Author Bruce Boyer wrote that successfully combining four patterns in an ensemble is the domain of the expert dresser (he expressed himself more gracefully than that but I am not by my library as I write this). And four patterns are truly difficult; indeed, in the context of business dress even a successful result will usually be too distracting to the eye.
The same challenge applies with as few as two patterns worn together. A satisfactory result is easier to achieve but may have a tendency to look as though the wearer is proud of himself for combining his checked shirt and striped necktie. That is of course the opposite of the objective of business dress which, as someone other than Mr. Boyer wrote long ago, is to stay out of the way so that men can do business.
All solids in combination is far too simplistic to be an alternative, leaving us inevitably with one pattern as the standard for quiet propriety. I use a photo of Lapo Elkann, a man not necessarily known for his propriety, to illustrate the point. Ignoring the pale socks and mother of pearl jacket buttons, and even those are restrained by the general peacefulness of the remainder of his clothing, a checked necktie is the only visible pattern. The result is quietly appropriate, or rather it would be but for the socks and the buttons.
Wear only one pattern to the office.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Wear Only One Pattern to the Office
Photo: ISpirit Vodka
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
26 comments:
Will, the advice of "one pattern" was also Mortimer Levitt's advice on clothes.
Mr. Levitt was the founder of the Custom Shop. He wrote "The Executive Look."
Mr. Levitt stated that a man should wear one fancy and two plains. In other words, If the suit wwere plaid or striped, wear a solid shirt and tie. Similarly, with a solid suit you could wear either a striped tie or a striped shirt, but not both.
Mr. Levitt favored this simple look because men look best in either evening wear or military uniform. Both are plain and simple ensembles.
I am not a strict adherent to the rule, but the "one pattern" look is the cleanest and most elegant look especially for transacting business.
Incidentally, good photo of Lapo Elkann. Never saw him look so good!
Mark
I guess this is one we'll have to disagree on Will. They don't come much more conservative than myself but the notion that you can only wear one pattern seems a bit too restrictive. Yesterday I was wearing a lightish weight wool blue accented POW check suit, blue end on end shirt, navy blue crepe de chine tie with white spots, and black captoe brogues. The notion that this was pushing the envelope in a business situ I find preposterous. A regimental tie with a blue chalk stripe suit is inappropriate to conduct business would come as new to many in Britain. I have no problem with a more muted look at times but to rule out two patterns or maybe even three one you roll in socks is to mind preposterous. Four I agree is a stretch outside country wear.
"Mr. Levitt was the founder of the Custom Shop. He wrote "The Executive Look."
A pity his shirts were junk.
I think the size of his lapels would distract me. I do not remember any bigger in the 70's
“The result is quietly appropriate”
Not with those lapels.
Having read both the Boyer and referenced Levitt sources, I view such advice as “idiot proof. “ I.e., failsafe, but IMO, often dull.
I follow the 1 pattern rule for court appearances, although if stucked to the office 2 patterns are very common. The fact I don't usually wear striped suits make it harder to go further, too. Truth be told, I only own two DB striped suits. Being quite skinny, at 6'00''/160 pounds (when fatter!), I find striped suits not very flattering, especially SB.
"I find striped suits not very flattering, especially SB."
And there I've been thinking they were very flattering for forty odd years (I'm 6' and 168 pounds). I don't wear pinstripes but worsted or flannel chalkstripe and consider them exceptionally elegant in single or DB form although the cut is classic coat and draped pant and not today's skimpier look. And nothing looks better with them than a tiny spot foulard tie or the two tone heavy woven silks from Macclesfield or Charvet.
Well Joe it is a bit of a stretch to construe my post as arguing that two patterns is inappropriate. I do believe that one pattern is somewhat better looking, particularly when the above the waist elements are textured. See most of the photos of Montezemolo published here these past couple of years.
What's with all the hatred for the double-breasted lapels? It's a double-breasted suit unbuttoned. It's the way he's wearing it that makes the lapels look so wide. But it is a double-breasted suit after all.
