Criticism of what people wear to black-tie events tends to focus on obvious sins: wearing a lounge suit, wearing a coloured tie and wearing a long tie instead of a bow (though this is less objectionable than one may think). These are some of the biggest sins against the traditions of the dinner outfit, and stand out as such. They also stand out because they are committed by a relatively small number of people.
For that reason, I don’t think they are the greatest black-tie sins. They’re big, but they’re rare. More important are the small sins committed by almost everyone. Those demonstrate how disconnected the ensemble is from its traditions, despite the apparent uniformity on display.
Sin 1: Cover your waist
This is the greatest sin, so it comes first.Every black-tie outfit needs to cover the waistband of the trousers in some way. That is an indisputable fact. This covering can take one of three forms: a waistcoat, a cummerbund or a double-breasted jacket.

A waistcoat should be the standard. If you’re wearing a single-breasted dinner jacket, something needs to cover up your shirt – particularly if the jacket only has one button.
A shirt with a stiff, oval front makes this obvious: only the stiff part is meant to show, the rest is covered up by a waistcoat. But even a soft-fronted shirt needs a covering. Even though its pleats form a rectangle on the front of the shirt, and even though they go all the way down to the waistband, that waistband must be covered.
This waistcoat can be black or white. White is less common and more formal, echoing as it does white tie or full fig. It can also be full or backless. If white, it should be made of the same Marcella as the shirt front. If black, it should be the same wool as the trousers.
The cummerbund was invented in the subcontinent as an alternative to the waistcoat for hot weather. It was originally a sash simply tie around the waist.
But what proportion of men at a black-tie event have some form of waist covering? Twenty per cent? Fifteen even? That’s why it’s the greatest sin.
Sin 2: Notch lapels
Most suits have notch lapels; dinner jackets should not have them. At some point, the black-tie industry forgot, or simply got lazy, and conflated the two.
A peaked lapel is more formal, aggressive and rakish. It suits black tie where it wouldn’t suit the decorum of day-to-day business. All dinner jackets, single or double-breasted, should have peak lapels. Yet a significant number (40%? 45%?) of men at a black-tie event will have notch lapels.
(Eagle-eyed readers will notice that my own velvet jacket, worn as black tie, has notch lapels. What can I say? My wardrobe is far from complete and the jacket was a vintage piece to trial a look. It’s on the list to upgrade.)
Sin 3: Shoes
The best shoe to wear with black tie is a patent pump with a grosgrain bow. Second on the list is a patent Oxford. Third is a plain black Oxford, without brogueing and preferably wholecut. All three are acceptable but are less impressive further down the list.
Yet how many men wear pumps? Probably zero. How many patent Oxfords? Perhaps 10%. And of the remainder wearing black leather shoes, there is probably a healthy chunk (again, perhaps 45%) wearing brogues, Derbys, boots or monk straps. So another low-level but popular sin. Multiplying number by grade of sin makes it a greater offence than a long tie.








8 Guest Comments »
ReplyDelete1.
“The best shoe to wear with black tie is a patent pump with a grosgrain bow.”
You typed this with a straight face?
Comment by smoothie — May 4, 2009 #
2.
And why shouldn’t he have?
Does one need to wear a motorcycle boot to “prove” his manhood?
Comment by David V — May 4, 2009 #
3.
Bond - Brioni Tux - Casino Royal - No cummerbund, one button, just braces and a white shirt. That rocked flat out.
Comment by hornett — May 4, 2009 #
4.
Do I need to wear a patent pump with a grosgrain bow to “prove” my manhood?
Comment by Ragdoll — May 4, 2009 #
5.
#2. What about shawl collar?
Comment by JT — May 4, 2009 #
6.
You did a good job of pointing out common ’sins’ of black tie attire, yet I feel you could explain better why these things are sins. What makes them so bad? I’m not sure why not covering your waist, wearing different shoes, or having anything but a peak lapel should be so deplorable.
My conclusion at so many people making the same ‘mistakes’ and these mistakes not being pointed by the media would be that it is a case of break with tradition and modern black tie differing from tradition. I understand that you might call tradition the entire point of black tie, but i’d be interested in hearing what the actual downsides of breaking these rules would be.
Comment by Matt — May 4, 2009 #
7.
I have not needed to wear black tie for a number of years so I’ve escaped this, but the simple fact is black & white render my complexion corpse-like. What is your view on makers like Emma Willis who offer an ivory dress shirt for evening wear, to minimise the harm on pasty-faced guys like me?
