Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
CT shirts are made in China. If you're going to pay for English shirts make sure they're made in England.

J&M is not "the gold standard" for dress shoes.

[/ QUOTE ]
It would be helpful if you actually read the posts you mean to respond to.

1.) It should be abundantly clear that I am not asserting that J&M are the best shoes you can buy.

2.) AE and J&M are NOT "roughly the same price," unless by "roughly the same price" you actually mean "about double."

3.) CT is English in cut and design, and their shirts cost 50%-75% of what you'll pay at most Jermyn Street shirtmakers. So I'm not sure if this qualifies as "paying for English shirts and not getting them."

4.) If your shirt snobbery requires a finer standard than CT, Pink, Turnbull & Asser, Gieves and Hawkes, Hawes and Curtis, etc. then this probably isn't the appropriate thread for you. Why do you derisively suggest that CT shirts "aren't much better than what you get at Nordstrom"? Faconnable, for example, seems to be of perfectly acceptable quality.

Clothes/shirt snobbery is fine and all, but the genesis of this thread was a question from a guy who's essentially learning how to dress. You're coming in here and telling him that the $200 shoes and $125 shirts that others are recommending to him are pieces of [censored]. At this rate, don't you think you're just encouraging people to give up the ol' ghost on trying to dress well?

[/ QUOTE ]

The first pair of standard black oxfords I found on the J&M site:

$265

AE is about $300. So hardly double.

Second, it's hilarious for you to write "It would be helpful if you actually read the posts you mean to respond to," and then go off about things I never said. My comments about mediocre construction were about CT & Pink only. Not other English shirtmakers. Third, I didn't say anything derisive about Nordstrom. Nordstrom shirts are inexpensive and of decent quality--they're not trying to be anything they don't claim. Don't read between the lines.

Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

*Don't ever wear a colored shirt with contrast (white) cuffs and collar. Just don't. Trust me. While we're on the topic of Pat Riley, don't ever wear a shirt with rounded leading edges on the collar. Or big long points. Or anything else "fashionable" or otherwise freakish.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not?

[/ QUOTE ]
Because it looks ridiculous, simply put.

Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Second, it's hilarious for you to write "It would be helpful if you actually read the posts you mean to respond to," and then go off about things I never said.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please highlight the "things I went off about" that you never said.

Again, with Tyrwhitt and Pink you're talking about $100-$150 shirts. You suggest that the OP or others who want a certain look at a reasonable price should look elsewhere because these two brands somehow misrepresent themselves. I think that's silly. You're still getting higher quality than Brooks Brothers, for example, not to mention a style that is distinctive (in the States, in any event). So what is your point, exactly?

Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Second, it's hilarious for you to write "It would be helpful if you actually read the posts you mean to respond to," and then go off about things I never said.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please highlight the "things I went off about" that you never said.

Again, with Tyrwhitt and Pink you're talking about $100-$150 shirts. You suggest that the OP or others who want a certain look at a reasonable price should look elsewhere because these two brands somehow misrepresent themselves. I think that's silly. You're still getting higher quality than Brooks Brothers, for example, not to mention a style that is distinctive (in the States, in any event). So what is your point, exactly?

[/ QUOTE ]

CT and Pink are not higher quality than the Brooks Brothers Makers shirts. Whatever you feel about the cut and styling, dollar for dollar, those are the best value and highest quality shirts you can get.

Here is verbatim what I said:

[ QUOTE ]

In most cities you're just not going to be able to get English shirts. A&S is standard, so is Harvie & Hudson and others. But the point is that CT isn't much different in construction from your standard Nordstrom shirt although it will have more flair. CT and Thomas Pink are very good at marketing a certain image but there's nothing great about the shirts themselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is how you interpreted it:

[ QUOTE ]
3.) CT is English in cut and design, and their shirts cost 50%-75% of what you'll pay at most Jermyn Street shirtmakers. So I'm not sure if this qualifies as "paying for English shirts and not getting them."

4.) If your shirt snobbery requires a finer standard than CT, Pink, Turnbull & Asser, Gieves and Hawkes, Hawes and Curtis, etc. then this probably isn't the appropriate thread for you. Why do you derisively suggest that CT shirts "aren't much better than what you get at Nordstrom"? Faconnable, for example, seems to be of perfectly acceptable quality.

[/ QUOTE ]

There wasn't "derision." I was pointing out that you're getting equivalent quality. I guess you don't understand this but the appeal of getting English shirts (and shoes, and Savile Row suits) is that you're getting craftsmanship and a product that is still made by skilled artisans. If you want the surface notion of English (big, high necked, spread collar, barrel cuffs with two buttons, bold patterns, bright colors), everyone does it and the Neopolitans can do bold patterns better.

