Put This On

A web series about dressing like a grownup

August 25, 2010
Q and Answer: Knives Jesse from Brooklyn writes: My uncle, although not a example of sartorial excellence, is a regular guy who does like things “done right, or not done at all”. He carries around a 3” Schrade “Old Timer” pocket knife made by the 100 year old American company before they were gutted and imported cheaper from China. Do you carry a trusty ol’ pocket knife at all? Is this a bit too working class for a man in an impeccable suit? A knife is a great thing to carry, especially if you have reason to use it.  (A few ideas: cutting, slicing, stabbing.)  Better to keep it in a bag than in your pocket, where it can weigh down your trousers and ruin the line of your clothes.  I myself often carry a Swiss Army-issued knife that was given to me as a gift by a veteran of the Swiss army when I was a kid.  It’s like the classic Swiss Army knife, but with a textured steel body, rather than plastic or enamel. I used to carry the knife in my bag every day, but I had to stop after I accidentally tried to bring it on a plane.  I mailed it back to myself, but that was enough to make me think twice, considering how forgetful I am, and the fact that I fly once a month or so. It just so happens that our friends at Archival Clothing just offered a useful guide to pocket knives.  You won’t be surprised to learn that we think vintage is a great idea - rare is the antique mall or vintage shop that doesn’t have at least a few good folding knives under the counter for twenty dollars or so.  Hopefully there’s someone in your neighborhood who still cleans and sharpens cutlery - a few bucks and that knife will be as good as new. One request: don’t wear a leatherman on your belt, no matter how impressed your coven or the rest of the set-builders in your community theater group may be.

Q and Answer: Knives

Jesse from Brooklyn writes: My uncle, although not a example of sartorial excellence, is a regular guy who does like things “done right, or not done at all”. He carries around a 3” Schrade “Old Timer” pocket knife made by the 100 year old American company before they were gutted and imported cheaper from China. Do you carry a trusty ol’ pocket knife at all? Is this a bit too working class for a man in an impeccable suit?

A knife is a great thing to carry, especially if you have reason to use it.  (A few ideas: cutting, slicing, stabbing.)  Better to keep it in a bag than in your pocket, where it can weigh down your trousers and ruin the line of your clothes. 

I myself often carry a Swiss Army-issued knife that was given to me as a gift by a veteran of the Swiss army when I was a kid.  It’s like the classic Swiss Army knife, but with a textured steel body, rather than plastic or enamel.

I used to carry the knife in my bag every day, but I had to stop after I accidentally tried to bring it on a plane.  I mailed it back to myself, but that was enough to make me think twice, considering how forgetful I am, and the fact that I fly once a month or so.

It just so happens that our friends at Archival Clothing just offered a useful guide to pocket knives.  You won’t be surprised to learn that we think vintage is a great idea - rare is the antique mall or vintage shop that doesn’t have at least a few good folding knives under the counter for twenty dollars or so.  Hopefully there’s someone in your neighborhood who still cleans and sharpens cutlery - a few bucks and that knife will be as good as new.

One request: don’t wear a leatherman on your belt, no matter how impressed your coven or the rest of the set-builders in your community theater group may be.

