The Essential Guide to Manliness

A lifestyle education for the definitive modern gentleman. Follow us on: facebook.com/essentialmanliness twitter.com/emanliness pinterest.com/manlypinterests Then you can keep up with fresh posts without scrolling through all those pictures of cats and pot roasts from people you're embarrassed to un-follow on Tumblr.

[essentialmanliness]

Gentlemen's Essentials: The Pocket Square

[Separating the men from the boys: a patterned silk madder square]

Having recently discussed such basics as an undershirt, a watch and the most essential pair of shoes, it's something of a leap ahead to address the advanced use of the pocket handkerchief. But as it happens, having seen several lovely examples to use, in a short space of time, and considering that not all readers are by any means novices in gentlemen's style, there is no time like the present.

Even the most accomplished dresser can be confused and intimidated by this little square of cloth. Some would argue that in more formal settings, it has no place.  With a dinner suit, certainly a simple white square is normally sufficient, as is none at all.  Bolder uses, especially with non-black dinner jackets, are for the most confident and advanced (or foolish; it's a fine line), and of course with white tie, no square at all would be safest, if not the absolute rule. N.B. Never take it out of your pocket.  If you need to use one to wipe your nose, or give to a weeping woman, carry a spare in your inside pocket.  White cotton is best for such a purpose.  In the latter eventuality, do not ask for it back.

But in classic business dress, there is always room for the pocket square.  For a more country or less formal look, it's virtually a requirement for a stylish appearance.  So, how does one choose something appropriate?  The default, especially in a business setting, is the safe white pocket square.  Linen is the standard, as it's stiff enough to hold the shape you want, while clean and un-fussy.  Cotton works just as well, though iGent purists may demur.  Satin/silk is a little fussy.

[link]

This post from Dirnelli shows the classic use of a pocket square with a business suit: clean, simple grey suit, neutral shirt, navy tie, black cap-toe oxfords, and a straight-folded white linen square peeking just a few millimetres out of the pocket.  Perfection. If in doubt, the white PS is the way to go.  Only two caveats to that: it's better with a city suit (navy, grey), than with anything more colourful or with a heavy texture like tweed.  It's also best not paired with a white shirt - light blue or a fine stripe or check is better - or pale or monochrome tie.

An exception:

[link]

This fine young man has a heavily textured knitted tie and a brown suit, making his use of white shirt and square together much less stark.

So if that's the baseline for classic business dress, what's the next step?  One of the great mistakes of men taking a new interest in their appearance is to match items too closely.  Indeed, matching sets of ties and pocket squares, normally in shiny satin, are widely sold.  Don't wear them, ever.  Or at least mix them up.  Nothing says cheap high street outlet store more than a shiny matching tie and square.  

[link]

The example above is a better way to do matching i.e. almost but not quite.  The strong patterns but neutral colours of the suit and shirt are almost fighting, but make a contrast to the well-chosen solid tie.  The square then references, without matching, both the shirt and tie in colours of the same family.  I wouldn't go here myself, but it's not quite matching, and not bad.

Indeed, when the pattern of the shirt, suit or tie is very bold, the safer option is again to look to the simple white square, even when the overall look is not so business-orientated, like this:

[link]

The bolder, more appealing option is to contrast the pocket square and the tie.  We might have many different ways of putting our clothes together - perhaps starting with an appropriate suit or even, as I often do, with the shoes I'd like to wear.  But in general, once the suit or jacket and shirt are chosen, and appropriate shoes, the next step is to take a tie that looks right against that background.  The pocket handkerchief, then, is usually the final touch.  If the tie is prominent against the shirt as usual, then it will be something of a centrepiece.  The square is then icing on the cake, the mustard on the sausage.  Robin to the tie's Batman.  Although as in the latter case, the little man can sometimes be more colourful:

[link]

The picture above is an excellent use of a flash of colour.  The navy knitted tie is darker but understated next to the beautiful glen check of the suit.  This gentleman has then chosen a reddish square to contrast strongly with the tie, while picking up and therefore blending a little with the red overcheck in the suit cloth.  A cheeky double peak fold makes this quite dandy,but not at all garish.

This takes the direct contrast one step further:

[link]

In this example, the muted colour of this lovely wool jacket and the mid-blue knitted tie, again offer space for a bright pocket handkerchief.  The gentleman has chosen a square with bright yellow elements - exactly opposed to the blue tie (and subtle blue striped shirt), yet related to the softer browns of the jacket.  Although the fold is very ostentatious and might case a murmur in his club at lunch time, the colour combination is very successful.

And taking things up a notch further still:

[link]

Again, this gentleman has opposed yellow and blue quite deliberately, with the yellows of the square also tying in to the cloth of the jacket.  The use of four patterns together, and two colours in the shirt, is extremely bold, but again the colour combination is well-considered.  The daytime use of a satin square is itself a bending of traditional rules, the monocle-popping fold too.  This is pushing the limits.  But note that for all its grandeur, the pocket square is by no means floating in space.  It's boldness is balanced by its clear integration into an overall colour palette - in a sense, the opposite of the traditional white square, which is inherently conservative, balanced with its boldness against a dark jacket pocket.

Here is another very successful example of contrast:

[link]

Red versus green, again a perfect opposite in colour.  But the tones are soft enough for the green not to stand out excessively against the jacket, and even the red tie,under the winter jumper, doesn't shout too loudly.  This is very good country-wear indeed.

Now here is our friend Professor Pingson, with predictable class and understatement:

[link]

Note again the greens and yellows in the square integrating just a little into the soft herringbone of the Professor's delightful suit.  In this instance, there are reds in both the square and the tie.  But the overall effect of reds against green, blue against yellow, between the two, manages both a contrast and a consistency that is exemplary.

So, to re-cap, some tips on top-class pocket handkerchief choice:

- Pick the tie first.  If that is consonant with your clothes, you are two thirds of the way done.

- Pick a square of colours that contrast with the tie, but of similar tone and even cloth.  The best combinations are where both are slightly muted.

