.jpg)
I have to admit that I do not see the attraction that some men find in all the bling that is worn by the "dressing to have my photo taken at Pitti Uomo" set these days. I saw one clothing writer comment recently that he was finally convinced that he was wearing too many bracelets so he reduced those to two and began wearing more rings to compensate.
Personally, I think the Prince of Wales has it about right when he is out of uniform during the day. A signet or wedding ring, cufflinks, an optional wristwatch and gold blazer buttons once in a while. I also think it acceptable to add a gold pin worn in the collar or through a keeperless knit tie but that and a dress set for black tie is all the jewelry that comes to mind. And the latter of course is beyond the scope of this conversation.
The most basic bling does not need to be particularly costly. A simple pair of gold cufflinks is about the price of a good necktie on eBay or through similar sources (I acquired the Trianon links in the photo from RJ for a great price and given the amount of stuff that he seems to have up for sale at any given time, you may be able to do the same). The cell phone has rendered the watch essentially unnecessary, and wedding rings are either a package deal with the wedding or not (since it is also worn on the left hand, the signet ring should only be seen on men who do not wear a marriage band).
Men who wear button cuffs can dispense with bling altogether, but I wish more of us would wear cufflinks. Those basic gold links are great looking and low maintenance since they do not tarnish. I see no reason why a cufflink man should settle for sterling silver unless it is a second or third set coated with enamel. After all, the money saved on one of those ultrasonic jewelry cleaning machines will make up much of the difference between a pair of sterling links and gold, and in times of need you can always have the gold melted down and recover enough of the value to pay for a good lunch. That is not an option with sterling silver.
And those are my thoughts on bling.
Posts
8 comments:
Will,
RJ is a haberdasher ? What's his website ?
Thanks.
Sorry for the confusion. That was a joke.
When my father gave me a swiss watch as a gift on my 21st birthday he mentioned that if I ever got lost or had an emergency while travelling I could always pawn the watch, its pretty neat to have such value on your person always in case you find yourself needing quick plane tickets back home after losing your wallet or to pay for any urgent needs... perhaps its not the best way to go about this, especially since it could be stolen, but it's reassuring that jewelry could get you out of a tight spot.
Good taste through restraint and understatement in one's appearance and life. One either learns it from Mom and Dad, or they don't. Judging by many men (and women) these days, few do.
Best Regards,
Heinz-Ulrich von B.
The rule I’ve adhered to over the last twenty years, is a heavy signet ring and that generally your cufflinks should be the same metal as your watch.
Some real toffs go for a gold tie pin, but I’d think that would ruin your tie. Also think enamelled cufflinks with club /regimental/school motif are smart.
As a lover of gold (for aesthetic reasons, you understand) it's a source of some regret to me that there aren't more opportunities for men to wear it, but there definitely aren't, and I'm in complete agreement with your run-down.
Gold cufflinks are an absolute joy, particularly if they're inherited, and even more so if they're inherited from someone who shares your initials and are engraved with said initials. I sometimes wonder if the preference among the upper-classes for long runs of family names has less to do with honouring a tradition and more to do with the savings that can thereby be made in buying and engraving various items made from precious metals.
I have slowly pared my wardrobe down to only grey trousers, white shirts, and black shoes. My second layer (jacket, sweater, etc...) is blue, and if there's a another layer it's black (overcoat for business meetings, parka for dog walking, etc...)
Granted this is halfway nuts, but it does simplify things.
And so the only real variable is my "bling." I have too many watches, and a few piti-bracelets, and feel no shame since everything else in my clothing is so regimented.
Sincerely,
Another slightly crazy dresser. :)
Basically agree entirely. Rings are a tricky area since the pinky is ok in Europe but considered the province of gangsters in the US. Wedding bands are an Americanism but have caught on in Europe....no doubt because of the influence of women. Love cufflinks (even just silks) but again less is more. They're coveted but who the hell would wear those ugly presidential presentation sets? I wear my old man's half hunter and chain in my breast pocket occasionally.....it's a bit of a geezerish affectation but looks rather distingue and not in the least flashy (don't wear a wristwatch at the same time).
Post a Comment