Posted in Q and Answer Pocket Knives
August 19, 2010
Q and Answer: Living With Fashion Chris from Phoenix writes: I have some philosophical questions for you.  The style you promote just happens to be something that is very much in fashion right now; ideas based on simplicity and classic American styles.  Did you have this approach 10-15 years ago?  Will this blog be gone in 10 years after fashion moves on?  I’ve often thought about this and was reminded of it again the other day while thumbing through an old GQ from 2003.  Many of the looks in the old GQ are the very ones argued against by the style experts in today’s GQ issues.  I know the Trad guys have their solution, but I feel some of those looks are a little too baggy and sloppy for my taste. Well Chris, 15 years ago I was barely a freshman in high school.  I dressed like a freshman in high school. Probably a distinctive freshman in high school, but a freshman in high school none the less.  Of course, it was in high school that I bought a copy of Alan Flusser’s Style and the Man, and accidentally stole from the library a copy of a book of Esquire illustrations from the 1930s and ’40s.  It was always a goal.  The Korea-era peacoat I bought when I was 16 is still the one I wear today. As much as we would like to pretend that men’s style is immune to the whims of fashion, that’s an absurd suggestion.  We are lucky, though, that for those of us with Y chromosomes, things are relatively stable.  It’s entirely possible for large swaths of our wardrobe to be appropriate ten or twenty years down the line, especially if we’re careful in what we buy. Take a look at Willie Brown, the former mayor of San Francisco, above.  He’s dressed simply.  A suit that fits well (though he buys off the rack), a white shirt, a white square, a gold tie.  This picture happens to have been taken during his mayoralty, about ten years ago, but it could just as well be taken today.  If it were taken today, he wouldn’t likely be at the height of fashion, but he’d still look pretty great. The realistic lifespan of a piece of tailored clothing is maybe ten years.  You can go from slightly ahead of the curve to slightly behind the curve, and if you play your cards right, you’ll get a ton of wear out of a piece.  If you’re extra-resourceful, you can pull it out of your closet again in a further five or ten years and catch the pendulum as it swings back.  Indeed, if you’re extra-conservative in your initial purchase, you can probably wear it continuously, if it’s being taken care of, and look just fine. It’s true that we’re in a golden age of classicism in men’s dress.  Whether it’s the recession or just the fates, outfits that usually profess fashion are claiming “permanent style.”  I think this is to be celebrated, frankly.  There’s no doubt that certain pieces, previously seen as classic, will become associated with this time.  Check out our Q&A about Doc Martens and grunge for an example. I’ve written many times that dressing is a social, communicative act.  Part of any communication is understanding that the meaning received may be different than the meaning sent.  One filter is fashion.  You can, however, understand fashion and see how it will shape people’s perceptions of your dress without being a slave to it.  Indeed, you can dress to set yourself apart from fashion - you can dress elegantly. In ten years, elements of what is in style today will not be in style.  Jackets will certainly be longer, for example.  Preppy clothes among the non-preppy set will subside, just as they did in the late 1980s.  Fewer people in cities will be seen in buffalo plaid, just as it was in the early 1990s. &etc. The principles, though, will remain the same.  Fit will be first and foremost.  Men will still wear blue blazers and grey trousers and black cap-toe shoes.  Natural fibers will be preferred.  &etc. If your goal in dressing is to be fashionable, then stick with GQ or equivalent.  Our goal is elegance.

Q and Answer: Living With Fashion

Chris from Phoenix writes: I have some philosophical questions for you.  The style you promote just happens to be something that is very much in fashion right now; ideas based on simplicity and classic American styles.  Did you have this approach 10-15 years ago?  Will this blog be gone in 10 years after fashion moves on?  I’ve often thought about this and was reminded of it again the other day while thumbing through an old GQ from 2003.  Many of the looks in the old GQ are the very ones argued against by the style experts in today’s GQ issues.  I know the Trad guys have their solution, but I feel some of those looks are a little too baggy and sloppy for my taste.

Well Chris, 15 years ago I was barely a freshman in high school.  I dressed like a freshman in high school. Probably a distinctive freshman in high school, but a freshman in high school none the less.  Of course, it was in high school that I bought a copy of Alan Flusser’s Style and the Man, and accidentally stole from the library a copy of a book of Esquire illustrations from the 1930s and ’40s.  It was always a goal.  The Korea-era peacoat I bought when I was 16 is still the one I wear today.

As much as we would like to pretend that men’s style is immune to the whims of fashion, that’s an absurd suggestion.  We are lucky, though, that for those of us with Y chromosomes, things are relatively stable.  It’s entirely possible for large swaths of our wardrobe to be appropriate ten or twenty years down the line, especially if we’re careful in what we buy.

Take a look at Willie Brown, the former mayor of San Francisco, above.  He’s dressed simply.  A suit that fits well (though he buys off the rack), a white shirt, a white square, a gold tie.  This picture happens to have been taken during his mayoralty, about ten years ago, but it could just as well be taken today.  If it were taken today, he wouldn’t likely be at the height of fashion, but he’d still look pretty great.

