Men's Clothing Forums banner

Fake button holes on suit jacket sleeve. What do you prefer?

37329 Views 35 Replies 23 Participants Last post by  chapelle14
I was curious to know when you get your suit jacket sleeve shorten do you have your tailor put new fake button hole stitching next to your buttons, have him do real button holes, or just leave it plain (4 buttons but no fake button hole stitching)?

Also whats your take on just having buttons on the sleeves and no stitching next to them? I would think it would not matter cause why put fake button holes next to them to begin with. That is if real holes are not an option. Is that a sign of a low quality suit? Or just personal taste?

If need to know, the suits are Canali and Corneliani.
1 - 3 of 36 Posts
Fake is as fake does!

Perhaps it is time to question the need for some of the fake or function-free features on suits and other items of clothing. It is all very well to "know" that you have working buttonholes where none are needed so that you can "appreciate the fine workmanship" I suppose, but absent a foppish leaving of one or two unbuttoned (guilty as charged, Your Honor:icon_smile_big:), what's the point, really?

Adjusting the sleeve length is a very practical reason for not having either real, but functionless, buttonholes or just the stitching, since they begin to look awkwardly placed if too much shortening is necessary. You can't take them out once they are in place. That is why, for instance, JAB includes a package of buttons for your tailor to attach after adjusting the sleeve length. Obviously, that adds an obligatory tailoring tag to your costs, whether you need a sleeve adjustment or not, but at least the buttons are in the right place if you do.

Why doesn't a clean, no-extraneous-buttons look become the standard of excellence and elegance instead of all that archaic, lovingly preserved detail? I should think that should be relegated to the die-hard trads, while the fashion squad should be looking to push style into the 21st Century. The fine fabrics and excellent fit should rule, not the cookie-cutter thrall to anachronistics, in my humble opinion.
See less See more
Hear, hear! And let's chop off the lapels while we're at it since they don't serve much purpose either!:icon_smile_big:
We've tried that with the Nehrus!

Actually, the lapels do have a practical function to "lap" against the elements. That is why I would not necessarily advocate doing away with the lapel buttonhole, nor the lapels for that matter.

What I'm addressing is the endless torture of agonizing over "working" v. "fake" v. "none" that seems to be going on constantly in the Fashion Forum. Why not rethink some of this? The current suit, after all, is a distillation of historic modifications, with residual elements preserved without much practical rationality and a whole lot of inconvenience and expense.

There is, whether we like it or not, an assault on "classic" mens attire going on. A large part of that is motivated by the "fussiness" of full-on, all-bells-and-whistles looks that are burdened by extranea. Maybe, just maybe, the kind of thoughtful folks who I believe represent most of the fora participants could very well push to make the suit and its offshoots more relevant to the people who will be wearing them, or choosing not to as they are now, after we're gone. I believe that a simplified, but clearly fine-fabric and beautifully fitted suit that has shed some of the unnecessaries could capture the attention of upcoming generations.
See less See more
Sprung trap!

I also like the extra detail the working buttonholes add on the sleeves. It differentiates my suit from the all the others out just a little bit more.
Ah, but wouldn't not having any buttons at all be the ultimate differentiation?:icon_smile_big:

And, while we're at it, why shouldn't coat collars and lapels be designed so that they could actually be fastened closed and look as though that was meant to be? That means, of course, finishing the underside of the collar in the same material as the rest, which is not commonly done, if ever. That's what they were originally meant to do, and if we're going to have them, why shouldn't they function as they were meant to?

That would only happen on the off chance that a person were caught out without an overcoat in a sudden squall; about as often as a surgeon would need to unbutton working sleeve buttons to turn back the cuffs, I suspect. At least the design would be honest.
1 - 3 of 36 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.