Friday, November 24, 2006

On The Street…..Madison Ave, Manhattan

Comments

Close comment

Detach comments

68 comments

  1. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 8:58 am

    I love the colour and length of these guys strides. Very James Brown!!

  2. Heidi

    November 24, 2006 at 9:14 am

    i don’t like it

  3. whyioughtta

    November 24, 2006 at 9:20 am

    Oooo…this is one handsome, dapper dude. The look incorporates the best of the 60s British invasion style, yet somehow still stays very modern.

  4. fashmoda

    November 24, 2006 at 9:28 am

    great pants … length ist perfect on him. And look at the gloves …

  5. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 9:30 am

    This outfit is (sadly) more the Thom Browne than James Brown..his pant is too short. His ankles must be freezing from the horrid length of those pants…

  6. Lit

    November 24, 2006 at 9:32 am

    James Brown wishes he had this much style! This guy does look quite brilliant, if not fashionable. But I love the coat, the gloves and the point of contention: those pants! I give them my vote as bringing together a great look. Well done Sir.

  7. Butch

    November 24, 2006 at 9:43 am

    Hope the red-backed book is a permanent accessory….

  8. ROPA TESTARUDO

    November 24, 2006 at 10:17 am

    call me crazy but those trousers looks so nice, good pic ;)

  9. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 10:26 am

    Well, I don’t know about James Brown….maybe Thom Brown

  10. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 10:57 am

    He works at Bergdorf.

  11. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 11:04 am

    Very sharp dresser but what’s up with the trousers length?

  12. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 11:16 am

    the cut,fit and colour of his coat are wonderful,but the ‘high water’length of his trousers is ‘not done’,it is hilarious and takes away from his good looks and his fabulous hieght.

  13. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 11:22 am

    TB or NOT TB there is no question…

  14. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 11:32 am

    Great coat! He looks stylish but i’d wear a longer pant…

  15. adda

    November 24, 2006 at 11:32 am

    dapper

  16. Maria

    November 24, 2006 at 11:54 am

    The notebook is like the perfect accesory this time! The pants and shoes are amazing on him. Not many other men can make this work.

  17. lintmag

    November 24, 2006 at 12:05 pm

    It’s amazing how much freedom women have for pants widths, lengths, and styles and men are judged so harshly by so many for diverting from the usual (often boring) thing. This guy looks great! gold star from me.

  18. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 12:06 pm

    looks like he has a pb with his pants…

  19. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 12:47 pm

    You americans and your long pants… this is perfect.

  20. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 12:53 pm

    too short for pants, too long for bermudas …. they’re pamudas!

  21. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 1:15 pm

    Ach, just don’t like those short pants. They ruin the line. Otherwise, yum!

  22. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 1:28 pm

    I personally love the length of his pants; they make his outfit a bit quirky and cute. I enjoy this look more than a highly refined, perfected outfit.

  23. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 1:32 pm

    i like the narrow cut of the pants, but i agree that they are a little too short. Maybe if they were just touching the tops of his shoes

  24. David

    November 24, 2006 at 2:19 pm

    Love it all. The length of the trousers makes the look just a bit edgier, and every other detail is spot on.

    Great use of light too; having him in that spot of sunlight really makes for a spectacular photo!

  25. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 2:20 pm

    He does Thom Browne better than Thom himself.

  26. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 2:28 pm

    thom browne aethetic indeed.

  27. Robert Kennedy

    November 24, 2006 at 2:57 pm

    Hello! I’m from Brazil and I readed about The Sartorialist in Vogue Brasil.

    This blog is very great, because it search the real fashion in the people.

    Congratulations!

    I liked it a lot.

  28. Stacy (LA, CA)

    November 24, 2006 at 2:58 pm

    Sart! Who *is* this handsome man? I’d hate to cut-up on him, only to find out he’s a famous photog or store manager. (you’ve done that to us before — I called Terry R. a truck-driver, albeit a Steve-McQueen-truck-driver!) The look works, high pants included — for all we know high-water lengths might be the latest thing in trendy Capetown!

  29. _nm**

    November 24, 2006 at 3:33 pm

    absolutly fabulous!!
    love the pants slightly too short, as well as teh gloves…
    it’s a shame that it’s too cold in NY to see what kind of vest he has underneath.

    & the light etc…
    just great!

  30. EMNH

    November 24, 2006 at 4:01 pm

    Crazy Good Photo…He jumps off the screen. Sharp outfit and an even sharper image.

  31. positively the same dame

    November 24, 2006 at 4:10 pm

    very cool — love the gloves, the short narrow tweediness of the pants, the solid black of everything else. yup, works for me.

  32. Schmick

    November 24, 2006 at 5:01 pm

    To sir….with luuurve!