The realistic lifespan of a piece of tailored clothing is maybe ten years.  You can go from slightly ahead of the curve to slightly behind the curve, and if you play your cards right, you’ll get a ton of wear out of a piece.  If you’re extra-resourceful, you can pull it out of your closet again in a further five or ten years and catch the pendulum as it swings back.  Indeed, if you’re extra-conservative in your initial purchase, you can probably wear it continuously, if it’s being taken care of, and look just fine.

It’s true that we’re in a golden age of classicism in men’s dress.  Whether it’s the recession or just the fates, outfits that usually profess fashion are claiming “permanent style.”  I think this is to be celebrated, frankly.  There’s no doubt that certain pieces, previously seen as classic, will become associated with this time.  Check out our Q&A about Doc Martens and grunge for an example.

I’ve written many times that dressing is a social, communicative act.  Part of any communication is understanding that the meaning received may be different than the meaning sent.  One filter is fashion.  You can, however, understand fashion and see how it will shape people’s perceptions of your dress without being a slave to it.  Indeed, you can dress to set yourself apart from fashion - you can dress elegantly.

In ten years, elements of what is in style today will not be in style.  Jackets will certainly be longer, for example.  Preppy clothes among the non-preppy set will subside, just as they did in the late 1980s.  Fewer people in cities will be seen in buffalo plaid, just as it was in the early 1990s. &etc.

The principles, though, will remain the same.  Fit will be first and foremost.  Men will still wear blue blazers and grey trousers and black cap-toe shoes.  Natural fibers will be preferred.  &etc.

If your goal in dressing is to be fashionable, then stick with GQ or equivalent.  Our goal is elegance.

Posted in Q and Answer Fashion
July 30, 2010

ethosophical asked: What tie knot(s) should I use and when should I use them?

Q and Answer: How Should I Tie My Tie?

You should use the four-in-hand knot.  It suits any type of collar, is formal enough but not too fussy, and has been favored by the most stylish men for nearly a century now.  The Windsors, it should be said, uniformly use it.

If you’re shorter and your tie longer, or if you prefer a larger knot, you can use the double four in hand.  This is simple enough - just circle your tie around twice, rather than once, before passing it behind, up over and through.

If you require a large knot for a very spread collar, or if you prefer symmetry to style, the half-Windsor knot is acceptable, though not recommended.  The full Windsor knot is for dicks.

The tip of your tie should roughly meet your belt buckle.  It shouldn’t be any shorter than the top of your belt line, and shouldn’t reach beyond your belt line.

When possible, the two blades of your tie should be the same length.  This will typically depend on your height, of course, unless you choose custom ties.  Some very stylish men have worn the rear blade longer than the front, sometimes tucking it into their waistband.  This is pretty great, but it’s also a Sartorial Power Move.

There’s no need to place the rear blade of the tie in its keeper.  That’s a little fussy.

Posted in Q and Answer Ties Accessories Gianni Agnelli Sartorial Power Moves
July 29, 2010

b3nbrooks asked: Sometimes when I am ironing the grid pattern of the metal on the ironing board shows through. Shaking out the fabric usually gets rid of it, but not in really dark fabrics like back dress shirts. What am I doing wrong?

My guess is that you need a new ironing board pad.  Or you’re pressing too hard.  Or both.

Posted in Q and Answer Ironing
July 29, 2010

vobios asked: How do you take care of a suit when traveling? What's the best way to pack it and not end up with a wrinkled mess? How do you keep it looking decent while on the road?

Reach through one of the sleeves, and pull it inside out.  Tuck one shoulder into the other, so that the lining is on the outside, then fold in half lengthwise.  Place your trousers flat on the bottom of your bag, with the ends flopping over the outside.  Put your jacket, folded in quarters with the lining out, on top of the pants.  Fold the top and bottom of the pants over the jacket. 

Then, when you get to your destination, hang everything immediately. 

This should be good enough for most trips.  If you’re traveling for a long time, and are disinclined to use a laundry, consider bringing a portable steamer with you.  I haven’t found this to be necessary, myself.

