[Winhes2]

Today at a celebration of life the only jacket and tie was worn by me.

Gee, doesn't respect require jacket and tie anymore, I wondered.

On the other hand, freed from the constraints of dark jackets, men wore shirts of a wider rainbow of colors.

Some looked better in the shirt colors than they would have in dark jackets.

So, maybe this move to informal dress has a net benefit because the additional acceptable colors allow more men to be helped by their clothes.

Back to the first hand, if suits and jackets were available, and often worn, in all the colors of the 70s, maybe the same could be achieved with suits.

 

[eagle2250]

"Today at a celebration of life?" As I understand it, a celebration of life is another term describing a funeral and to my mind, funerals call for dark, somber colors...not "shirts of a rainbow of colors!" Based on your concluding comment, I sense you may be engaging in a flight of fancy, excusing the boorish behavior of the other attendeed at that "celebration of life." Sorry.

 

[Fading Fast]

If you go back to the '30s - pre-hippies '60s, suits (most of the time) and sport jackets were offered and regularly worn in a much wider variety of patterns, colors and fabric options than we see (overall) today.

To be sure, the "Ivy" suit (a subset of the '50s-'60s clothing options) was conservative, but even that subculture expressed its boldness in sport coats, GTH pants and some brighter hues for ties, sweaters and socks.

I've often thought that the decline in the common use of the suit and tie - and its relegation to more conservative parts of business and society - resulted in the loss of that just noted variety of colors, patterns and fabrics.

Before, when men wore those clothes to everything including, yes, work, but also picnics, barbeques, the beach (sometimes in the '30s), house parties, running errands, travel, etc., then men wanted all that variety in suits and sport coats that they now get in shirts, etc.

 

[Winhes2]

If more suit colors were widely available, more men could look better in suits. That would be nice and may bring them back.

Barring that, I think the thinking behind my original post as meandering toward recognizing the relative benefit to many men of casual wear, available in many colors, to suits available in few.

Where I live the past decade has had an awful trend to men wearing black notwithstanding it being an awful color on many of their sun deprived complexions during long winters.

Looking around the room yesterday made me think of how much nicer male society could look if more men wore more colors more appropriate for their colorings.

Designers still haven't mastered how to make a long sleeved shirt, worn alone, look not too alone on an upper body. Sweaters, ascots, plastic pen holders in pockets, something else is still needed to help shirts beyond either stripes or patterns, but the additional colors available in shirts is a step in the right direction.

 

[Dhaller]

If more suit colors were widely available, more men could look better in suits. That would be nice and may bring them back.

Unfortunately, it's just not possible to run a company that way. Launching a bunch of high-dollar products on spec in hopes that it triggers the formation of a marketplace? Good luck finding investors to back THAT.

The fact is, in the past men wore suits because that's what men wore. It was a rule (not a law, but it may as well have been.) Remember that what we call "a suit" itself evolved as *casual wear*! It's what a man could relax in when he wasn't in a stroller or some more formal getup.

(Which, I have to say, a well-fitted suit IS extremely comfortable, but that's another topic.)

IF suits somehow can back into wider usage (they won't, ever - that ship has sailed, and fashion is relentlessly bored with where it was yesterday), you would "organically" have a panoply of colors and styles.

(Just thirty years ago, I had far more suits than I do now, and I did indeed have them in various colors and patterns, depending on whether the use was work, or going out, and so on. I had a WHITE suit! I certainly have no place for such thing now, alas.)

But suits are like cars: you start with the daily drivers. That means if you have two suits, they're one solid blue, one solid grey... just as a two-car garage has one sedan (dad) and one SUV (mom). Add suits three and four, and now we can start having some fun - a glen plaid, a pin stripe - just like our four can garage now accommodates our Porshe cabriolet and our 1960 vintage pony car we're promising ourselves to get running someday. Room to play.

But probably fewer than one man in ten has three or more suits these days.

DH

 

[Winhes2]

Right.

So now we turn to the question of how to make non-suits look good. For me the long sleeved shirt, worn alone, rarely gets the job done.

Sometimes a small pattern is sufficient if the colors are right for the wearer.

But usually a solid shirt alone looks like it needs something more.

And usually the patterns offered don't look good on the wearer.

Here is a challenge to the board, to show I'm mistaken. Post images or links to images of men looking good in long sleeved dress shirts alone (above the waist).

A striped shirt? I doubt it.

Plaid? Nope.

