Editor’s Note: This in-depth guest post is from reader Cesar Devers, and it explores which trends of the moment can actually be timeless looks for some. Leave your thoughts in the comments.
The Dappered masthead contains the phrase “Fashion is temporary and expensive. Style is timeless and affordable.” This oft-repeated distinction between fashion and style encapsulates what many consider to be a key distinction between men’s and women’s clothing: longevity. Menswear moves at a glacial pace compared to fashions of the fairer sex. You need only look at the various period shows on TV to see this. With some discrepancies, Frank Underwood, Don Draper, and Nucky Thompson dress essentially the same. Since the pace of Men’s style is so slow, we as men tend to avoid trends, since we don’t want to risk purchasing clothing that might look even slightly dated in a few years. Yet at the same time, we should also avoid the other side of the coin: categorically dismissing styles because they are trendy. In fact, certain trendy styles can be timeless and you should strongly consider embracing them.
Let’s look at some of the more popular trends in menswear and see who should be embracing these styles as part of their timeless wardrobe. Fair warning: the following argues in favor of trends, against trends, against “rules,” and in favor of pleats. Hopefully this piece encourages a few of you to try out a new style and really consider what flatters YOU, regardless of trends and rules.
Thinner Jacket Lapel Widths
Who it looks best on: Slimmer guys/those without broad chests.
You can’t read a thread about the J. Crew Ludlow without someone commenting on how skinny the lapels are. Some claim this will look dated soon (every year someone predicts that this will be the year lapels get wide and we all revert to some 1970’s Bee Gees fantasy). Even Joestradamus predicted the widening of the lapel for 2014. If so many people think the Ludlow lapel is too thin, then why is the Ludlow so popular? I think it’s because it flatters the thinner man who was, until very recently, completely ignored by mainstream suit makers. According to Alan Flusser, the guru of timeless style
Slimmer Tie Widths
Who it looks best on: Guys who favor narrow lapels.
Thin is in. This has been the case for what feels like forever. Grumpy menswear “purists” think that tie width should hover around 3 ¼”. If you’re a man with a small frame and therefore wear a jacket with a narrower lapel, you should buy a narrower tie to maintain a balance. Come to think of it, there are some good thoughts about tie/jacket proportion on this post from 2011 by commenter Tom Kin Ta.
Same Suitsupply model, two different suits. The box and red line show the ‘ideal’ lapel width according to Flusser. On the left we have a discordant combination of a wider lapel with a thin tie. On the right, the lapel hits the ideal location. Also, because the gent has a small frame, the slim tie and Four in Hand knot pair nicely. Anyone else think the spread collar shirt with a Four in Hand looks odd? On left: Soho Light Blue Houndstooth ($599) On Right: Napoli Blue Plain ($399)
Little to No Pant Break
Who it looks best on: Guys with shorter legs compared to their torso.
We should be forever grateful to Thom Browne for channeling his love of suits into helping bring back slimmer-fitting menswear. Still, for all the good he’s done, he also made his signature no-break pants a trend that has been hard to shake. While you’d never call Browne’s style “timeless,” pant break is a great opportunity to visually lengthen or shorten your legs. The less break you have, the longer your legs will appear. If, for example, you have long legs compared to your torso, I’d suggest sticking with a more classic break. Check out this great guide from Effortless Gent for more on pant break. Really think hard about the break in your pants, because this is one of the more common alterations that men have to make. Many suits don’t come with hemmed pants so you’ll be getting your pants hemmed often. Don’t let a salesperson or tailor talk you into a break you won’t like. If you’re unsure, get more break. You can always have the pants taken up more later. Too little is irreversible.
Wearing a suit without a belt
Who it looks best on: Those with unusually long, or unusually short torsos.