Posted in Q and Answer Packing Travel
July 28, 2010

posteriori asked: Hello, I just found your site this week, and I am loving it. I wonder whether you would be able to help me out with my clothing situation.

About seven months ago, I got a new job as the facilities manager for a chain of seven locally owned (and awesome) coffee shops. I absolutely love this job. The problem is that I am mostly doing maintenance work, which I enjoy, but it is just dirty enough so that it relegates me to 't-shirt & jeans guy.' It is important to me to look my best, and I've been having trouble finding ways to be stylish and functional. (I'm single and work around a bunch of cute coffee shop girls.) Are there any tips you can provide to help me make the most of this limiting environment?

Thank you for your time.

Don’t worry!  You can still look sharp, despite the demands of your job.

There’s no doubt that a waspy prep look or a Euro-luxurious won’t work for you, but that isn’t all there is in the world of style. 

Get yourself a good pair of blue jeans, and some kick-ass boots.  Check out the Wolverine 1000 Mile Boots, or the Red Wing Gentleman Traveler.  Get a few heathered gray t-shirts, and a few tough, high-quality work shirts.  Make your work an asset to your style.

We’re all about clothing that’s appropriate to the context in which it’s worn, and for you, wearing work clothes is absolutely appropriate.  Get out there and bonk some cute coffee shop girls for us.

Posted in Q and Answer
July 12, 2010
Q and Answer: What’s the Difference Between a Suit Jacket and an Odd Jacket or Sportcoat? Mike from Michigan asks: You shouldn’t wear a suit jacket without its matching pants. I understand the rule, but why? What’s the actual difference between a suit jacket and a blazer or odd jacket? What about odd vests? Wouldn’t they almost always come from a three piece suit? Suit jackets and odd jackets are very different beasts. A suit jacket is more formal, and generally designed for business.  That means harder, smoother finishes on the fabric (typically worsted wool), more sober colors, business patterning (like pinstripes or chalk stripes), and buttons that roughly match the color of the jacket. In contrast, odd jackets are more casual - they’re often called sportcoats because they were originally worn for sport.  Patterns and colors can be much bolder.  Fabrics are usually more textured.  For blazers, the fabric may be solid in color, but there is often significant texture, and almost always contrasting buttons (be they metal, horn or even white mother of pearl).  You won’t see stripes on an odd jacket unless they’re the stripes of your boat club and you’re bound for the regatta (like the fellow pictured above).  There are some suit jackets that can be worn as odd jackets, but if you want a general rule - just don’t do it.  Sometimes a bold country suit - say in corduroy or tweed - could be separated, for example.  Cotton or linen suits can often be separated as well - think of their natural textures as a “goes both ways” feature.  Of course, you then run into the problem of your pants and jacket soiling and wearing at different rates, which you don’t want. As for odd vests or waistcoats… they certainly can be purchased individually, particularly in the UK.  Generally speaking, wearing an odd vest is such a bold statement that it should only be undertaken if you live across the pond, or if your personal inclination is towards the dandy.  Tattersall waistcoats have a long equestrian history, but otherwise most odd waistcoats are in solid, contrasting colors.  The StyleForum member ManOfKent is a great example of how they’re worn.

Q and Answer: What’s the Difference Between a Suit Jacket and an Odd Jacket or Sportcoat?

Mike from Michigan asks: You shouldn’t wear a suit jacket without its matching pants. I understand the rule, but why? What’s the actual difference between a suit jacket and a blazer or odd jacket? What about odd vests? Wouldn’t they almost always come from a three piece suit?

Suit jackets and odd jackets are very different beasts.

A suit jacket is more formal, and generally designed for business.  That means harder, smoother finishes on the fabric (typically worsted wool), more sober colors, business patterning (like pinstripes or chalk stripes), and buttons that roughly match the color of the jacket.

In contrast, odd jackets are more casual - they’re often called sportcoats because they were originally worn for sport.  Patterns and colors can be much bolder.  Fabrics are usually more textured.  For blazers, the fabric may be solid in color, but there is often significant texture, and almost always contrasting buttons (be they metal, horn or even white mother of pearl).  You won’t see stripes on an odd jacket unless they’re the stripes of your boat club and you’re bound for the regatta (like the fellow pictured above). 