- Try to keep the colour of the square, or even one colour, related to a colour in your suit.

- And perhaps bear that in mind when picking your tie i.e. choose one that is opposite or distinctive from your suit colour.  Burgundy or rust-brown ties on navy suits are excellent, for example.

- But if it's not adding up, and especially with something tricky like a grey or patterned suit, keep it simple.  The white square is safe:

And finally, there is another option, especially if you're in business attire and just not sure:

[link]

If in doubt, you could leave it out.  Not a lot of people know that.

-"M"

[essentialmanliness]

Gentlemen's Essentials: The Black Cap-Toe Oxford

It will become clear to you, dear reader, that I see shoes very much as, literally and metaphorically, the foundation of a gentleman's attire.  Shoes speak a great deal about not only your taste, but to the careful observer, your budget, personal habits and of course, knowledge of what is correct in the lofty vaulted realms of classic menswear.  

To this subject, we shall return.  But as we are in our early days, let's start with a sound piece of advice to any young man (or misguided older one) who needs to build a respectable wardrobe.  Simply this: your essential shoe is a black cap-toe oxford.  What is an oxford?  It is a shoe with closed lacing (meaning that the two sides you lace together are joined onto the shoe at the bottom - if they are two flaps, then the shoe is a derby).  It is also, technically, a shoe where the vamp - the part over the ball of your foot, and the quarter - the part on the rear/side or flanks of your foot, are joined together with stitching rather than being of one piece.

In common usage, especially in America, the word "oxford" can mean any shoe designed for work.  Even a derby, which really isn't.  "Balmoral" is a term used equally loosely in the colonies, but should mean a shoe where there vamp and quarter are one piece of leather, but divided horizontally instead at the height of the bottom of the facing (where the laces go).  Black balmorals, adelaides and wholecuts (but not derbies, in my view), are interchangeable with black cap-toe oxfords for most practical purposes.  But never mind for now about what an oxford isn't; it's easier to show you what it is.

What we are talking about is a black leather shoe, with a sewn-on leather sole, closed lacing and a toe cap.  And we mean a shoe with no other ornamentation e.g. "gimping" (decorative serrated edges) or "brogueing" (decorative holes along the seams), or "medallion" (decorative holes on the toe).  Clear enough?  Best to take a look at some: courtesy of Mr "Wurger" of Styleforum, here is an exemplary selection of black cap-toed finery:

As these classic basics go, the three pairs above are some of the best money can buy.  Arguably, of ready to wear shoes, they are the best.  An educated perusal will tell you that they each have rather different shapes: all are made in Northampton, the centre of England's shoe industry, and the Edward Green on the left, is very English indeed.  The John Lobb on the right more slender and pointy with a whiff of Paris about it. and the Gaziano & Girling in the middle with its distinctive soft square toe, fine and slightly chiseled to hint at an Italian influence.

But these are minutiae to the vast majority, even of well dressed people.  What these are, are tidy black business shoes.  Bloody good ones.  Now take a look at these, also from Mr Wurger:

Without labouring on the detail, they are three more pairs of Northampton-made shoes, from makers of great reputation and standing.  Excellent shoes, not cheap.  But not as expensive as those above.

And finally, a couple more of Mr Wurger's collection:

The American pair on the left perhaps look a little more old-fashioned.  Those on the right, English, and not dissimilar in shape to some of those above.  Yet every one of these eight pairs of shoes, ranging in price from roughly $300-$1600, is made in almost the same way.  In fact, although there is a point beyond which the leather will be visibly much cheaper, a shoe that is sewn rather than glued, with a leather sole and a respectable shape and style, can be had for well under $200.  The Black cap-toe oxford is every man's shoe.

It would be easy to say that the black cap-toe is important because it is versatile.  Actually, that is not quite the case.  In some ways its use is very limited: it goes with nothing at all in the casual wardrobe, and can look odd with more natural and earthy tones even in a smart suit.  The black cap-toe has its natural home with a business suit.  And that is its value.  Anywhere in the range of navy blues, greys and charcoals, plain, pin or chalk striped, herringbones, glen checks, birdseyes and more, the black cap-toe is the shoe.  Ergo, if you are in business - any business - you need these shoes.

Since the late nineties, even in England, it has become acceptable, fashionable if I dare use the word, to wear brown shoes for business.  And it's not all a bad thing: a tan half-brogue can look very dapper with a navy suit, or a dark brown suede with a Prince of Wales check can give a softer edge for a certain kind of professional.  The range of colours of men's suitings found these days demands a range of colours in shoes.  

But if you're going for an interview, or a meeting where you need to show you mean business, or you're a young man with just two suits (they are blue and grey, young man!), then this is the shoe you reach for.  A $200 Loake, or Allen Edmonds from the outlet is just fine. Others can spend more, and indeed get a better shoe, but it's a matter of diminishing returns: this is your baseline, and once you've passed it, from intern to board member, it's never going to be in any way inadequate.

What's more, there's a bonus stage for the black cap toe: when the need for black tie arises, you have a box ticked.  For a lot of men, evening wear is a rare requirement, and these days it can't be assumed that a man has a dinner suit.  Of course, he should.  But again, if resources are limited or a young man is setting out to put his adult wardrobe together, he might be looking to hire a suit for the occasional dinner event.  Not an ideal situation - and I'd suggest at least buying your own dress shirt - but common enough.  What he can't hire, though, is shoes.  Later on, one might have a plain toe oxford or whole-cut, in a fine black calf, or even patent leather.  But if you're short of that, your old friend the black cap-toe is adequate.  Perhaps buy some silk/satin laces to differentiate the shoe more obviously from the every-day.