The casual suit trend has brought with it a beltless trend. When the pendulum swings back, however, don’t be so quick to grab the belt. I firmly believe some men should never wear belts with suits. Belts divide your body at the hips (or waist, depending on where you wear your pants). Therefore, it visually draws attention to the ratio between your leg length and your torso length. If your torso and legs are about the same length, wear a belt with pride all the time. Have a short torso and long legs or vice versa? Consider going beltless when you wear a suit. It will provide a clean line from your upper to lower body and, when combined with a flattering jacket, give you better vertical proportions. However, going beltless means buying a suit that has no belt loops and instead uses side tabs or has buttons for suspenders (also known as braces, for our friends across the pond). You can have a tailor remove the belt loops from your trousers and add suspender buttons for a small fee.
Belts can divide. Beltless? Worth a shot.
Shorter Jacket Lengths
Who it looks best on: Guys with unusually long torsos.
Particularly short jacket length is the biggest trend right now in #menswear. Nothing says “I spend a lot of time on Tumblr” like a jacket that shows your entire rear-end while standing. Jackets should cover your entire rear, right? You should follow the finger curl test, right? Wrong. Well, sometimes wrong. Again, this all depends on the ratio between your leg length and your torso length. If you have a long torso, a jacket that covers your bottom will only serve to shorten your already relatively stumpy legs (editor’s note: Watch who you’re calling stumpy!). The opposite is true for men with relatively long legs and a short torso. A short jacket on that body type can leave the wearer looking oddly disproportional.
No pleats / Flat Front Pants
Who it looks best on: Those who don’t have big legs and/or a big rear.
Almost all the pants that the trendy menswear set have worn for the past 10 years or so have been flat-front. Chances are the dress pants you had when you were a kid had pleats. Taking these two data points, it would be easy to equate flat-front with modernity. However, doing so would ignore the cyclical nature of every aspect of fashion. The 1960’s was another period when flat-front was in. Nothing is inherently modern about not having pleats; flat-front is simply en vogue right now. The worst part about this trend, especially when combined with the slim trouser leg trend, is that you see many men squeezing themselves into pants that look ridiculously too tight. If you have big legs and/or a big rear, try pants with pleats. It might be hard to find well-cut pleated pants, but they exist.
Button Stance
Higher stance looks best on: Those with longer torsos
Lower stance looks best on: Those with short torsos
Button stance refers to the vertical placement of a three-button jacket’s middle button or a two-button jacket’s top button. Aside from J. Crew’s ludlow jackets, the current trend is towards a relatively high button stance. In Dressing the Man, Flusser states that the ideal button placement should “…divide the body so that the torso and legs appear at maximum length.” Notice Flusser doesn’t say something like “an inch below the belly button” or other commonly espoused “rules” of style. It is all about doing what is best for your body. If you have a short torso, try a lower button stance. It emphasizes the V-shape of your upper body and creates a more athletic look. Men with long torsos can go for a higher button stance and still look proportional.
Take a moment to admire the button stance on the man to the right. What was the trend when this picture was taken? Where is the button in relation to his belly button? No one cares because he nails it. (Image is from Rundschau magazine, 1978. Image was scanned by Sator and can be found here)
Pocket Squares
Who it looks best on: Those who don’t need to make their torsos look longer.
Pocket squares function similarly to belts in that they divide your upper body in half. Obviously, because pocket squares don’t go across your entire chest, the visual division isn’t as severe as a belt. Nevertheless, if you want to make your torso appear as long as possible, skip the pocket square.
Another visual divider. Like a belt for your chest. Kinda.
Vests/Waistcoats
Who it looks best on: Those with shorter torsos. Also, 19th century bartenders.
Maybe this trend has died down a bit, but we have all seen the casual vest with a knit tie and plaid shirt look that stores like J. Crew really push. Many “purists” say you should never wear a vest without a jacket. After all, most vests don’t have matching material that wraps around the back (usually it’s a satin like material so it moves well beneath the jacket you’re “supposed” to be wearing with it). But vests are a great way to visually lengthen your torso. Vests (also called waistcoats) should cover your waist. For that to happen, they extend past your beltline in the front. By both being a tad longer than your torso and obscuring the point where your shirt meets your pants, vests can make a man with a short torso and long legs look more in proportion vertically.
Waistcoats. Not for everyone, but they work on some.
Remember, it’s just as easy to get sucked into thinking in terms of “rules” as it is to become enamored with certain styles only because they are trendy. The great thing about trends is that they allow you to see a certain style across a wide variety of body shapes. Once a style becomes popular, all of the other men wearing it can act as examples of why a certain style would or wouldn’t flatter your body, and may even inspire you to attempt something you might have never thought of trying. One of the biggest examples of this is when Thom Browne and Don Draper colluded to trim the entire silhouette of menswear. Sure, Thom Browne took it to the extreme, but it was the first time many young men realized that men’s bodies have shape and that their shape should be flattered. Now most of us demand a flattering cut on our jackets, especially if we have something to show off; we have a trend to thank for that.
If you can learn from trends and make flattering style choices, you’ll achieve something very rare: timeless personal style. Once you have that, no one will think “oh my gawd, his pants have pleats,” but rather “damn, he looks good.”
Cesar Devers is a web developer and designer living in New York, NY. He once blew all of his summer internship money on great clothes with poor fit (for him) from the Brooks Brothers semi-annual clearance. Having to donate such wonderful clothes led him to become interested in menswear and the principles of proper fit.
Nice work Cesar; great topic and quality writing to back it up!
One thing to keep in mind regarding pants with no break… It can be very difficult to lengthen them in the future if you change your mind. Even if you have the material for it, a permanent mark can form at the site of the old hem line, leaving you with a horizontal stripe if you let your pants out. In theory, this is less of an issue for someone who is simply lengthening pants by letting out a cuff.
As someone who is 5’10” and around 150 lbs, the thinner tie is essential. Traditional-width ties look like I’m a kid in my dad’s tie, or like I’m about to attend a 1920’s themed costume party.
Also, thanks for the torso-related comments. I’m all torso, so this explains why everyone except me hates H&M sport coats.
For an amateur like me, this is a perfect cheat sheet for pre-tailor prep. Thanks much.
As a shorter man, I believe a full break actually helps lengthen your legs and make one appear taller overall. I switched most of my pants to this look over the last year, as long as you are wearing slim cut dress pants…
I may be in the minority, but I like dressing like Imperial machinery; it aids in storming Rebel bases for me.
Nice article, Cesar! In the end, as you imply, the best way to discover a style that will make you feel confident is to trust yourself. Ask yourself: Do I like how this looks on ME? It’s about discovery (maybe even self-discovery)–and that’s what makes it fun.
I’ve seen narrow ties and lapels come and go. Even though I’m not particularly slim, I favor the look of narrow ties and lapels, so that’s what I wear most regardless of what might be in style at a given time.
I would just say, you would have to be an EXCEPTIONALLY thin man for the ludlow lapels to be appropriate. I am sure some of them are out there, but even for slim guys like myself that can get away with wearing RL Black Label, the lapels on ludlow are just an extra step too skinny most of the time.
Fantastic article. As a novice a lot of what was considered timeless seems to be “whatever was in style in the 40s/50s” and a lot of lazy group think. Its only recently where it seems to be that men’s style has started evolving to embrace all sorts of looks, not just country gentleman and preppy college guy as the only real styles of note.
A lot of good content in this article. I won’t add any of my opinions because to me this is almost like a rhetorical article…just a lot of good things to think about.
I’ve added brace buttons on all my suits and I am 1000x happier when I get to wear them. They are so much more comfortable and nobody will ever notice the difference but me.
My suits now have either brace buttons or side tabs, none have belt loops anymore. Even if you’re tall, there’s no downside to losing the belt
Fantastic post. Really enjoyed the forward looking nature and hope to see more guest posts like this in the future.
Vests/waistcoats are also a great way for overweight (but not obese) men to hide their blubber flaws.
