i agree w him. i would only wear a button-down collar with a tie if it was a nontraditional tie. i would not wear a button-down/tie combo unless it was a deliberate move like wearing a bola tie or some other obnoxious styleHJO wrote:
James Bond is not credited.
OCI/callbacks/etc Men's Clothing Mega-thread Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
- aIvin adams
- Posts: 174
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:29 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
- yhezel
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:21 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Any opinions on the Hugo Boss Astro Hill suit to start building a wardrobe?
Also, can someone recommend another suit with a similar style?
Also, can someone recommend another suit with a similar style?
Last edited by yhezel on Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- BunkMoreland
- Posts: 289
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:16 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Opinions: on interviews, whether or not a small white linen pocket square in TV fold would be appropriate
- vamedic03
- Posts: 1577
- Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
You can agree with him all you want, but either y'all are wrong, or Brooks Brothers, J.Press, and other very traditional men's clothing companies are wrong... FWIW, I'll assume y'all are wrong. Not all of menswear is defined by Esquire.aIvin adams wrote:i agree w him. i would only wear a button-down collar with a tie if it was a nontraditional tie. i would not wear a button-down/tie combo unless it was a deliberate move like wearing a bola tie or some other obnoxious styleHJO wrote:
James Bond is not credited.
- vamedic03
- Posts: 1577
- Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Personally, I'm not a fan of pocket squares as I think they tend to look tacky, but if you keep it subtle, go for it.BunkMoreland wrote:Opinions: on interviews, whether or not a small white linen pocket square in TV fold would be appropriate
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- zettsscores40
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Yeah I agree with that looking too mafioso. I have a suit very similar to that except with narrower stripes. Hate the pants though. Bought it 3 years ago when I didn't have a clue about mens clothing so the pants are pleated.Waterman47 wrote:Pretty sure it's a RL tie. Almost bought one but ended up passing.zettsscores40 wrote:Like the tie.GodSpeed wrote:For some reason, basketball players have the absolute worst taste in suits.Waterman47 wrote:Speaking of basketball, I noticed that the trend of horribly high cut 6-button suits has died out, for the most part.
2006 NBA Draft:
2009 NBA Draft:
Take a fashion top (but no other tips) from Arod:
--ImageRemoved--
That's a great 3 button suit.
And I love the cut and fit of the suit but I hate wide chalk stripes. Looks too Mafia-ish IMO, and not in a good way.
-
- Posts: 4249
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
I've never set foot in a J.Press, don't own anything by Brooks Brothers, and have never once read an issue of Esquire. And as a neutral party, I say button-downs with ties makes you look like a low-rent used appliance salesman. It's really a terrible look.vamedic03 wrote:You can agree with him all you want, but either y'all are wrong, or Brooks Brothers, J.Press, and other very traditional men's clothing companies are wrong... FWIW, I'll assume y'all are wrong. Not all of menswear is defined by Esquire.aIvin adams wrote:i agree w him. i would only wear a button-down collar with a tie if it was a nontraditional tie. i would not wear a button-down/tie combo unless it was a deliberate move like wearing a bola tie or some other obnoxious styleHJO wrote:
James Bond is not credited.
- Waterman47
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Just know that it would set you apart from everyone else. If you're comfortable with that, go for it.BunkMoreland wrote:Opinions: on interviews, whether or not a small white linen pocket square in TV fold would be appropriate
I personally wouldn't do it because it might look like you're trying too hard. The rest of the ensemble better be impeccable, IMO.
- GodSpeed
- Posts: 236
- Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:05 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
At first I was like "no way" but you MIGHT be able to pull it off. I'd say no though. Honestly, it's not going to win you any points for doing it and you stand to lose a lot if someone doesn't like it.Waterman47 wrote:Just know that it would set you apart from everyone else. If you're comfortable with that, go for it.BunkMoreland wrote:Opinions: on interviews, whether or not a small white linen pocket square in TV fold would be appropriate
I personally wouldn't do it because it might look like you're trying too hard. The rest of the ensemble better be impeccable, IMO.
Actually, that's a good rule of thumb for interviews. Everything deviating from the traditional uniform(Navy/dark charcoal, solid suit, red power tie, white shirt, black shoes, black belt), at best, will do nothing for you and at worst will cost you the job.
