A couple generations ago the thrifty brahmins of New England had the concept of the lifetime wardrobe. A man came of age, bought his clothes, kept his figure and rarely needed clothing again. He always looked good, while wearing things that were the antithesis of fashionable.
Even Savile Row clothing will not last a lifetime unless a wardrobe is large enough so that it does not get weekly wear, but fashion should continue to be irrelevent. Oh, necktie widths may change a little over twenty years but the rest of the wardrobe is generally frozen in time. Which is how it must be if we are to continue nodding our heads when we hear the argument that bespoke clothing is cost-effective on a per wear basis.
And we do hear it. I have lost count of the number of times I have heard about the age of some item of the late Duke of Windsor's clothing. It was said of him that later in life he rarely bought tailored clothing, though given the number of New York labels in his wardrobe that saying was probably more politically correct than completely truthful (remember, this is a man who wrote in his autobiography that he had only a fraction of the clothing that was auctioned off after his death).
Windsor aside, for now, the longevity of well made tailored clothing is an argument for having a core of relatively neutral items that can be worn for years without eliciting "There's that tweed suit again" whispers. That is not to say that wardrobes should be free of memorable items, only that those should come later.
Early on, eschew the extreme and make do with loud shirts.