All Requests: The Well-Dressed Man Part 3

Okay.  We've divided the world into three general categories of men: Category 1 being the well-dressed men with some kind of flair; Category 2 being the men who make few mistakes and are passable in most situations, but have no particular strong aesthetic statement, and Category 3 being the oblivious bad dresser. 

We've outlined some of the major mistakes that the Category 3 people make.  We've talked about the implicit messages, good and bad, that being a sharp dresser, an acceptable but neutral dresser, and a bad dresser send. 

So now I guess it's time to talk about what makes a good dresser.  This is much harder than the others.  And I am not, myself, a good dresser.  I don't have a great eye or the patience or discernment to notice a lot of things.  And I don't have much confidence in my own judgment about what's cool.  Nonetheless, I persevere to fulfill my readers' request. 

First let's distinguish between being a good dresser and having a particular style or taste.  You can be a good dresser and be, say, way too preppy for my tastes, or way too indie, or whatever.  This becomes very murky ground.  Still, I plow forward.

I think the trick for male dressing is mastering texture and layering.  Color's important, too, and drape.  And pattern.  But texture is really what it is all about, I think.  You can't have too much going on, or it's noisy and unpleasant.  But there should be some softness and some sturdyness in what you've got on.  Softness makes me want to reach out and touch.  Sturdyness reminds me that you're a man.  Corduroys are nice.  A little bit of nub in the weave of a shirt is nice.  Or a jacket that's surprisingly soft.  But you don't want too much of that.  I am not sure how to articulate this, but I suggest you start looking at men who are dressed well.  Observe pattern and texture.  You will start to see things that you might not have noticed before.   

My ex-boyfriend, a Category 1 guy for sure, took me out for a birthday dinner tonight.  I interrogated him on the subject.  He maintains that men have a lot of trouble with color, generally.  He's got a great eye for colors that are unusual without being flashy -- a lot of browns, greens, burnt oranges, olives -- warm, relaxed, unique but not overly eye-catching.  He layers well.  He looks comfortable without being fussy; hip without being trendy.  He tells me shoes are a big distinguisher.  Today he was wearing leather half-boots that are interesting, sensible, and stylish.  He tells me you have to be willing to spend money on your clothes (this is a mental barrier for me, too, and keeps me in the women's equivalent of Category 2 or 3 more than I'd like to be).   I asked him where he learned how to dress and he was stumped.  "I always kind of noticed things, and had an opinion about how I wanted to look," he told me.  "But I made some terrible mistakes, too."   There's a picture of him at a pretty young age wearing cowboy boots with shorts.  This is the price you pay for taking risks, I guess.

I have no solutions for men who are looking to be Category 1 dressers except to pay attention to texture and pattern and play around with layers.  And don't settle for the plain old khaki-blue-grey-olive limitations that Banana Republic or J Crew or the Gap is feeding you.  The world is more colorful and interesting than that, and you are more resourceful and independent minded than the people in the merchandising department. 

And don't fuss too much about it.  It's not that important, to anyone.  I've had mad crushes on men in all three categories.  If you're cool, and you're cute, and you're fun, and you're confident in your own skin, I don't really care how you dress. 

Phew.  What a big subject this has turned out to be.  I've ruffled a bunch of feathers, it seems.  All in a day's work. 

Comments

[BO]

Everything looks good in burnt orange. Also, if you have my cheek bones, your category is of little significance. I get what I want. Much Respect & Hook'em!

[R.L.]

Anybody else notice the Crime and Punishment parallel in all of this? Just compare the following dialogue between Porfiry and Raskolnikov concerning his article "On Crime" to the abovementioned contention that "Category 1 men can and do and should break this rule":

"...it was not that part of your article that interested me so much, but an idea at the end of the article which I regret to say you merely suggested without working it out clearly. There is, if you recollect, a suggestion that there are certain persons who can... that is, not precisely are able to, but have a perfect right to commit breaches of morality and crimes, and that the law is not for them."

Raskolnikov smiled at the exaggerated and intentional distortion
of his idea. "What? What do you mean? A right to crime? But not because of the influence of environment?" Razumihin inquired with some alarm even.
"No, not exactly because of it," answered Porfiry. "In his article all men are divided into 'ordinary' and 'extraordinary.' Ordinary men have to live in submission, have no right to transgress the law, because, don't you see, they are ordinary. But extraordinary men have a right to commit any crime and to transgress the law in any way, just because they are extraordinary. That was your idea, if I am not mistaken?" (http://www.kiosek.com/dostoevsky/library/crimeandpunishment.txt)

[bridgeovertroubledwater]

Sorry to bust in here off topic....especially with such a provocative comment directly above this one....but I'm curious if others have watched Sherry's birthday party people arrive on the Blog Birthday party part of the site and become intrigued how they mix and mingle with each other.

