Anonymous asked: Thoughts on GQ? If I'm confronted with yet another NFL player's moose knuckle in a skintight size 36s suit, I'll have no choice but to call 911. And their blog reads as if written by Bieber, but with less knowledge of syntax and grammar (perhaps an attempt to compete with Four Pins, which has terrible writing and irrelevancy locked down right now?). Was it always this bad? Or am I looking at the past with rose-colored glasses? I'm on the verge of starting a GoFundMe to revive Men's Vogue.
I think what we tend to forget about publications like GQ is that they are in business to sell magazines. While we (I) like to think it would behoove large publishing houses to stick to conservative, well-cut, timeless fashions, the truth is there’s no way to make money off of publishing the same magazine twelve times a year. And their audience is far too big for the niche messaging of our favorite JapAnglo periodicals.
While it’s easy to look to the past with rose-colored glasses, major men’s fashion publications have always been about selling. Hell, look at any of GQ's issues from the 1970s and try to keep from laughing out loud. Simply put, the best businesses are able to create their own markets, and that's basically all fashion does. If GQ is able to push all-skinny-everything today, then they position themselves (and their advertisers) well for when that trend dies out and we’re back to double pleated parachute pants. Oh, and it’s worth mentioning that GQ and their advertisers have all-but complete control over when that happens.
Then there’s also the face of #menswear. To my thinking there is a very cliche profile of someone deeply engrained in men’s clothing today — young (mid-to-late 20s), deeply influenced by cultures outside of their traditional set (hip-hop, skateboarding, punk rock, etc.), intrinsically curious, and quick to follow. If some schmuck like me is able to sense this pattern, then you bet your bottom dollar advertisers have already commoditized it.
And because much of today’s editorial content seems to be stuck in a very bizarre “too erudite to be explained simply” and “too erudite to be explained with a straight face” paradox, it makes sense that mainstream media would take the high road. It’s easy to sell to someone with a rye, “Is this irony?” smile, especially when many (if not most) of GQ's readers have little more than a passing interest in clothes and style, but a constant need to be “ahead of the curve.”
I won’t pretend to have never been an apostle of publications like GQ. And I actually still have a subscription today (my mom has gotten me a subscription every Christmas for the past ten years — thanks mom!). However, like with everything, we start to grow out of things. Today I mostly look at mainstream publications like Four Pins or GQ for high-level inspiration, remembering that that’s really all they’re there for anyway.
I wouldn’t spend too much time lamenting the machine that is men’s fashion, lest you find yourself unable to remember why you got interested in the first place. Instead, take everything you see (whether it’s from here, GQ, your favorite forum, wherever) with a grain of salt.
Author’s note: On the off chance GQ is reading this and wants to pay me to write, I’m happy to rescind all of it and pledge my allegiance to the based god or whatever.
Anonymous asked: Please tell me that Russell plaid number lined in tatas belongs to you. Or at least tell me who made it...
Alas, it is not. The jacket pictured is bespoke by Leonard Logsdail. If you’re not familiar with the name you can see his tailoring first hand in movies like Wall Street, American Gangster or Wolf of Wall Street. Logsdail seems to have a penchant for “colorful” linings. You can see some of his other commissions here.
The “Lorenzo Cut” by Eidos Napoli, available soon from No Man Walks Alone
"I have always been interested in fashion as an informing design discipline: proportion structure, detail, materiality, texture, color and quality. With a heightened interest in, and an awareness of the built environment, the ‘store’ has become a critical, perceptual and psychological component of merchandising as well as imaging. Architecture and fashion are partners." —Charles Gwathmey (via)