Red Dawn: Brooks Brothers Introduces Red Fleece

Red Fleece

Today Brooks Brothers sent out an email unveiling Red Fleece, the new name for what was formerly called the University collection. Brooks now has golden, black and red fleeces similar to blue, black and purple labels.

Now before you purists and fogeys cry foul, recall that Brooks has produced special collections catering to young men for at least 100 years, and Red Fleece is just the 2013 iteration of a longstanding merchandising strategy.

Still, the farther we move along the passage of time, the farther we get from the origins. Red Fleece includes plenty of eyebrow raisers, such as ’70s-looking swim trunks, legible t-shirts suggesting membership in a fictitious yacht club, a track jacket that could easily blend in with the wares of a hundred brands at an apparel trade show, and the weirdly random Mexican Blanket Hoodie.

The collection has plenty of nods to tradition, however, and a few weeks ago I actually picked up this popover, an item of clothing that I’ve always had an allergic reaction to:


If Brooks can conquer a sartorial pet peeve, they must be doing something right. — CC

93 Comments on "Red Dawn: Brooks Brothers Introduces Red Fleece"

  1. fair point about the history of Brooks doing this but, looking back to something like Brooksgate, wasn’t it youthful versions of the other lines items like slimmer cut OCBDs and blazers and not straight up novelty wear like this stuff? Shouldn’t Brooks be teaching the youth to transition into dressing like grown ups?

  2. Christian | May 14, 2013 at 8:57 am |

    Why would they do that when today grown-ups dress like the youth?

  3. Mike Forsyth | May 14, 2013 at 8:57 am |

    That is a very strange assortment of trad and trash.

  4. Roy R. Platt | May 14, 2013 at 9:05 am |

    The email that I received from Brooks Brothers announcing “Red Fleece” said “Bright Young Things”.

    That might make one wonder if anyone at Brooks Brothers knows that “Bright Young Things” is the title of the film version of Evelyn Waugh’s book “Vile Bodies”?

  5. Oh, this is the worst-looking shirt I ever saw. What, when you buy a shirt like this I bet you get a free bowl of soup, huh?

  6. I believe they tried to launch this line as “Flat Iron” two years ago. As I recall, they found the one neighborhood in NYC with the least number of 20-something’s and built a store around the concept. Now that they have a new name, do they have the sense to move the store to Murray Hill?

  7. Are we still doing the $40-t-shirt-from-China-as-unpaid-advertisement thing? I thought even the new Abercrombie and Fitch had moved off of that one by now…

  8. ” the new name for what was formerly called the University collection”

    “University collection” was bad for sales, it reminded young men of their student debt burden.

  9. Neat-o! Cool! More clothes designed to fit old-school 19-year-olds from the good old days … right after they were liberated from a German POW camp, waiting for their first hot meal in two years. I might add that the term “Red Fleece” has a special meaning to those who were in-country in Vietnam, not that they are part of BB’s demographic.

  10. Back in the 1960’s the Brooks “University Shop” was a greatl place to shop for moderately priced Brooks Labeled clothing, dress & sports shirts, manufactured by Sero of New Haven, sweaters by Allen Paine and quality khakis!

  11. Having just turned 30, I’m probably at the upper-end age wise of the target demographic for this collection, and admittedly like the look of a few of the more adventurous items. (Including the ’70s swim trunks.)

    That being said, I’m very disappointed to see that almost all of the items have been imported. While Brooks has gone out of their way to include Supima and “organic” cotton in the names of several products, they haven’t bothered to ensure domestic production. I know this makes much more of a difference to me, personally, than the type of fibers in the fabric.

    If this changes in the future, I’ll be thrilled, but until then I’ll continue to patiently acquire vintage Made in the USA Brooks Brothers items from eBay, or go to other makers for contemporary pieces that can make the same claim.

  12. How can their marketing dept. pen something like, “….respect for heritage” and then pair it with a photo of a Fred Castleberry twin wearing salmon shoes, skin tight, rolled wheat jean-ish pants, a high school varsity jacket and a bow tie? Whose heritage is that, exactly?

