(Cover credits GraphicaArtis/Getty Images)
What is “Explain to me”?
In the editorial office, we set ourselves a little challenge: what if for once, instead of talking about the things we like, we talked about the things we don't like , or at least, about which we have reservations ?
Why not. But that's all ? No !
That would be too easy, let's see. All we would have to do is criticize, deride, and create consensus, as all the thousands of fashion journalists before us have done.
So we're going to say that the goal will be to act as a "stylistic devil's advocate" , to defend a point and its counterpoint, to try to draw something from it... A conclusion, a lesson, a nuance?
The minimum is to explain. To look for “why” this thing pleases.
The rule is therefore to carry out an analysis of a clothing practice or a type of piece that we find:
- Either ugly , old-fashioned , unsuitable for the current context.
- Either too difficult to carry, or too difficult to access.
- Or unloved by the general public.
But why do such a thing? By masochism? No, don’t worry.
To nuance, open our minds , test our aesthetic perceptions , and therefore progress in our understanding of style.
And if by chance we don't succeed, well... We will at least be fixed on something: the object of the day can be definitively buried without regrets.
PS: The first episode of Explain Me focused on pointed shoes and is available right here.
Just imagine: it's October, and you've decided that this year you'll spend the fall with a nice tweed jacket, because you've been saying that for six seasons of Peaky Blinders already. is starting to do well, and that you too could probably give yourself a little elegant gangster look in tweed.
Well aware that this type of jacket requires a certain budget for adequate quality, you decide to turn to vintage, by going Savvy Row .
And after long hours of intense china, excavations among dusty racks and refreshing eBay pages, you finally find it: the tweed jacket you were looking for.
An old tweed with a very rustic micro-pattern like we don't make anymore, a pretty shoulder line, colors which still have a contemporary look... The price seems very good, the impeccable condition, the finishes indisputable. In short, everything is there, you have discovered a nugget.
But as you're about to pull out the credit card, the moment you lay your eyes on the jacket again, you realize there's a catch: it's a three-button jacket.
Three-button jacket from Walker Slater .
“Argh, what is this grandpa thing!” you exclaim.
Suddenly, dozens of snippets of sentences about all the evils of the three-button pop into your mind: “an outdated style that will never come back again” ; “a form of jacket that makes its wearer smaller” ; "a stilted air" ...
And while you curse our ancestors for having bad taste too
“But what could people have seen in the three-button jacket?”
Why does it appeal?
1. The desire to be outdated
Outdated , adjective: “Which has ceased to be in use, which evokes a bygone era.” (Synonyms: Obsolete, obsolete, old-fashioned.)
First, let's take an argument that applies from a modern perspective: choosing three buttons is sometimes a way to stand out in a deliberately old-fashioned way.
In the same way that some people have a taste for these famous buttoned ankle boots, or for overalls, or even jumpsuits, and other pieces with a truly “vintage” look.
I believe that the charm of the three-button jacket is comparable to that of these ankle boots: it arouses curiosity for a bygone era. (And that's a lot of buttons in both cases)
After all, positioning yourself in a marked shift from an era, even if it means coming across as an "original", is one of the strongest levers to pull to stand out in your style.
The question being, do we stand out in a good way?
It all depends on whose eyes. If you work in a very formal and conservative environment, which is already attached to a certain classicism in style, choosing the three buttons can make you seem like a connoisseur of past elegance, and go even further far from the others in said classicism.
Jacques Chirac, a former president whose image has recently become that of a style icon (not without a touch of irony), was an accomplished wearer of the three buttons.
(Photo by Daniel SIMON/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images)
It must be said that nostalgia is a very powerful phenomenon as I showed in my last episode of Sapristi. What is excessively old-fashioned therefore carries, paradoxically, a potential for a change of scenery, for reverie, which can be successful for those who know how to use it skillfully.
But I would be dishonest if I didn't tell you that, 99 times out of 100, you would lose your teeth.
You will also notice that when we talk about more casual clothes, we are more inclined to say that it is "retro" , while the formal clothes of yesteryear sound "outdated" or "old-fashioned" , which is a word more loaded with negative connotation.
The dressy style, because of the presence to which it claims , receives less indulgent qualifiers when it has gone out of fashion. It is more socially threatening, more ostentatious, because it still evokes a certain status, and where we can find a charming good nature in the person who wears the overalls, although they are outdated, we will see much more scathing reactions emerge on costumes that play on past codes.
Come on, if I show you the Rolling Stones with three buttons, I'm sure you'll suddenly think it's cool. (Photo by © Hulton-Deutsch Collection/CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images)
2. A more covering, more reserved style
Julien Scavini, on his excellent blog Stiff Collar , explains it very well: whoever chooses three buttons is choosing a more reserved elegance. Which also coincides, in general, with the idea we have of a past elegance, precisely.
