When a jacket-and-jeans combination works well, it is one of the most stylish outfits a man can wear, successfully bridging the casual and the formal, and merging the best elements of both.
It is, however, hard to get right. As mentioned in a previous post on The Newsreader Look, if the jacket and other elements in the top of the outfit are too formal, you can split yourself in half – giving the impression that you only paid attention to your upper torso, because you are going to sit behind a desk on TV.
The key to getting that combination right is making sure the fabrics of the more formal elements – jacket, tie, shirt, possibly handkerchief – are as casual as they can be. So no suit jackets (worsted wool cannot look anything but smart), no silk ties, probably no linen handkerchief and realistically no white shirt.
Two recent photos from the Sartorialist illustrate this very well. The younger gentleman has chosen casual fabrics for everything in his top half: rough woollen jacket; silk, stuffed handkerchief; a wool or cotton-mix tie; and a blue, oxford-weave, button-down shirt. By getting the fabrics right, he has managed to wear both a tie and handkerchief with faded jeans and plimsolls; the ultra-formal with the ultra-casual.
This is one extreme end of the spectrum: every fabric here is the casual choice. He could have opted for one or two more formal fabrics (white shirt, cashmere blazer) and it would still have worked, held in place by the casual material of the shirt and tie. He didn’t have to play it that safe.
The second, slightly older gentleman is at the other end of the spectrum. The shirt is white, of a smooth cotton with a spread collar. It is accompanied by a white, linen handkerchief. The material of the tie is hard to discern, but it is certainly more formal than that of the previous example. The only saving grace is the herringbone jacket.
Now, the jeans are admittedly darker and smarter. So the top half has less work to do in meeting the bottom half half-way, as it were. But the top half is still too pristine. The way the handkerchief is folded so precisely. The flash of a tie clip. It all smacks of dress attire and isn’t suited to jeans.
He wouldn’t have to change much to get my (entirely subjective and arbitrary) approval. Just wear a blue shirt. Or stuff the handkerchief in. Even unbuttoning the shirt collar would save the day.
Jeans and a jacket can easily go wrong. But bear the materials in mind and you’re half way there.
11 Guest Comments »
1.
Great observations on the proper way to mix jeans and a jacket. I loved those pictures from the sartorialist also, he has alot of great photos on his page.
Comment by Giblees Fine Clothing — October 30, 2008 #
2.
I will preface this by stating that I respect your opinion nine times out of ten Simon, but this time I have to disagree with you. I find the man on the right looking positively polished, and very urbane. He is clean, crisp, has a great looking leather bag, well-styled hair, and good glasses. This man can take his casual outfit many places in one day from lunch to shopping (and not being looking at with a skeptical eye by the staff) straight on to a casual night out. Whereas, the boy on the left, while there appears to be an honest attempt to achieve a pulled together look it is however one that is all wrong in my view. Let us examine this in detail; the boy’s outfit shows a lack of quality in fit and fabrication. He is wearing elements that look to me as if they belonged to someone else, or are from a flea market. It is pulled together but not in my sense of the phrase, only by the fact that each piece is obviously distressed, and not in a good way but from age, washing, and too much wear. The jacket is rumpled, the tie looks faded (and is nearly in his crotch,) the right pocket flap is missing (or tucked in,) the jeans are short and have holes (that do not appear to be designer styling but obviously from age and wear,) the footwear looks juvenile, and the bag is too big and ugly. Frankly, at first glance, with that bag, my initial take was that he looked positively disheveled. There is nothing contrasting as there is nothing ultra-formal about anything the boy has one in that photo. I thought you were contrasting the two, but to see that you find fault with the man on the right amazes me entirely. That man on the right could take that look from morning to night. I applaud the boy for the honest attempt you have shown, but he would find himself thrown out of a few establishments with that outfit, of that I am sure.
Comment by Nicola Linza — October 31, 2008 #
3.
I completely agree Nicola. The man on the right looks sharp and impeccable. The young man on the left looks ragged. As if he read this blog in the future on jacket and jeans and tried to attempt the look. Yet he bought all his clothes (jacket,jeans,shoes) from a thrift shop. The only thing wrong with thrifting is when you purchase items that look like they belong in a thrift shop.
Comment by smooth — October 31, 2008 #
4.
i agree with nicola also. i believe both of these were taken at the ralph lauren show by scott schuman during fasion week. both looks are very good but very different. yet, both looks fit the wearer. well- cut, premium denim these days looks as formal- and cost about as much as a great pair of slacks. i know here in dc i wear tailored blazers with high quality shirts(robert talbott, rl purple label, paul smith) and matching quality ties. in the winter i am a tweed and flannel whore. i love this look because i can go right from work to a great happy hour and get told how great it looks from the subway to the club.
Comment by Derrick — November 1, 2008 #
5.
by the way, here’s alan flusser doing it impeccably. http://video.men.style.com/?fr_story=601bfa9e4cf4ae16403e2c0ae768bdc4a81dbb16
Comment by Derrick — November 2, 2008 #
6.
I had not seen that interview with Alan Flusser before, that link is very good, thanks Derrick.
Comment by Nicola Linza — November 2, 2008 #
7.
I am glad to see that I was not alone here. Look, many of us have great items that we have inherited, that we take on as our own, and use with great success. I think I am safe to say that applies to vintage finds too. So yes, secondhand is perfectly fine in my view, as long as it does not look it – that is the key, as “smooth” stated (that was an excellent example in your comment “smooth,” regarding the issue of thrift.)
Comment by Nicola Linza — November 2, 2008 #
8.
Our problem with the guy on the right is perceptional; from the pic he looks sharp, but we’re not seeing the jeans as jeans….just as dark slacks or khakis which would have been the correct choice based on the rest of his ensemble.
I suspect if we saw the entire outfit there would be a complete disconnnect between the top-half and the bottom.
Comment by Ted B. — November 3, 2008 #
9.
once we hit the era of $200+ jeans, i’m sure we all can agree that jeans are looked at differently in functionality as well as aesthetic. the diffence between what you would wear a pair of classic-cut, raw APC jeans for vs a pair of worked over diesels is stark. there’s no longer a monolithic way of looking at jeans anymore. in both of these pictures, the jeans represent what the wearer was trying to put across and personally i believe the gentleman on the right did it much better.
Comment by Derrick — November 3, 2008 #
10.
Ted,
You bring up a valid point, for the man on the right, if they were simply dark slacks or khakis…yes, perfect; however, I have no problem here as denim, as we have to consider that the upper leg of the man on the right is dark blue, and fitted, as a jean would fit. Therefore, we have to presume they are certainly dark denim, simply dark crisp denim that I have to say works perfectly with the crisp upper half. I just would not pair that upper look with worn denim, ever. Well, frankly I would not wear worn denim in the city anyway, no matter the circumstances. I wear that type of look on the right many times and with dark denim. I would have liked to see his footwear choice, with that particular look and tote. I would specifically pay attention to the footwear, to balance the upper half; as footwear always tells more about a man than most else. What I would have done here on the right is say Gaziano & Girling’s Canterbury in Vintage Cedar that is precisely my gut choice, something clean and chic, a tad darker than the bag, with just a hint of detail keeping the overall impact minimal. The mid-section pant region is dark so regardless of fabrication, it simply blends between the upper half and the footwear. Any well cut dark pant would work on that man, of course, the tote, I also believe cannot and should not compete with the footwear and the most tailored item, here being the blazer. The look on the right just works me. It says simple, unadorned, and clean, timeless. To me, one cannot go wrong with that particular look; crisp, minimal and clean, it is always a powerful, handsome casual look for a man, of any age.
Nicola
Comment by Nicola Linza — November 3, 2008 #
11.
Thank you all for your comments and I have to say I agree with nearly all of them. To me the chap on the right is just too perfect – I think it’s those damned points on the pocket square.
Simon
Comment by Simon Crompton — November 4, 2008 #
The way the man on the right has folded the pocket square really is too much.. though even with a smart suit, such peaked folds to me just smack of some sort of hideous perfection. But I agree that the upper half does not wear well with jeans at all, even if they are dark and more formally cut/styled. Actually one of the best shots of anyone wearing jeans with a suit was recently done by GQ, of all magazines.. the shoot featured Jason Stratham wearing dark, trim but not slim dark jeans with a suit jacket and an oxford shirt, and the result was particularly inspiring in that the entire outfit worked well, and did not divide the person wearing it in the way that this week’s right hand man is divided.
I guess I’m alone in thinking that with the exception of the tie length, the young man on the left looks quite good. I feel the point of combining jeans with a jacket is to look more casual, to dress up jeans.. the man on the right simply should forgo the jeans and use some other pair of trousers.
One last thing, something that I feel is very telling about the way someone is dressed: do they look comfortable? The young man on the left looks like he was born in those clothes. I feel that the man on the right looks stiff in his posture, and in his face, the way his arms are positioned. It’s easy to over analyze these things, but I see them nonetheless.
It smacks of dress attire because (I’m afraid to tell you) it probably is… .
Does anybody know where the beautiful guy on the right got that PERFECT bag?
This discussion is fascinating. Personally, I find denim unacceptable with neckties or sports coats, tatty denim even more so. Yet you and your commenters discuss this at length, and I found the discussion valuable.
I agree with Nicola: to me, the young man on the left looks slovenly, and the one on the right looks sharp (though I probably wouldn’t like his pants if I could see them well). Then again, I favor a tidy appearance, and I like neatly folded points sticking up out of my breast pocket.
More generally, I can’t stand the asymmetry of the four-in-hand knot, yet I know some people favor it for precisely that reason–it looks less planned. I understand the dégagé argument in favor of spending 20-30 minutes planning your clothes so that you look like you gave no thought to your attire; I just don’t agree with it completely. I find some of the tricks employed by those who follow that school of thought to be artifice-ful (as it were)–like Gianni Agnelli’s watch–yet also acknowledge their overall superb taste.
Ultimately, it’s a matter of where the individual places the boundaries, and what, for him, bends the rules in one case, and breaks them in another.
Dear Simon,
I couldn’t find anything in the archives on this. Do you have any recommendations as to where to find a simple cotton summer jacket? Nothing at Orvis or Barbour was particularly inspiring. Sunspel only has a Harrington jacket.
-B.
Depends what you mean by simple. Have you looked at Boglioli?
I will attending my sons wedding in Thailand on the 24th January 2016 moi is a little overweight!! waist 40in, and neck 17.5 collar size, what would be the best attire for a beech wedding??? I am looking at having some white linen shirts made to measure would you suggest anything else??
Linen is perfect, and keep it formal – white shirt, beautifully tailored grey trousers, hopefully a dark jacket if that’s in keeping with the occasion. As with all weddings, remember that it’s about the bride and what she wants the dress code to be
Do you concider linen handkerchief to be more formal than linen one?
Typo?
My apologies! I meant to write ”Do you concider linen handkerchief to be more formal than a silk one?“
Ah! And yes, probably, but the difference is more in style (and very cultural). Cream silk would just seem quite old-fashioned today I think
Thank you! I understand. Off course that color, pattern and texture plays a role but I always thought that a plain or relatively simple shiny silk handkerchief is more formal than more linen, which is by nature slitghly iregular in texture.
True. I guess linen looks formal because it is so sharp, and stays sharp. You also don’t really see the irregularity in the small amount showing