Conservative doesn't mean bland or boring or even not good. I dress extremely conservatively and I frequently get compliments. In fact, I think it's EASIER to look good being conservative than it is trying to be GQ at a charity ball or something. It's done well so rarely, especially by the under 30 crowd, that a 25yr old with a solid navy suit, black LEATHER SOLED shoes, black belt and strong red tie actually stands out.
-
- Posts: 484
- Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:28 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
+1. Brooks Brothers invented the OCBD in 1900. Though a bit more informal than a spread collar, it has been a corporate wardrobe staple for the past century and looks fantastic with the right outfit. Ken Cosgrove on Mad Men rocks the look pretty well.vamedic03 wrote:You can agree with him all you want, but either y'all are wrong, or Brooks Brothers, J.Press, and other very traditional men's clothing companies are wrong... FWIW, I'll assume y'all are wrong. Not all of menswear is defined by Esquire.aIvin adams wrote:i agree w him. i would only wear a button-down collar with a tie if it was a nontraditional tie. i would not wear a button-down/tie combo unless it was a deliberate move like wearing a bola tie or some other obnoxious styleHJO wrote:
James Bond is not credited.
Not for an interview unless you're an older candidate (late 30s). It's too difficult for a young person to pull off without looking costume-y.BunkMoreland wrote:Opinions: on interviews, whether or not a small white linen pocket square in TV fold would be appropriate
- vamedic03
- Posts: 1577
- Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
It appears that its only available in black, so, no, its not a good entry level suit. Look at navy or charcoal.yhezel wrote:Any opinions on the Hugo Boss Astro Hill suit to start building a wardrobe?
Also, can someone recommend another suit with a similar style?
- zettsscores40
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Well if a fictional character on a tv show based on a 1960s ad agency does it it must be good enough for us.
- zettsscores40
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Some people say never, some people say never in certain situations. I've never seen anybody say swing for the fences so why risk it? It's a less formal look. You don't want that for any interview. Maybe at the office later down the line sure but never for any kind of interview IMO.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Pufer
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:32 am
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
It is perfectly acceptable to wear a button down collar with a tie, sure, so long as the collars on your shirt are long enough. It is not, however, perfectly acceptable to wear a button down collar with a suit. Common does not acceptable make.vamedic03 wrote:Please inform Brooks Brothers and J. Press of your revelation regarding button down collars. Its perfectly acceptable to wear a button down collar with a tie and suit. Its a traditional preppy look.James Bond wrote:I'm not going to find and read whatever "rant" you're talking about, but button down collars are made to be worn without a tie. That's their entire purpose. Wearing one with a tie makes you look like a dweeb, not a conservative. The rule is, buttons - no tie and tie - no buttons.jrs12 wrote:Pufer,
I've pretty much agreed with everything that you said on this thread until the button-down rant. While the aesthetics are debateable, the BD stigma you describe is simply nonexistent in the United States at this point, at least east of the Rockies. You might as well berate people for not wearing hats outdoors. As Paul Fussell pointed out (yes, I know he wasn't right about everything), the button-down collar is now almost an upper-class calling card. It's also an extraordinarily conservative choice. Personally, I like it for business, because it seems to send the message that you're there to work, not to fuss about your clothes.
For an evening social event, sure, I'll go with a spread collar.
The "traditional preppy look" (the "Harvard style," as it were) does not include suits. The "preppy" doesn't generally wear a suit; he wears a sport coat or a blazer and an informal striped tie. The button down collar is perfectly acceptable with a tie if, and only if, you are not wearing a suit. With a suit, it is only acceptable if you are not wearing a tie (you're dressing down the suit to sport coat territory).
The exception to this is the "Ivy League style," which is quite related to the Harvard style (after the preppy graduates from Yale, grows up, and takes over the family business after a few years spent yachting, he starts dressing in this style). This is your J. Press, a company whose primary claim to fame is that they completely eschew stylistic considerations in order to appeal to a particular group of power-elites. This style requires completely shapeless sack suits, wide ties (often with gaudy, prominent tie bars), and colorful button-down collared shirts. Basically, if you want to look rich, but you don't want to look good in accords with any modern aesthetic, you will dress in the Ivy League style.
