David Tennant has a FANTASTIC summer suit here

[CharlesB]

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Except from being badly fitted where the waistcoat & trousers meet, yes, it looks like nice fabric.

bk

 

[CharlesB]

Except from being badly fitted where the waistcoat & trousers meet, yes, it looks like nice fabric.

bk

its probably just his stance against the robot

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Daleks are not robots! lol (laughing at my nerdiness.)

Baron, it's not so much badly fitted, excpet by your (and my) aesthetic. For some reason, most modern waistcoats are really high like that with some space between them and the trousers. I've seen this with everyone.

David Tennant is a sharp dresser overall and a fantastic Doctor Who.

 

[Josephine]

David Tennant is a sharp dresser overall and a fantastic Doctor Who.

He's dreamy... He can even make those velvet suits look good.

 

[CharlesB]

Daleks are not robots! lol (laughing at my nerdiness.)

Baron, it's not so much badly fitted, excpet by your (and my) aesthetic. For some reason, most modern waistcoats are really high like that with some space between them and the trousers. I've seen this with everyone.

David Tennant is a sharp dresser overall and a fantastic Doctor Who.

I know they aren't but I thought I'd see who would be a big enough fan to spaz out on that one minor fact... lol

 

[Baron Kurtz]

For some reason, most modern waistcoats are really high like that with some space between them and the trousers. I've seen this with everyone.

yep. modern waistcoats are generally badly cut and fitted. Length and interaction with trousers is integral to a well executed fit.

bk

 

[Micawber]

Of course the rise on those trousers does not help.

Nice Dalek.

 

["Doc" Devereux]

I think he looks great: I particularly like the detailing around the manipulator and weapon mounts. Now if we could just get him to polish his lower casing, it would be pretty much perfect.

 

[Tomasso]

modern waistcoats are generally badly cut and fitted. Length and interaction with trousers is integral to a well executed fit.

It appears, from the current runway shows, that some designers are deliberately cutting their three piece suits to show shirt/tie at the waist. The two piece suits will often have the front quarters cut away enough to expose the same. [huh] It reminds of an untucked shirt tail hanging out from below the hem of a sweater.

 

[Edward]

Yes, I agree it's a design issue. It seems that in recent years while trousers rises have lowered, waistcoat height has not dropped with them. That's my biggest problem with modern suits now - I have come so much to prefer a higher waist that it really irritates me.

 

[metropd]

I agree with Edward. Some things change for the better but somethings were done for a reason, because they aesthetically had a purpose. In the case of wearing a higher rise with a waistcoat it works because it elongates the figure and highlights the masculine silhouette. The man on top looks....... well not very good.
He looks like the highschool freshman who dressed up for the class report.

 

[Feraud]

It appears, from the current runway shows, that some designers are deliberately cutting their three piece suits to show shirt/tie at the waist. The two piece suits will often have the front quarters cut away enough to expose the same. [huh] It reminds of an untucked shirt tail hanging out from below the hem of a sweater.

Yes.
It has a Justin Timberlake feel to it.

 

[dman]

In the case of wearing a higher rise with a waistcoat it works because it elongates the figure and highlights the masculine silhouette.

When you consider the "modern" masculine figure and compare it to the present day masculine ideal, you'll find that lower cut pants and a shorter waistcoat are highlighting this day and age's masculine form. There's an importance placed on the abdominal muscles that was before placed on the shoulders. A really fit man living today isn't going to want pull his pants up too high and hide the fact that he has a fit body.

If you read through this old article from GQ, "My Father's Fashion Tips" ( http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_5711 ) you'll find a really interesting meditation on men dressing ironically. The father states that only women should dress ironically: that the act of dressing up for women is really the act of **********—one can asses the ***ism of the statement themselves.

The way that present-day well-dressed-men dress harkens to this idea of irony. Are you supposed to be see a man in a suit or are you supposed to see what's beneath the suit? If clothes grant themselves to semiotic interpretation isn't it a bit unfair to simply dismiss them on the grounds of your own personal aesthetics (this is a question asked generally)? After all can anything really be wrong or right in clothing? The rules you might strictly adhere to are just as arbitrary as anything (and born out of class and discrimination—"those in the know" sort of thing). Is it possible to compare modern aesthetics with the past in a way other than suggesting that the modern dresser is simply juvenile and ill-equipped?