I do not understand mid-thigh city coats like the one Tommy Hilfiger sent on to the runway at Mercedes Benz Fashion Week in New York recently. Oh, a heavy tweed coat of that length has some utility on the weekend but in the city I would think that men wearing those lightweight suits that the designers are offering would prefer to wear something more than long underwear to stay warm. And of course, the lack of length means wet calves in the rain.
Cover your thighs.
Photo: Frazer Harrison/Getty Images
Posts
18 comments:
Even with the vest, those splayed open quarters on the jacket combined with trouser tights not coverable by the short outercoat makes the whole package look chilly to me too.
If you're 5'8" or shorter and have a long torso and you live in a moderate climate like Washington, DC, the mid-thigh really does something positive for your proportions without adding too much chill in my opinion - which is why I wear one.
They look nice. I think they are also fairly practical if you spend a lot of time sitting on trains, buses or in taxis. I thought they derived from car coats anyway, so it makes sense to me.
As the opposite of Billy, being 6'6", even long overcoats come to mid-thigh. I've learned to appreciate the look, it also helps that I live in a climate without much rain.
Go out in a sharp rain shower in London/Dublin/NYC in one of these and your bags are going to be dripping from mid thigh to ankle within two minutes flat whereas with a full length classic Burberry showercoat it takes a fair time for the bottom 4" of your pants to get damp....these coats are about fashion (they'll be out of date in five years) not practicality!....nothing wrong with that but that's reality.
They don't look nice. They look casual. And trendy.
You have my full support!
An element appropriated from mid-60’s mass-market fashion. As a one-time, long-term user of public transport, mid-calf is more to my liking, faux pas though it may be.
The trend toward very light overcoats is part of a general tendency over the last ~10 years to wear more layers of thinner clothing. This trend is more evident in casual streetwear, which is not exactly a common topic of discussion on ASW.
I've always been a fan of knee-length coats, which I believe are referred to as car coats or something like that. Do you tend towards full-length coats yourself?
Couldn't agree more.
In college, I had a wonderful houndstooth topcoat with raglan sleeves that I bought for the princely sum of one dollar. It was thin and short and looked great (60s vintage, I believe). It worked in the cold and the snow because, being young, I was hot-blooded.
Now such a contraption would be nearly worthless. Knee length at the very least, thank you very much.
"Lucas said...
They don't look nice. They look casual. And trendy."
....I have a pic of myself wearing a not dissimilar style coat in about 1976.....not a pretty sight.....when purchasing clothing always think what you're going to look like in photos in 25 years time......and it's not a car coat btw.....they extend only to the upper thigh
I don't agree with you at all: if it's raining, take a cab!
I must politely disagree with your statement that coats must cover the thigh. If dress were only about practicality, this blog would not exist. On the other hand, fleeting trends with no purpose other than for the sake of difference are silly and childish. The mid-thigh length coat is both practical in the Bay Area (little rain with mild weather) and stylish (lengthening the legs adds height). Further, they have been around for at least 100 years.
The link is to a drawing of a frock coat, which is an early version of a suit jacket rather than an outercoat. But no matter. If men want to wear coats of that length they will.
Personally, I don't think it is going to happen. In the Bay area, to stay with the example, the only time one needs a coat at all is when it is raining. And then ankle length is considerably more practical than mid-thigh.
Will, oh no! Now you tell me after I start a peacoat with the LL Etna! I like the shorter length because it's more versatile, given our relatively mild climate and mostly casual environment. Coats like that are useful for keeping the wind at bay.
Nothing wrong with pea coats unless they are worn over a suit like the one in the photo that I was griping about.
"Nothing wrong with pea coats unless they are worn over a suit"
.....Strictly speaking you're right Will but the peacoat is a great solution if you're shlepping between temperate and icy climes (think London/Moscow or London/Chicago in January) in suit order!
Post a Comment