Letter: Unconstructed style does not suit everyone

Click to follow
Sir: Roger Tredre's interesting article 'Savile Row begins fightback to save the gentleman's suit' (16 July) reports Savile Row tailors' 'sneaking regard' for Giorgio Armani. I fear any such regard will hardly be sustained by the absurd Armani ensemble you published in juxtaposition.

The model appears to have been screwed up into a ball and left overnight; only his spectacles seem to offer anything like a reasonable fit, and the untucked-in shirt tails suggest he has neglected to adjust his dress before leaving.

Curiously, the shirt seems to be composed entirely of tail - there being no apparent evidence of any upper section above a waistcoat and jacket seemingly composed of wrapping paper.

We are urged to 'admire the . . . subtleness' of Armani's clothes. In this case it seems he has crammed in enough subtleness to stun a rhinoceros. I am constantly irritated by the invented jargon of 'unconstructed'. It ignores the infrastructure due to craftsmanship and can only be successful on the baggy, shapeless silhouettes which - thankfully - went out with the overwhelming vulgarity of the 1980s. It is so passe now.

Finally, surely the antonym of construct should be destruct - a far more fitting application in the circumstances.

Yours faithfully,


Editor, British Style

London, N7

16 July