As I mentioned above, there are far looser rules on shoes for work these days, and many other black shoes are perfectly suitable for most workplaces.  Some would still, perhaps, draw the line at a derby for classic business dress.  But a black brogued oxford is not an unusual sight with a city suit, despite its rural origins.  Or, as the general rule is that less decoration makes for more formality, what it known as a punched cap-toe, or a quarter-brogue:  

The more knowledgeable and sharp-eyed reader will note that this beauty, again from Mr Wurger's collection, is actually a quarter-brogue balmoral: the horizontal brogued seam along the sides of the shoe shows the balmoral construction very neatly.  But these are a very smart pair of shoes, and perfectly suitable for most work places.  N.B. this does not apply to your dinner suit option - balmoral is fine, but no brogueing at all, please.

Mr Wurger has a whole discussion on the joys of various black cap-toe oxfords (and balmorals, it seems, possibly even adelaides, though I hope not derbies for fear of terrible confusion), here.  It is a good resource for styles and sizing comparisons in this simple, essential, and wonderful shoe.

As we're in winter, at least in the Northern Hemisphere, I should also give a mention to the oft-neglected dress boot: the rules are really the same as for shoes, in that closed lacing i.e. an oxford or balmoral boot is the only style smart enough, and that less or no brogueing, is smarter.  Here is a reasonably-priced and very smart quarter-brogued boot (and a quintessential business suit), from another Styleforum denizen, Mr "Upr Crust":

So there it is, your first and most valuable gentleman's shoe.  Learn to polish it to a fierce military shine (my friend Justin will teach you), and you have a sign of confidence, composure and togetherness.  A gleaming toe cap is a statement, a weapon.  It says you take care of yourself.  It says you respect your surroundings and the business you're there for.  And it says you know what a proper man's pair of shoes looks like.  That, my dear reader, is an introduction to the black cap-toe oxford.  It is the most important shoe you will ever own.

[fromsqualortoballer]

[essentialmanliness]

A Holiday Gift Guide for the Menswear-Inclined

[I thought I'd share this rather good guide to gift-buying for those of you celebrating Christmas or a birthday perhaps - credit to Mr "fromsqualortoballer".

Although rather American-focused, I can't really fault the advice. Just two caveats:

Firstly, re. "2", always buy socks made of natural fibres.  I will write something about this soon with some suggestions.  

And secondly, "8" leaves me quite baffled.  I don't really know what any of those words mean, apart from "toothbrush".  Must be some sort of typographical error.  So just add "toothbrush" to the list.  I'm sure that would be fine.

-"M"]

The holiday season is once again upon us, and now that we’re done spending too much on ourselves during Thanksgiving sales it’s time to think about the other people in our lives that deserve our gratitude. This list is for the #menswear among us - maybe it’s a brother, a father, a friend, a husband, or something else entirely; no matter what relation, here’s your unequivocal menswear gift guide for this holiday season.

For this list I tried to select items that add a lot to a complete wardrobe but often get overlooked. I also tried to steer clear of items that rely heavily on sizing, since that can make gift-giving difficult. He may not think of getting these for himself, but he’ll sure be glad that you did.

1. A nice umbrella. Nothing destroys the powerful look of a nice suit like the plastic sheen of a cheap umbrella stick. Any guy walking down the street with a solid stick umbrella automatically goes from “Person in the rain” to “Person too important for the rain.” A chestnut-stick umbrella with a subtle canopy (think dark, subdued colors like black, navy, and burgundy) will always help elevate professional attire. These options from Howard Yount and Kent Wang are essentially identical - take your pick. If you’re looking for something a bit more luxe, buy your guy this Talarico from No Man Walks Alone and he’ll never lose his umbrella again.

2. Socks. Yeah, socks used to be a lame gift, but not anymore. A couple of pairs of over-the-calf merino or cashmere socks will do wonders. Pantherella on Sierra Trading Post is always a good bet - wait for 35% off.

3. Nice hangers. We often talk about the beauty of an article of clothing, but rarely do we reflect on the even greater visual impact of a well-organized closet. A though-out wardrobe on display is greater than the sum of the parts. Keep your guy’s too-expensive sportcoats in tip-top shape by giving him a few high-quality hangers. It’s something he’ll never get for himself but will use every day. The Hanger Project makes the best stuff, but there are more affordable options at Sierra Trading Post and Wooden Hangers USA (the latter two come in one size only, though).

4. Gordy’s camera strap. You don’t want your guy out there bloggin’ with his nylon Canon strap on, do you? Set everything right with the best place to get a hand-made, high-quality, and affordable strap. It’ll go much better with his Alden tassel loafers - trust me.

5. A really nice tie. Ties can feel a bit played out, so if you go down this route make sure that it is very high quality and not too loud; something that he can wear every week for the next decade. There are lots of good places making great handmade ties right now; Vanda, Panta, Yellow Hook Neckties, Viola Milano, and Conrad Wu come to mind, but there are plenty more.

6. A new belt. Yeah, I know he’s spent $2k on shoes this year, but have you seen his ripped-to-shreds split leather belt? It’s terrible. I highly recommend Equus Leather for classic bridle belts; Narragansett Leathers is also a good bet, and if you don’t have time for a custom option then Allen Edmonds and Brooks Brothers are solid choices as well.

7. Shoe care accessories. Speaking of shoes, make sure that he has all the necessary tools to keep his prized possessions in great shape. The Hanger Project has the whole range of Saphir products, and you can get shoe trees at Sierra Trading Post for cheap.  This shoe valet from Brooks Brothers is also a great kit for the real shoe fanatic.

8. A dope dopp. Are you shopping for a guy that geeks out over selvage denim and American construction? Get him this dopp kit from Black House Project (made in San Francisco) and let him get his toothbrush fades on. Ernest Alexander has great dopp kits as well - made in the USA from waxed canvas, and 25% off today.

9. A cashmere scarf. If the weather warrants it, a nice cashmere scarf can be a way to wear a luxe material without spending too much. My cost-effective favorites are these at Sierra Trading Post, from Moon Mills. I mean, check out that houndstooth one! What a winner. With the inevitable 35% off code these clock in at under $40.

