https://twitter.com/dieworkwear/status/1769611260537213150
I love this photo because it tells such a beautiful story involving men’s clothing, politics, and global culture.
Sometime around the turn of the 20th century, Brooks Brothers debuted their No. 1 Sack Suit. At this time, the suit was just starting to pick up steam about to replace the frock coat and the sack suit was different from its European counterparts in four important ways.
First, it had a much softer shoulder. British tailoring firms such as Huntsman are known for their stiff, built-up shoulders, but the sack suit features a softer, more natural shoulder line, making the wearer look more casual and relaxed.
Second, since Brooks Bros invented ready-made tailoring in 1849, their garments tended to feature less handwork. You can see this most notably along the lapel. A bespoke European jacket will typically feature handmade pick stitching. An American jacket will be machine-finished
Third, a sack jacket typically has a three-roll-two closure, which means a three-button coat with the lapel rolling down to the second button. This is distinct from a “hard three,” where the lapel rolls to the top button, or the more common British two- or one-button jacket.
Fourth, and most importantly, a sack jacket doesn’t have front darts. A dart is a fold or tuck in a garment, sewn down to create shape. In menswear, it’s added to areas where you want curves, such as below the rib cage. Darts are more common in European tailoring, esp Italy.
The sack suit represented two things. First, the suit in the early 20th century had little prestige. Men in high positions, such as finance and law, wore frock coats. Men lower on the professional ladder, such as clerks, wore suits. They were like how we see jeans today.
So, the sack suit had a democratic element, at least relative to the frock coat. Suits were the material and metaphorical representations of nascent democratic capitalism. In a sense, it hid class, as white-collar employees and bosses wore the same uniform at work.
At the same time, since Brooks Brothers clothed American elites, things that landed in their Madison Avenue shop also took on distinct class connotations. Their styles were widely copied across the country and became the template for classic American male dress.
A footnote: I think this reflects an American tendency, where we celebrate the common man and poke fun at the rich but also worship self-made men because we hope one day that will be us. In any case, it’s at least more democratic than European gentry.
Back to tailoring. The sack suit carried American men from the hopping jazz clubs of the Roaring 20s through The Great Depression and onto college campuses of a booming post-war America. By the 1960s, Black jazz musicians also gave it a sense of cool.
But social and political upheaval the civil rights movement, student protests, and Watergate also cast the suit as too “Establishment” by the 1970s. Many young people turned to other uniforms for identity: the working-class look or the hippie aesthetic.
The sack suit saw some upticks over the years, such as when Mad Men debuted, but it never returned to its mid-20th century heights. The language of classic American tailoring is mostly dead today. Even strident US nationalists don’t wear American tailoring.
If you want to find classic American style today, you’re better off going to Japan, where a community of diehard menswear enthusiasts keeps it alive. @wdavidmarx’s book Ametora is a great read on how Japan saved American style when this country abandoned it.
For example, Yuhei Yamamoto is the head of Tailor CAID, a bespoke tailoring shop based in Tokyo. He knows all of the details that go into this look the two-button cuff, machine-finished lapel, dartless front, etc. He knows classic American style better than most Americans
Similarly, Seiji McCarthy is a bespoke shoemaker based in Tokyo who makes handmade versions of classic American footwear. He gets all the lines and proportions right because he knows this style. I think of his work as “upgraded Alden” (a standard bearer for classic US shoes) https://t.co/ICEgAXReSm
Last month, someone told me they’re getting married in April and want to get their father-in-law (FIL) a suit for the occasion. Their FIL is a 75-year-old El Salvadoran immigrant who worked as a coffee picker back home and now works in a produce warehouse.
He said his father-in-law wants to wear a suit but isn’t comfortable with suits in general. His fiancée said she’s never even seen her dad in a tie. But the FIL feels his daughter’s wedding is special and wants to look good. Family’s budget is ~$1,000 https://t.co/ctXLUZPeCn
I sent him a list of places to check out, including J. Press. When they called the DC shop, the staff said they would make sure their Honduran manager would be there to help facilitate communication.
This reader later sent me a very enthusiastic email, saying his father-in-law loved the experience. His wife’s reaction upon seeing him was an immediate, “Wow, que guapo” (“Wow, how handsome”).
I want you to think about this: how is it possible for a man who has never worn a suit to look better than most celebrities and almost all of government? Compare his suit to Mark Consuelos’ $6k Tom Ford suit. Or to Matt Gaetz’s shrunken suits. Who looks better?
IMO, if you put a tie on him and stuff a white linen pocket square into his breast pocket, he will look like a million bucks at his daughter’s wedding. This is the great thing about knowing a little about tailoring and finding the right clothier: anyone can look great.
More than 100 years after its invention, this style still flatters most men.
If you’re interested in this style, check J. Press, The Armoury (Model 11), Junior’s in Philadelphia, O’Connell’s in Buffalo, The Andover Shop, and Brooks Brothers (look up the model No. 1 Sack Suit).
The third season of @trufelman’s Articles of Interest podcast, titled American Ivy, also covers a lot of this tailoring history. You can find it on Spotify and the podcast’s Substack.
🔗: https://t.co/LTTw6Tw1im