Comment by Paul Hardy — May 5, 2009 #
8.
Thank you all for your comments.
Matt, you make a very good point. While black tie is more rule-bound than any other type of dress, and is the one remaining area where a sense of ‘propriety’ could still be said to determine it, not much is said about the practical reasons behind rules.
I will elucidate this in a future post, but broadly the rules are all about creating contrast in texture - patent Oxfords or pumps, for example, create shine that mirrors the lapels and bowtie, where normal Oxfords do not. Equally, the waistcoat/cummerbund is largely a question of being faithful to how the shirt is designed and its practicalities.
Hornett, Bond did indeed rock but I would suggest that was a result of the cut, material and jawline. In a waistcoat he would have looked better.
JT, a shawl collar is perfectly acceptable for black tie. Slightly less formal than a peaked lapel.
Paul, ivory shirts are a nice alternative and can work well. But do bear in mind that the strength of black tie is contrast, and contrast will always be hard for pale complexions. Not much you can do there.
Simon
Comment by Simon Crompton — May 6, 2009 #
I think that due to the modern trend of what we might call "self-definition," coupled with anti-traditional movements like deconstructionism, we have a generation of people who not only do not know what the rules are, they do not even know that rules exist. For that matter, too many of us moderns fail to understand the myriad benefits of having rules.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, some hyper-ideological academics cook up cockamamie notions like gender being a "societal construct," and declare that beyond biology, there are no innate differences between males and females. This and other nonsense oozes into the popular consciousness, and leads to, amongst other evils, the destruction of gender-based differences in attire and situationally-appropriate clothing.
Which leads us too poor, misunderstood, much-maligned black tie. Simon summed it up nicely when he wrote that "tradition is the point of black tie." Now that we are so accustomed to living without rules, we chafe at having to follow them, not understanding that by following the rules, we are actually freer than having to make them up as we go. In the case of black tie, we can simply learn what the rules are, follow them, and always look fantastic, thus freeing us from having to reinvent the wheel--and keeping us safe from sartorial sin.
Simon- Interested in your thoughts on a waistcoat pairing for my upcoming wedding. My tuxedo is single button, peak lapel (grosgrain). My bowtie will be black grosgrain as well. I have flexibility on the shirt style (wing or standard collar) and the waistcoat. Would you recommend a particular style to complement the single button, peak lapel jacket? Would a double breasted waitscoat be out of the question under a single breasted jacket? What about collar type and color (black or white pique)? If you think a particular style of waistcoat would be best, I'd be interested in the style of shirt you'd pair with it as well. Thanks for your thoughts.
ReplyDeleteWhy would peak lapels be inappropriate for a business setting? I thought business was done originally in daytime formal wear (Morning Coats & Strollers). Didn't those coats have peak lapels?
ReplyDeleteDownindixie,
ReplyDeleteYou are right that business originally took place in those outfits, but then you're not going to go to work in tails or a detachable collar are you?
A peak lapel can work fine for business but be aware that it is something a little more aggressive and individual. Don't wear it with showy socks, braces and handkerchief as well! Balance is the key.
Simon
Thanks for the explaination. Obviously I wouldn't wear a morning coat to work in this day and age.(LOL)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteEvery man who knows anything about fashion knows that you need a black tie in your collection. It is a classic color and works with every color.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with your comment "The cummerbund was invented in the subcontinent as an alternative to the waistcoat for hot weather. It was originally a sash simply tie around the waist." My understanding was that it was originally worn in the fields in many countries to support your back. If you look at Fenton's photographs from the Crimean war(eg http://www.old-picture.com/crimean-war/000/Zouaves-Crimean-Two-War.htm) you'll zouaves and others (http://www.old-picture.com/crimean-war/000/Montenegrins-Group-of.htm) wearing things around their waists that look like cummerbunds. Quite when it got into black tie I don't know. But I remember something from the tailor and cutter talking about a craze for them in England one summer in, I think, the 1880's. Clearly as a summer replacement for a waistcoat they have a lot to recommend them.
ReplyDeleteHello. I was wondering if it is alright to wear a cummerbund with a marcella oval bib front shirt; or if it is better to wear a cummerbund with a rectangular bib front shirt? I have an event coming up that I am currently planning for. Thanks
ReplyDeleteA cummerbund is designed for a rectangular front, usually pleated
ReplyDeleteThanks for this.
ReplyDelete