Large dots? Uh uh.

Paisley? Sorry.

They usually either look like the designer felt they had to do something, anything, to avoid a solid broadcloth shirt or else the wearers don't know how to choose shirts in colors that help them look good.

The one element that does have potential is the texture. I have seen solid colored long sleeved shirts in Herrington type weaves that have looked nice. Perhaps Oxford cloth is better than broadcloth because it adds something to the shirt without introducing the mistakes of the patterns listed above. Flannel is excellent but only for casual wear. I'm thinking of the business environments that formerly wore suits.

Button down collars may also be an element that helps long sleeved shirts look like they don't lack something.

 

[215339]

Hmm, does this work? Not quite alone though.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bx8fzj7p3hn/

I think the key is having interesting details overall. One piece collars, interesting pants, texture, patterns, popover plackets etc.

You did say MEN, but I think the same idea applies for this picture.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BsGXXS3HGKY/

 

[Winhes2]

His yes. Small enough pattern ( i listed large dots as unatractive) and the blue field isn't too dark for his complexion.

Hers, not for me. I can't see a man looking good in that shirt on the job. The different collar may be an exception to my complained of patterns. But we'd need a successful visual example.

 

[Winhes2]

Looking again at that blue shirt (I'm using a phone) maybe that is texture on the chest alone and not a small pattern over the whole shirt.

Perhaps in the arts. Not sure about an accountant in that.

But that would be the context in which it is worn which is a different question than whether it helps him look good. It may accomplish the latter better than most.

We may have to complicate the question by adding the "appropriate in contexts in which only conservative suits used to be worn" criteria.

 

[215339]

Looking again at that blue shirt (I'm using a phone) maybe that is texture on the chest alone and not a small pattern over the whole shirt.

Perhaps in the arts. Not sure about an accountant in that.

But that would be the context in which it is worn which is a different question than weather it helps him look good.it may accomplish the latter better than most.

We may have to complicate the question by adding the "appropriate in contexts in which only conservative suits used to be worn" criteria.

I think it's a tuxedo shirt with pleats.

Why must we complicate things?

I was thinking if things have gotten so casual in this era, it's likely easier to have fun and experiment more in places where conservative business dress had ruled.

 

[Winhes2]

Why must we complicate things?

That is a good question.

Groups have distinguished themselves through dress in the past. Blue collar vs white collar, for example. Maybe they will strive to continue to do so even in the absence of other good reasons.

 

[Dhaller]

I just don't like wearing a dress shirt "bare" - it feels incomplete.

If I have a dress shirt on, I either have a sport jacket on, a suit, or a sweater. When I was in college, I used to wear a dress shirt and vest, but I'd feel incredible affected doing so now.

If I were going to an event where I expected all the men to be wearing trousers and (nice) dress shirts, I'd wear a (nice) dress shirt and a sport jacket.

DH

PS. I guess the exception is REALLY fanciful shirts. I will confess that in my (comparatively) dissolute youth, I could sometimes be found in an Etro dress shirt, you know, going out dancing or something. I have a cousin - a Texas oil exec - whose off-work uniform is Lucchese ropers, blue jeans cinched with a cowboy belt, and a tucked-in Robert Graham shirt... works for him. I don't recommend these approaches, however!

 

[Winhes2]

I just don't like wearing a dress shirt "bare" - it feels incomplete.

If I have a dress shirt on, I either have a sport jacket on, a suit, or a sweater. ...

If I were going to an event where I expected all the men to be wearing trousers and (nice) dress shirts, I'd wear a (nice) dress shirt and a sport jacket.

DH

Agreed. They need something. Maybe the texture is the answer for a dress shirt not to look bare. That tuxedo shirt is like wearing Epaulettes, more Michael Jackson than is appropriate for serious informal business dress. But a more subtle texture may work to give it something to show it was made to wear alone without the unfortunate patterns listed above.

What about something like these herringbone shirt , pink herringbone? I'm not sure whether it is a weave, texture, or pattern or more than one. The blue has both blue and white. The pink is pink alone. I prefer not having the second color. But even the second color may be small enough to avoid the mistakes of the patterns listed above. The herringbone texture, if in a single color, appears to show the shirt is not intended to be worn only as a background for a tie. Not as textured as a sweater and more upscale than oxford cloth (no disrespect to the trad crowd, but I'm about social contexts other than theirs. In theirs, ocbds are recognized as sufficient.). Are there other similarly subtle shirt textures?