There are some suit jackets that can be worn as odd jackets, but if you want a general rule - just don’t do it.  Sometimes a bold country suit - say in corduroy or tweed - could be separated, for example.  Cotton or linen suits can often be separated as well - think of their natural textures as a “goes both ways” feature.  Of course, you then run into the problem of your pants and jacket soiling and wearing at different rates, which you don’t want.

As for odd vests or waistcoats… they certainly can be purchased individually, particularly in the UK.  Generally speaking, wearing an odd vest is such a bold statement that it should only be undertaken if you live across the pond, or if your personal inclination is towards the dandy.  Tattersall waistcoats have a long equestrian history, but otherwise most odd waistcoats are in solid, contrasting colors.  The StyleForum member ManOfKent is a great example of how they’re worn.

Posted in Q and Answer Suits Jackets Sportcoats Vests Waistcoats
July 5, 2010
Q and Answer: Wrinkle-Free Shirts?Dan in Baghdad writes: What is your thought on wrinkle free shirts?  Personally I’m not a big fan:  First, they’re never quite wrinkle free.  They look okay, but still need a little work after washing to make them look crisp.  And many are not really meant to be ironed either—for example one such shirt I purchased from Land’s End, which is 55% cotton and 45% polyester, looks slightly burned/melted after I ironed it. Wrinkle-free shirts always look worse than natural cotton shirts.  Do not buy them. There are two kinds of non-iron shirt.  One is as you describe above: a blend of polyester and cotton.  The only time polyester (or almost any petroleum-based fiber) should be in your wardrobe is if you’re buying high-tech “wicking” gym clothes.  Polyester has the super power of making things look cheap and ugly.The second form of non-iron shirt is all cotton, but impregnated with a chemical bath that makes it resist wrinkling.  This chemical treatment makes the shirt breathe poorly, look weirdly shiny, and feel slick and unpleasant.  It also washes out of the shirt after a few dozen go-rounds with the laundry.  This style of non-iron is marginally better than the the other one, but there’s really no reason not to just jettison the weird chemicals all together.  Maybe if you travel a lot in places where there are no irons in hotels(?), and need one shirt for emergency looking nice duty.  Maybe.The reality is that for casual wear, most all-cotton oxford shirts look fine without ironing as long as they’re hung dry or at least removed promptly from the drier.  The heavy, textural weave of cotton oxford is resistant to wrinkling on its own - the worst you can expect is rumpling, which I for one find kind of charming.  It’ll basically end up looking like the one above.  I wouldn’t wear a rumpled oxford with a suit, but if I was planning to wear a suit, I’d just iron a proper dress shirt.If you iron once a week, it will not take you more than the length of one re-run of Seinfeld.  I know, because I do my ironing while watching Seinfeld.  Usually on Sunday afternoons.  Pull your shirts out of the drier while they’re still a bit damp and go to town.  It should be easy going.

Q and Answer: Wrinkle-Free Shirts?

Dan in Baghdad writes: What is your thought on wrinkle free shirts?  Personally I’m not a big fan:  First, they’re never quite wrinkle free.  They look okay, but still need a little work after washing to make them look crisp.  And many are not really meant to be ironed either—for example one such shirt I purchased from Land’s End, which is 55% cotton and 45% polyester, looks slightly burned/melted after I ironed it.


Wrinkle-free shirts always look worse than natural cotton shirts.  Do not buy them.


There are two kinds of non-iron shirt.  One is as you describe above: a blend of polyester and cotton.  The only time polyester (or almost any petroleum-based fiber) should be in your wardrobe is if you’re buying high-tech “wicking” gym clothes.  Polyester has the super power of making things look cheap and ugly.
The second form of non-iron shirt is all cotton, but impregnated with a chemical bath that makes it resist wrinkling.  This chemical treatment makes the shirt breathe poorly, look weirdly shiny, and feel slick and unpleasant.  It also washes out of the shirt after a few dozen go-rounds with the laundry.  This style of non-iron is marginally better than the the other one, but there’s really no reason not to just jettison the weird chemicals all together.  Maybe if you travel a lot in places where there are no irons in hotels(?), and need one shirt for emergency looking nice duty.  Maybe.