EDIT: Hmm. In the original post I meant T&A, not A&S. Anderson and Sheppard is a suitmaker, Turnbull & Asser is a shirtmaker.

Cat talk
 

Lots of useful tips in this thread. Let me add some pepper. The old Fred Astaire adage about dancing applies also here : it must look effortless to have class. In other words, you can be trying too hard.

Of course, if it's peers you are trying to make an impression on, then this aspect is probably lost on them; they probably try too hard too. But the true connoisseurs of style know that, although it can be learned and approximated through sheer, hard effort, it cannot be possessed except through emotion and intelligence.

Mickey "Karl" Brausch

Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
I guess you don't understand this but the appeal of getting English shirts (and shoes, and Savile Row suits) is that you're getting craftsmanship and a product that is still made by skilled artisans.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I understand this. What's your [censored] problem, exactly?

The point of this entire dialogue: guys who are learning how to wear a suit aren't going to routinely spend $200+ on shirts. Yes, there is a quality difference between CT and T&A. But there's also a dramatic quality difference (and visual-appeal difference) between CT and the crap that most twentysomething guys buy off the shelves of Macy's when they get their first office job.

Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess you don't understand this but the appeal of getting English shirts (and shoes, and Savile Row suits) is that you're getting craftsmanship and a product that is still made by skilled artisans.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I understand this. What's your [censored] problem, exactly?

The point of this entire dialogue: guys who are learning how to wear a suit aren't going to routinely spend $200+ on shirts. Yes, there is a quality difference between CT and T&A. But there's also a dramatic quality difference (and visual-appeal difference) between CT and the crap that most twentysomething guys buy off the shelves of Macy's when they get their first office job.

[/ QUOTE ]

I made my point several posts ago, which is to say that CT isn't much different in quality from Nordstrom's house brand.

Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

*Don't ever wear a colored shirt with contrast (white) cuffs and collar. Just don't. Trust me. While we're on the topic of Pat Riley, don't ever wear a shirt with rounded leading edges on the collar. Or big long points. Or anything else "fashionable" or otherwise freakish.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not?

[/ QUOTE ]
Because it looks ridiculous, simply put.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I own a couple shirts like this, and think they look fairly formal and, eh, not ridiculous. I'm basing the looks more on receiving compliments from others and being urged by girlfriends to get a couple shirts like this. Also in my previous jobs (i-banking especially) this look was fairly standard IIRC.

French Cuff Shirt - I am not sure if this was mentioned (and there have been several threads in OOT on this) - but I recommend the french cuff shirt sans jacket. I own alot of them from past jobs, and work them into my business casual wardrobe. It seems the ladies, they like it. I wear silk knots cause cuff links look a bit too formal without the jacket, imo. Also (perhaps) worth mentioning, rec'd in GQ recently as a "style tip".

-Al

Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

Al - contrast cuffs/collars look better on Asian people because of their complexion. Higher contrast clothing does, in general.

Re: Looking more professional, a fashion thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

*Don't ever wear a colored shirt with contrast (white) cuffs and collar. Just don't. Trust me. While we're on the topic of Pat Riley, don't ever wear a shirt with rounded leading edges on the collar. Or big long points. Or anything else "fashionable" or otherwise freakish.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not?

[/ QUOTE ]
Because it looks ridiculous, simply put.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I own a couple shirts like this, and think they look fairly formal and, eh, not ridiculous. I'm basing the looks more on receiving compliments from others and being urged by girlfriends to get a couple shirts like this. Also in my previous jobs (i-banking especially) this look was fairly standard IIRC.

French Cuff Shirt - I am not sure if this was mentioned (and there have been several threads in OOT on this) - but I recommend the french cuff shirt sans jacket. I own alot of them from past jobs, and work them into my business casual wardrobe. It seems the ladies, they like it. I wear silk knots cause cuff links look a bit too formal without the jacket, imo. Also (perhaps) worth mentioning, rec'd in GQ recently as a "style tip".

-Al

[/ QUOTE ]
This is an instance of me doing what I hate in these sort of threads, which is recommending something that's a matter of personal preference as if it's holy writ. I just really dislike the contrast collar look -- I think it's silly. I'm not shocked that it's popular in i-banking considering the 90s power-look associations. I wear a lot of checks and stripes but don't think there's anything wrong with plain white, either; it just seems to me that if you want a white collar, you wear a white shirt.

As for french cuffs, I agree with you. It's very rare that I wear a barrel-cuff shirt anymore, whether under a jacket or on its own (as with my usual "office uniform"). As you'll have noticed above, I think it's ridiculous when people suggest that french cuffs are too "flashy" for an interview.