<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dressing the Man</title>
	<atom:link href="http://manolomen.com/2005/12/04/dressing-the-man-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://manolomen.com/2005/12/04/dressing-the-man-3/</link>
	<description>Fashion and Lifestyle Advice for Men</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:49:54 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ed Driscoll</title>
		<link>http://manolomen.com/2005/12/04/dressing-the-man-3/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed Driscoll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Dec 2005 17:49:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://manolomen.com/?p=70#comment-10</guid>
		<description>Many thanks to the Manolo for the link! 

&quot;What looked good on the Cary Grant in the 1950s still looks more or less good today.&quot;

Actually, it goes back much longer than that. One of Flusser&#039;s tenets is that the rules for men&#039;s fashions were pretty much codified in the 1930s. You can see that in action in the illustrations and photos from that era in Flusser&#039;s books. 

If you ever get your hands on &lt;i&gt;Men In Style&lt;/i&gt;, edited by Woody Hochswender, a mid-1990s collection of illustrations from Esquire in the 1930s and &#039;40s (it&#039;s a bear to find, I ended up paying a pretty healthy sum from an online book dealer), you can really see what I mean: with only a few exceptions, all of the duds--especially the suits from that era--would still look perfectly current today. About the only thing that&#039;s changed today (for the worse) is the near absence of hats. 

This is can be a tremendous relief to your wallet as well: pick styles that have stood the test of time for over 50 years, and you&#039;ll get years and years of service from them. Pick something because today&#039;s &lt;i&gt;Esquire&lt;/i&gt; or &lt;i&gt;GQ&lt;/i&gt; is touting it as this year&#039;s Big New Thing, and chances are, in about six months, you&#039;ll be sorry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Many thanks to the Manolo for the link! </p>
<p>&#8220;What looked good on the Cary Grant in the 1950s still looks more or less good today.&#8221;</p>
<p>Actually, it goes back much longer than that. One of Flusser&#8217;s tenets is that the rules for men&#8217;s fashions were pretty much codified in the 1930s. You can see that in action in the illustrations and photos from that era in Flusser&#8217;s books. </p>
<p>If you ever get your hands on <i>Men In Style</i>, edited by Woody Hochswender, a mid-1990s collection of illustrations from Esquire in the 1930s and &#8217;40s (it&#8217;s a bear to find, I ended up paying a pretty healthy sum from an online book dealer), you can really see what I mean: with only a few exceptions, all of the duds&#8211;especially the suits from that era&#8211;would still look perfectly current today. About the only thing that&#8217;s changed today (for the worse) is the near absence of hats. </p>
<p>This is can be a tremendous relief to your wallet as well: pick styles that have stood the test of time for over 50 years, and you&#8217;ll get years and years of service from them. Pick something because today&#8217;s <i>Esquire</i> or <i>GQ</i> is touting it as this year&#8217;s Big New Thing, and chances are, in about six months, you&#8217;ll be sorry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