10. A night out. Your menswear loved one probably spends too much time on the internet, anyway. Give him a reason to dress up. Get him out of the house, for a change.

(photo by Gerald Waller for LIFE magazine)

[laboreethonore-deactivated20150]

If you tie your tie with the Eldredge knot please don't talk to me.

[essentialmanliness]

No further commentary required.  We will talk about ties later.  This subject will not be included.

P.S. It does not look the way you think it looks.  Really.

[the-suit-man]

[essentialmanliness]

Bloody Awful: The Sartorial Dangers of "Celebrity" Worship 

This man is an actor of some sort, and allegedly quite a capable one.  But I'm sharing this picture because of the absolute horror it represents in terms of correct dress.  The gentleman is not, as one might expect, playing a part here, perhaps as a cocktail waiter in a casino, or sub-vaudevillian cabaret turn on a cheap cruise liner.  No, apparently this is how he has dressed himself for a black tie event.

In fact, the black tie that he seems to be finding so irksome is really the only part of this ensemble that makes sense.  Firstly, as a man of excellent physique, he nevertheless has naturally sloping and rather narrow shoulders in proportion to his head, so the shawl collar was a poor choice.  A peak is more flattering, though the skillful addition here by his tailor of shaped and extended shoulder padding does ameliorate that problem, and it's his choice.  

But what is not acceptable is the ridiculous colour: not so much midnight blue as Ford Focus metallic-effect polymer.  Even worse is the complete absence of a waistcoat or cummerbund to hide the join of trousers and shirt - an absolute no-no.  And finally, leaving a cuff button undone to show that they are there is as insecure, "#iGent" and ugly as an unfastened monkstrap. Which he might also be sporting for all we know.  Lord help us.   Read the Black Tie Guide for salvation.  Please.

http://essentialmanliness.com/post/68490176093/evening-wear-its-black-and-white

[iknowshitaboutfashion]

Tweedophilia

[essentialmanliness]

I saw this a few minutes ago on the Tumblrscope and spend a moment reflecting on how beautifully dressed these people are, with only a morning of country sports in mind.  How few people bother to make the effort these days, I thought.  And then I realised this is from some sort of historical television programme.  I don't watch much televlsion, but I suspect this one is quite good.  Even with the sound off. -"M"

[memories65-deactivated20150708]

[essentialmanliness]

1930s style - harmonious taste and masculinity in two very different looks.  The lady on the right is clearly impressed.  Me too.

[essentialmanliness]

Essential Englishness

If there is a definition of classic men's style on which most would agree, I think it's fair to say that, one way or another, it has its spiritual home in England.  Only yesterday I discovered a Tumblr by a Portuguese teenager who seems to model himself on the aristocracy of old Albion - although he's frequently wide of the mark, it's admirable nevertheless - keep reading, Ricardo!  With no disrespect to the outstanding tailors and cordwainers of Italy and elsewhere, Englishness and gentlemanly style are nigh synonymous.  In theory at least.  

Even now, photographs of the Duke of Windsor in the 1930s abound on the internet as examples of fine manly dress.  Of course, the Duke turned out to be a Nazi, and also married an American, but for both indiscretions history might ultimately forgive him.  Because he did dress jolly well.

[Above: Edward, Duke of Windsor.  Bit of a Nazi, but lovely lapels.]

It seems to me that the 1930s hit a certain sartorial sweet spot, by being the first era that not only had its own fashions, but that saw a wide variety of styles old and new, in use at the same time as expressions of individuality.  Double and single-breasted suits, notch and peak lapels, two, three or even four buttons, paddock cuts, cuffs or not, and all manner of patterns and textures.  Really, just the kind of range and creativity to please the most dandy and demanding of gentlemen, while retaining the common criteria of tailoring, tidiness and manly dignity.  

Naturally, I am being rather unfair here on our American cousins, to whom we should also express gratitude for their inherent lack of discipline in matters of style: the wondrous human melting-pot that was New York in the 1930s has been responsible for exactly the heterogeneity that makes style of the era so special.  Immigrants from all over Europe, and Italy in particular, brought their own tastes (and tailors) to add to the Anglocentric establishment that greeted them.  The increased popularity of spectator shoes is a gift for which I personally thank America from the bottom of my heart.

[Made in England, popularised in America. Translatlantic cooperation at its best.]

Still, when it comes to being a definitive modern gentleman, being English certainly helps, if only by stereotype.  It's far easier to be perceived as a gentleman when one speaks like the Prince of Wales. A tweed jacket and a neutral expression of mild displeasure merely complete the mental image that people all over the world have of a proper English gentleman.  But there, I'm afraid, is an irony: even for an actual English gentleman, extra effort is required to fulfill the role. Not quite "camping it up" - steady on!  But certainly embracing the persona.  Because the Englishman is not what he used to be.

Having worked in several countries, it has usually been a matter of some irritation to count Americans as colleagues.  They're not particularly good at understanding other cultures, or that people in other countries don't automatically assume an American right to global cultural and economy hegemony as a God-given fact akin to the laws of physics.  Still, with absolute humility I must concede one thing: Americans, in general, are both better dressed and better mannered (the latter only when dealing with other English-speaking people, of course, but still), than their English cousins.

It's a sad fact that Americans in general, are raised better, to say please and thank you, address strangers or even just elders, as "sir" and "ma'am", and wear a jacket and tie at least, to work.  By international reputation and through the artistic vomit of ten thousand awful films, the libertarian free-for-all is America's international image.  But the Englishman's reality.  Americans, in general, don't curse in front of people they don't know.  The Englishman, these days, barely knows when he's cursing.

Now it's true that David Niven and Errol Flynn might have been great hell-raisers, and possibly even micturated in public on occasion. But they would have been dressed properly, and remembered to thank the waiting taxi driver.

Anyway, whatever the respective and common cultural ills of the United Kingdom and the United States in our modernity, we are in this together.  Gentlemen, we have an example to set.  Don't let me down.