The reality is that for casual wear, most all-cotton oxford shirts look fine without ironing as long as they’re hung dry or at least removed promptly from the drier.  The heavy, textural weave of cotton oxford is resistant to wrinkling on its own - the worst you can expect is rumpling, which I for one find kind of charming.  It’ll basically end up looking like the one above.  I wouldn’t wear a rumpled oxford with a suit, but if I was planning to wear a suit, I’d just iron a proper dress shirt.

If you iron once a week, it will not take you more than the length of one re-run of Seinfeld.  I know, because I do my ironing while watching Seinfeld.  Usually on Sunday afternoons.  Pull your shirts out of the drier while they’re still a bit damp and go to town.  It should be easy going.

Posted in Q and Answer Oxford Shirts Shirts Ironing Laundry Non-Iron Shirts
July 3, 2010
Q and Answer: The Formality of a Rubber Watch Band James asks: I’ve been concerned recently about the occasions on which it is appropriate to wear my current wristwatch. The watch is a handsome and somewhat expensive Swiss Army Chronometer in a very nice burgundy. Color matching is no issue, but the problem is the black rubber wristwatch band. The band seems a fairly inelegant piece. I’ve considered replacing the band, but I can’t find one that seems appropriate, so I’m fairly committed to the band I have. Does this choice mean that I cannot wear this wristwatch in semi-formal or formal occasions? Your instincts are right on.  A watch with a rubber band is strictly for casual or sporting wear.  A metal band is generally for casual wear, and a leather band is suitable for any purpose.  When you think of the formality of a watch remember that watches are made for purposes.  A chronometer is made for sport, usually styled for sport, and generally should be worn for sport (or at least in a casual situation where you can pretend sport might break out at any time).  Certainly there are exceptions, but with a rubber band and a colored face, your watch isn’t one.  With watches, simple means formal.  A plain white face, without complications, and a black leather band is as formal as it gets. If you like this watch, hang on to it, and wear it casually.  Enjoy it.  Consider investing in something more formal for more formal occasions.  You can probably buy a lovely, good-quality precious metal manual-wind watch from the middle of the 20th century - say a Longines or a Bulova - for a couple hundred dollars that will do you well for the rest of your life.  Buy something you can afford, that appeals to you, with a real movement (no quartz), and buy something made by a company that makes watches, not clothes or even (sorry) pocket knives.

Q and Answer: The Formality of a Rubber Watch Band

James asks: I’ve been concerned recently about the occasions on which it is appropriate to wear my current wristwatch. The watch is a handsome and somewhat expensive Swiss Army Chronometer in a very nice burgundy. Color matching is no issue, but the problem is the black rubber wristwatch band. The band seems a fairly inelegant piece. I’ve considered replacing the band, but I can’t find one that seems appropriate, so I’m fairly committed to the band I have. Does this choice mean that I cannot wear this wristwatch in semi-formal or formal occasions?


Your instincts are right on.  A watch with a rubber band is strictly for casual or sporting wear.  A metal band is generally for casual wear, and a leather band is suitable for any purpose.  When you think of the formality of a watch remember that watches are made for purposes.  A chronometer is made for sport, usually styled for sport, and generally should be worn for sport (or at least in a casual situation where you can pretend sport might break out at any time).  Certainly there are exceptions, but with a rubber band and a colored face, your watch isn’t one.  With watches, simple means formal.  A plain white face, without complications, and a black leather band is as formal as it gets.


If you like this watch, hang on to it, and wear it casually.  Enjoy it.  Consider investing in something more formal for more formal occasions.  You can probably buy a lovely, good-quality precious metal manual-wind watch from the middle of the 20th century - say a Longines or a Bulova - for a couple hundred dollars that will do you well for the rest of your life.  Buy something you can afford, that appeals to you, with a real movement (no quartz), and buy something made by a company that makes watches, not clothes or even (sorry) pocket knives.

