A YOUNG MALE READER writes:

Men’s clothing has not fared any better. Any given article of traditional men’s clothing is marked by loyalty to custom and accrued wisdom. Yet an assembly of them betrays an incredible variety of textures and origins, the fruit of trade and empire. The offerings are more cosmopolitan than a U.N. convention: Norwegian sweaters, Hebrides tweeds, English tattersalls, Indian madras, Shetland sweaters, Cordoban leather, Peruvian Alpaca… Each bears the mark of its maker, who may come from any corner. And yet, such wares are branded as provincial and elitist. Clothing with neither character nor color are the order of the day. It can be plausibly traced to the levelling instinct to which you refer, and to expel tradition from any fount of influence.

It may be a bit much to expect men as a class to take an interest in sartorial matters. But, as with architecture, when modern wares are so bereft of any tradition and beauty, who would?

Traditional attire is making a comeback in certain circles. Some, not content to leave tradition untrammeled, fuss with it until it becomes an effeminate showpiece, as a jaunt over to J Crew or GQ will reveal, with feeble collars, too skinny ties, shrunken suits, and waifs for models.

On a related note: Is it possible to be a traditionalist in America without being an elitist*? The charge is inevitable, as there is little in the way of modern tastes and mores that merits approval.

[Elitist as in discerning. Joseph Epstein has a terrific essay on this topic.]

Laura writes:

You mention the global origins of the best in men’s clothing. Let me qualify your point a bit. While the materials are from diverse cultures, they are used to create Western, and specifically British, clothing for the well-dressed man. Peruvian Alpaca is not used to create ponchos for New Yorkers. Elegance in men’s wear is still patterned after the nineteenth century Anglo-American gentleman, with significant modifications. Men may be fashionable and trendy in other sorts of clothes, but elegance and traditionalism are defined with this specific cultural identity.

As with women’s clothing, the quality of men’s clothing – of the materials alone – has declined. They are throwaway clothes.

As to your last point, anyone – man or woman – who dresses beautifully faces the charge of elitism. Fantastically wealthy celebrities dress like proletarians. I saw a picture of David Beckham and his wife coming out of a restaurant in Los Angeles recently. They both would have been at home in any McDonald’s even though their outfits were probably worth thousands of dollars. Why would they go to such lengths to disguise their wealth? Reverse snobbery and the hatred of distinction is part of modern life. People lack any inner resources to cope with envy. That comes from being constantly fed the lie that it’s what you are that matters, instead of what you believe and what you admire.

It takes courage to dress well. People used to sneer at those who didn’t dress well. Now it’s more the other way around.

                                                          — Comments —

Joe Long writes:

Women’s fashions are greatly influenced by gay men, as is well-known. So are men’s…in another direction entirely: “elitism” is not the charge that men fear for “dressing well!” (Steve Sailer, I believe, had some remarks a few years back on the deliberate sloppiness of masculine dress, through aversion to participating in what’s increasingly seen as gay culture.)

Like many men, I am blessed with aesthetic obliviousness in any case, at least when it comes to clothing – particularly male clothing. If my wife reassures me that the clothes I’m wearing don’t look stupid, I’m satisfied; and if she isn’t around one morning to help, then the world must takes its chances with my appearance. I do try to do my bit for civilization in that area, however, by wearing hats – and I look forward, in a few years and with a slightly higher percentage of grey whiskers, to carrying a stick as well.

Male vanity is most unseemly, but hats are good for tipping, doffing, or refusing to tip or doff – and a good, stout stick, well, Theodore Roosevelt and G.K. Chesterton understood, and so does every eight-year-old boy who hasn’t been ruined yet. THAT’s masculine fashion for you.

Laura writes:

Ah, so all that “deliberate sloppiness” out there is a noble crusade against effeminacy. Interesting. : – )

It’s true, men are less vain, though I don’t think pride in dress is unseemly in a man. Many women don’t see it as their responsibility to help their husbands dress well anymore. And so men look as terrible as women do, just in a different way. A co-worker of my husband’s once showed up at work wearing a V-neck sweater. It was on backwards.

Hurricane Betsy writes:

Laura said, “A co-worker of my husband’s once showed up at work wearing a V-neck sweater. It was on backwards.”

That’s nothing! I used to have this homosexual friend, a really nice boy, but incredibly insecure, and always desirous of being seen to be fashionable. For a time, he wore his shirts inside out.

Brett writes:

What’s “wrong” with elitism?

The idea that some rise above others, and we make them the new standard, is called growth, change and development.

It’s a positive thing.

It gets confused because in this society, EVERYTHING seems to be personal, so people assume that if you have higher standards, it’s to put on airs. Then again, that seems to be their way of pre-emptively convincing you to avoid such behavior, because they are afraid that they will look like shiftless slobs in comparison…

Laura writes:

It is elitist today be individual and distinctive, separate from the herd and not a conformist, as I pointed out here in regard to modest clothing. Therefore being accused of elitism in clothing (with comments such as, “Don’t you look all dressed up?”) is actually a compliment, though it is usually intended as an insult or to cut someone down.

Please follow and like us: