The mafoofan and Thom Browne philosophies are not too unlike.

TheFoo · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by iammatt

I would like to as well, but I don't understand them.

Did you miss edmorel's forward-looking summation?

dopey · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

I enjoy these threads.

Originally Posted by iammatt

I would like to as well, but I don't understand them.
Imagine you are with five of your friends in college and you each are drunk, think you are very smart and that other people find you interesting. Now is your chance to see what it would have looked like from the outside.

gomestar · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by gdl203

I would add that I'm not a TB-hater despite what may transpire here. I wouldn't wear most of his stuff (although I can't say I never will if I find something that fits and is not overpriced) but I think that it looks good on a number of people who wouldn't even wear tailored clothing in the first place. His attention to quality is something I can approve as well. The philosophy BS is slightly annoying though.

If you've ever been to his store, you'd see that most of his stuff is not a whole lot of stuff. Simple suits, button down collar shirts (both oxford and sea island cloth), and cardigans consitute the vast majority of his stock. You'll get the odd piece here and there, but his store and his shows are two totally different animals, even BF is different as it utilizes much more colors than TB mainline. Granted, I haven't been in there since September, so who knows what's there now.

All of his clothes are exceptionally well made (his main tailor is a very esteemed individual), though they are pricey.

dopey · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by gomestar

. . .

All of his clothes are exceptionally well made (his main tailor is a very esteemed individual), though they are pricey.
This is a great thing about his clothes (and Black Fleece, too).
I am glad he insists that the stuff he sells be good quality. It is one more guy holding down the fort against the Coach-ification of Seventh Avenue.

TheFoo · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by gomestar

All of his clothes are exceptionally well made (his main tailor is a very esteemed individual), though they are pricey.

Thom Browne uses a tailor for himself?

bluemagic · Feb 9, 2009

I would argue that some of the self-mocking bits and excess, such as the high trousers, are necessary for the message to come across. They are needed to demarcate Thom Browne's ideal as a new one; if there weren't these bits, it would be hard for most people to separate Browne from the pre-postmodern. And Browne is not just trying to be a throwback to the days of pre-postmodern (i.e. traditional). It didn't mean anything special to be traditional in the days when tradition ruled the earth. Now that post-modern chaos rules, the modern, couched in the vocabulary of the traditional (flannel suits, oxford-cloth button-down shirts, cardigans) can be quite jarring.

itsstillmatt · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

Imagine you are with five of your friends in college and you each are drunk, think you are very smart and that other people find you interesting. Now is your chance to see what it would have looked like from the outside.
Now I get it.

bluemagic · Feb 9, 2009

The issue of quality makes me think that the mirror opposite of Thom Browne is not Tom Ford, but rather H&M.

Fuuma · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

That is interesting but Thom Browne can't advance that idea or he would advance himself out of business as a clothing salesman. Instead, he would write books.

This is simply untrue; modernism (taken in the architectural sense in that discussion) isn't about having no innovation. Many designers I enjoy offer very little variation or even forego seasonality entirely, instead concentrating on the same core theme every season (or offering) and adding some incremental innovations as they progress. Say a guy develops a technique for bonding leather and paper and uses that material to make jackets for his new collection.

You guys have a very static view of modernism and an ephemeral one of fashion so when the two meet you get a systemic error. The problem isn’t with fashion design or modernism but with your own limited understanding of both. Clothing design is part of an answer to the problems and specificities of modern living; there is nothing surprising about it changing to adapt to the times.

gomestar · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Thom Browne uses a tailor for himself?

What I mean is he has this main guy (I forget his name, he's some Italian geezer) who then in turn has a staff of tailors who work for him.

bluemagic · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by Fuuma

This is simply untrue; modernism (taken in the architectural sense in that discussion) isn't about having no innovation. Many designers I enjoy offer very little variation or even forego seasonality entirely, instead concentrating on the same core theme every season (or offering) and adding some incremental innovations as they progress. Say a guy develops a technique for bonding leather and paper and uses that material to make jackets for his new collection.

You guys have a very static view of modernism and an ephemeral one of fashion so when the two meet you get a systemic error. The problem isn't with fashion design or modernism but with your own limited understanding of both. Clothing design is part of an answer to the problems and specificities of modern living; there is nothing surprising about it changing to adapt to the times.

Well-put. I think people are conflating modernity with tradition.

gomestar · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by dopey

This is a great thing about his clothes (and Black Fleece, too).
I am glad he insists that the stuff he sells be good quality. It is one more guy holding down the fort against the Coach-ification of Seventh Avenue.

I agree, and I think $1900 for a BF suit is a great price, even at full retail (I can't wait until they're on sale). In his mainline suits, there is a clear eye given to quality, details, and craftsmanship that is missed by so many these days. At least he isn't selling a $3,000 suit that is expensive partially because it's made by Gucci.

Fuuma · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by bluemagic

Well-put. I think people are conflating modernity with tradition.

And modernism with modernity?

gomestar · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by Fuuma

This is simply untrue; modernism (taken in the architectural sense in that discussion) isn't about having no innovation. Many designers I enjoy offer very little variation or even forego seasonality entirely, instead concentrating on the same core theme every season (or offering) and adding some incremental innovations as they progress. Say a guy develops a technique for bonding leather and paper and uses that material to make jackets for his new collection.
.

I agree, and I particuraly enjoy "the classics" whether it be for clothes or anything else. My Eames chair looks just as great today as it did in 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990.

bluemagic · Feb 9, 2009

Originally Posted by Fuuma

And modernism with modernity?

Whoops.

The mafoofan and Thom Browne philosophies are not too unlike.

THE FOO

Stylish Dinosaur

Super Yelper

Stylish Dinosaur

THE FOO

Distinguished Member

The Liberator

Distinguished Member

Franchouillard Modasse

Super Yelper

Distinguished Member

Super Yelper

Franchouillard Modasse

Super Yelper

Distinguished Member

Classic Menswear Featured products

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

It’s a mark of quality and craftsmanship

I like it when it’s subtle

I don’t like visible stitching

Doesn’t matter to me

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: