Kum - by - trad, my lord
Kum - by - trad
Kum - by ivy, my lord
Kum - by - ivy

we're all on the same side if we stick to the clothes, i know this by instinct - my blue blood tells me so

^ Sounds like "Classic Traditional American Style from every angle" to me.

You belong here!

Best -

Yes. They forked off back in 2004.

Nothing wrong with that.

This is my first most on any message board related to clothes. I have lurked for a few months on both this board and the Curriculum board, having been introduced to both via AAAT (lurking there as well). A quick personal note, my clothing style is based in Ivy, with some southern (rural Florida) influences as well. I didn't realize "Ivy" referred to any thing but colleges and plant life until exploring a comment made in Miles Davis' autobiography about Brooks Brothers suits. My father is from rural Florida, and my mom is from Maine, so a mixed marriage of sorts. My conception of clothes from childhood on was probably shaped by southern practicality and yankee thrift long before I understood the terms. I wore plain front pants because my father did. I have no clue why he preferred them. My father would balk at any conversation of clothes that didn't focus on practical hunting or fishing attire. I came to prefer things like madras shirts, seersucker, Oxford shirts, LL Bean sweaters and cords, based on having them bought for me from a young age by my mother. I later discovered a deeper style (the one one Miles was referring to) as I became more obsessed with jazz and more interested in the cinema. I started become very interested in a 1950's ascetic in regards to clothing, furniture etc. Sorry for the lengthy personal note but I wanted to provide context for my opinion on the thread topic. After viewing hundreds of threads on the message boards, I can't help but reach the conclusion that Trad as it's became to be known is not something I would want to associate with. Certain posters contradictions aside, there is an aspirational current that can't be divorced from Trad. With most posters on The Curriculum, I think this holds true whether they are aware of it or not. I don't mean to stereotype but I picture their magazine rack filled with Cigar and Wine magazines. I'm not knocking their personal interests, but I'm not interested in them either. I think the clothes are very much tied to  their conception of an idea rather than a personal sense of style(I realized there are exceptions to this). I find it instructive that the two most interesting (and best) dressers and people on the Trad forums also post here. Brownshoe and Patrick.  I am interested in clothes for the sake of clothes. They do fit in my personal conception of my self but only insofar as whatever misguided notions I have of what's "cool" or ascetically pleasing. I'll kill this now, I would be pretty upset if I had just read something of this length on a message board. I just thought I might offer an "outsider's" perspective on the topic. I do enjoy this message board, and honestly some posts on AAAT and the curriculum. I will post here again if I have not all ready worn out my welcome.

Robert

I might be jack hammering this into this thread a bit but...

The English style is definitely intertwined with the Ivy style.

I think the Ivy or natural shouldered style, whether Trad or Preppy is perhaps more universal than the English style because it is:


1. Slightly less of a uniform

2. Covers all bases, including casual while English style has incredible details for the city, the nautical and horsey set but is lost for many casual functions.

3. The natural shouldered look has some snob appeal but it is more willing to borrow and adopt which makes it more English. The English tend to reject unless they cannot resist. As a matter of fact, the natural shouldered versatility and willingness to adapt while stil remaining recognizable as a genre is part of its strength.

4. Natural shouldered clothes are all about comfort through personal style while the English stuff has more structured propriety which sometimes causes comfort to suffer.

5. Natural shouldered clothes can absorb other culture's accessories and fabrics but not always the reverse. Americans can wear the English shirts with a sack suit but they cant wear a button down with a Savile Row jobby.

6. The natural shouldered suit down plays secondary sexual characteristics which creates both more personality and more of a casual approach to power, which is ironically more slouchy and English.

7. The mutability of the sack style jacket allows it to be cool or stuffy, appeal to young, old, foreign or domestic. I know Anderson and Sheppard bill that their jackets are anonymous and enhance the wearer's style and personality, the sack suit actually does this better. The silhouette looks good with just about any fabric and works for suits or with jeans.

8. The color spectrum allowed in Ivy clothes is literally almost unlimited.

9. Americans and the rest of the world still recognize the Ivy look as a rich cultural look and the English think it's both liberating and refreshing.

10. The clothes are rooted in the best universities so come from a good sporting, intellectual and partying background.

I like to think of it as "Classic Uniform Now Trad" or C.U.N.T. I'm gonna trademark that. Would look nice on a polo shirt.

Steve McQueen Vs. Niles Crane ?

Last edited by Decline & Fall (2009-03-05 08:32:21)

Last edited by 1966 (2009-03-06 01:01:28)

And a very good 2 cents too. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I'd agree with all of the above.

As I've said already today when musing on Chensvold I just find that the aspirational schtick of 'Trad' leaves me cold. I guess doubly so because as one who manipulated 'Trad' into being I know how fake it all is. We used the aspirational aspect to sell the concept in this land of the iGents. Gomez to ridicule the aspirants and me to start a debate.

Aspiration is far more American than English I think. Or maybe I'm just talking about the world I know. It's a very laudable thing to want to 'better' yourself though and so if I'm being fair I have to applaud the desire to do that which the Trads & Chensvold so clearly demonstrate. What looks odd to me makes perfect sense to them.

I just love The Look. All the rest is no part of my world. I'll probably carry on finding all these people irresistibly funny and will doubtless feel the need to mention that fact from time to time, but I am aware that it's more than a little unjust of me.

Let people buy into a fantasy on the internet and let bloggers blog about subjects which they know & care little about. They have their reasons for being aspirational and I should respect that.
I hope the Trads can link themselves to the world that fascinates them through participating in an Internet scam and I hope that by writing anything on any subject that catches his eye Chensvold can make it as a writer.

May all their dreams come true.

I shall stick to reality and enjoy the company of those like myself I think. People who just love the clobber. The real fans. Those with nothing to prove.

Peace, Tweed, Good Times -

Jim