I'm surprised at the reaction to Will's simple point about the elegance of dressing simply.
Always the dandy, Lapo Elkann can dandify even a subdued outfit like this.
But what is Will saying with this photo and essay? Dress like Lapo Elkann? Perish the thought! Never wear more than one pattern? Absolutely not! He's saying that one pattern for business situations is enough, because (in this post anyway) he is talking about business wear, which should "stay out of the way so that men can do business."
Look at it this way: what would you do to make yourself look good if you restricted yourself to one pattern?
To paraphrase seitelman, men look best in plain and simple ensembles. So the challenge is to create a simple outfit that isn't boring.
Which is not an order to give up one's hard-won pattern combining skills.
After all, dressing appropriately for the time and place is central to the notion of classic dressing. If I read this post correctly, that's what it's about.
"Wear only one pattern to the office."
"Well Joe it is a bit of a stretch to construe my post as arguing that two patterns is inappropriate."
Really? Overall I agree with most of your opinions Will, and I'm sure you know more about clothes than I ever will (why else would I regularly follow you), but in this particular case you're being over restrictive. Take a look at some of those Esquire illustrations from the thirties which you like so much, many of which are set in work situations, and patterns abound. I'm very conscious you have to be careful in certain work situs because you don't want to stand out too much but then just go for muted patterns. I've actually found that with three sensible conservative patterns I'm much less conspicuous than guys with blue pin striped suits, solid shirts/white collars (very Donald Trump) and lime green Hermes ties with red/blue motifs. And I've just described a not uncommon "uniform" in international business. For those that lack experience with combining colors, textures, and patterns you're giving sensible advice but if you can handle it be a bit more adventurous I'd say. Most of the men aren't going to notice but the women will!
"But it is a double-breasted suit after all."
His lapels do look rather wider than the norm Matt, although it could just be the way the pic is taken. I love db suits, nothing looks better in a formal environment.
"He's saying that one pattern for business situations is enough, because (in this post anyway) he is talking about business wear, which should "stay out of the way so that men can do business."
Well that's where we have an honest disagreement Horatio. If you have a knack or some experience you can easily do two or maybe even three patterns. I do it all the time and I absolutely abhor over flashy dressing.
"lime green Hermes ties with red/blue motifs"
Once again showing that something that costs more is not necessarily better.
Consider also Cary Grant. Though he wore patterns in his youth, when he grew older (i.e., by the time he was in color movies), he wore nothing but solids. His ability to look good in no patterns is one of the reasons he remains a fashion icon.
Incidentally, I agree with both Willl and Brummagen Joe.
Brummagem Joe, I think that the message may be more profound than you have perceived initially. It is true that with some experience, you can combine two and three patterns. But could it also possible that in most instances the wearer could have looked better in the particular circumstances? If one is more appropriate, it does not mean that the other is not good.
I myself tend to wear several patterns every day when working. In my environment, I am not required to dress up and as a result I useh a mix of several patterns and colors to make my dressing more exciting. I can do this because I am surrounded by people in jeans, shorts, t-shirts and similar attire.
On the other hand, if I had to meet a banker or an important client, I would probably follow Will's advice. I feel as if my ensemble would be a safer bet with less risk of displeasing the other party.
Will's post is actually very accurate in the sense that most people in my area who wear suits usually wear black suits and a solid shirt. Since they don't wear pocket squares, that leaves them with only one pattern visible on the tie. Maybe that has nothing to do with it, but it is worth considering.
"most people in my area who wear suits usually wear black suits and a solid shirt......If one is more appropriate,"
What are they Pol? Pop stars or security guards? Unless you intend to follow one of these occupations never, ever, buy a black suit outside of evening dress. Multi patterns are not "less appropriate" provided it's done with with restraint. That's my point. I'll be wearing three patterns tomorrow, and a knitted tie, and I wouldn't look out of place sitting next to J. P. Morgan. Well only slightly!!
"Once again showing that something that costs more is not necessarily better."