  33. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 6:22 pm

    At first I must admit I didn’t really like the slim pants but now the more I observe the picture I see that it does fit together it’s just not what we see everyday. Now that I remember my Dad was into the James Bond mod look and used to wear trousers like this in the 60′s with turtlenecks and slim cool sunglasses and racing gloves.It is very 60′s mod with the gloves hitting at wrist level, slim coat even the shoes. . Stylish

  34. positively the same dame

    November 24, 2006 at 8:04 pm

    to anonymous at 12:47 “you americans and your long pants…”

    the man in the photo wearing the short pants is likely an american, and the comments — which appear to split fairly evenly pro and con — were certainly posted by an international assortment of readers. your assumption that those against are from americans, and only americans, says more about your own limitations than those of the posters, wherever it is they call home.

  35. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 8:13 pm

    what a look! he pulls the Thom Browne off with great panache/Ă©lan or whatever you want to call it…awesome gloves too.

  36. Butch

    November 24, 2006 at 8:19 pm

    To Anon 1:15, in answer to your question–first, I think this photo poses the question of whether the guy’s trouser length is intentional or not.

    I’d say not–or rather, I think the guy probably thought that he could get away with otherwise too-short pants because of the current mode.

    But, in general, your question addresses the issue of fashion change itself. Why are long dress lengths right one season and less right the next, and finally absolutely wrong?

    The answer is complex, but, in short (and undoubtedly unenlighteningly): the time is right for change, for something that looks new.

    After years of deeply breaking, if not puddling pant legs, well, something other is required. The eye rebels at first, but then comes to accept the change, which finally seems absolutely right.

    Ultimately, I think, the key to a look’s success has to do with proportion–with keeping all its elements in pleasing relationship to one other. So your objction to this guy’s look may, finally, have to do with his failure to do just that.

    Sorry to go on so long. Hope this helps.

  37. Danny Boy

    November 24, 2006 at 8:24 pm

    Oh, please. Disaster. Has this guy’s cat died? Is that why his breeks are at half-mast…?

  38. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 9:05 pm

    I think his pants are very cool and modern. I appreciate individuality and pushing against conventiality.

  39. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 9:27 pm

    that silly thom browne pant leg length is a *TEST* to see whether or not men are trend-gullible!!! please exercise some common sense and do *NOT* succumb to this kind of insult to y/our sartorial intelligence!

  40. Anonymous

    November 24, 2006 at 10:01 pm

    What kind of lens did you use? The photo. looks vertically streached.

  41. ambika

    November 25, 2006 at 12:16 am

    The length of the trousers would be so difficult for anyone else to pull off.

  42. milamar

    November 25, 2006 at 2:29 am

    I like the colours, but not so much the cropped trousers. And I bet the choice of his notebook’s cover was not accidental – it really adds an extra taste to this outfit :)

  43. Jimmy Neda

    November 25, 2006 at 3:59 am

    It is hard to look great with short pants but I think he wears them well!

  44. Poised over London

    November 25, 2006 at 5:24 am

    Yes, the overall look is cool, but I just can’t cope with the flood pants. Too many memories of schoolyard taunts…

  45. Anonymous

    November 25, 2006 at 5:57 am

    He is the epitome of perfection. I’m melting like butter.

    Slim high pants with oxfords….*sigh* AND THE HAIR!!!! I’m a puddle.

  46. Anonymous

    November 25, 2006 at 6:23 am

    This man would look great in a black plastic bag!

  47. Anonymous

    November 25, 2006 at 6:46 am

    Wearing pants that are way too short may be hip in the USA but it’s not my kind of style. I prefer it more individual.
    But the coat seems to be pretty nice!

  48. Carlene

    November 25, 2006 at 7:42 am

    I love this, especially with that red portfolio. He looks great! Why do we like the shorter pant leg? Hmm, it’s fresh and different, it makes a tall, lean guy look taller and leaner, it’s a little geeky, it takes balls, it references the mods, who were ice cold, and it shows off your shoes and socks. You need good shoes, or at least interesting shoes, I think, to make this work. That’s why I like them, anyway.

    anonymous 1:15, you hiking yet?

  49. milton toshiba

    November 25, 2006 at 9:09 am

    I like only the color.

  50. Anonymous

    November 25, 2006 at 9:28 am

    Nice high-waters

  51. anne

    November 25, 2006 at 12:13 pm

    beautiful photo and light (as always at this place :))…pants to short, sorry. and i’d like to add: european viewpoint :)

  52. marie

    November 25, 2006 at 12:26 pm

    The pants are a bit too “high-water” for my liking, otherwise, it ia a great outfit.

  53. marie

    November 25, 2006 at 12:39 pm

    Anonymous said…
    too short for pants, too long for bermudas …. they’re pamudas!

    12:53 PM
    ———————————–
    anon:12:53

    Your comment made me literally laugh out loud and also I nearly choked on the iced tea I was drinking! :)

    Very witty and I will not ever forget “pamudas!”

    Marie

  54. Zaydoun

    November 25, 2006 at 12:54 pm

    Fierce cheekbones

  55. Anonymous

    November 25, 2006 at 2:38 pm

    “please exercise some common sense and do *NOT* succumb to this kind of insult to y/our sartorial intelligence!”

