they seem to 'cross over' into every aspect of human life

A quick look at Murrays Toggery shows me some true horrors in the trouser department. A lot of rugger bugger shirts, some great and some hideous footwear and a fascination with England (union flag covered British Bulldog paperweight, Truefit & Hill aftershave etc.

Perhaps there's been so much criss crossing over the years it's all become difficult to pin down. Which is how we like it isn't it?

Having said that - OCBD above - Bang! There you go

I never even like Andover Shop offerings that much.  Did/does anyone?
There's a shirt of O'Connell's on Ebay at the moment.  Poly/cotton.  That would rule it out for many.
We owe a debt of thanks to Horace for pointing out the superior nature of Scottish/English/Irish knitwear.

I seem to remember that North Face started off quite well: in the United States: the preferred outerwear of the granola crunchers.  Now - oh dear.  I saw some pot-bellied, wheezing tramp in Aldi last week in a North Face 'top' - North Face in letters about two feet high.  Like other 'names' from the past (Helly Hansen, for instance) it has taken on highly suspect associations.  Russell Athletic is another of these.  The most obvious and notorious is, of course, 'Burberry', with that hideous check.  My daughter's friend, who is from Saxony, wears the rubbish without blinking.

I used to wear North Face, HH and other clothes including fleeces and breathable goretex jackets, boots but never in town or the high street. I can't imagine getting dressed in ivy in the Himalaya so it was a case of dressing appropriately for ones environment. Some of the people that post pictures of themselves on Ivy Style Facebook don't seem to dress appropriately but if that's what they get off on ...

^ Spot on.  My elder daughter was wearing it during her first marriage, to her bank manager bore.  Now she's wearing Hollister instead.
My brother-in-law turned up for lunch last year clad in a North Face puffer.  Not too bad when you get him away from my wife's sister, a sour-faced, purse-lipped little bore (still religiously doing her hour's exercise each day). 
My wife wears Ugg boots.  But, like Dracula, she never drinks...  cheap, fizzy wine...

I've learned, growing older and doubtless more susceptible to the cold, to layer up.  A fleece sleeveless vest ('Alaska', USA-made) has just been acquired.  This is worn between a wool or flannel shirt and a thick sweater or sweatshirt, so absolutely invisible to any passing member of the great English public.  An actual puffer I remain highly dubious about, but those Bean items are excellent and I wish I hadn't parted with mine after wearing it off and on during the winter of 2011-12.

Once you break the misconception that Ivy and Preppy are fashion styles, you can finally see that they are one and the same. They describe the lifestyle of a particular socioeconomic group, of which clothing is only a small part. This is not exclusive because anyone can lead this lifestyle. But those who really do this don't spend years discussing in forums whether certain items of clothing are part of it or not.

Skipper is probably bang on here.

But Ivy and preppy are purely fashion styles to me. I don't lead a lifestyle that could in any small way be described as Ivy or prep outside of clothing styles. And I would actively avoid being part of any socioeconomic group (unless it was in some way connected to fairly lazy, half achieving, impoverished, tired and bored part time working dads)

For me it's not exclusive because anyone can wear the clothes.