    When I see stuff like this (and by “like this” I mean ex-Ruby, current York St., most RL Polo blue label, and so on) my instinct is to ensure that if I have anything in my closet that is attempting to be mimicked or made more “youthful or playful” by these brands that I never, ever wear it.

    This isn’t Brooksgate; this is a Ringling Brothers show. There are so many things wrong with that popover (including that it’s a popover), that I don’t know where to begin…..

  13. @Luke,

    The point has been made many times before – but, ‘made in the USA’ doesn’t ensure better quality or, even, better wages/working conditions. Have you ever been to the garment district in NYC, for example? Many of the fabrics/materials sourced there are junk, and many of the “factories” there – the ones that manage small scale “domestic” labels/production – are a half step above sweatshops….largely full of immigrants of suspect legality sewing clothes for minimum wage, no benefits, and no overtime….before they head off to their second or third jobs.

    In many cases it can be cheaper for products to be made here than overseas and few companies make that decision based on anything but raw economics and issues of scalability/volume (not based on quality or humanitarian concerns)…..

  14. The models in that photo look like they’re nursing hangovers and will get changed before lunch…

    Or maybe I’m projecting.

  15. I guess I’m willing to settle for the fact that while it doesn’t necessarily mean better wages/working conditions, it means higher accountability for those wages and working conditions. Regardless of the motivation of the manufacturer, I find domestic production, or production in other first world countries/GDC to be less of a strain on my conscience.

  16. It’s hideous.

    The seersucker sack jacket caught my eyes, then I noticed the button stance. Golly. Now, that’s a low button stance.

    And the suits: wow. If we needed an example of an UNnatural shoulder–well there it is. Extended, padded, the works. Laughable.

  17. Thing is, they’re capable of making a great looking jacket (and suit) at a reasonable price point.

    Exhibit A:,default,pd.html?dwvar_793M_Color=NAVY&contentpos=7&cgid=

    This, we may guess, is a Southwick made jacket. Probably based on the Douglas or Warwick. A great looking shoulder, shaping/tracing withOUT front darts, and medium to long lines that make any gent look, well, better. If they can do the jacket for $598, surely they could offer of the rack suits for around $798.

    Since Brooks now owns Southwick, the possibilities are endless. We hear about the return of Own Make for fall of 2013. Reason to hope?

    Probably not. Maybe it’s best that TNSIL returns to what it originally was:


  18. I give it a C+ or B-, not as garish or silly as I was expecting. The fact is, if they want to sell clothes to 20 somethings (other than items for church/wedding/job interviews), they needed more “youthful” options.

  19. FYSK
    As a male model, if I had just returned from a Zegna shoot in Milan to a call from my agent to show up for this BB shoot, I would get hammered before I showed up too!

  20. The standard letter-grading system isn’t sufficient. An “F” is far too generous. Most of this stuff I wouldn’t wear even if I were given it for free. It’s reminiscent of American Eagle/Abercrombie & Fitch circa 2003, which wasn’t a good look then and isn’t a good look now. To add insult to injury, this offensive styling of has metastasized to Brooks Brothers proper. The only extra slim-fit shirts – a personal wardrobe staple – have, at least for the time being, been brought under the purview of Red Fleece. This is coming from someone firmly inside the target demographic, a twenty-something grad student.

  21. And Christian, please tell me you didn’t actually pay for that popover. I’d rather wear jorts.

  22. Christian | May 14, 2013 at 3:21 pm |

    Unfortunately I do have to pay for my Brooks items.

    But I had some rewards points.

    I haven’t worn it yet, though….

  23. Christian, I challenge you to wear that popover in public where people can see you.

    I do not understand what Brooks Brothers is doing with Red Fleece. They would have better served hiring designers released from Ralph Lauren after Rugby was shut down and relabeling all of that for a younger audience.

  24. A word of the wise to any traditional clothier considering coming out with a more edgy, youthful line: make sure to assign it an appellation not prone to punny mockery.

