There are many factors to consider if we want to understand the changes that happened between 1958/59 and 1964/65:

1)    in the beginning it was a handful of people- kids who didn’t even know each other… then it was just a little clique of “modernists” within the larger Soho jazz scene… then it spread, and mixed and changed again and again and got larger and larger… from subculture to mainstream (RSG, Carnaby Street, The Who etc.) until it was the dominant youth cult, and some kind of uniform evolved, but the fashions changed and it got watered down and commercialised… that’s the old myth and part of it is true…

2)    the early modernists would go to jazz clubs for a live concert, or they would listen to a jam session in a basement, or they would meet each other in the cinema or in certain coffee bars, in certain clothes and record shops, at the tailor’s, at the office or some other work, at Art school, wherever… and they bought LPs and they usually didn’t dance… but people are young, happy and foolish and they need to dance and they had already discovered rhythm and blues via Ray Charles and the concept of the discotheque was the new thing…and suddenly there were all those exciting, obscure import records and a lot of new nightclubs opened up… some of the kids involved in this scene had a different background (Skiffle, Rock ’n’ Roll, the Big Beat). A lot of the music that was played in the Lyceum or the Scene or the Disc etc. would have been considered as “pop music” by the Modern Jazz purists ca. ’58…

3)    when  a scene or a subculture becomes mainstream, it always gets diluted…first it attracts some copycats… that’s not a problem, you always move on and change, so you can be one step ahead of the crowd… the “3rd class tickets” never get it right, anyway…but some people will always get it totally wrong, and when those who don’t have a clue at all think they have to prove something, they don’t argue, they fight… same all over the world… now you got a bunch of bored kids on a beach and it’s a bank holiday and there are two “rival tribes”: the scooter gangs and the ton-up-boys … It’s very simple and the young soldiers got their uniform… so that’s were the “Sawdust Caesars” came from…. Now you got your folk devils….



So there were a lot of changes, and a lot of crazy things were happening simultaneously (fashion wise just think Carnaby Street and Richmond) and at a certain point in history, there was definitely a “schism” in the scene (or what was left of it)….That was when psychedelia hit the scene and the hair got longer, from the high bouffant backcombing French line hairdos and the King Arthur to the long unkempt look with long sideburns (ca. 1966/67). Some of the kids couldn’t stand those records and wanted nothing but R&B, Soul, Motown and Ska…no long guitar solos and no mystical or surrealistic lyrics… and some of them still wore suits and had short, neat crops and crew cuts, collegiate cuts, Princeton or Boston styles, and the hair got shorter and shorter…



See the Jeff Dexter interview…

http://www.djhistory.com/interviews/jeff-dexter

We could also go into the details of the sartorial styles:

Polka dots and stripes in all sizes and mad colours, and paisley prints everywhere, floral patterns, pop art, op art and psychedelic designs, ultra low rise hipsters, very tight, frogmouth pockets, tunnel belt loops,  bell bottoms and flares, extremely tight, with wide belts, Afghan coats, beads and bells, suede boots and moccasins, Indian and native American things, Art Nouveau revival and period militaria, or  neo-Regency Dandy style corduroy and velvet suits with Count Dracula collars, shirts with extremely long points or beagle collars….

Vs.

Solid OCBDs, candy stripes, and good old checks…Gingham, and plaid Madras cotton, natural shoulder jackets and flat fronted trousers, usually uncuffed and without a break in the crease or even a little too short, worn half-mast around the ankles…blockbusters or de canoes, Harrington jackets, tennis jackets, blue jeans, Sheepskins, cords, Crombies, Sta-Prest trousers, some decent knitwear, crew neck and v-neck sweaters and cardigans, Fred Perry polo shirts, white T-Shirts, flight jackets and Aviators, maybe Trilby or pork pie hats or a flat cap…

Continuum? Hardly…

Mutations? Maybe….

Progress? Hardly…

Decadence? Maybe… but this doesn’t mean, that the original modernist ethos died…

John Simons has kept his vision alive, he is true to his roots and he hasn’t stood still…

And I don’t think that most of his customers were hooligans or Person of Pakistani heritage bashers…;-)


As Brideshead, Chris Hardy and others have stated about the late sixties there was a huge difference between the sussed Ivy stylists and the bovver boys with their heavy boots and their clip-on-braces…

There was also a huge difference between the faceless numbers vandalising the seaside resorts and those in the know in 1964… “you better move on”…. 