Good point on the pleated pants, but can you go a bit deeper on pleated pants, what to look for, how many pleats, examples of good looking pleated pants?
I honestly don’t think 99% of the population notices lapel width, unless they’re razor skinny (think under 2″) or uber fat (think Suit Supply’s San Diego fit). Plus, the thinner lapels on a ludlow helps their blazers look less like suit jackets. Just my take though.
Old Alfani from Macy’s. Years ago.
I don’t think 99% of the population notices 100% of the details mentioned in this article. They just see a guy in a suit and think it looks good. So really, it’s a matter of personal comfort.
Thank you, Paul! Glad you liked it.
Heretic! Burn him at the stake!
Something is WRONG on the internet! https://xkcd.com/386/
Sure. So I don’t think it’s fair to make blanket statements like someone has to be exceptionally thin for ludlow lapels “To be appropriate”. That’s what I take some issue with. But I do think lapels blend in more than say, tie width.
It should be mentioned that the function of pleats is/should be tied to the rise of your pants. The lower the rise on your pants the less a pleat makes sense because your hips (unless you have speed skater thighs) are your widest point.
Rises seem to be headed upwards again, btw. I blame Joaquin Phoenix.
I am not “EXCEPTIONALLY thin” by most any standard (5’9″, somewhere between 150-160 lbs) and I don’t have any problem wearing Ludlow-type lapels.
Here’s an image I dug out from an old Friday Challenge on the Threads, wearing a JCF Thompson suit (virtually identical cut to the Ludlow).
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/theantiduck/friday11_zps942da188.jpg
Ludlow lapels may be thinner than some, but they are by no means the razor-thin, unwearably fashion-forward type that you see on, for example, Benedict Cumberbatch in Sherlock.
http://kristinkoga.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/sherlock-203-00578.jpg
Thank you, Seth! I’m glad my point came across successfully. Discovery, self-discovery, re-discovery.
I think you misspelled “I thank Joaquin Phoenix”
Here’s the issue that comes up with narrow lapels- you collar in that photo is substantially larger than your lapel. That’s inevitable, just because a skinny collar is never going to fit a tie under it properly, but a wider lapel would still be closer to ‘ideal’
That’s an outstanding fit, though, +1’ed with extreme prejudice
Pleats look better with a higher rise, for sure. That’s probably because a higher rise requires more room in the seat/thigh. Their other basic function is to add volume to the leg of the pant as it leaves the jacket to make things look proportional.
With a slimmer cut jacket you need a pant with a slimmer silhouette – otherwise you look bottom-heavy. With a fuller cut jacket you need a fuller leg as it exits the jacket so you don’t look too top-heavy. As a result, pleats tend to be in when fuller cut suits are in (see the 40’s, 50’s and late 80’s-90’s) and go out when fits are trimmer (see 60’s, 70’s into the early ’80s and present day).
I’d include the obese in the category of men who should always wear a three-piece suit whenever they wear a suit. In fact, the heavier you are the more you can benefit from a vest. My biggest apolitical qualm with Chris Christie, for example, is that he lets his pants cut him at his heftiest point. His white shirts also always billow forth from his ample midsection, creating an ocean-like visual that draws attention to just how rotund he really is. A vest would streamline his entire appearance and make him look taller and leaner. For proof, look no further than literal presidential heavyweight William Howard Taft.
I don’t find the Ludlow lapels to be razor thin. They’re slightly narrower than is absolutely traditional, but they’re not super-slim by any means. Look at the Spencer Hart jacket Bennedict Cumberbatch dons in the BBC’s Sherlock – that jacket – tailored for him on Savile Row – has has lapels that make Ludlow lapels look giant. I’m not saying that I endorse Cumberbatchesque lapels, but he’s become an international sex symbol and I’m guessing the clothes are one reason why.
Agree wholeheartedly. I’m bigger than you (6’1″, 205-210, 42R or 44R) and the Thompson/Ludlow lapels are spot on for me as well. Also, a major +1 for the width of your tie bar.