First, more reserved because less revealing. When you wear three buttons, both the tie and the shirt become more discreet, because more of them are covered.
Thus, we understand a little more why the three button is perceived as more austere, and why it is favored by those who want to convey an image of stricter, more sober elegance.
It is also because it is more covering that it also offers a very different silhouette from those of today's guns: the three-button offers a more "tubular" silhouette, while the two-button is more attractive. attention to the waist, which it is supposed to mark via the bending.
Even if the choice of colors accentuates it, I find that the overall aura of the two characters is different: the one on the left seems more expansive, more flirtatious, the one on the right more reserved, more discreet. ( Stiff Collar )
Now, who would benefit from having a torso that appears longer and more continuous? People who are significantly overweight.
I've often heard that the three-button is only for very tall people, and with hindsight, I would tend to say exactly the opposite: a 1m95 giant in a three-button will look like he has an interminably long torso. , except under certain conditions (which I will explain later in the article).
While a very overweight gentleman will certainly not look thin, but he will appear more homogeneous in his silhouette: where the two buttons draw attention to the waist, and therefore the stomach, the three buttons creates a bust with less demarcation. It levels the entire silhouette.
Forgive me the quality of the editing, but I found these photos gleaned from "large size" sales sites very telling: see how the man on the left seems to have a silhouette that is certainly massive, but more balanced, while the one on the right attracts all the attention around the top button of his jacket... And it is precisely in this area that the overweight is most visible.
Moreover, in these photos, you see that they both go against all customs, and close the last button of the jacket.
If you think about it, it's better from a "technical" point of view : despite the "fault" in customs dictating that you never close the last button, it better distributes the visual mass of the torso , while the last open button accentuates the bending. Desirable thing in the majority of cases... But not this one.
Wearing a fully closed three-button is therefore an option to consider if you have this type of physique
Well... as long as the last button isn't pulled by the tension of a jacket that's too small.
To soothe your sore eyes from the previous montage, and give some credit to the strong men, here is Winston Churchill in three buttons with a sulphate. Badass.
(Photo by Capt. Horton/Imperial War Museums via Getty Images)
And for more standard physiques?
Leonardo Dicaprio, 1m83, average build, in a well-cut three-button, and sober. It doesn't look THAT bad... Without being remarkable either. (Photo by Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images for Tag-Heuer)
Assuming you move beyond the question of fashion and connotations, from a point of view purely based on silhouette, it seems possible to me, subject to a few conditions.
- Don't have short legs. In clothing, absolute size matters less than proportions. If you have short leg length in relation to your bust, the three-button will only accentuate it since it lengthens the torso as much as possible, as we saw above. It is also because of this that the three-button has acquired the reputation of being "good for tall people" and "bad for small ones" : often, tall people are taller largely due to greater leg length, and vice versa for little ones. But this is not absolute , and there are small ones with short torsos and slender legs, just as we sometimes come across large ones with endless torsos and relatively short legs in comparison.
- Be equipped with a minimum of build. I'm not talking about having broad shoulders like a rugby player, but if you sometimes find that you seem a little narrow in the shoulders or chest, not broad enough, or frail in certain outfits, the three button will make you feel that again more. This is particularly due to the fact that the chest is more covered by the jacket.
- Dress well. Yes. Seriously. Well, reading this argument you are entitled to wonder if I am not making fun of you a little, but what I mean is that as with all controversial style practices, the one who masters the all other parameters (colors, cut, accessories, materials, proportions) is MUCH more likely to succeed in making a daring choice than someone who does not have such experience. In the case of the three buttons, I would say that if you really want to wear one, you might as well play the old-fashioned dandy card to the fullest , and make slightly more daring choices.
In summary, I would say that the three-button is the potential ally of three types of men: those who want to appear old-fashioned and strict , those who are very overweight , and those who want to play anachronism, but this this time in quaint extravagance rather than austerity.
If you are not in any of these three cases, move on.
3. The case of the “false three buttons”, or “two and a half buttons”
I talk about it briefly because it is important not to confuse them: the "two and a half buttons" is in reality a two-button jacket in which the additional button is hidden behind the jacket lapel, revealing only a buttonhole more on the reverse.
The practice originated from actors during the golden age of Hollywood who all began, little by little, to leave the top button of their three-button jackets open.
No doubt they had noticed, intuitively, that this trick very slightly accentuated the shape of the jackets, and that this corresponded well to the image of athletic and very virile heroes that they were constructing at the time. Image which will logically end up favoring the two buttons, which accentuates the bending even more.
A jacket measures "two and a half buttons", or "three roll two", from Sartoria Partonopea.