Horatio:I've nothing against Hermes ties per se, I've got one, but they are something of a uniform item in the business set and can produce a far noisier effect than conservatively matched patterns(particularly when teamed with contrasted collar/body shirts). I know some people who wear nothing else but Hermes ties.
The fact is there is no one answer. I don't disagree that two solids and one pattern can look very good but to make it a rule of life for work situations is simply not necessary and is going make you look very boring after a time.
Does Marzotto wearing two patterns (and probably three if we could see his socks) look inappropriately dressed for business?
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Dress Shirts Are Simple
a) For the purposes of this post I don't care how many patterns are below the waist. Wear a different sock on each foot if you like.
b) I did not say two patterns are inappropriate. Once we can get past that point it may be easier.
3) Montezemolo beats Marzotto four ways from Sunday. :-)
)" I did not say two patterns are inappropriate. Once we can get past that point it may be easier."
Er no, but you did say wear only one pattern to the office and that's where my dissent occurs. There's nothing wrong with the advice of course (and the inexperienced should probably take it) but over a lifetime it could be rather constricting, but for those that want to go this route, have at it
3) Montezemolo beats Marzotto four ways from Sunday. :-)
This may be true although I'm not quite sure who Montezemolo is but you've highlighted Marzotto as a role model and he invariably looks fairly good.
I like checked ties like that. Must have three or four from Drakes. Sometimes I think maybe it looks too much like I'm wearing a wedding tie when not at a wedding, but this post makes me feel better about that.
Brother Will, I can appreciate your actual, final point here: the clothes should not jar the sensibilities of clients/customers who are probably strangers, and who may have antedeluvian clothing tastes.
Once one is more familiar, and perhaps in a less formal settings, then spread the peacock feathers. Until then...
Micro or mini patterns can help a closet dandy wear three or four patterns and look like he's only wearing one.
Blue suit in mini houndstooth, which looks solid unless we're embracing.
Anatrite knit tie which looks solid black from a foot away.
The only visible pattern is the blue butcher stripe shirt. That's three patterns. For most, it's a somber blue suit, black tie with a striped shirt. But we'd have to be kissing for you to notice the patterns.
Hey...makes me crack up at the board meeting...
Black shoes, please...Lapo's blue suede shoes are nice, but only at the Agnelli ranch.
Lapo's brother John Elkann is a better example of how a younger man should dress in business. He's usually in a solid blue suit, sober tie, and shirt and dark simple shoes. Boring, you say? Guess which brother recently became the new president of FIAT?
I find that when I have an important client meeting or have to appear in court, my dress gets simpler and plainer. Solid suits, shirts and ties. Grays and blues and black shoes.
Brummagem Joe,
I wasn't knocking Hermes ties per se; I was observing, indirectly, that for less than half the price (or, if you're a good shopper, less than a tenth of the prices) of a gaudy tie by Hermes (or another manufacturer), you can get a high-quality tie in a subdued pattern from another manufacturer.
Which is not to say that all Hermes ties are unwearable--just those that feature hideous colors like lime green.
Still waiting for one to show up in my local thrift stores. Where I live, one might!
Brummagem Joe said...
""Mr. Levitt was the founder of the Custom Shop. He wrote "The Executive Look."
A pity his shirts were junk."
I would beg to differ - I had 6 Custom Shop shirts made up in San Francisco back in the early to mid 90s, and they still look good.
A youthful good call on my part to get nicely tailored shirts - nicely tapered, with french cuffs, and a few collar and texture variations. I've kept up the habit. These days I'd go with different tailors, but more out of snobbishness and larger wallet than from a quality perspective.
I also like van Laack OTR shirts - bought in Dusseldorf - some I have had since my college days in the 80s and they still look good. Don't ask me how I managed to make the good call to buy 6 of those shirts when I was 20 - painfully expensive back then too.
When I think of four patterns, I think of suit, shirt, tie and pocket square. I could conceive of serious business wear that had a subtle pattern in the suit, contrasting color for the collar and cuffs of the shirt, a muted tie and pocket square. Yes, technically four patterns, but nothing that took away from the wearer, or detracted from the message he is delivering.
Post a Comment