[David Niven Basil Rathbone and Errol Flynn in "The Dawn Patrol". Terrifying the Boche by pomade alone.]

[essentialmanliness]

Dispinterest!

There is clearly a lot of work to be done on this platform.  No wonder they have yet to identify a revenue model.  "Sneakers?"  Words defy me.

You may do your bit to save Pinterest from itself, by visiting pinterest.com/manlypinterests and re-pinning essentially manly things.  Many more are coming, mark my words.

[essentialmanliness]

Evening Wear: It's Black and White

When I was asking what to write next, the clear favourite answer was a guide to black tie.  Or, as they say in the colonies, "tuxedo".  This example, from No Man Walks Alone, has huge batwing lapels to frighten Professor Pingson (I really must stop talking about him), but it's basically perfect:

And we all want to be perfect, don't we?

Here are some top tips:

1. Stick to black and white.  Or if you must, a cream-coloured jacket

2. Dinner jackets have peaked lapels.  A single-breasted black dinner jacket may have a shawl collar. (Or midnight blue, but you're on the edge now).

3. Fold down collar with marcella front, or pleated front.  Wing collar works for some.

4. Studs, not buttons.  And cufflinks.

5.  Unless you are wearing a double breasted jacket: black cummerbund or waistcoat, that matches the facing of your lapels, and your tie.  

6. Which is preferably grosgrain or alternatively satin, always silk.  Unless you are wearing the cream jacket, in which case the lapels are the same as the rest of the jacket, and the accessories just match each other.

7. Black, un-cuffed straight trousers, no back pocket, cut high for braces with buttons not loops, and a stripe on the seam that matches the tie etc.

8. The bow tie is black, you tie it yourself, and it should preferably be sized - essential for a wing collar.

9. A simple white pocket square or buttonhole is dandy enough.  Nothing at all is also enough.

10. Wear proper shoes.  Good leather, or patent if you don't like polishing, must be an oxford not a derby (or a dress pump if you dare), and plain or cap toe - no brogueing.

11. Black socks, plain, long, preferably silk.

12. Don't forget your undershirt, tonight of all nights.

13. Braces (suspenders), never a belt.  They will never, ever be seen by anyone but you.  If you have to have a novelty item, this is it, as it should always be invisible.

14. Because you never remove your dinner jacket.  If it's single-breasted, you may unfasten the button while seated.

15. But not the tie.  Ever.  At any time.  Despite what you've seen James Bond do.  He also still looks good after heavy drinking.  You don't.

That, in a nutshell, is what it's all about.  There are variations, rules you can break and all kinds of details that you could fuss over, but if you stay within these rules you almost certainly won't look stupid.  Even if you are, a little bit.  Which you're not, or you wouldn't have read this far.

A very good resource on this subject is here.  In the mean time, for those who live by such things, here's a diagram to make it easier.  As you can see, it's perfectly simple...

Have fun at the opera.  

- "M"

[essentialmanliness]

The Fatuousness of Fashion

At the risk of alienating a reader or two, it is important to point out the distinction between style and fashion.  The latter is a moving sea of gimmicks, fads and recycled "innovations", around which cliques of celebrities and their acolytes revolve in a cynical game of constant, disposable re-invention.

Style, on the other hand, is enduring.  It is not merely a matter of clothing - although relevant to it.  It is a matter of personal grace and bearing.  Avoiding the transient whims of "fashion" is one of the most stylish choices a man can make.  Flared trousers, narrow lapels, asymmetric haircuts and huge shoulder pads are all things with which you might have experimented.  The problem is that at some point, they will have come to look ridiculous.  Truly stylish attire, even if it carries an old-fashioned air, is never foolish, even to those who don't espouse the classic menswear look themselves.

Over the last few years, as happened every thirty years or so, the vagaries of fashion and the mainstays of classic menswear, have overlapped a little. Not so much that every young man is now well dressed of course, far from it.  But enough for some to have taken an interest in a well-fitting suit or a scotchgrain monkstrap, which might have been anathema to them a decade ago.  The sight of teenaged girls comparing brogued oxfords is both endearing and surprising.

This meeting of the nebulous and the substantial has caused some difficulty, though.  Some sartorial beartraps into which many a man will fall: the "#menswear"/"#igent" faux-classic.  What this generally involves is elements - frequently expensive - of decent men's clothing, perhaps at the dandy end of the spectrum, combined with a vile and incongruous interloper drawn from the world of fashion.  A world which, being useful only to teenaged girls, should be kept a long way from the gentleman's wardrobe.

For example:

Now, this handsome young fellow is doing a lot of things right.  I'm not sure why he looks so angry, but perhaps because someone out of shot has just pushed him over against that wall.  Anyway, he has an acceptable haircut (due a refreshing, possibly), appears to be growing a beard (continue, please), and is wearing a splendid double-breasted blazer (which I hope he doesn't scuff against that wall).  The bright buttons are perhaps a bit much, but overall, the top half is rather nice: clean white shirt, sensible tie, a simple pocket square, and all's well.

But, for the love of all that's good, why is he wearing overalls on his legs?  I shall return later to the issue of "jeans", but if there were ever trousers less appropriate to a blazer and tie, I struggle to imagine them.  And those burgundy double monks, although it's hard to tell the quality from here, would make a perfectly casual and tasteful accompaniment to that blazer - had the trousers been, say, a pair of grey flannels, or even a beige twill/chino in a combination that I believe is known as "the California tuxedo" (queer folks, Americans).  I said would.  Because for some reason - right - for the perfectly well-known reason of international Instagram iGent twattery, he has left them unfastened.

I hope that somewhere in that black holdall is a sack he can put over his head in shame.  As to why he has his watch on the wrong hand, I can only give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he is a leftie.  But why it's upside down is anyone's guess.  Really, stop it.