Great article and I agree on all points. Well done!
This should do:
Illustrates a couple of these points, I believe.
This should do:
Illustrates a couple of these points.
These are seersucker, but the pattern is bomb
http://bntailor.tumblr.com/post/51138947616/blue-seersucker-trousers-by-b-tailor
Really? I’m 5’4” on a good day and I’ve found full break makes me look like I’m wearing my dad’s pants. With my slim cut pants I’ve gotten more compliments since I’ve changed to a quarter or half break.
that’s certainly a testament to the extent to which I don’t notice lapel width until someone points it out. never noticed how mad skinny those are and I’ve seen every episode.
If you’re wearing the San Diego cut, you’re going to attract WAY more attention than if you’re wearing razor-thin lapels. Kinda hard to miss a suited gentleman gliding by overhead as his lapels carry him upwards on a gust of wind. (Best bring an umbrella for in-air duels with Mary Poppins.)
Yeah… I just bought a Ludlow in Italian Wool and I have to say, doesn’t look trendy on me at all, the lapels and everything are perfectly proportional to my frame. Also barely needs any tailoring out of the box and that’s only if I get super nit picky.
Yeah, I’m going to have to disagree with you on the flat front pants issue. Pleats add visual bulk, and if you’ve already got a lot of that going on in the thigh/butt area then the last thing you need is more. I happen to be one of these dudes, so I know the struggle, but it’s way better to just find something that’s cut generously enough that you’re not a stuffed sausage up top, then straight to slightly tapered below the knee so your cuffs don’t eat your shoes.
As a short guy, suit jackets that are shorter seem to look the best
While I agree that it’s all about proportion and body shape (and many people clearly don’t understand this, including Thom Browne and the people at J.Crew), some rules are there for a reason, especially one you haven’t even contemplated, which is “no belt when wearing a waistcoat (note: a waistcoat is not a vest; a vest is a sleeveless sweater)”. This is crucial, as the belt “breaks up” the body while the waistcoat basically tries to do the opposite, not to mention the fact that the bottom of the waistcoat WILL get caught up over the belt, or worse, sit on it and “flare out”.
I particularly agree on the whole proportioned-to-one’s-body tie/lapel-width thing, but you failed to mention a variable that plays a big part in all of this, which is the width of one’s neck: you WILL look silly if you have a wide neck (16″-16.5″+) and wear a skinny tie or skinny lapels. The whole 2.5″ tie thing HAS to come to an end, 3″ is plenty slim (which is the key word: we’re looking for slim, not skinny) for anyone who isn’t 5’6″ and 120 pounds, and the same goes for lapels. The Ludlow sells because people think if they’ll wear it, they’ll look like Jon Hamm, but the truth is it’s a pretty poorly-constructed suit (that I suspect has skinny lapels to save on material more than to appeal to slim guys) that will look outdated once fashion decides it’s time for wider lapels, just as early-mid 60s suits looked outdated from 1969 to 2009.
As for jackets’ length, again, some rules aren’t meant to be broken. A chopped tail looks pretty bad no matter how short your legs are, and I say this as a 6’0″ guy who has really short legs for his height. I’ve tried on many shorter jackets in my life (including the extra-short Suit Supply Copenhagen) and I’ve always looked like I was wearing my little brother’s school blazer. Covered butt is the way it should always be.
“you collar in that photo is substantially larger than your lapel”
It looks great.
To quote Pirates of the Caribbean: They’re “more what you’d call “guidelines” than actual rules”
Like I said, it’s still an outstanding fit, but aren’t we all here trying to improve? We can always do a little better, myself as much as anybody
Politics today, he’s better off courting the Fat Vote than the Sartorial Vote. Relatabilty trumps decision making
Fussing about collar size on an outfit that looks terrific isn’t an improvement. At some point, get out and wear the clothes and stop criticizing every last little detail.
A good article on the whole that gets people thinking instead following some rule blindly.
