Dubious Fashion Choice

Waiting for a subway train today at North Station, I saw a guy wearing what I would have to describe as "skinny sweatpants." Naturally I think it's bad enough that someone thinks it's okay to wear sweatpants out in public (and by "out in public" I mean "anywhere beyond one's front porch or yard"), but it's even worse that he'd chosen to wear something in public that looked like he'd swiped it from his middle-school-age brother, or possibly his girlfriend.

Didn't guys learn anything from the skinny jeans fad? You are not Mick Jagger. You have not earned the right to dress like him. And now our favorite cozy, indoor lazy pants are being subjected to the same stylistic missteps, which obviously at least one guy thinks is okay.

I'm blaming the designers for this one. They've been meddling with our sweats; I've noticed a recent boomlet of sweatpant offerings from various fashionable brands and labels, with accompanyingly inflated prices. Todd Snyder's collaboration with Champion: $118. (I will admit I like the contrast waistband on those, but...) Acne: $220! (Wow, zippered pockets.) Club Monaco: $389!! (At least they're cashmere. Yup, cashmere sweatpants.) Band of Outsiders: $575!!! (A mostly wool/cotton blend, with cargo pockets. When you put it that way, who could resist?) Even damn Gap sweats are $50 $40. (Anyone who pays full retail for any item at Gap deserves to be ripped off.)

I have two or three of pairs of sweatpants that I wear around the house when it's cold. I'm sure I didn't pay over $12 for any of them, and they aren't crappy polyester blends either. I either got them in cheap stores like Old Navy or I found them on clearance in other, moderately priced stores.

The worst part of when designers get hold of a simple, utilitarian, everyday item isn't the obscene markup itself, it's that there are people who see such an item and think "I need to have a pair of those." And when someone drops $200 on a pair of sweatpants, he thinks he needs to wear them everywhere to justify the expense. What's the next step, designerified thermal underwear?

Style Don't: Jacket Required

I've used AdBlock Plus in my web browser for some time, but there are certain sites for which I allow exceptions. Generally these are sites that I visit regularly and that I also know are operated by an individual who is relying on the revenue generated from ad views and clicks for part of their income, such as Universal Hub, Curbside Classic, and Dappered. (I don't have ads appearing here because there isn't enough traffic to generate any meaningful real-world revenue.)

Naturally, the ads on these sites tend to be related to their content. But yesterday while I was visiting Dappered, I noticed an ad in the right sidebar for a menswear product so appallingly heinous I had to click on it, and now I'm going to make you look at it too:

These abominations are known as "jacketless tuxedos," and the person responsible for this idea should be fired, then forced to wear only these items of clothing every day for the rest of his/her life.

Let's be clear: this is not a tuxedo. This is an excuse for a tuxedo, the "I couldn't be bothered" alternative. This is what nearly two decades of "business casual" and the tech industry's lazy, hoodie-and-flip-flop non-aesthetic has wrought and foisted upon the clueless and feckless men of this country. And here comes Jos. A. Bank to take advantage of that while making it worse...

There are a couple of circumstances in which I could see this not being a style foul: if you are seven years old and are making your First Communion, I think this would constitute an acceptable outfit (in an age-appropriate smaller size, of course). And maybe, MAYBE (but I admit I'm not 100% in favor of it) I could see this as a prom outfit in certain situations, like if most/all the guys in the class were planning to dress more casually for the event.

But really, that's just it: this is a very juvenile outfit, the sort of thing you see on young boys. Once you reach about age sixteen, there are certain events for which you need to be properly dressed, full stop. And that means a suit with a jacket, or in some cases a tuxedo with a jacket. Because technically this is not a tuxedo; it's a pair of pants and a matching vest, which we will henceforth refer to as a "fauxedo," or perhaps a "broxedo."

Now, I have nothing against vests. I like vests, in appropriate settings, which only include formal events like proms and wedding parties when worn under a jacket, not in lieu of a jacket. Guys: if you're getting married or going to prom, man up and wear what you are supposed to. Your mate/date will certainly appreciate the effort.

PS: Shit, I never even got around to the part about how long ties are not appropriate with tuxedos. You know what? Never mind, I can't. This has been enough for today already...

Emmy Fatigue

I spent last night flipping back and forth between the Patriots game and the Emmy awards ceremony. I'm kind of glad I didn't end up devoting my full attention to either event, because both were letdowns (for different reasons).

As usual, most of the Emmy winners were people who had already won, making for a predictable and disappointing program. I haven't seen Homeland, but I've heard many good things about it, and I'm sure I will get around to seeing it soon. I'm happy the academy recognized the show and its actors and creators, but it came at Mad Men's expense. I'm less disappointed about the show not winning a fifth Best Drama award than I am that Jon Hamm, Elisabeth Moss, Christina Hendricks, and Jared Harris were shut out of the acting awards. At this point it seems no one from MM is ever going to win an acting Emmy, which is a real shame.

It was nice to see Louis CK get recognized for his work on his great, great show. Maybe Amy Poehler's turn will come next year. On the other hand, I'm not sure at the exact point Ricky Gervais became such an utter asshole that I can no longer stand the sight of his face nor the sound of his voice, but when he appeared last night I had to switch back to the game. And Jimmy Kimmel was a big disappointment as host; pretty much everything he did and said fell flat.

I sincerely hope Lena Dunham uses some of what she's earned/earning from HBO for Girls to invest in the services of a stylist. Look, I get it, you're a 26-year-old hipster chick chronicling the lives of twentysomething hipster chicks: you're supposed to be edgy and look like you don't care about stuff like fashion or beauty. But that dress looks like something that your grandmother would have rejected as too frumpy, and I don't think you understand how eye makeup is supposed to be used.

P.S. I love Elisabeth Moss as a blonde, but the dress she chose to wear was iffy, too. Nice cut, awful fabric.

Words Not Minced

Last week was Fashion Week in New York, where designers show their collections for the forthcoming season (in this case, next spring) and everyone loses their collective mind over some trend or other. Even though I spend an inordinate amount of time shopping for and thinking about clothes, I don't pay any attention to what goes on at Fashion Week, because it has absolutely no relevance to how I dress or what I might consider buying.

Designers often structure their collections around a theme, which is an entirely justifiable creative impulse. However, sometimes the chosen theme is so obtuse, recycled, or just plain wrong that it merits special (negative) attention.

I consider Michael Bastian a talented designer whose work is best seen in his own namesake collection. Those clothes are classically styled but with a more modern cut, made exceptionally well of beautiful fabrics, and are obscenely expensive.

His line for Gant, however, is another thing entirely, and a young thrifter and blogger from Portland, ME who goes by A Fistful of Style has done a deservedly venomous takedown of the spring 2013 collection from Gant by Michael Bastian. Read it first, then see for yourself. It is honestly insulting to think that he and Gant expect people to pay good money for this horrible-looking retread crap, but obviously I am not the target market for the line.