    I’m seeing red because of the Red Fleece collection.

    I’d have to drink a lot of red, red wine to be caught dead wearing anything from the Red Fleece collection.

    I imagine the Red Fleece collection will put Brooks Brothers in the red.

    Those responsible for the Red Fleece collection should wash their hands clean of this bloody mess.

  25. Tom Conroy | May 14, 2013 at 4:58 pm |

    I think some others have mentioned: When I became a Brooks customer in the 1980s there were three levels: Brooksgate (for young men in their twenties); 346 for men in their 30s and Golden Fleece for men who had made it. The price levels were appropriate to their market. inexpensive for Brooksgate, medium priced for 346 and expensive but by no means the most expensive suit in NYC for Golden Fleece. They also offered made to measure and were just at the end of offering custom made suits (which I do not think were more than double the price of GF). Marketing lessons from long ago but I can’t believe that they don’t apply today. If you want young people to come in the door, offer them decent stuff that they can afford.

  26. Mitchell S. | May 14, 2013 at 5:00 pm |

    Kudos to Christian for having the courage to wear the color-block popover shirt in public. It takes a real man to wear a short-sleeve, button-down, fun shirt with a pink pocket.

  27. Soren Yace | May 14, 2013 at 5:36 pm |

    Can someone explain to me the appeal of a sack jacket to anyone under the age of 40?? I want to understand.

  28. Otter Spotter | May 14, 2013 at 6:15 pm |


    Hey let’s through a chandelier in the shoot…yea it will look hip

  29. Mitchell S
    Yes, it will take a real man to wear such a shirt because it ain’t gonna attract a real women! If you are good with that, you’re golden, er, pink, er, yellow….

  30. Christian | May 14, 2013 at 6:34 pm |


    Guys under 40 wore them for 60 years or so. Check the Historic Images category.

    @Typo Spotter


  31. Looks like we’re not done with the trend of everything two sizes too small yet. Dang.

  32. Straight Arrow | May 14, 2013 at 10:13 pm |

    The appeal of the sack jacket to a guy under 40 is that it prevents him from looking like a narcissistic twit.

  33. Marcello Portofino | May 14, 2013 at 11:30 pm |


    At least two sizes, purtroppo!

  34. Richard Meyer | May 15, 2013 at 3:28 am |

    Edgy.Cutting Edge. Hip. Pushing the envelope. In other words, awful

  35. Minimalist Trad | May 15, 2013 at 3:49 am |

    As if Brooks Black Fleece wasn’t already bad enough!

  36. F.E. Castleberry | May 15, 2013 at 5:06 am |

    I’m flattered that AEV once again manages to name drop me in an article that has nothing to do with me. It’s quite adorable.

  37. Fred –

    This article, in fact, has quite a lot to do with you. “Red Fleece” encapsulates your personal style, the modeling/marketing for the brand includes advertisers/friends of yours (KJP and the do-dad gang), the guy in the varsity jacket looks just like you (outfit included), you very briefly worked for a similarly misconceived label (Rugby), and you’re in the process of launching your own clothing line (save those pennies Ivy Style readers!) which will include similar, overpriced, hideously “modern” items (circa 2007 skinny ties, patterned pop over shirts, and so on….).

    Your entire post 2008/2009 existence has been defined by the same sense of make believe, lack of self awareness, overt pandering, and dangerous, unearned bravado that drives companies like Brooks Bros to spend resources launching garbage like “Red Fleece”. So, if you’re not too busy splatter painting your (York St./Rugger) chinos, hanging taxidermy around your apartment (just like Sid Mashburn – what design sense you have!), comparing yourself to and copying great designers/authors/artists, hawking free gear from sponsors on eBay, or not working, perhaps you should read this comment thread…..absorbing the feedback may just save you from having to start over, again.

  38. Christian | May 15, 2013 at 6:58 am |

    Jeez, AEV give it a rest. Talk about “not working.” Nothing comes from nothing. What is accomplished by that?