The key to dressing well is two fundamentals (IMHO).
1. Proportions
2. Harmony (from color, to fabric to proportions),
Once everything has that right balance, it creates a very aesthetically pleasing visual to the observer.
I realized 15 yrs ago that narrower tie width look better on me than the standard tie witdh bcos I’m not built like a barn door. The larger tie on me looked comical and it was like the tie is wearing me instead of the other way around. It was that obvious so I wore youth ties instead of “mens” ties :).
And my very first suit (15 yrs ago) made by a humble tailor in Sri Lanka is on the slimmer side even by todays standard. I didn’t ask him to do that (nor had I heard about “slim”) nor did he called it that way. To his tasteful eye he figured a more slim cut suits me better than the cut he used for my dad who is muscular.
I think people used to dress much better before the proliferation of mass produced clothes.
Find the colors that flatter you most. Find the fit that flatter you the most and then wear it like a champion.
How do u you know if something looks good on you? All though most people may not be able to think through and put together a good outfit, all most everybody can recognize and appreciate a good one when they see it. So experiment and through trial and error you will figure out what works for you.
Pleats are for men whose waist is narrower than their hips, and who wear their trousers there. It allows the fabric to drape over the hips smoothly while still fitting in the waist.
How is it an outstanding fit? You can see creases down the sides of his coat when he’s standing straight in the right-side picture.
I question when people say “fits perfectly” or “doesn’t need much alterations” because most people don’t know what a proper fit actually is.
Disagree with 1-3. Counterpoint to #1: the Ludlow is popular BECAUSE the style now is for more narrow lapels. Why this is the trend can be debated, but the sales of Ludlow suits has stayed strong because 1)that is the trend & 2)websites like this influence many buyers towards certain purchasing choices(i.e. Ludlow). The Ludlow will not be as popular in the next decade. The market & demand is the very reason that BB has changed their great offerings, in an attempt to cater towards a larger customer base, and thus alienating long-time customers who have been loyal customers to the more traditional suiting.
Good article, but I disagree with many of the points. The thing about this article is that the rules are meant to be basic guidelines, not hard & fast rules. These exceptions affect a small minority of the population. And of that group, there will be those for whom the exceptions Joe makes are true due to their physical characteristics, and those that still choose to dress according to the current trends(slim/narrow) no matter their size. 80% of people will not be able to conform or relate to the exceptions, and thus, when the exceptions are used as examples of the rules, every one ends up looking less than his best. The only hard and fast rule should be to dress in such a way that flatters your specific body, instead of following GD trends. This simple goal simply encompasses all other things – listing a bunch of rules is redundant. If a man has a long torso, a shorter coat with the proper proportions(not just cutting it short and RAISING the stance) will flatter his body. The converse is true as well. These trends WILL become dated, and sooner than later. This article could have simply said “dress in such a way that your clothes flatters your body and makes you look sexy” and it could have ended there – no need to expound and expound.
That being said, No break looks very stupid and will phase out soon. Same for narrow lapels and ties, especially the egregious stuff you find at lower end department stores. in addition, Low rise Trou look flippin stupid – they aren’t jeans. Look at all the best dressed men of the 20th century and study how they dressed and their proportions. I’m 24 and I realize this stuff. These same trends are the reason that great stuff at Brooks has turned shitty. I can barely wear the 1818 trousers up at my navel – the rise is 2″ too short now. That, and their substantial lapels have shrunken.
On a Ludlow 42R (my size), the lapel is 2.5 inches at its greatest width, and the distance, if you continue from the lapel to the shoulder line, is in total 6 inches. So it is 1/2 an inch short of the midpoint. Perhaps that is not quite the “fraction” that is mentioned, but 1/2 an inch is not, by any means, dramatic.
Maybe a 2.75 inch lapel would be ever so slightly better for my chest width, but it is hard to say 2.5 is inappropriate or merely trendy. More likely it is an acceptable preference and is one of many good looks a guy could shoot for.