Regardless, these days this type of jacket is nothing more than a two-button jacket with a "nod" to the past.
She was quite fashionable at Pitti winter 2019 in fact. From my point of view, this detail is a way for the sartorial enthusiast to subtly say "look, I know, I know" , and to allude to his historical knowledge of elegance, while conforming to contemporary canons of the silhouette of the two buttons.
Note also that you CANNOT transform a three-button jacket into a two-button, or a two-button into a three-button: the cut of the lapels and collar is different for these two shapes.
A diagram, from the excellent blog Stiff Collar , which shows the difference in lapel cut between a two and a three button.
In the first case, your collar would come off, pushed by the excess fabric, and in the second, your jacket lapel would be pulled by a lack of material. Think about it if you feel like a handyman when you see that famous three-button jacket found in thrift stores... It's a bad idea.
Why is it stuck?
I have already distilled counter-arguments while presenting the arguments in favor of the three-button, but all good things must come to an end, and the time has come to give the decisive arguments against the three-button.
1. A case of “V”
As the last century progressed, as well as during the one we live in, a certain idea of what the male silhouette should be has been refined, clarified, and gained in importance: a beautiful square of shoulders, a fitted waist, and an impression of height via good leg length.
I can't say if this image is completely "innate". It is certainly found as far back as in the sculptures of Greek antiquity.
Drawings that clearly show the idealized silhouette in the 19th century. Note that the average man was also significantly smaller back then.
In such circumstances, you won't be surprised to learn that more buttons equated to more torso elongation, and therefore, a closer end result to the barrels. In fact, the Edwardian suit, dating from the beginning of the 20th century, and which is considered the "ancestor" of the modern classical style, had four buttons.
However, for several decades now, the ideal silhouette of a man has looked more and more like this:
Because it is an international brand that offers both sober and very daring things, I find that Suitsupply gives a good barometer of what the overall trend is in terms of suits in the world.
Obviously, nothing is set in stone, and I would also tell you that fans of a sharper sartorial style are gradually moving towards a silhouette that is still fitted, but looser, especially in the pants, with a higher waist.
But the central idea remains the same : the contemporary ideal man is tall, thin in stature, broad in the shoulders, and longer in the legs than in the torso. The anchor points of its silhouette are the waist and the shoulders. This is the famous V silhouette , which you hear about as much when it comes to sport as it does to fashion.
And each time you try to balance this or that aspect of your body shape through clothing, it is to bring you closer, consciously or not , to this ideal silhouette.
The problem is that if the three-button jacket can indeed, under certain conditions, give a certain elongation to the torso, it is absolutely no match for the two-button jacket when it comes to emphasizing the waist and the build, and it will always make your torso appear longer, where more leg length is preferred these days.
This simple argument weighs at least as heavily in the balance as all the arguments we cited above in favor of the three buttons: a design detail, a color, a style, a genre... All of this can evolve quite quickly. 'one year after the next, following the trends. It can be controlled, it can be diverted, it can be reinterpreted.
But when the very idea that makes up the essence of the design of a garment conditions it to give you a silhouette that is not in phase with the canons of an entire era , it becomes difficult to fight.
What I personally think about it
At a time when it is said that the suit is "dying slowly" (just like the very idea of formal attire), I cannot, in all conscience, recommend the three-button to the vast majority of men, and wouldn't wear it myself.
Even with the advantages it may have in certain particular cases, I believe that as long as the physical canons of men remain as they are today, the three buttons will either be a mistake or a second-best solution.
There would obviously be some elements which could favor its return: for example, if the cuts continued to evolve sustainably towards more fullness , it would be possible to see tall people wearing the three buttons: as the jackets would be wider, this would balance the "long torso" impression given by the additional button.
Let’s take (again) Jacques Chirac as an example, in three buttons.
Photo by Michel GINFRAY/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images)
On a very tall guy like him, jackets with both three buttons AND large ones look very good. But you would expose yourself to a double shift from the trend: fullness AND buttoning.
Notice that if you look at him he is not quite 1m90, but appears closer to 1m80: this is the effect of the size of the jacket which makes him very slightly shorter while making him look wider .
Which on him is a rather convincing result.
However, you know well that in the eyes of the general public, the trend and the spirit of the times are taken into account more than pure questions of silhouettes and proportions. It is therefore difficult to imagine how a piece such as the three-button, which responds to a very specific morphological niche, while evoking an outdated air, could make a comeback.
To put us back in the initial situation of the article, I would therefore have advised you to put down that vintage three-button tweed jacket that you had just found, even though the deal seemed attractive.
But in fashion, nothing is impossible , and sometimes it's the most improbable trends that end up being the most successful. So if one day that obsolete third button comes back, don't forget to take a look at this article again.
