Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
You don't seem to understand. It doesn't matter what YOU PERSONALLY have done, looked at or talked to. The buyer for Saks in NYC in 2004 decided something was trendy. This was informed by a number of factors, but Japanese influence and Hedi Slimane's era at Dior have been probably the biggest influences in the last 10 years. What happens then? It gets filtered through the media, it gets into magazines, and it slowly seeps into popular culture. Then lower-tier designers take these influences and make products eerily reminiscent (in 2008) of what Hedi did (in 2004). Go on revolveclothing at any given time and you will see essentially knock-offs of what was done on runways 4-5 years ago. This is just how it works. You do not see this effect happening and you believe you are making your own decisions. This is laughable. You are as much a slave of trends and marketing as hipster kids wearing keffiyehs (actually probably more so). There is a reason the Gap sells selvedge denim - it's because Japanese repro hit it big 5 years ago. There is a reason H&M sells slim-fit tuxedos - it's because Lucas Ossjendriver at Lanvin made them popular years ago. There is a reason that Club Monaco sells... well actually about 2/3 of what Club Monaco sells is derivative of minimalistic Thom Browne (aka Brooks Brothers Black Fleece).
Here are a few funny comments:
"Loafers are comfortable and easy to slip on and off." If that were the standard, we would all be wearing UGG slippers.
"Button down collars don't flare out when you are wearing them without a tie." Used to be people wanted this flare-out generally. Why do you think this is good? I personally wear nothing but buttondown collars but it's pretty funny that you think this isn't trendy. You can thank pretty much thank styleforum circa 2007 and its ilk for the fact you can get them anywhere and everywhere today.
"Flat front pants are comfortable and bunch less than pleats." Flat fronts are no less comfortable than pleats. This is the result of a change in perspective by a number of european tailors about 10 years ago, and the fact that slim and minimalist is the order of the day (for which you can thank Hedi at Dior and Raf's early tenure at Jil Sander). Pleats still look better on larger people.
"Three button suits look like crap." People in the 80s and 90s thought they looked good, your view on this is the product of the decisions of various tailors and a trip back to the 50's in terms of what is popular among guys like Michael Anton
Saying any particular style is the "only appropriate way to dress" is unbelievably stupid and reveals your ignorance and myopia. You probably have not read anything about any of this and are pretty much talking out your ass. No style is "timeless". "Timeless" is a marketing buzzword that has effectively sold americana workwear to the masses for the past little while. The modern iteration of these clothes is simply a modernized romanticization of a sepia-toned former era that can be sold to people... with a slimmer cut; thanks again, Hedi. Same way "authenticity" has been used to sell people made-in-usa boots and cone mills selvedge denim, same way "construction and materials" has been elevated to a fetish ("yeah bud this cotton is milled by hand in Zimbabwe"). You may not even be aware of any of these movements (in fact judging from the superficiality of what you've posted I would bet you're not) but they basically determine what you think looks good.
I think the funniest thing about "timelessness" is that it apparently only spans popular culture in the 1950s.
I absolutely don't deny that dressing "ivy" looks good. It can look good or it can look bad, just like almost any trend/style/fashion/whatever you want to call it. Here is an awesome derivation of ivy in NYC by a dude called "Jkissi" who spends very little on clothing: http://streetetiquette.com/
What I am denying is that it is the best way to dress or that it is not a fad. Yeah, go try telling that to Quoddy mocassins who suddenly a couple of years ago went from a quiet company that got a few orders trickling in every week to all of a sudden WAY too many and couldn't come close to filling demand. Tell that to epaulet and context clothing and a dozen other brands and stores that are capitalizing on the ivy bug. To deny that it's trendy is just nonsense.
I thought AAAC was dead. It has less traffic than the NS radio forum. Didn't posting bad things about the aesthetic qualities of Allen Edmonds shoes get you banned there once upon a time (as I sit here at my desk wearing a pair of AE's)?
The BB sales do not stack with the corporate card. I know this because my work wardrobe is like 90% BBBF (currently wearing it head to toe). Honestly I barely use my corporate discount except if I wanted a pair of shell cordovan shoes, which never go on sale but which the discount applies to.
