EPTSimultaneously art, personal expression, and a mixed media that encompasses the overall aesthetic of the human body, fashion can be interpreted in multiple ways. For many, it is simply “how to impress” – filled with a multitude of rules to be followed and a statement to be made. For the more initiated, it is the ultimate form of social identity; you judge what you see, so one controls what others are able to see. Yet still, for some, fashion is an art to be mastered.
I feel this thread leans in the direction of the first interpretation the most. Most of those that post simply need advice on how to dress themselves to be more “grown up,” or “professional.” We are here to help. Don’t be scared – how you present yourself is important to success in today’s society, and fashion is more than just clothes. Every part of your visual, and sometimes beyond, goes into how you are perceived. From your clothing to your hair, from personal hygiene to the way you walk, and sometimes even how you smell (or for the lucky, taste) can go into your presentation.
I only ask that you post basic information about yourself – height, weight, measurements (instead of body type!), basic lifestyle (student, working, etc), and the area you live in. This is to ensure you get the best advice tailored to you! There’s no point in being recommended a down coat if you live in Southern California and ask for a “jacket for the cold.”
For those in the latter two groups, we welcome you. I hope everyone can be within the second group – aware of one’s perceived social identity and caring for how they represent themselves. For the select few who go beyond a personal tie in and look into the world of runways and designers, we love you just as well.
Useful Discussions: (within the thread)
Casual
+ Show Spoiler +
Suiting
+ Show Spoiler +
Misc
+ Show Spoiler +
Outside the thread
+ Show Spoiler +
http://www.teamliquid.net/blog/jwd
http://www.reddit.com/r/malefashionadvice/comments/lnn5k/how_to_build_a_wardrobe/
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/forum/forum.php?s=c0e7f5e135df30ba7826ad20abfa6e87
http://superfuture.com/
http://www.styleforum.net/
http://stylezeitgeist.com/forums/
http://www.thefashionspot.com/
http://www.ssense.com/
http://www.mrporter.com/
http://www.gravitypope.com/
http://www.reddit.com/r/malefashionadvice/comments/lnn5k/how_to_build_a_wardrobe/
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/forum/forum.php?s=c0e7f5e135df30ba7826ad20abfa6e87
http://superfuture.com/
http://www.styleforum.net/
http://stylezeitgeist.com/forums/
http://www.thefashionspot.com/
http://www.ssense.com/
http://www.mrporter.com/
http://www.gravitypope.com/
A LIST OF WEBSTORES
FAQs
Some un/common Acronyms
Here
Andy Answers
+ Show Spoiler +
>why is cuffing necesssary
"Necessary" is a hard word. I'd say that a lot of people have come to enjoy cuffing because getting the perfect break on a pant can be hard sometimes and also because cuffing changes up the proportion of a pant really easily. Also, some folks wear pants with different shoes, so cuffed a pant leg can help a pant work better with one shoe while leaving it uncuffed might work better with another. In general, I think that cuffing isn't a bad thing unless you're just doing it without really keeping an eye on your overall outfit. If you're into that "heritage", "menswear" thing and you really enjoy loading up an outfit with lots of little extra flourishes like that, then go for it, I guess.
>in what situations do you use "flashy" socks
I think guys should feel free to wear whatever colors and patterns they like, but I also recognize that having a bold intarsia pullover isn't always appropriate. I think if you're wearing a relatively fashion-minded suit, it's fine to pair it with socks that are a little louder and maybe pull a little more attention. You've got folks who love that no-break, slightly baggy trouser who also love a heavily textured sock (e.g. Engineered Garments pant + White Mountaineering sock) and you've got folks who prefer a really clean, fitted suit with something that just has a single, bold dose of color (e.g. Paul Smith suit + Richard James sock), so it really depends on what you're trying to achieve.
>why are more simple designs more expensive in general
The question is a bit generalizing. I find that the simpler the design, the more precise it has to be. You don't have extra details like drape or pattern or texture to hide any imperfections in cut, material, or fit, so if it's a really straightforward, simple item - it better be done really well. And that extra attention to cut, material, fit, etc. requires more work. And I'm not just talking about work in producing the item, but also think about research into it. Failed patterns, garments sampled with poor fabrics, and so on.
>why bother investing so much time in fashion?
Because I think it's interesting. I think people's relationship to their clothes is very complicated and I think it's a subject worth exploring. In many ways, you wear what is fashionable, but you also influence how the collective notion of fashion is formed; it's a system in which each person is both input and output.
>how do you know if something is worth how much it costs if you don't have access to a physical version of it
"Worth" and "value" are very fraught issues. I think it's important to get your hands on clothes as much as you can if you want to learn about clothes, educating your eye and your hand to how fabric works, how it feels. How a pima cotton yarn feels compared to one made with really short staples. How much heavier camel is than mohair. How black calfskin looks against your skin as opposed to brown lambskin. Online stores make it easier where you can just send things back if it doesn't meet your standards, but I think it just begins by being very clear what your budget is and how much you feel like spending. You shouldn't feel compelled to buy something out of your budget just because someone has told you it's better. You should ask, "Is it better for me? Is it a good value proposition given what I can afford?"
>why are floral patterns so popular
There's been a resurgence in the last few years of men being willing to adorn themselves, to dress themselves and I think that embracing more elaborate patterns and textures has been a big part of that. It's not because the pattern is floral that modern buyers and modern customers are drawn to it; it's more that the use of print implies a certain thoughtfulness when designing and wearing the garment. Why that pattern? Why that combination of colors? Why that scale? How does it look against a solid? How does it look against another pattern? It's really just that there's a little MORE to it.