  39. @CC –

    If you only supported comments that “accomplished” something, you wouldn’t have any. I was responding to Fred’s attempt at sarcastic patronizing. Nothing more, nothing less.

  40. Christian | May 15, 2013 at 7:13 am |

    But other comments aren’t directed to one individual, repeating the same thing over and over. To what gain, is what I ask. It really is protestething too much.

  41. @CC –

    I’ve been reading your blog for years – the comments (and even the topics/posts) repeat themselves in droves (including regular, repetitive, individual diatribes against Richard {Mr. WASP 101}).

    Fred – and his ‘brand’ – has much in common with labels like Red Fleece. Many of your readers hold strong opinions about him. He also looks exactly like a model in the picture you posted. And, he replied – sarcastically – to my passing comment about him. I replied in kind.

  42. Christian | May 15, 2013 at 7:30 am |

    I lob the occasional one-liner water balloon at WASP 101. I also did the Halloween post, which was creative and humorous. You, however, attempt to psychoanalyze Fred with deadpan earnestness that has many of us scratching our heads.

  43. If by “occasional” one-liners you mean “regular” (supplemented by reader comments), than I agree.

    I believe the comment record will show that the vast majority of my “Fred” comments are incorporated in replies and banter largely driven by other readers’ reactions/opinions to a single comment I may occasionally write (or by Fred, himself, replying).This thread included.

    The comment record also shows that many of my Fred comments are received quite positively by other readers. Moreover, I would argue that the content of most of my comments is quite germane given the subject matter and context. While Fred may serve as a starting point and obvious punching bag, he’s representative of a genre and broader set of problems affecting current men’s style and fashion…..

  44. Minimalist Trad | May 15, 2013 at 7:59 am |


    Believe me, AEV speaks for many of us who are nauseated by what F.E.C. stands for.

  45. I, too, am in AEV’s camp.

  46. I find the excessive FEC comments embarrassing for all parties involved.

  47. Embarrassing indeed. And a waste of time. Live and let live. The only people who seem to care are the ones that are already feeding off of the negativity to begin with. Course it’s easy to snipe when you don’t have your own blog , style or otherwise. I respect FEC for standing in the public eye at least.

  48. F.E. Castleberry | May 15, 2013 at 8:58 am |

    This…I don’t know what else to call it—obsession—AEV has with my life and work is odd. I’m not all that bothered by it though in the end. It’s just strange.

  49. I agree. Fred is a phony and his taste is odious.

  50. Christian, a sincere thanks for the heads up on the Red Fleece line. I work just down the street from the Chicago BB store and I’ll be heading down there after work to check it out. And the popover rocks. It’s the “get off my lawn crowd” with their catheters and overflowing colostomy bags who doth protest. And F.E.C. keep on doing what you do, I appreciate it. Those who judge are always the one’s who won’t be judged without slinging silly, smarmy, exhausting uselessness. They l-o-v-e to hear themselves type.

  51. Halliburton | May 15, 2013 at 10:46 am |


    Perhaps it’s time for you to start a separate blog for Castleberry, Bob, and the rest of the romper room crowd.

    I’m in my 30s, but I know that Ivy is a matter of tradition, not of tasteless, vulgar, experimentation.

  52. Christian | May 15, 2013 at 11:05 am |

    Alas not pleasing everyone all of the time is part of our editorial mission.

  53. Gornergrot | May 15, 2013 at 11:59 am |

    I think AEVs analysis is spot on regarding Fred. He’s a tiresome fame whore. And the idea that there are people that buy into his ersatz prep lifestyle profoundly saddens me.

  54. Roy R. Platt | May 15, 2013 at 12:02 pm |

    @CC…….just wondering, is the back of this shirt solid pink? It seems like a very good shirt to wear on a Caribbean beach or on a cruise ship. As they are 3 for $139.00, did you get one or did you get three?

  55. @Bob
    I’m glad you didn’t resort to “slinging silly, smarmy, exhausting uselessness.” You’re better than the “get off my lawn crowd with their catheters and overflowing colostomy bags…”

  56. “I’m in my 30s, but I know that Ivy is a matter of tradition, not of tasteless, vulgar, experimentation.”

    How does one explain Chipp then? Lime green and grape shetlands? Pants of every shade by one the revered Ivy merchants? Perhaps their irreverent ties weren’t experimental afterall. Certainly not their garish suit linings that included such vulgarities as jock straps tongue and cheek?

  57. Gornergrot | May 15, 2013 at 1:19 pm |

    @ E…..You answer your own question…..Chipp products were novelty items worn tongue in cheek.

  58. Christian | May 15, 2013 at 1:54 pm |


    Back is solid pink. Fabric is pique´, as often used in polo shirts. Not the Wal-Mart fleece an earlier poster suggested.

    Also, be mindful of the huge difference between personal taste and whether items are part of this clothing genre or not. Halliburton’s suggestion that “Ivy is a matter of tradition… not experimentation” flies in the face of Brooks history, such as its fun shirt.

    Halli, you should reread my Damned Dapper piece for The Rake, which you’ll find in the Top Drawer menu in the right column of the site.

  59. I guess it was that time of the week again where AEV had to play the FEC card… Such a shame that his persona revolves around the ridicule of one kid.

  60. @ George,
    Well so far no one’s judging me George. So I haven’t resorted to anything. Oh wait, Halliburton called me part of the “romper room crowd.” Ouch. Wanna start?
    Here, I’ll give you something to go on. I just got back from
    BB and bought a couple of the Red Fleece oxford shirts. Have at it.

  61. A. E. W. Mason | May 15, 2013 at 4:06 pm |

    Were I Mr. Castleberry, I’d probably console myself with two maxims, the first attributed to Churchill: “The venom of a man’s enemies is a measure of his own strength”; and “The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.”

    One does get the sense that something personal has transpired between these “litigants” behind the scenes, the facts of which are unknown to the rest of us. But, who knows.

  62. AEV is the superego. FEC is the id (on steroids).

  63. It sounds to me that CC is courting Fred for advertising. Unfettered and unflattering opinions on Fred will go the way of criticism of advertiser KJP: expunged from the comments section. Not too long ago we praised CC for his open comments section, now it is the dominion of the narrow-minded and cash and free goods hoarder.

  64. @AEV – That May 15, 6:42 AM comment is brilliant.

  65. @Ethan – FEC isn’t a kid. He just acts like one.

  66. Fred, there is a resemblance to you and your style on this “red label” launch as AEV has insisted. Well, bravo for you then Fred! When one of the largest well known menswear brands in the world creates a whole collection based on (lets use AEV’s words here) ” “Red Fleece” encapsulates your personal style, the modeling/marketing for the brand includes advertisers/friends of yours (KJP and the do-dad gang), the guy in the varsity jacket looks just like you (outfit included)”… I’d say you’re influencing the direction of menswear… whether it’s a fleeting moment, a failure, or a longer trend… you’re the man. All AEV has influenced is about 5 guys with similar bad behavior… Fred, congrats… you’ve clearly won. 😉

  67. Curmudgeon | May 15, 2013 at 7:39 pm |


    Some of us try to forget Brooks’ “fun shirt” out of respect for what they have done to contrıbute to and perpetuate Ivy style.
    As the saying goes, even Homer sometimes nods.

  68. I’m just curious who is going to pick up the 3 polka dot shirtsfor $139

  69. This and Fred’s taste is to Ivy/Trad/Preppy what Olive Garden is to Italian cuisine: rubbish. It may be ubiquitous and trendy but it is headed for the bad taste section of charity shops with other trends.

  70. @ Minimalist Trad: totally agreed on your Black Fleece comment. Some of these garments fall into the Clown category. Anybody with a little sartorial taste knows that the shorter the trousers are, the narrower they should be. Trousers this short and this narrow look ridiculous. And I thought suits with above-the-knee trousers were last worn by twelve-year olds in the 1940s. Who would want to revive that?

  71. Etymologue | May 16, 2013 at 4:20 am |

    @ oxford cloth button down

    Re: “I find the excessive FEC comments embarrassing for all parties involved.”

    I find FEC embarrassing.

  72. @Etymologue – I think that you have misunderstood my comment. It was not in defense of FEC. I am just tired of hearing about him in this comment section. I understood AEV the first few times that he made his point. I think that it is safe to move on now.

  73. Soren Yace | May 16, 2013 at 3:34 pm |

    @Christian I think what was being suggested is that the heathered grey of the shirt looks like the heathered grey of common sweatpants.

    The shirt seems whimsical and springy, so I am at a loss as to why a drab color like grey was incorporated in an otherwise playful shirt.

    For all the criticism companies creating youthful lines receive, are not new strategies to attract newer, younger customers warranted?

    Let’s assume this scenario is universally experienced: Muffy’s father’s J. Press blazer is in pristine condition 2 or more decades after being purchased (not sure when he acquired it). Who, then, is buying clothing from J. Press if all of their trad/ivy mid-century customers’ original J.Press/BB clothing circa mid 20th century still wears like new?

    Excuse the morbidness, but I believe a certain class of trad shoppers will soon be dying, so who is going to support J.Press/BB after that happens?

    I’ve always wondered what exactly are most of you going into J.Press and BB to buy when one is wont to hear how great all of your old J.Press/BB clothing still is/ how much better it is than what’s in the store now. You certainly aren’t looking for different cuts/fits. You aren’t getting anything tailored. You already have your odd jacket, blazer, charcoal wool trouser, pink OCBD, repp tie, etc. You aren’t buying black fleece/red fleece/ university collection/ York St/ BB circa 2009+, so why exactly are you even entering the store?

    Just my $0.02.

  74. Soren Yace
    Nothing man makes last forever, but one can still get traditional Ivy clothing at J.Press, O’Connell’s and Cable Car, I’m sure there’s other regional clothiers. The point is to build a timeless Ivy wardrobe, not chase fashion.

  75. Mr. Wyllys | May 16, 2013 at 5:51 pm |

    Well…I’m usually pretty quiet, but I’ve been in the Bass so I’ll throw in for what it’s worth…someone asked what the attraction of a sack suit was for someone under forty was…Most of my jackets are darted (but not gigilo tight), but I have a few that aren’t…I think the most common association of the sack coat is something boxy and ill fitting, but it doesn’t have to be that all, after all most jackets I have seen in my rather short time on earth have been boxy and ill fitting……and darted. Mr. Castleberry seems alright to me, his style isn’t really mine, but then again most people’s isn’t, so their you have it. And finally, just because someone doesn’t like something doesn’t always mean it has no place in Ivy canon. For example, I wouldn’t wear bit loafers if you paid me too, but I do not question their place…I wear pink shirts, yellow shirts and plenty of other things most people hate…but they are ivy…

  76. Mr. Wyllys
    Well put, I think many of us old timers are just signaling a warning, that these tangential “fads” or looks, while fun, can end as fast as they begin. In other words, buy it judiciously, eyes wide open.

  77. Roy R. Platt | May 16, 2013 at 8:14 pm |

    @Soren Lace: As I am one of those who is still wearing the suits and jackets that I got at Brooks Brothers in the ’60’s and ’70’s and as you wonder why I still go into Brooks Brothers, the most recent example was when I wanted some of the Wide Stripe shirts, that were 3 for $225.00.

    I waited until the Family & Friends 25% Off event, and then went and bought three of the Wide Stripe shirts.®-Cotton-Non-Iron-Slim-Fit-Wide-Stripe-Dress-Shirt/ME01186,default,pd.html?dwvar_ME01186_Color=BLUE&contentpos=1&cgid=0203

    Yes, almost everything at Brooks Brothers has changed. The quality had declined and the prices (apparently following the sayings of Chairman Mao) have taken a great leap forward (much more than just inflation).