Dear readers.  Gentlemen.  Don't do this kind of thing.  There is a very clear line between dressing like a man, stylishly, even with a touch of the dandy about you.  And dressing like a fool.  This young man is firmly on the wrong side of it.  Beware.  And to you in the picture, if you're reading: don't lose heart.  Just stand up straight, fasten your shoes, and put some bloody trousers on, man!

[mostlyharmlessstuff-deactivated]

Peaked flannel

Peaked lapels on single-breasted jackets used to be rare (although not entirely without historical precedent), as they are generally considered to be more formal than notched lapels. These days, however, they seem to be much more common, presumably because they add some extra “flair” to a suit and a suit these days is pretty formal in itself. Personally I often find that they are just “too much”, especially if the lapels themselves are rather wide (which seems to be an emerging trend, thanks to designers like Tom Ford). While the lapels on the Hackett suit above are rather modest though, I still would have preferred them to be of the more traditional notched kind. The saving grace is that I mostly wear the jacket unbuttoned (it is a three-piece after all) and this creates an extended roll of the lapel that make the peaked lapels somewhat less prominent. 

[essentialmanliness]

When I picked Professor Pingson of "Mostly Harmless Stuff" as TEGTOM's first ever "Gentleman of Taste and Distinction", it was with just this kind of thing in mind.   On the subject of peaked lapels, I am very much a fan of this style as more formal than the alternative notch.  I agree that the lapels in this instance are not really wide - average, I would say, at about two fifths of the distance from collar to shoulder - but high.  Tom Ford (whom I believe is a clothing designer) and before him, Mr Ralph Lifshitz Lauren (whom, I am pretty sure, owns some clothing designers), have certainly made the high peak more mainstream, and it's something I rather like.   It tends to make the wearer look taller, and emphasise the width of the shoulders, perhaps why it looks especially good on a dinner jacket, where the simple and stylised silhouette is most desired.  Perhaps as Professor Pingson is a very tall and slender gentleman, the illusion of increased height is undesirable.  But his solution of generally wearing the jacket open makes perfect sense.  Especially as the fit and lines of the jacket and waistcoat are so pleasing, and the visible buttons of the waistcoat and extra flannel texture yardage, give an air of substance and solidity. As for the rest, the solid black captoe shoes and the light blue shirt with moderate spread collar, are the 1.1 never-wrong staples of any gentleman's working wardrobe.  "Definitive Gentleman" indeed.  And with a grey flannel suit and these basics as a blank canvas, the exact contrast of a muted green neat tie, and a reddish pocket square of equivalent tone, are simply perfect.  If there is a single example of how to dress properly and perfectly for work, broken down into simple stages, this is it. Well done, Professor Pingson.  This is a truly exemplary look, and I'm glad I picked you!

[essentialmanliness]

Gentleman's Essentials: Wear a Watch

There is a school of thought that classic menswear, giving up one's seat for a lady on a busy train, or careful table manners, are anachronisms of little value or relevance to modern society.  Naturally, my opinion is diametrically opposed: the sooner society re-embraces dignity, decency and shoe polish, the better.  That also holds for this subject, where the questions of practical value and contemporary usefulness are equally vexed - and irrelevant.

Wearing a proper watch is rarely essential for its original purpose of telling the time.  The almost universal ownership of mobile telephones that update themselves by magic, and come to think of it, the discovery that the Sun rises in the East and hits its zenith at around mid-day, make the watch a matter of style.  Just as the bottom button on one's jacket is present even though it must never be fastened, and yellow gloves are sometimes carried with a morning suit but never worn, it's just one of those simple rules: a gentleman wears a watch.  A respectable, mechanical watch.

There are many fora, articles and commercial websites to be found where the wristwatch  cogniscenti gather to discuss the finer points of horology.  But just as the modernists with their disposable digital items, or these days, those setting no value by owning a watch at all, dismiss the mechanical watch as a museum piece, so these watch-lovers delude themselves as to why a watch is worn.  You will read all manner of justifications for the "life-long endurance" and "investment value" of the mechanical watch from those seeking reason for an eye-watering expense.  Both are nonsense, in that although some watches can indeed become valuable, or even last a long time, an ornamental sundial would probably win on both counts.  

People who love watches, love them because they are pieces of art.  Art expressed as engineering.  Engineering for it's own sake.  That serves no practical purpose other than achieving itself in the most beautiful way possible.  That is art.  An admiration of art is no bad thing, nor is collecting it.  But there is no pretending that your collection of oil paintings is really about insulating the drawing room.

So why must a man wear a watch?  A proper watch says that you value tradition.  It says you intend to be on time.  It occasionally gives you something to fiddle with that is charming and stylish, rather than the anti-social tick of checking your telephone, or the apparent insecurity of constantly adjusting your tie or hair arrangement.  But most of all, it says you're properly dressed.  A gentleman does not wear jewellery as such - perhaps a wedding ring, or some other simple token of sentimental or religious value.  But just as a lady feels incomplete without her adornments, a man is incomplete without a watch.

Personally, I think a watch should be smart, but not too showy.  Large chunks of gold are for drug dealers, prematurely-famous cabaret acts, and lottery winners.  Steel is manly.  A subtle gold watch on a strap, or platinum if one doesn't feel the need to shout about it.  Each to his own means.  And there we have the next complaint, of some at least: mechanical watches can be expensive.  This one costs $750,000, or thereabouts:

Which of course, is rather silly, at least if one is planning to wear it.  And I'm not sure it's even particularly lovely to look at.

I would suggest that a good mechanical watch can be found at any budget, and should be.  Here's something lovely I have my eye on, for around the $40,000 mark:

Too expensive?  Yes, rather.  At least, it might have to wait until David Cameron, inevitably, hires me tomorrow as his image adviser.

Let's look down another notch or two then, shall we?  How about this, for about a fifth of that - $8000?

OK, cheapskate, $2000?

Really? $1000?

Seriously, this is the dangerous, slippery slope of becoming interested in watches.  Just like a lady who likes diamonds, a collector of antique cars, a train-spotter or a crack addict, it's an expensive, time-consuming and possibly relationship-ending business that involves elements of all the aforementioned fixations.  So perhaps don't get involved in all these watch websites.