Most gentlemen will have button-down collared shirt in their closet for some purpose, but you can be sure that purpose will have nothing to do with business. Everyone who legitimately sports the Ivy League style at the office is a douche; everyone else who wears a button down collar with their suit is a boob.
-Pufer
- vamedic03
- Posts: 1577
- Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Wow, you seem to harbor some anger towards button down collars with suits... chill out and recognize that men's business wear has very few hard rules...Pufer wrote:It is perfectly acceptable to wear a button down collar with a tie, sure, so long as the collars on your shirt are long enough. It is not, however, perfectly acceptable to wear a button down collar with a suit. Common does not acceptable make.vamedic03 wrote:Please inform Brooks Brothers and J. Press of your revelation regarding button down collars. Its perfectly acceptable to wear a button down collar with a tie and suit. Its a traditional preppy look.James Bond wrote:I'm not going to find and read whatever "rant" you're talking about, but button down collars are made to be worn without a tie. That's their entire purpose. Wearing one with a tie makes you look like a dweeb, not a conservative. The rule is, buttons - no tie and tie - no buttons.jrs12 wrote:Pufer,
I've pretty much agreed with everything that you said on this thread until the button-down rant. While the aesthetics are debateable, the BD stigma you describe is simply nonexistent in the United States at this point, at least east of the Rockies. You might as well berate people for not wearing hats outdoors. As Paul Fussell pointed out (yes, I know he wasn't right about everything), the button-down collar is now almost an upper-class calling card. It's also an extraordinarily conservative choice. Personally, I like it for business, because it seems to send the message that you're there to work, not to fuss about your clothes.
For an evening social event, sure, I'll go with a spread collar.
The "traditional preppy look" (the "Harvard style," as it were) does not include suits. The "preppy" doesn't generally wear a suit; he wears a sport coat or a blazer and an informal striped tie. The button down collar is perfectly acceptable with a tie if, and only if, you are not wearing a suit. With a suit, it is only acceptable if you are not wearing a tie (you're dressing down the suit to sport coat territory).
The exception to this is the "Ivy League style," which is quite related to the Harvard style (after the preppy graduates from Yale, grows up, and takes over the family business after a few years spent yachting, he starts dressing in this style). This is your J. Press, a company whose primary claim to fame is that they completely eschew stylistic considerations in order to appeal to a particular group of power-elites. This style requires completely shapeless sack suits, wide ties (often with gaudy, prominent tie bars), and colorful button-down collared shirts. Basically, if you want to look rich, but you don't want to look good in accords with any modern aesthetic, you will dress in the Ivy League style.
Most gentlemen will have button-down collared shirt in their closet for some purpose, but you can be sure that purpose will have nothing to do with business. Everyone who legitimately sports the Ivy League style at the office is a douche; everyone else who wears a button down collar with their suit is a boob.
-Pufer
-
- Posts: 484
- Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:28 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Eh... I was browsing the Cravath and Davis Polk attorney profile pages and more than a few partners were wearing button down collars for their head shots. So if your standard for "acceptable" is "acceptable to wear at a major white shoe law firm" then it seems fairly acceptable. If, on the other hand, one needs to appease the internet sartorial police, then it might give offense to some of the more conservative among them.
But for an interview I'll certainly agree that the target should be "as inoffensive as possible" which means a spread collar. Once you're at a firm you can figure out what the unspoken dress code is and work within that code to your taste.
But for an interview I'll certainly agree that the target should be "as inoffensive as possible" which means a spread collar. Once you're at a firm you can figure out what the unspoken dress code is and work within that code to your taste.
- HenryKillinger
- Posts: 248
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:56 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
you have mocked Pufer and therefore you will be shunned.vamedic03 wrote:Wow, you seem to harbor some anger towards button down collars with suits... chill out and recognize that men's business wear has very few hard rules...Pufer wrote:vamedic03 wrote:
Please inform Brooks Brothers and J. Press of your revelation regarding button down collars. Its perfectly acceptable to wear a button down collar with a tie and suit. Its a traditional preppy look.
