[Vecchio Vespa]

I like Steve Hoffman because I enjoy music and audio gear, but they also have an open ended discuss anything section. Someone posted there lamenting how hipsters were destroying men’s trousers, rendering them uncomfortable in critical regions. Then followed five pages of snark and juvenile attempts at humor. The poor OP came away with neither sympathy nor useful information. I am confident that had the OP posted here, he would have received both commiseration and good source information for comfortable trousers. With a few outliers, members here are just that way, and I find it very refreshing in this all too snarky and unhelpful world. Thanks, Trads!

 

[blue suede shoes]

Agreed!! And that other forum, the one that begins with the word "style", why is there such profanity from everyone? Every post reads like rap music lyrics. Discussions here are much more civil.

 

[215339]

Agreed!! And that other forum, the one that begins with the word "style", why is there such profanity from everyone? Every post reads like rap music lyrics. Discussions here are much more civil.

As someone who posts on both forums, the bolded is pure hyperbole and grossly inaccurate.

There is relatively more profanity, but not to the point of detracting from the conversation.

 

[Charles Dana]

I like Steve Hoffman because I enjoy music and audio gear, but they also have an open ended discuss anything section. Someone posted there lamenting how hipsters were destroying men's trousers, rendering them uncomfortable in critical regions. Then followed five pages of snark and juvenile attempts at humor. The poor OP came away with neither sympathy nor useful information. I am confident that had the OP posted here, he would have received both commiseration and good source information for comfortable trousers.

I, too, like Steve Hoffman's website.

Discussing men's clothing in a completely straight-faced manner is an endeavor (and ability) that is limited to a narrow demographic. Accordingly, such a discussion is best left to forums specifically intended for that subject.

When a man inserts a clothing-related topic into a forum that doesn't ordinarily deal with sartorial matters, then a goodly amount of snark is guaranteed to ensue. From men, anyway. Why?

People have a tendency to treat any unforeseen or out-of-context comment as a foreign body. They feel vaguely threatened by it. After all--it's unexpected and, thus, scary! Accordingly, people want to neutralize the invader. This impulse--an ancient defense mechanism--is especially strong in the world of online discussion forums, where, often, anonymity emboldens the participants to go on the offensive. After all, what harm can come to a keyboard warrior?

Therefore, just like macrophages, forum members engulf the strange comment and torture it to death--or at least gravely wound it--with snark. Why snark? Because being snarky is much easier (and much more fun!) than coming up with a thoughtful response. Plus, snark is a weapon that you can't get arrested for using.

I suppose that for most men, clothing is merely something you throw on for the sake of modesty (and for warmth, depending on the weather); it isn't something that is seriously talked about. So if a clothes-related issue is raised in all sincerity in a forum not dedicated to clothes, it is a strange bird that must be shot down. Men, those fearless warriors, must protect the tribe!

 

[Doctor Damage]

Trad is about traditional and classic American clothing and style. And maybe some cultural and social and sporting stuff ONLY if it's directly associated with the whole preppy and upper crust or upper middle class New England experience of the middle part of the 20th century from which the clothing and styles stem.

Trad is NOT political, religous, racial, moral, ethical, financial, automotive, musical, etc etc, no matter how much people try to make it such (or try to post-facto layer it onto their own preferences inre those things).

 

[Fading Fast]

Trad is about traditional and classic American clothing and style. And maybe some cultural and social and sporting stuff ONLY if it's directly associated with the whole preppy and upper crust or upper middle class New England experience of the middle part of the 20th century from which the clothing and styles stem.

Trad is NOT political, religous, racial, moral, ethical, financial, automotive, musical, etc etc, no matter how much people try to make it such (or try to post-facto layer it onto their own preferences inre those things).

I like and agree with this ⇧, but wonder if automotive - i.e., are there some cars that are Trad ( a woodie wagon or an Alpha Romeo) in the same way there are clothes that are trad - belongs in that group. I don't know as I haven't thought it through, but it seems cars (maybe music too - is Sinatra or Glen Miller, or swing, the OCBD of music?) stood out as different than the others items (that I fully agree with) in your list. Truly just thoughts.

 

[Vecchio Vespa]

I like and agree with this ⇧, but wonder if automotive - i.e., are there some cars that are Trad ( a woodie wagon or an Alpha Romeo) in the same way there are clothes that are trad - belongs in that group. I don't know as I haven't thought it through, but it seems cars (maybe music too - is Sinatra or Glen Miller, or swing, the OCBD of music?) stood out as different than the others items (that I fully agree with) in your list. Truly just thoughts.

Even if there were such things as Trad cars, dogs, furniture, musicians, beverages, etc., discussing such possibilities might interfere with the workings of the Trad forum. Therefore, if one were to broach such topics it might be safer to launch them on the Interchange.

;0)

 

[eagle2250]

I think that we sometimes become far too specific in our efforts to define the parameters of the various sub-forums that make up AAAC, unnecessarily creating atmospheres of subject area elitism and limiting potentially very positive discussions/exchanges from occurring within certain of the sub-forums. Just my opinion...for what it's worth.

 

[smmrfld]

Agreed!! And that other forum, the one that begins with the word "style", why is there such profanity from everyone? Every post reads like rap music lyrics. Discussions here are much more civil.

This is grossly inaccurate and doesn't represent StyleForum at all. SF is a great resource on many topics.

 

[Dhaller]

I can certainly appreciate a whole separate hobby of "trad" cars, but I'll say this: I know a fair number of men who are classic car enthusiasts, and they tend to exist at a very far sartorial remove from "trad" clothing fashion!

(If I had to guess, I would say the car of choice for trad clothing enthusiasts is a late model Toyota Camry, simply because that's the world's most popular car for some years now.)

