Today is a warm, spring-like day, even though it is still a couple of weeks before the end of winter. This got me to thinking whether it would be appropriate to wear Nantucket Reds this early in the year. (Actually mine are properly "Picante Reds" from Land's End, but very similar. A clothing knowledgeable co-worker of mine saw them last year and immediately exclaimed, "Nantucket Reds! East Coast rules!") I know there are a number of conventions and taboos governing the wearing of white apparel (not before Memorial Day, or not before Easter in Dixie), but are the conventions governing Reds so stringent? I know they are more or less summery apparel. Would gentlemen of taste and refinement look askance at me for wearing them this early in the year if the weather is indeed summery.
Cap'n,
I wear them whenever the mood strikes me. If there are three feet of the snow on the ground and I'm in the mood, on they go. There may be a convention on Nantucket that governs use, but I have no idea whether and what it is. I'm not there and I'll do it my way. They really are a bit different than white in that they have a warmer tone to them. Of course, Sator will probably point out that white is perfectly good in the winter as it was so worn in the court of Henry VIII.
Last edited by AQG (2008-03-07 15:12:42)
I don't know who invented the rules. I think they actually apply opny in Northern Maine. Those pants are usually heavy cotton. They may keep you warm soon. The simple fact is Madras belongs to hot days, which often occur before memorial day in CT. The reds, you could wear them in December if you wanted to. the rules are a little passe. If you wear them in March maybe all you are saying is that you are confident of the return of summer.
Last edited by tom22 (2008-03-07 18:14:20)
We never subjected reds to the same rules as seersucker and linen. I last wore reds before Thanksgiving, and thought seriously about breaking 'em out last week during our unseasonable warm spell (that would be the one the day before it snowed again.)
I'd love "Trads" to reject "Nantucket Reds" as not being 'traditional'...
Because they're not.
They're only a gimmick from 48-ish years ago under the name "Reds". Beyond that they seem to date to '45 without the marketing tag on the Island.
http://www.nantucketreds.com/reds_history.html
The naming & trademarking came even later -
http://nantucket.plumtv.com/stories/thats_nice_fade
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2005/08/18/whats_pink_and_green_and_worn_all_over/?page=1
http://www.fodors.com/world/north%20america/usa/massachusetts/nantucket/feature_30005.html
"Bermuda has its shorts, Fiji its sarongs. Nantucket's totemic clothing items are made of cotton dyed red so as to fade to a dull salmon shade. The reds were something of a secret code until they were singled out by The Official Preppy Handbook in 1980." Ahhhhh - The OPH!
http://www.mensvogue.com/clothing/threads/articles/2007/08/nantucket_reds
"The first pair of Reds appeared around 1960, when Philip Murray inherited the store from his father and remade Brittany trousers (named for the sail color on boats in the Brittany region of France) using a new dye hat, with a bit of sun and salt, paled to just the right shade of pink."
Another bit more of the fake "tradition", eh?
!
J.
However, though they aren't 'traditional', they are certainly classics.
There is a lot of difference between those two terms.
If tom thinks their okay year 'round, then that's fine with me.
Nantucket Reds count as a species of GTH pants, so wear them whenever and with whatever you want. The primary message of Reds is, "take your rules and shove 'em!"
Let's speed this up -
How old does something have to be to be 'Traditional' for you?
48 years is OK, so how about:
38?
28?
18?
????
Never had a Norwegian sweater as a kid. We were always kitted out in LL Bean grey ragg wool sweaters for cold weather. I have no idea why, but they were ordained by my parents. Haven't seen or owned one in ages. They do still appear to be available, though.
Ol Chums,
I think I had previously pointed out that Murray's owner stated that he wanted to come up with something to sell to tourists. Certainly not handed down by Sainted Brittanic forebears, and yet,, a look developed some 40 years ago on Nantucket is ruther cool also, eh?
Me thinks the Barbour jacket analogy has merit. Perchance just clothes. But indeed a class marker originally to some. Before one could purchase Reds at Lands End, a sailing inspired clothing item from a WASPy remote island had some cache, no? It shall not earn you membership into the NY yacht club, dat for sure.
Entante cordially,
Commodore TChauncey
Is the totemic significance greater to those aping the original wearers in the case of both Reds & the Barbour?
I'd say yes.
The class marker thing is for 'outsiders'.
... Maybe?