But do wear a watch.  Here's an example of something that would cost you under $200, a used watch from a well-known maker, with some history on its face and that is both manly and respectable:

You have many choices, but wear something.  And if you need advice, you know who to ask.

- "M"

[essentialmanliness]

Dear Dave

You're the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.  Which must be nice.  You also look a bit like me, so I'm told.  Or perhaps, as I'm a shade younger, I look a bit like you.  Except I have a modest beard on my face.  Because God made me a man.

Anyway, that's not the point.  I'm writing this post as a message to you, about something that's been irritating me for a while.  Nothing political, you understand.  Which is probably a relief. Although now I mention it, as I have some background in these things, just one thing: never mind benefit crackdowns and austerity meanness - reduce indirect taxes i.e. VAT and fuel excise, substantially and fast.  Take the deficit hit, it won't matter.  You won't get growth without putting money in people's pockets.  And it's anti-inflationary at the same time.  And would almost certainly win you the next election, not that I'm bothered either way.  But trust me on the VAT.  Really.

Ah, sorry about that.  Can't help myself sometimes, forgive the digression.  That's not why we're here at all.  No, aside from fixing the British economy, I wanted to talk to you about an issue that's been bothering me even more.  Taking your jacket off.  And rolling up your sleeves.

Here's you, Dave.  Wearing a suit and tie in your favourite publicity picture.  Looking like a properly dressed, resolute and energetic man.  It's a good picture.  And a good suit, now I look at it.  Jolly well done.

See?

Now that's what lower-indirect-tax-loving future Conservative voters like to see.  A man who looks like a Prime Minister.  But then you go and do this:

Now, had you been in your living room at home, after a hard day's public administration, this would be fine.  Taking off your tie and jacket for a nice cup of tea with Mrs Cameron.  And nobody looking.  Although perhaps you could have hung your trousers up with the jacket and slipped into some corduroys and your slippers.  And a smoking jacket.  But never mind, it's your private space and you can wear what you like.  Except it isn't.  You're in front of a camera for a staged opportunity, visiting children with cancer.  So why are you pretending you've been washing the dishes?

The thing is, Dave (you did ask us to call you Dave?), you're not "Dave" at home, you're Mr Cameron the Prime Minister.  And it is in this capacity that you're visiting the sick children.  So what's wrong with looking like the Prime Minister?  Perhaps some "image guru" has told you that taking off the jacket and tie and rolling up your sleeves will make you look like a practical, down-to-earth man, a man of the people, with will and a purpose - to get his hands dirty, muck in and fix things.  Hurrah for Dave-next-door!   But you're not emptying any bed pans, are you, Dave?  You're visiting for a photo opportunity.  Publicly showing support and all that.  Which is fine.  Except that everyone knows you're the Prime Minister, so trying not to look like one does come across as more than a little contrived.  Like you're trying to portray an unrealistic image of getting stuck in and helping the nurses in some undefined, physical sense. Or the air conditioning is broken.  Dave, it's not right.  Your image guru is misleading you into electoral suicide.  Now it's not for me to care too much whether you or the other one are at Number 10 next time.  But you really do need to take some better advice.

Here's one example of how awful this is for you, where you've taken off the jacket to tell the bread bakers how you're helping them.

They didn't believe you.  And you weren't even baking any bread. So why the jacket off, and the sleeve-tinkering?

Here's another one: Dave rolls up his sleeves to strangle some Sri Lankan poor people?

I'm sure that's not really what you were doing, and at least in this case you weren't actually wearing a suit.  But it is an odd look.  I was around in the eighties too, and all the New Romantics did that.  But really, Dave, it's not very Prime Ministerial.

Perhaps that's the idea.  You're a bit sensitive about the old Etonian thing and all that.  Wanting to show a softer face and all.  But please, don't do it.  Wear your nice suit, and instead of taking half of it off every time you see a common person, try being happy as who you are: the head of a government, with an education and some respectable tailoring.  Whatever they say, nobody really minds having that kind of person as a leader.  They will care a lot more about the VAT...

But really, Dave, it can all be OK.  Work wear for work.  Keep reading TEGTOM.  And when you really are off-duty, even having an off-duty photo opportunity, just go for actual gentleman casual.  You look so much happier.

Do up that bottom button, though. OK?

- "M"

[essentialmanliness]

Man's Best Friend (An American Thanksgiving)

The gentleman in the picture below is not your best friend.  He is some sort of underwear model, and that combined with his vacant expression and narrow forehead leads me to presume, perhaps unfairly, that he's not the most manly of men.  Harsh, but first impressions are important, if not always correct.  I should note that appearing in public in one's underwear is definitely ungentlemanly.  But I expose this gentleman for a purpose.

This picture is an example of the unsung hero of a man's wardrobe: the undershirt.  There are many available - this one from Marks & Spencer, whence the image is taken.  There are numerous places to buy them and I have undershirts from several different makers, sometimes costing less than a handful of dollars.  The important thing is that your undershirt should be a) white and b) 100% cotton (or near enough).  I would also suggest that if you wear an open-necked shirt i.e. no tie, then a V-neck is a better style for you.  A man's undergarments should not be seen, beyond a little flash of sock when walking or sitting.

Some undershirts, like that pictured, are woven in such a way as to promote "wicking" of sweat from the skin, so they say.  But whatever the marketing slogans, your white cotton undershirt is an essential.  In cool weather, it's an extra layer.  And, perhaps counter-intuitively, in warm weather it's even more useful.  Why?  Because it keeps your shirt looking fresh.  There are few things that make a man look more disheveled than a damp patch on his shirt.  Perhaps you've gone casual with no jacket, or have taken it off while in your office, and in doing so revealed a wet region on your back or (God forbid!) under your arms, to the world at large.  That's simply awful.  You could be wearing the finest hand-stitched tailored shirt that money could buy, and look like a wreck,  All for want of a three dollar undergarment.

