You are not logged in.

#1 2008-02-26 18:57:26

tom222222
Member
Posts: 277

That little New England world

since I have been banned on AAAC I know little about the trad thread. For once and always I would like to put up a post about the stuff I knew, the stuff I wore, the stuff I still wear. and a few things that I would like to wear. None of it has to do with style. This is just the stuff people wore and knew about when I was growing up. It will always be outside the world of fashion. There are no rules. this is just what you wore.
     Yor had to have two jackets. One was a navy blazer. the other was a Harris tweed jacket. you needed two and you could do whatever you wanted to vary them. You had to have the two and better off in winter weight. you didn't have to go to school in the summer. You had to have a pair of flannels. you had to have corduroy pants. you could get away with them in the 60s. you had to have Arrow shirts. decent shirts. nobody cared then about a label, as far as I knew. You had to have shetland sweaters. they were cheap. and they were warm, so you survived in the badly heated northeast buildings. you needed a tan raincoat with a lining. Burberry was way expensive (although they sold it at JPress). London Fog was fine. not expensive but it worked.
    The big fashions back then circa 1975 were down jackets or vests. LL Bean was great. Irish handknit sweaters.  Sperry boat shoes. they had these ugly boots from Frye. That was a fashion, far too ugly for me. Basic pre designer jeans were big. shoes were loafers, although at that time I wore a very comfortable Gucci imitation that Barries sold. lovely shoes. A handknit Irish sweater and a down vest from Beans was a fashion statement. a tweed jacket made you out to be a dandy. MY double breasted overcoat from the Savoy Tailors Guild marked me in my junior year as a fashionista before they coined the term. Nobody dressed that well, or owned as nice an overcoat. Not the Hovings or the Sarnoffs. It didn't matter that much, or maybe an English overcoat was too exotic.
     It was all cheaper than today. The look may have cost some money but not like today.
     Perhaps more importantly the schools and the education was cheaper. There has been inflation but back then the Ivies kit and kaboodle cost 8 grand a year. 30 years later the bill is 50 grand a year. It is all different today. the money is different and the styles are different and the kids are maybe a little different. though on the slight occasions that i meet them they seem smart and ready to take over the world. The fashions though, hmmmmmmm.

 

#2 2008-02-26 19:20:07

tom222222
Member
Posts: 277

Re: That little New England world

when I was tiny my parents dressed me in blue blazers and madras. this is what it was. I kind of have come to a conclusion that in the south (the rest of the country was hopeless) these things became class distinctions, But in little New England in the 1960s everyone dressed this way. Maybe you grew out of the colthes and people noticed. and there may have been a few class distinctions if you owned suits and overcoats. but everyone dressed way back when and everyone sort of dressed the same way, as best as I can remember.

 

#3 2008-02-26 20:11:07

tom222222
Member
Posts: 277

Re: That little New England world

or Manton can explain it all.

 

#4 2008-02-26 22:00:48

Horace
Member
Posts: 6433

Re: That little New England world

A lot of good material here Tom.  I'll post in reply anon.


""This is probably the last Deb season...because of the stock market, the economy, Everything..." - W. Stillman.

 

#5 2008-02-26 23:09:21

shuman
Member
Posts: 184

Re: That little New England world

Thanks for posting this. I much prefer the real stories over made up or current versions of whatever the kids are calling it...

 

#6 2008-02-27 01:37:09

Taylor McIntyre
Son of Ivy...
Posts: 342

Re: That little New England world

 

#7 2008-02-27 06:34:16

JRR
Member
Posts: 104

Re: That little New England world

 

#8 2008-02-27 06:59:43

Archie
Member
Posts: 89

Re: That little New England world

I"m an 80's kid and born and raised in the South, so I'll try and add my 2 pence to this great discussion.

Growing up as a little Southern boy, Preppy rig was king. Since running across this message board & AAAT, I've realized that what I wore was New England/East Coast/Preppy/Trad or whatever other label gets put on it...but brighter. I really only remember wearing BD oxfords as a kid, but they were always pink, yellow, green, orange or white. Uni. Stripe oxfords were, again, in non-primary colors. Polos were Lacoste or Duck Head. In the event that I needed sweaters (again, this is the South), they were usually wool and usually some sort of Fair Isle/Ski Sweater design. I had a navy blazer, but only wore it when I had to (usually to church). Chinos were Duck Head. Period. I never owned any other brand until high school (a nice, heavy, button-fly pair from the Gap that I wish I still had). Shoes were Weejuns, Dirty Bucs, Saddle Oxfords, Bean Boots/Mocs or Sebago Bluchers with the laces curled up at the ends so that you didn't have to tie them. Socks? What are socks?

I had no idea what LL Bean was until Junior High when many of the kids I went to school with started wearing the old Bean Anaorak pullover jackets. I probably would have thought the sack jacket was made of burlap and was used for carrying potatoes (however, I do now wear the sack jacket because the cut does well for me). I vaguely remember madras, but I don't think I owned any. Shorts were just cut-off chinos.

Sorry if this is completely non-linear, but more things come to me as I type. I know Trad gets the beat-down around here and, in some ways, I understand completely. Giving it a name is just a way to pigeonhole it within the cannon of "style". Parts of it come from the Ivy/East Coast tradition. Parts come from the late 70's/early to mid 80's Prep style. I feel they're a fairly natural pair for one another if you take it all into consideration. But, it isn't a lifestyle or a mindset. It just is what it is.

Archie

 

#9 2008-02-27 07:13:11

mike
Member
From: Covington, KY
Posts: 1397

Re: That little New England world

I really like that this all sounds so normal.  Not rich, not poor, just regular everyday life sort of stuff.  i really can live without all the class stuff.  maybe i'm just jealous because i didn't go to fancy schools or live in a fancy neighborhood.  i do have a relative who takes me to Brooks Brothers and tells me they only sell clothes - not lifestyles - i like that.


You love him? He is hephaistion.

 

#10 2008-02-27 07:37:59

Archie
Member
Posts: 89

Re: That little New England world

Agreed, Mike. My one grip w/ AAAT is the homogenization factor. It's as if many are afraid they may run into another Trad on the street and they have to be sure they'll be spotted wearing the proper rig. Clothes/style isn't a contest and it isn't a checklist. Like you say, it's just normal, everyday, PRACTICAL stuff.

I like that, too.

Archie

 

#11 2008-02-27 07:45:34

Trad to the Bone
Member
Posts: 175

Re: That little New England world

You know, you guys perpetuate the classist crap way more than the Andy Trads do.

You pull out one or two posters and project their bull on everyone. 

Let's take a scan at the top threads right now:

Below the "stickies"

1.  Is Trad becoming popular again because they make tradly things for my kids?  A pretty dumb question, because they've always made preppy items for kids.

2.  Sourcing "unwashed" Bills.

3.  The sales thread.

4.  The "what I got in February" thread (pretty dumb, but where's the classism?).

5.  Someone asking after the fit of Corbin jackets.

6.  Harris attempting to source a decade old pattern for a couple of Irish poplin ties Press used to offer.

7.  Madras sourcing from Cape Madras.

8.  A thread comparing the unlined LHS to the Brooks loafer.

9.  A kid trying to find his way in semi-formal attire.

10.  Sourcing "chinos" from Lands End.

11.  Someone asking the fit of the AE Bruzzano.

12.  A general thread on blazers.

13.  A guy asking what to do about a scar:  should he shave around it, or let his beard grow out.  Worthy of the IPOD.

14.  A wonderful thread from Doc D on the Albert Slipper. 

15.  The "what's on EBay" thread.

Where's the aspirational bullshit you all constantly clamor about?  These threads seem pretty normal to me.  They're mostly about sourcing or discussing particular items of clothing. 

Tom, I'm sorry to have hijacked.  Your posts were wonderful, and I wish we could hear more like that from folks here and at Andy Trad.  I'm just sick of the near constant claim around here that "The Trads" are all about social climbing and class struggles.  Bull.

TB

 

#12 2008-02-27 09:01:39

Taylor McIntyre
Son of Ivy...
Posts: 342

Re: That little New England world

Last edited by David (2008-02-27 09:10:00)

 

#13 2008-02-27 09:09:02

Taylor McIntyre
Son of Ivy...
Posts: 342

Re: That little New England world

Last edited by David (2008-02-27 09:10:28)

 

#14 2008-02-27 09:52:28

egadfly
Member
Posts: 136

Re: That little New England world

 

#15 2008-02-27 10:09:31

Taylor McIntyre
Son of Ivy...
Posts: 342

Re: That little New England world

^ Top Post!

I'm an opportunist. It runs in my family.

If we have a "Trad" I want to make it good.

If we scrap the construct then I win again as I'm not a "Trad" I'm an Ivy League fan. I don't even think much of "Preppy".

The alternative to "Trad"is not to call Classic American Style "Trad". To not buy into the concept.

As soon as you call your Weejuns "Trad" you are referencing AAAT, Harris and all the rest. Unless you live in Japan.

Your choice.

I'm more interested in a bigger picture... I can fit "Trad" into it & I can see how with a bit of work "Trad" could actually mean something and not just be a bit of a joke.

I'm an opportunist.

(I'll write more on this later - Time to blow my nose again)

Best -

J.

 

#16 2008-02-27 11:56:58

Taylor McIntyre
Son of Ivy...
Posts: 342

Re: That little New England world

... I actually don't have that much to add here after all other than restating if were going to have "Trad" then let's make it good.

What's the point otherwise?

Why have the new forum & the new name & the new look at the old style otherwise?

You can be creative & move forward like me or just sit there splashing about in your own pee I think.

Let's raise the bar - Join me!

Avanti!