Posted in Q and Answer Watches Watch Bands
July 2, 2010
Q and Answer: The Matter of SocksJason asks: For years I’ve been buying discount and department store socks and I think I’ve finally hit a critical mass of mismatched, holey, crappy socks.  I think I’m going to throw them all away and start over. I’m a causal dresser for work and play, but I’m getting married soon and I’m also looking to dress more impressively to improve my career. Any recommendations on brands or types? Of course! If you’re looking to simplify your sock life, I recommend navy over-the-calf socks for all non-athletic-shoe wear.  Gold Toe socks are inexpensive and easy to find, and hold up quite well.  Go with wool or cotton.  You can get Gold Toes very, very inexpensively at Costco, if you’re a member there.  A dozen pairs of identical navy over-the-calf socks will get you through almost any situation.If you want to go a bit higher end, sign up for the deal flier on SierraTradingPost.com.  They carry some very nice English socks, and if you wait for a “30% off everything” sale, you can do quite well on them - less than ten bucks a pop. Navy isn’t the be-all, end-all for socks, though it is the one color to go with if you’re going with one color.  The general rule is to match your socks to your trousers, which will lengthen your leg line, so if you’d like to get more creative, some gray and lighter socks would help.  You can also wear colored socks that compliment your outfit - sort of like a pocket square for the lower half of your body.  I myself sometimes wear red and purple socks for this purpose.For colorful casual socks, I’m a big fan of the sales at Banana Republic.  Banana Republic has a pretty tired aesthetic generally, but their hoisery is quite nice.  Often towards the end of the season socks dip down to $1.99 or $2.99 per pair in store.  Strike fast and hard when this happens.  These socks are generally too short to wear in a situation where it would be embarassing to show leg (like with a suit), but are fine for casual wear.  They’re often quite good-looking and I’ve found them to be reasonably durable. In winter, traditional ragg socks are best with your boots.  I’ve been very happy with the pairs I bought on clearance from Lands End.  Nothing wrong with the classic sock monkey socks, either.  If you need more warmth, check out the various technical wool boot socks at Sierra Trading Post. If you have a Q for us to Answer, email contact at putthison .com

Q and Answer: The Matter of Socks
Jason asks: For years I’ve been buying discount and department store socks and I think I’ve finally hit a critical mass of mismatched, holey, crappy socks.  I think I’m going to throw them all away and start over. I’m a causal dresser for work and play, but I’m getting married soon and I’m also looking to dress more impressively to improve my career. Any recommendations on brands or types?

Of course!


If you’re looking to simplify your sock life, I recommend navy over-the-calf socks for all non-athletic-shoe wear.  Gold Toe socks are inexpensive and easy to find, and hold up quite well.  Go with wool or cotton.  You can get Gold Toes very, very inexpensively at Costco, if you’re a member there.  A dozen pairs of identical navy over-the-calf socks will get you through almost any situation.

If you want to go a bit higher end, sign up for the deal flier on SierraTradingPost.com.  They carry some very nice English socks, and if you wait for a “30% off everything” sale, you can do quite well on them - less than ten bucks a pop.


Navy isn’t the be-all, end-all for socks, though it is the one color to go with if you’re going with one color.  The general rule is to match your socks to your trousers, which will lengthen your leg line, so if you’d like to get more creative, some gray and lighter socks would help.  You can also wear colored socks that compliment your outfit - sort of like a pocket square for the lower half of your body.  I myself sometimes wear red and purple socks for this purpose.

For colorful casual socks, I’m a big fan of the sales at Banana Republic.  Banana Republic has a pretty tired aesthetic generally, but their hoisery is quite nice.  Often towards the end of the season socks dip down to $1.99 or $2.99 per pair in store.  Strike fast and hard when this happens.  These socks are generally too short to wear in a situation where it would be embarassing to show leg (like with a suit), but are fine for casual wear.  They’re often quite good-looking and I’ve found them to be reasonably durable.


In winter, traditional ragg socks are best with your boots.  I’ve been very happy with the pairs I bought on clearance from Lands End.  Nothing wrong with the classic sock monkey socks, either.  If you need more warmth, check out the various technical wool boot socks at Sierra Trading Post.


If you have a Q for us to Answer, email contact at putthison .com

Posted in Q and Answer Socks