Some folks photos have- up until today- had a kind of identifying header and others a number sequence. The places of some photos have stayed the same, like the wonderful first photo of the full face grin of some charming fellow, and also the last photo has been well anchored by a strongly set bearded man- seemingly guarding the back door. But today he moved in one, yielding his post to a snowy mountain top shot. Others have moved around within the body of photos...as if mingling as we would at a real party.

Now today most photo headers have disappeared and a lot of folks have moved around over night and the pictures now are numbered in sequence- almost!- up to 70. But #s 4 and 5 are out of sequence....nearish to #50...and # 49 is missing! Maybe that person is outside smoking....

Sorry to bore you with my mundane observations...I'm a Virgo, what can I say.

Happy Birthday Sherry -this is the actual day right?- and thank you for inviting us in to your blog party....I've had a great time watching guests arrive and mingle.

[James]

Bo is right about burnt orange!

I've enjoyed reading the clothing posts. I think I'm probably a 3 who turns into a 2 when I have to dress "nice" (fortunately I live in Austin so that's almost never). I flex to a 2 because going to 1 seems to require more money and I take no pleasure from spending money on clothes although sometimes I do admire the category 1's for their stylish threads. Great series, though.

Happy Birthday.

[James]

Bo is right about burnt orange!

I've enjoyed reading the clothing posts. I think I'm probably a 3 who turns into a 2 when I have to dress "nice" (fortunately I live in Austin so that's almost never). I flex to a 2 because going to 1 seems to require more money and I take no pleasure from spending money on clothes although sometimes I do admire the category 1's for their stylish threads. Great series, though.

Happy Birthday.

[James]

Don't know why that posted twice. Sorry.

Well, you'd think after asking the original question I'd come back to actually check on the answer, wouldn't you? I think maybe paying more attention to the clothes I wear may be the answer. Anyway, thanks Sherry!

[Ben Duffy]

I agree with the ex's comment on shoes, but not the connotation of "you have to be willing to spend money on your clothes".

If you don't spend money on clothes you go around naked. The connotation is that you have to spend a lot of money to have cool clothes. Cool clothes can be expensive but they sell some really ugly stuff for $,$$$.$$ too. The hard part is that you actually have to go shopping to buy clothes. Be patient, you can get great stuff on sale!

My personal opinion is that you have to pay attention to what you wear before you're fumbling around in your closet the night of the date.

Here's a recipie.

Notice when people comment positively on what you're wearing. This means it looks good on you. Buy more things like it but in different colors, patterns or fabrics.

Part with things that you, your partner or your friends hate on you (or paint the bathroom in them). This will help you get rid of things that a frugal, un-wasteful mind would hold onto for years. I personally have a mock-turtleneck that I was told has to go. We need to heed these hints.

Find styles that are cut to fit your body and look for these cuts when shopping. Buying things out of your best cut means they'll probably migrate to the end of the closet or back of the drawer.

Try on clothes that you think look good on other people. They may be out of your usual genre but you could be pleasantly surprised.

Buy clothes that make you look good, not because you're looking for that perfect item. It is a change in thought that can lead you to styles that you hadn't thought of before. Looking for that perfect blazer, shirt, shoes whatever can erode your savings increase your purchasing and create a cycle of displeasure with clothes that really do look good on you.

Be comfortable with yourself. No matter what you wear if you're biting your lip all night and look like you have to pee you can't pull any outfit off...

[Bill]

I don't even know if anyone will notice this, as I'm not sure how old the original post is. But one thing I didn't see mentioned is the whole regional aspect of things. For instance, in Maine you'd probably be considered to be at the height of fashion wearing a white tee shirt under a flannel button down, jeans, and hiking boots, a la 1993. Whereas in NY city, you'd probably stand out hopelessly. I'd also like to point out that the common term for your "Category 1" is metrosexual. Generally they do things that those of us in the other categories would never dream of doing (like getting manicures, oh the horror!). I'm not saying there is anything at all wrong with this, but in general I think most guys want to look nice, but don't spend a huge amount of time trying to get our look "just right".