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.
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.
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!
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
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.
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.
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!
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.
“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.
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.
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<
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.
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.
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!
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.