    What hasn’t changed are the people who work in Brooks Brothers. An employee who wasn’t born in 1976 when I bought the Special Order suit that I was wearing, made a very special and successful effort to get the three shirts that I wanted in my size.

    In case you are still wondering, the time before that I went into Brooks Brothers and bought several pairs of the Repp Stripe socks. Former President Bush is not the only old person who likes colorful socks.

  78. Pessimistic Trad | May 16, 2013 at 8:48 pm |

    If Ivy fashion has come to this, maybe it deserves to die.

  79. It would be nice if the remaining few natural shoulder clothiers actually offered jackets with, well, a natural shoulder. That’d be a good starting place.

  80. Reactionary Trad | May 16, 2013 at 10:39 pm |


    But then, they’d lose their “cool” customers.

  81. The ad looks like a bunch of less attractive amateur models trying to recreate a Rugby ad with clothes they bought at American Eagle or stole from their dad’s “donate to goodwill” pile.

  82. It’s so depressing.

    I checked the Brooks Japan website. Not much better.

    Let us suppose that the stylists and designers repeat this liturgy during meetings: “More shoulder! We need more shoulder!”

    Lament the loss of the natural shoulder. Now we’re left with cheaply made “preppy” accessories.

    Our only hope: that the Kamakura Shirts folks decide enough is enough and apply their Ivy Know-How (IKH) to tweed jackets (Scottish weavers, please) and blazers.

  83. My perpetual question for some posters is: what are skinny gents supposed to wear? Mid-90s Ralph Lauren baggy pants? I agree that much of this Red Fleece line looks silly, but thin cut clothes aren’t exactly an affront to dignity and self-respect. Then again, dear Muffy think it’s an outrage that Brooks sells v-necks. Poor gal.

  84. @MRS – You’re right, but the problem with this collection isn’t the cut of the clothes, it’s the styling. A lot of early-Aughts American Eagle/Abercrombie & Fitch vibes here.

  85. A. E. W. Mason | May 17, 2013 at 2:02 pm |


    One additional factor at play is that it is much harder for a tailor/manufacturer to make a jacket with natural shoulders that fits well and looks good as a piece of tailoring. I’ve read that padding is a kind of cheating; it enables the manufacturer to give the jacket structure and thereby ensure that it will hang and look better on a multitude of body shapes. Kind of like pianists who play Bach with a lot of pedal to hide their mistakes.

  86. Yes, true.

    Good cloth matters a lot. The better Scottish tweeds and English worsteds can stand up to soft tailoring–light/thin canvas and very light/thin shoulder padding (wadding).

    The extreme is the “soft” or “unconstructed” jacket. I think J. Keydge is an example of the breed. A bit more tailoring, and you have the NH Hampton model Nick Hilton resurrected a few years ago. Which is no more, sadly.

  87. Orgastic future | May 19, 2013 at 10:48 am |

    Lol, the “old, stuffy, get off my lawn, closed minded, headmaster” culture of this board strikes again. Some of us appreciate our favorite clothing houses not wanting us to look like a “factory produced 50’s librarian.” And we’re not old enough yet to think that “all things boring” and refined equal “taste.” Let the youth own our youth!

  88. Pale Male | July 8, 2013 at 3:51 pm |

    “The point is to build a timeless Ivy wardrobe, not chase fashion.”

    This usually translates as “time stopped in 1955.” My point is to buy what I like and not buy what I don’t like. And I like what I consider elegant & graceful, sometimes witty & whimsical, and always suitable to me. Not Fashion. Always Style.

    I don’t dress to please Muffy Adrich, and Muffy certainly doesn’t dress to please me.

  89. Pale Male | July 8, 2013 at 3:53 pm |

    Muffy ALDRICH.

    Apologies for the typo.

  90. Have one of the color-block polos on the way from online closeout.

  91. So I went into BB this past weekend to try on some of their Red Fleece products. Their chinos fit perfectly! Perfect for weekday classes. I know some of the other shirts look terrible, but the whole collection is not bad. I don’t understand why anyone would make, or buy, an “extra slim fit” shirt though.

Comments are closed.