Cordovan for Everyone!

wink

 

#17 2008-02-27 14:06:01

SubtleCool
Ivy, but subtle with it.
Posts: 289

Re: That little New England world

Tom 'n' Archie - love this.

It's REAL.

Buy the clothes because they look good and wear them because they look good.

'Lifestyle?' Oh, naff off.


Me? Conspicuous? Lady, I'm the invisible man.

 

#18 2008-02-28 19:47:52

tom22
Member
Posts: 295

Re: That little New England world

How great is this. I am tom22 again. the mysteries of the internet.
     What happened? Not with internet names but per the topic. What happened? I think it was advertising. I think RL made the clothes aspirational. I don't know this but I think this. I just don't remember advertising being very important in clothing decisions in the 1960s or early 70s. The label counted for a lot. but the label was credited by word of mouth. Some kids did set styles but the styles weren't all that expensive. Prep school girls wore short tartan skirts. Some people wore leather jackets but I guess thay had a military elan that was lost on me. There was a thuggish element in my school and I guess I associated leather jackets with creeps.
     The Yale Co-op used to have after winter sales. McGeorge sweaters, Sero shirts. Even I could afford them. That was where you bought your clothes.  My mother bought me a carry on bag in Burberry plaid in the late 70s. In a sphisticated shop in a New Haven burb. No one then knew what Burberry was. Well, my parents knew. And I knew, I had lived in London. Let me count. over 20 years later, I used it to carry heavy litigation files into court (It did have a heavy leather strap, it was made for the job). You could count the breathless compliments. All I said was: The thing is 20 years old.
      Maybe people had a lot more clothes way back when. But everyone had the same clothes. The same styles. you looked like each other. for the most part. I do remember kids wearing leather jackets back in the 60s. all of those people joined the mob. It was way later when I associated a brown leather jacket with those who served us in a Wold War.
      Circa 1977 I remember i had an internship at a factory in New Haven. The nice benefit at the end of the summer was a lunch with the CEO at the New Haven Country Club. The only different car, meaning non American was one Rolls Royce that was considered aspirational. Only one family owned one. Everyone else owned an American car. and the price differential for those was slight. I wonder what a Cadillac went for in 1977? 10000? I don't know. I do remember someone saying that the Rolls cost 50000 or 70000 or I really don't remember. But that was the only aspirational car and only one family owned it.
      Horrors of the lunch, one badly groomed accounting major from Notre Dame insisted on having a private interview on how to recreate the company. I remember how the uncomfotable accountant CEO tried to avoid the issue. That awful guy kept making out with the one very attractive female interns in the parking lot after work. I expect that they are both in prison today. the guy just didn't fit in.
        on the other hand maybe he is a multimillionaire. One of my professional assasin clients who did  an 18 year bid made 4 million bucks when he got out. life is what it is.

Last edited by tom22 (2008-02-28 19:56:48)

 

#19 2008-02-28 20:24:43

tom22
Member
Posts: 295

Re: That little New England world

I think my point is, way back when, when Brooks had an ad on the 2nd page of the NYT and and ad in the New Yorker, that was it. Both ads were 2 inches long by an inch wide. These clothes weren't aspirational. They were just New England. They may have been high end New England but everyone knew about them. at worst, they were pricey. The alternatives were mabe a third to a half off and the alternatives were decent clothes. I remember making these decisions about a raincoat. Richard Thomas gave a better value. These decisions are hardly remembered today. There were no magazine ads of half naked people.

Last edited by tom22 (2008-02-28 20:26:36)

 

#20 2008-02-29 01:39:20

Taylor McIntyre
Son of Ivy...
Posts: 342

Re: That little New England world

Personally I think it was Ralph Lauren too & his wonderful photo shoots.
The Official Preppy Handbook came out of the zeitgeist which he created.
AAAT follows on from that.

Please keep this stuff coming, Tom - You're a breath of fresh air on the subject of these clothes.

Thank you.

 

#21 2008-02-29 20:34:38

tom22
Member
Posts: 295

Re: That little New England world

I remember the ads in the NYT in the mid 70s. Filled with pictures from Bloomingdales of women that I had never seen the like of. Those ads were way big and way astonishing. If there were male clothings ads other than the tiny ones from Brooks I sure as hell don't remember them

 

#22 2008-02-29 22:20:52

Coolidge
Member
Posts: 1192

Re: That little New England world

 

#23 2008-02-29 23:46:59

Horace
Member
Posts: 6433

Re: That little New England world


""This is probably the last Deb season...because of the stock market, the economy, Everything..." - W. Stillman.

 

#24 2008-02-29 23:49:14

Horace
Member
Posts: 6433

Re: That little New England world


""This is probably the last Deb season...because of the stock market, the economy, Everything..." - W. Stillman.

 

#25 2008-03-01 08:01:46

longwing
Member
Posts: 198

Re: That little New England world

Perhaps daddy drove a caddy, but I remember many a Biff and Muffy getting around in BMW 2002s.

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2008 Rickard Andersson