    Call me nonconformist, even revolutionary, but this type of comment is as narrow and formalist at it can be.
    Do people find peace in conforming to somebody else’s rules!?! This is still a “modernist” time I’m afraid…postmodernism is avoid as a “trick” of evil forces.

  56. Edward

    November 25, 2006 at 6:31 pm

    too Thom Brown! not a good look for real men. Very fem and not for men.

  57. Alessandro

    November 25, 2006 at 9:07 pm

    Sartorial intelligence or sartorial intolerance?

    I agree with Maria; aren’t we progressive enough to allow a little personal freedom in pant length? Ultimately, this site is about style and not fashion which means, if this gentleman can pull off short pants, which he can, more power to him.

  58. gerald

    November 26, 2006 at 12:18 am

    the trouser fit is amazing. and what is with these ‘too thom browne’comments?

    is it not okay for ANYONE to adapt to that style? my gosh. some men love that look! get over it!!

  59. jkrnyc

    November 26, 2006 at 12:40 am

    I keep coming back to this photo, and I can never get past the point of just thinking, “WOW, what a phenomenal photograph” to having anything to say about the subject’s clothes. The figure, super-sharp and seemingly super-large, everything else around him slightly swimming and smeared. Just a great, great picture. No harm that his face and expression are so striking, but it’s your shot that makes it, Sart. Bravo. This is my favorite, photographically, since the Jil Sander show pic with the woman in the purple dress. Sartorially for men… I’m still in love with the Painter >sigh<

  60. Anonymous

    November 26, 2006 at 2:14 am

    on him, the trousers actually look good. so bravo

  61. Anonymous

    November 26, 2006 at 6:43 pm

    Hi guys, it’s “anon 1:15″ back again, wanting to thank Butch and Carlene for giving me their thoughts … I much prefer when people post (somewhat) lengthy and insightful comments rather than a mere ‘yea’ or ‘nay’ vote.

    Butch, I agree with your analysis of trends & the need for something new, and I agree with you that (trends notwithstanding) his pants are TOO short … but I don’t mind getting away from the long trousers, so long as we stay within the range of things that look good rather than silly.

    Carlene, I thank you as well, and I think that this look would be much better if his trousers came just to brush his shoetops … that would still (I think) accomplish all the style points you mentioned. I’ll stay with my slight-break trousers for now, but maybe just a little less break; hope that doesn’t dissapoint too much.

  62. positively the same dame

    November 26, 2006 at 7:16 pm

    i absolutely agree with maria and alessandro — the last thing this blog is about is conformity. one can certainly like or not like the stylistic choices depicted here, but judgments about whether something is right or wrong, too this or too that, are totally meaningless and irrelevant. the “not done” comment is especially egregious — who the fuck says so, more to the point, who cares?

    declarations of the wearer’s sexuality or (you have got to be kidding) preference for young children, or the assignation of nationality based solely upon the choice of pant length, would actually be funny were it not so offensive.

    what distinguishes this blog from so many (among other things) is the remarkably civil nature of the comments in keeping with the the genial tone set by our host. i do hope everyone who wishes to participate will continue to observe this trend and do their part to keep it friendly and special.

  63. Lit

    November 27, 2006 at 1:31 am

    Blah blah blah,too short pants?! Why? So he doesn’t look the way the average guy looks, but the average guy looks like crap half the time, so that’s no reference to draw from.

    This man clearly knows a lot about clothes. Note how he balances the controversial length of the pants by having them in traditional tweeed, and the coat and gloves are standard old-world elegance. This was absolutely intentional and well carried off indeed.

    I think positively is aboslutely correct: this blog is about embracing what might be different, quirky elements of style and my thing is, as long as you look good, then it’s perfect, and this gentleman certainly looks fantastic.

    So stop the bitching and moaning about the pants’ length, whether you’re American or otherwise!

  64. Regina

    November 27, 2006 at 5:55 pm

    Somehow, these short pants are very charming, he is very sophysticated.
    I think

  65. Anonymous

    November 29, 2006 at 4:35 pm

    this guy looks absolutely fantastic the pants, gloves coat ..oh so stylish, this is what style looks like confident, individualistic and clean

  66. mark

    December 8, 2006 at 1:57 am

    Whether these sort of “short” pants are ok would depend on the way and context in which they are worn. If the entire outfit is of a high quality and cut and the look is intentional, then the “short” pants look is fine (or at least while the trend lasts). But if the “short” pants were worn simply due to sloppiness or poor tailoring, then they are not ok. I would also say that these type of “short” pants are not necessarily suitable only for skinny men. I would imagine that a skilled tailor would be able to cut “short” pants for a more portly man, and yet enable him to look stylish.

  67. Anonymous

    January 10, 2007 at 3:29 pm

    at first i liked it,
    but im put off by the trousers…

  68. Anonymous

    February 5, 2007 at 3:12 am

    If it’s not about conformity but what looks good, then this dapper gentleman needs to have his pants lengthened!

Leave a comment




Related posts