The current styles were founded in the revolution during the early seventeenth century that sharply changed the elaborately embroidered and jewelled formal clothing into the simpler clothing of the British Regency period, which gradually evolved to the stark formality of the Victorian era. It was in the search for more comfort that the loosening of rules gave rise in the late nineteenth century to the modern lounge suit.
The silhouette of a suit is its outline. No suit is skin-tight; the amount of extra fabric and the way it hangs is known as the drape. The shape of the front of the suit is particularly affected by the way the suit buttons. The two main cuts consist firstly of ''[[double-breasted]]'' suits, a conservative design with two vertical rows of buttons, spanned by a large overlap of the left and right sides; and secondly, ''[[single-breasted]]'' suits, on which the sides just meet at the front down a single row of buttons.
British suits are characterised by strongly tapered sides, minimal shoulder padding, and two [[vent (tailoring)|vent]]s. Italian suits are characterised by strongly [[Shoulder pads (fashion)|padded shoulders]], minimally tapered sides, and no vent. American suits are considered more casual than the preceding styles, and are characterised by moderate shoulder padding, moderately tapered sides, and a single vent. The sack suit is a loose American style. ''Contemporary'' is a term that includes a variety of recently designed garments that do not fit into the preceding categories.
The suit is cut out from a length of fabric from a roll by a cutter using a cutting pattern, a paper outline of the parts. The pattern can be draughted in various ways. With a ready-to-wear suit, the same pattern is used many times to make identical suits. Made-to-measure and bespoke cutters can work by pattern manipulation, altering a stock pattern, or by using a drafting formula to calculate adjusted lengths. Some bespoke tailors work by "Rock Of Eye", drawing and cutting by eye
In modern society, men's suits have become less common as an outfit of daily wear. During the 1990s, the prevailing management philosophy of the time favored more casual attire for employees; the aim was to encourage a sense of openness and egalitarianism. "Business casual" dress still tends to be the norm for most workers up to and sometimes including mid-level management. Traditional business dress as an everyday style is generally limited to middle- and upper-level corporate management (now sometimes collectively referred to as "suits"),[41] and to the professions (particularly law). Casual dress has also become common in Western academic institutions.
For many men, particularly in Western society, wearing a suit is reserved for special occasions, such as weddings, funerals, and other more formal social events. Hence, because they are not a daily outfit for most men, they are often viewed as being "stuffy" and uncomfortable. The combination of a tie, belt and vest can be tight and restrictive compared to contemporary casual wear. The Christian Science Monitor reported that a suit combined with a necktie and slacks was "a design that guarantees that its wearer will be uncomfortable." [42] During the late 1960s and early 1970s, men's suits became less commonly worn, in much the same way that skirts and dresses were dropped by many women in favour of trousers. This was seen as a liberation from the conformity of earlier periods and occurred concurrently with the women's liberation movement.Sack suit cut
For every trend there is an anti-trend.
Despite suits in 2011 and 2012 being all about a cut that heightens a look of masculinity, this is still a world in which every day has become something of a dress-down-Friday. Thus a style of suit is gaining popularity that bucks the masculinity-focussed elements of suiting and instead takes its lead from the come back of all things vintage.The neo-sack suit sports the rolled shoulders that inspired the cut’s name (hence the suit’s shoulders roll down the wearer’s, like a sack would) though with a slimmer waist than the cut of suit originally had, though not as slim as what’s on-trend.
To learn more about the sack suit, with far greater detail on the cut, problems with it to avoid and who is designing it, follow the link.
Three-piece suits
Let’s face it: the waistcoat has long been a dead item for most men, but thanks to a resurgence in its popularity in men’s street wear the waistcoat is back with vengeance. And it’s back as a statement piece, a piece that says that you, the wearer, is sartorially savvy and are likely to be a cut above your peers.
Having recently returned to men’s wardrobes as a standalone piece to be worn casually, the waistcoat’s new found popularity means the return of the three piece suit.
The three-piece in 2011 / 2012 is all about cohesion; forget the mismatching style prevalent in the early parts of the 20th Century and in the 1980s. The return of the three-piece means that the waistcoat has to be cohesive and, thus, in the same fabric as the suit’s other two pieces.Tip: If you do want to venture outside the realm of three matching pieces, stick to a cohesive colour palette; you may want to pair a pinstripe black suit with a pinstripe charcoal waistcoat. Personally I’d embellish a two-piece suit with a cotton or wool sweater vest / tank top as opposed to a mismatching waistcoat.
On selecting the perfect three-piece suit I’d recommend looking for a waistcoat whose V shape breaks somewhere between the sternum and the base of the rib cage. I’ve seen waistcoats that accompany three piece suits from the likes of Giorgio Armani which don’t sport the V shape at all, simply finishing just under the collar; these are going to be a lot harder to wear and ignore the conservative subtlety this revival depends upon. Moreover, such a large waistcoat won’t convey a slim waist as effectively as one with a deeper neck, though they may imply more height on a particular figure.A three piece suit from Simon Spurr. Note the peak lapels and flourish to the peak handkerchief while overlooking the fact that the second top button is undone: this is a mistake, the fact that the lowest button isn’t done up isn’t, however.