DH

 

[Vecchio Vespa]

While I agree that Trad is about a specific type of clothing, I also note that those of us who are still around and embraced the style in the 1950s and 1960s, especially in the northeast, will recall that our parents and friends liked a lot of the same things, such as British roadsters, big woody wagons, all manner of messy dogs such as bird dogs, houses crammed with old mahogany furniture and (even if threadbare) oriental rugs, golf, tennis, sailing, lacrosse, martinis, Manhattans, and summer trips to the beach. These are things that were so common in that place and era that it would be easy to conclude they were Trad. But these are things lots of people liked, and some of them are neither easy to find nor practical anymore. Some of them have fallen out of favor, often multiple times. It was socially inadvisable to drink martinis from about 1970 to 2010, and only an automotive tinkerer can keep an old Jag or TR3 running today. Some of them were things some Trads disliked, especially the sporting interests (how many of us love lacrosse or blue water sailing?). So it is no surprise that a Trad today might like hybrids or electric cars, craft beers or wine, soccer or frisbees, sleek condos with gorgeous cut pile carpet, and summer trips to Machu Pichu or winter getaways to Cabo. That doesn’t make any of those things Trad, does it?

 

[FLMike]

^You lost me on the pile carpet.

 

[Vecchio Vespa]

Honest questions -

That late?

That early?

I really don't recall martinis being socially out of favor for some 4/5s of my life.

It's not a scientifically derived bracket. Cheers!

 

[Vecchio Vespa]

^You lost me on the pile carpet.

A lot of folk, even some Trads, like it. I'm with you.

 

[Dhaller]

I don't know why I'm thinking about this, but I am...

... I'm often amused by all the "is it Trad" spinoffs, like girlfriends, dogs, cars, etc.

But the fact is, Trad is a clothing fashion, not a subculture; it's just all about clothes and how to wear them, not a prescription for allowable music to listen to, or places one should live.

So it's very different from, say, "Mod", which in addition to a distinct style of dressing DOES prescribe many other cultural elements, like musical tastes and political proclivities. Why is Mod a subculture, while Trad isn't?

I think it comes down to proximity.

Mod - and other subcultures - arise when people come together in a certain place and share ideas and trends in real time. So, 1960s London, for example, or 1970s San Francisco (Hippies being another subculture.) People are in the same place at the same time, and while they identify one another with fashion signifiers, they're also actually there amongst each other, sharing music, company, ideas, and so on.

Not so, the Trad. Trad is informational - a set of images and rules shared on the Internet, primarily in forums. We hear the complaint all the time: "I'm the only Trad in my office/neighborhood/family/town/etc."

Most "Trads" are isolated; they get their fashion orders online, not because they live in a society of like-minded folks who happen to organically align on fashion (witness the origins of Trad: Ivy League schools in the 1950s and 60s, men living proximity to one another, and indeed, in their case, sharing a subculture... indeed, many of these men probably knew one another well before college, having gone to prep school together and so on.)

But being, as one is, the lone "Trad" on one's street or in one's office, one is free to develop musical and political tastes independent of other Trads. There's no subculture there.

"Trad" is the remnant *fashion* of a subculture which *did* exist (maybe) about 60 years ago. That's it.

Left, right, jazz, classical, rock, hip hop... it's all good. Just make sure you have the right collar roll, and you're set!

There's no such thing as "non-trad" behavior because there's no *Trad* behavior.

DH

 

[Dhaller]

Anti-fashion...

And as far as the rest goes, it all really depends on whether you were (unspokenly, mind you) forbidden to come downstairs in the mornings without a collared shirt on or not.

Why are devotees of Trad so reluctant to term it a fashion? I mean, it's one of the most specific, prescribed fashions out there - the very fact that almost anyone here could write down ten elements of Trad dress (weejuns, sack suit, OCBDs, collar roll, cuffed trousers, nantucket reds, negative break, boat shoes, shetland crewnecks) and everyone would agree means it's a definitive clothing fashion.

DH

 

[Vecchio Vespa]

Anti-fashion...

And as far as the rest goes, it all really depends on whether you were (unspokenly, mind you) forbidden to come downstairs in the mornings without a collared shirt on or not.

Oooo. You just brought back bad memories!

 

[215339]

I think it's incredibly common in menswear forums to act like we don't follow particular fashions.

I believe we do though, even if they're defined more by a particular decade.

Fashion, from my point of view, is just how we view time.

 

[Vecchio Vespa]

My late father was born 1928. His father, 1880.

That'll Trad you out (up?) standards-wise right from the start...

Yup. My late father was born in 1915, a product of the Edwardian era in many ways. His father served in the Spanish American War and WWI and WWII) and took his midshipman cruises on square riggers! Between their eras and their both being career naval officers there was no way we could ever be seen at the breakfast table without being dressed. Fortunately leaving Virginia for LA in 1967 shook things up, as did my father's retiring and moving to the Seattle area.

 

[Vecchio Vespa]

In my v

Decidedly impressive family history to say the very least.

I do sometimes wonder how many of us are one or two or even three generations behind - so to speak - by virtue of having older fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers, etc. and how much it has impacted us culturally?

In my case it goes - 1928, 1880, 1836, 1798 so just on the basis of that alone, I am 3-4 generations "behind".

I do believe that another member brought up a very similar point in an other thread which I cannot seem to find for the life of me now.

Perhaps it was brother @Flanderian or brother @JLibourel ? I can't recall...

In my view it had to have made a difference. Sequential generations growing up with older parents seem to me to be much less in touch with the world as it exists and changes and more in touch with the world of their own parents. I also thought the intersection of the late sixties with those older generations was a formula for disaster, but to my delight my grandfather and father navigated it pretty well, probably because my great grandfather was rather a free spirit, and he left a strong imprint on them.