To some, the idea of wearing an undershirt seems illogical, especially in hot climes.  But I speak from experience that, although on a very hot day one will indeed still feel hot, the added comfort of a close-fitting undershirt is actually a relief: no concern that your appearance is anything other than immaculate, no uncomfortable sensation of a bead of sweat running down your back.  The undershirt, dear reader, is a liberation.

On which note, I turn to the title of this post, and my reference to those self-proclaimed defenders of liberty, the Americans: today is their festival of "Thanksgiving", and I wish them all a happy one.  But it is us, the rest of the (civilised) world, who should thank America, for popularising the "T-shirt" style of undershirt in the first place.  The traditional singlet or (be ashamed of this expression, America!) "wife-beater", is simply a nonsense as an item of clothing, as it offers no protection from the sweatiest part of a man's upper body - the underarms.  Thanks to the American ubiquity of this short-sleeved wonder, the rest of us gentlemen can remain fresh and fragrant on the most trying day.  So thank you, America.

Now, two further points, if I may: while on the subject of personal freshness, it is a basic essential of gentlemanly togetherness to always smell pleasant.  Not overloaded with effeminate perfumes of course, just clean and manly.  Use of an underarm deodorant is as essential as one's morning shower.  I personally recommend the "stick" variety as it coats the underarm most consistently with the active ingredient.  I would also suggest, particularly to the hairier gentleman, the trimming of the hair under one's arms, to allow the deodorant to reach the skin, and prevent the build-up of odour-causing bacteria.  Forgive my bluntness, but the subject is important.

And the second and final point: "undershirt" and "T-shirt" are essentially the same thing.  Therefore I consider it a grave error of dress to wear a so-called "T-shirt" as anything other than undergarment, pyjamas, or sportswear in the most casual settings.  The "T-shirt" as leisurewear, along with its ugly sisters (jeans and sport shoes) counts as one of the great sartorial tragedies of the last hundred years.  To that subject I shall return.  In the mean time, put on your undershirt, and then put on your shirt.  They are not the same thing!

-"M"

[essentialmanliness]

Gentlemen of Style and Distinction: "Pingson"

In matters of taste and style, examples from which to learn are a sine qua non.  For all the abundance of guides, rules and worthy blog posts - both good and bad - suggestions are not enough.  As they say, a picture speaks a thousand words.  For all our pretensions (mine in particular) to an independent mind and original perspective, we are products of our environment to at least some degree.  Acquiring the right environment, then, is important.

From time to time, I will suggest references - people, blogs, even one-off pictures, of the way a definitive modern gentleman should look.  I'm not especially interested in the vacuous world of "celebrity", so although a well-known or public "figure" might appear from time to time, I'm just as likely to choose someone who has a meaningful existence beyond the internet, and is little known on it.  As I am now. This gentleman, as much by good timing as anything, as there are many from whom I would happily choose, is the first.

I know this man only as "Pingson", from the very mixed bag that is Styleforum.  There are several frequent posters whose style I admire, but one of the reasons I chose this man as the first example, is that he meets the description "definitive" so well.  According to his own words, he is a university lecturer from Sweden.  I've no idea how varied and permissible the Swedish academic environment is from a sartorial perspective, but from examples I've seen of other universities, I would guess "very".  It is therefore a matter of choice and distinction that he dresses so well.

If there is any downside, I suppose it would be that Professor Pingson is not a great risk-taker.  But then again, for most people, diving into the more esoteric areas of menswear is usually a mistake.  What the Professor does is take classic menswear by its very letter, and confine his experimentation to a clear and conservative definition of good taste.  That's not to say his appearance is boring - the colourful ties and pocket handkerchiefs are carefully chosen but no less interesting for it.  His selection of rich textures and weaves in jackets and suits, is varied and appealing.

So, Professor "Pingson", I congratulate you on being the first ever TEGTOM "Gentleman of Taste and Distinction".  And to you, dear reader, a simple suggestion: if you're not sure what to wear for "business casual" or simply every day good taste, ask yourself: "What would Pingson do?".  His own writing and some inspiring pictures (from which these above are taken), can be found here.

- "M"

[essentialmanliness]

Prologue: Real Men Don't "Whoop"

About a year ago, I was taking a long walk along the beach - as I do most days, finding it both beneficial to the the body and stimulating for the mind.  As the miles went by, I found myself disturbed by the seemingly widespread phenomenon of "whooping".  Not by girls, or even boys.  But men.  Men playing sport, exercising perhaps like me, or just congregating at the end of the day to socialise with other men.  Men  grown in body, perhaps with jobs and interesting lives, even wives and children.  Warbling and squealing in a hideous falsetto, like so many flat-footed aquatic birds.  And so the thought struck me: "real men don't whoop". But what, after all, is a "real man"?  I find myself wondering increasingly often whether "manhood", as my grandfather, or his, would have understood it, is in terrible decline?  I mention my grandfather, or perhaps I should say grandfathers, deliberately: as I move into what some cultures call "the age of wisdom", I realise that many things my grandfathers told me as a boy were indeed good guides for a positive, manly life.  To always have manners.  To act with dignity.  To dress well.  To take responsibility.  And my grandfathers didn't ever, to my knowledge, "whoop". So in writing this Guide, I take it upon myself to try to stem the rapid egress of traditional masculine values from the modern world.  A tall order perhaps.  But to try anyway is surely the manly thing to do.  I intend to write occasional pieces that lean toward the philosophical, such as this.  Others that give guidance or examples of gentlemanly style and behaviour.  And thirdly, some suggestions of products, services, places or people that suit the life of the definitive modern man.

I say definitive, because to my mind, that is what a modern gentleman must be: a definition, or a re-definition even, of unashamed, traditional masculinity.  In manner, decorum, ethic and dress.  An example to other men, and the vanguard of a better and more civilised mankind.  This, my dear readers, is The Essential Guide to Manliness. 

- "M"