>why does streetwear feature a lot of "ironic" stuff
Though I don't agree with everything that Slavoj Zizek says, he has given several talks about how consumption has become tied into questions of intellect, purpose, culture, intention, etc. I think that modern consumers are very aware of their consumption and that streetwear—in which there is little variation in design, but lots of variation in graphics—is a great example of this. There's only so much work you can do to the pattern blocks and fit of a sweatshirt itself, so companies have to distinguish themselves via the "ethos" and "message" of their brand, whether through actual marketing or just through the prints they put on their clothes. Younger consumers are generally not attracted to very earnest messages, so things like irony, humor, satire, and outright vulgarity are probably more useful for these sorts of brands.
>what is good baggy vs bad baggy in terms of fit
That's mostly a question of intention and execution. Is the pant baggy because you couldn't find another pant? Or is it baggy because you wanted a pant with a specific line to it and a specific proportion to be worn against specific types of tees and to create a specific silhouette. It seems obvious that if you were buying a pant, you're buying that pant for a reason, but lots of people just buy what is at hand and don't or can't look harder. The obvious example would be a designer like Yohji Yamamoto; his pants are full, with pleats and wide cuts and are slung loosely around the waist, but there's a deliberate effect that creates when you wear it with one of his jackets and his shirts.
"Necessary" is a hard word. I'd say that a lot of people have come to enjoy cuffing because getting the perfect break on a pant can be hard sometimes and also because cuffing changes up the proportion of a pant really easily. Also, some folks wear pants with different shoes, so cuffed a pant leg can help a pant work better with one shoe while leaving it uncuffed might work better with another. In general, I think that cuffing isn't a bad thing unless you're just doing it without really keeping an eye on your overall outfit. If you're into that "heritage", "menswear" thing and you really enjoy loading up an outfit with lots of little extra flourishes like that, then go for it, I guess.
>in what situations do you use "flashy" socks
I think guys should feel free to wear whatever colors and patterns they like, but I also recognize that having a bold intarsia pullover isn't always appropriate. I think if you're wearing a relatively fashion-minded suit, it's fine to pair it with socks that are a little louder and maybe pull a little more attention. You've got folks who love that no-break, slightly baggy trouser who also love a heavily textured sock (e.g. Engineered Garments pant + White Mountaineering sock) and you've got folks who prefer a really clean, fitted suit with something that just has a single, bold dose of color (e.g. Paul Smith suit + Richard James sock), so it really depends on what you're trying to achieve.
>why are more simple designs more expensive in general
The question is a bit generalizing. I find that the simpler the design, the more precise it has to be. You don't have extra details like drape or pattern or texture to hide any imperfections in cut, material, or fit, so if it's a really straightforward, simple item - it better be done really well. And that extra attention to cut, material, fit, etc. requires more work. And I'm not just talking about work in producing the item, but also think about research into it. Failed patterns, garments sampled with poor fabrics, and so on.
>why bother investing so much time in fashion?
Because I think it's interesting. I think people's relationship to their clothes is very complicated and I think it's a subject worth exploring. In many ways, you wear what is fashionable, but you also influence how the collective notion of fashion is formed; it's a system in which each person is both input and output.
>how do you know if something is worth how much it costs if you don't have access to a physical version of it
"Worth" and "value" are very fraught issues. I think it's important to get your hands on clothes as much as you can if you want to learn about clothes, educating your eye and your hand to how fabric works, how it feels. How a pima cotton yarn feels compared to one made with really short staples. How much heavier camel is than mohair. How black calfskin looks against your skin as opposed to brown lambskin. Online stores make it easier where you can just send things back if it doesn't meet your standards, but I think it just begins by being very clear what your budget is and how much you feel like spending. You shouldn't feel compelled to buy something out of your budget just because someone has told you it's better. You should ask, "Is it better for me? Is it a good value proposition given what I can afford?"
>why are floral patterns so popular
There's been a resurgence in the last few years of men being willing to adorn themselves, to dress themselves and I think that embracing more elaborate patterns and textures has been a big part of that. It's not because the pattern is floral that modern buyers and modern customers are drawn to it; it's more that the use of print implies a certain thoughtfulness when designing and wearing the garment. Why that pattern? Why that combination of colors? Why that scale? How does it look against a solid? How does it look against another pattern? It's really just that there's a little MORE to it.
>why does streetwear feature a lot of "ironic" stuff
Though I don't agree with everything that Slavoj Zizek says, he has given several talks about how consumption has become tied into questions of intellect, purpose, culture, intention, etc. I think that modern consumers are very aware of their consumption and that streetwear—in which there is little variation in design, but lots of variation in graphics—is a great example of this. There's only so much work you can do to the pattern blocks and fit of a sweatshirt itself, so companies have to distinguish themselves via the "ethos" and "message" of their brand, whether through actual marketing or just through the prints they put on their clothes. Younger consumers are generally not attracted to very earnest messages, so things like irony, humor, satire, and outright vulgarity are probably more useful for these sorts of brands.
>what is good baggy vs bad baggy in terms of fit
That's mostly a question of intention and execution. Is the pant baggy because you couldn't find another pant? Or is it baggy because you wanted a pant with a specific line to it and a specific proportion to be worn against specific types of tees and to create a specific silhouette. It seems obvious that if you were buying a pant, you're buying that pant for a reason, but lots of people just buy what is at hand and don't or can't look harder. The obvious example would be a designer like Yohji Yamamoto; his pants are full, with pleats and wide cuts and are slung loosely around the waist, but there's a deliberate effect that creates when you wear it with one of his jackets and his shirts.