-Pufer
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- zettsscores40
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
This. Pufer is never wrong.HenryKillinger wrote:you have mocked Pufer and therefore you will be shunned.vamedic03 wrote:Wow, you seem to harbor some anger towards button down collars with suits... chill out and recognize that men's business wear has very few hard rules...Pufer wrote:vamedic03 wrote:
Please inform Brooks Brothers and J. Press of your revelation regarding button down collars. Its perfectly acceptable to wear a button down collar with a tie and suit. Its a traditional preppy look.
-Pufer
-
- Posts: 4249
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
One of which happens to be button-downs with suits make people look like circus clowns.vamedic03 wrote: Wow, you seem to harbor some anger towards button down collars with suits... chill out and recognize that men's business wear has very few hard rules...
- zettsscores40
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
everyone thinks they're a GQ model or whatever the female equivalent of that is. Although GQ does give some decent advice don't try dressing like the guy on the cover (at least most of the time) for work/interviews. If you're in a boutique, posh office or w/e then sure go for it. Other than that I don't see the point in risking it. The reward is minimal and you won't look that good (there's models are doing it, not your average Joe ie most of us ITT). Even GQ says buttondowns are a no-no with a suit for those trying to emulate modern style.amyLAchemist wrote:http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 7&start=25
ITT I take on Godpseed's role of telling people, in this case women, they aren't professional in their dress.
- romothesavior
- Posts: 14692
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Well, I'm wearing a button-down with a suit tomorrow, mostly because I have no other shirts to wear (most of my wardrobe has been moved to STL). Is it ideal or trendy? According to GQ, no. But a hell of a lot of people do it, and the button down has been worn with suits (yes suits, not just sports jackets) periodically throughout the past century, so I certainly won't be looking or feeling awkward in it.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- zettsscores40
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
One thing I haven't seen discussed is hairstyles. I think we've covered facial hair.
- zettsscores40
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
What's the event?romothesavior wrote:Well, I'm wearing a button-down with a suit tomorrow, mostly because I have no other shirts to wear (most of my wardrobe has been moved to STL). Is it ideal or trendy? According to GQ, no. But a hell of a lot of people do it, and the button down has been worn with suits (yes suits, not just sports jackets) periodically throughout the past century, so I certainly won't be looking or feeling awkward in it.
- GodSpeed
- Posts: 236
- Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:05 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
+1zettsscores40 wrote:everyone thinks they're a GQ model or whatever the female equivalent of that is. Although GQ does give some decent advice don't try dressing like the guy on the cover (at least most of the time) for work/interviews. If you're in a boutique, posh office or w/e then sure go for it. Other than that I don't see the point in risking it. The reward is minimal and you won't look that good (there's models are doing it, not your average Joe ie most of us ITT). Even GQ says buttondowns are a no-no with a suit for those trying to emulate modern style.amyLAchemist wrote:http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 7&start=25
ITT I take on Godpseed's role of telling people, in this case women, they aren't professional in their dress.
I've been saying everything you just said for a while for a while now. You really shouldn't be trying to look like GQ model, even once you get the job. Pants with no break, for example, look terrible if you're doing anything but posing for a cover page.
And like I said a few posts above, you have much more to lose and almost nothing to gain by trying to be trendy. Just dress WELL- clean, well fitting and with the times (not 6 months ahead of it or 10 years behind it). You'll gain almost nothing by being ultra fashionable even if someone likes it and you stand to lose a lot with anyone you offend.
Dealing with juries has taught me a lot about dressing properly. Not turning off 4 people > impressing 1 person.
- romothesavior
- Posts: 14692
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm
Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)
Going to watch a trial for my internship. (I'm a 0L interning in HR at a Fortune 100 company this summer, and an attorney invited me to come watch a trial.)zettsscores40 wrote:What's the event?romothesavior wrote:Well, I'm wearing a button-down with a suit tomorrow, mostly because I have no other shirts to wear (most of my wardrobe has been moved to STL). Is it ideal or trendy? According to GQ, no. But a hell of a lot of people do it, and the button down has been worn with suits (yes suits, not just sports jackets) periodically throughout the past century, so I certainly won't be looking or feeling awkward in it.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login