What was the original mod style?

Hard or camp?

Was it more about understatement? A subtle cool?

Or was it louder and more extravagant? Was it all about the panache?


Maybe, that’s where the difference lies…

The “modernist” look is all about understatement…

The “mod” look is a little bit more conspicuous… “His clothes are loud… but never square”…

I feel 1966's debut pics deserve onother compliment on my part in that they are a nice example of a ( IMHO ) perfectly Modernist and individual outfit without any of your traditional British Mod looks about. Hopefully my comments will be appreciated although we could only be sure when seeing the barnet really

1966,
Yes it was a compliment.

I learn something every day. Googling I discovered Invertere claim to have invented reversible coats.

Reversible coats seem to be a really big deal in the US. BB or J Press have them in stock

I do not know how popular they were in the UK. The only reversible item I own is a fleece from Uniqlo.

Last edited by 1966 (2008-11-18 07:04:39)

I suspect it's all myth & legend by now.

A Grey or  Blue suit denoted what part of London you came from?

Chris_H says No.

Bullshit always smells, don't it? 

I don't mean to labour the subject or give offence but... 

I read Phil Thornton's book on casuals during a boring plane journey to southern Italy, and liked parts of it very much.  (Let me state quite clearly, however, my interest in Girls Ball games peaked around 1967.  My late father-in-law supported Everton, other members of the family loyally root for the Rams.  Whatever, as Ali G might say). 
I see these chaps around still: Stone Island and a scowl, scrunching lager tins in their gnarled fists.  They're called chavs now and, as we all know, because Robert Elms has told us so, chavs are just mods given a different name... 

Okay so far? 

Pablo seems, more or less (or more or less as someone once said to me, bringing a shy smile to my old face), to think along the same Elms-ish lines.  Hmm... 

Let's forget 'mod' for the minute.  Shall we use the term 'stylist' instead?  It's not that 'mod' is a naughty word, but, like 'fascist', it's a mite emotive.  The 'stylist', I should have thought, was mainly a very sussed London lad who liked black music (broadly speaking), went in for a bit of 'topping up' (if he called it that), and followed Italian waiters round Soho checking out their strides etc. etc.  Maybe he liked what he'd heard about the Gaggia and even tried food other than egg and chips every once in a while.  Are we in 'Absolute Beginners' territory here?  But is he 'Ivy'?  Does he do 'softening and crumpling'?  Does he allow his precious loafers to get dirty?  Possibly not.  Austins/Davids/Cecil Gee Ivy sounds crisp: Fame, Clapton, Watts.  Jagger and Richard sound 'crumpled' (in all the wrong ways), whereas Charlie...  Charlie looks...  well...  bloody smart, actually...  and so does young Georgie... 
Do they ever stick their noses into Carnaby Street?  Well, it's close by, so possibly, possibly.  But they're not 'Carnaby Mods', are they?  That comes a bit later. 
Of course, by the time 'Clothesville' is up and running, the individualistic twist - 'Jack Kerouac never rang this number' - is really kicking in hard; and somebody-or-other is soon going to be anxious that his scene is going wavy and contemplating a sideways step or two: maybe into the dark corners at Ronnie's, maybe in the Beat Hotel...  or Tangier...  or Jerusalem... 
I like to think of the Ivy Shop customers from the day its doors opened to around the time Simons and Kwintner split as almost 'stern': hair, macs, shoes, suits, ties, everything.  Not 'mods', possibly not even 'modernists' - because how could Johnny Moke fart about in a caravan smoking pot and be a 'modernist'? 

Ultimately, though, and without meaning any harm, The Who kick-started the revival, muddying the already muddy waters, which have stayed cloudy ever since.  Weller and Hewitt - and Elms to some degree - must all take the blame. 

I could go on - again - but I've talked enough bollox for one day.

Last edited by Suitedbooted2000 (2009-04-23 07:45:08)