Heroes of the Style Vortex: John Cale

So, Lou Reed is sadly with us no more and whilst his influence on music has rightfully been celebrated, his influence on style doesn’t seem to have been picked up on much. Although it may be a cliché now, can you think of anyone who did the all-black leather look prior to him? Sure, the leather jacket was a staple ‘50s rebel look favoured by people like James Dean and Link Wray, but did anyone assimilate it into a totally black look before Lou did? Well, possibly, but even if they did he was the one who made it his own. And in the decades that followed, his leathery look was taken up by generations of New York bands from the Ramones to the Strokes. Like his music, Reed found a style he liked and stuck to it (and this is not a criticism; Songs for Drella is my all-time favourite album and I think the reason he managed to carry on creating good music in middle age was because he knew what he did best; thus his New York album isn’t so far away from the Sweet Jane-type riffage of his Velvets days.)

(Still, I think he missed a trick by not starting his own clothing brand. Along with signature leather jackets, he could have sold Velvet Underpants, for one thing.)

But whilst Lou Reed was justly credited for his influential ways, isn’t it true to say that his one-time Velvets collaborator, John Cale, is unfairly less well known, not only for his extensive musical output but also for his unique sartorial ways? To be fair, he should be inducted into the Coolness Hall of Fame (were such a thing to exist) based on his Velvets work, his solo work and all the stuff he played on or produced, including albums by the Stooges, Nick Drake and the Replacements, and that coolness would stand even if he’d done it all whilst dressed in a clown costume. Plus I believe he was the first person to cover Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah. And he played the viola in the Velvets! How un-rock and roll (and thus cool) is that?!?

Stylistically, though, he more than held his own, doing the all black Velvets thing with the rest of the band and then moving on to doing deliberately shocking things like freaking out his audience by wearing a hockey mask a decade or so before Friday the 13^th’s Jason Vorhees. And, whilst I praised Leonard Cohen for growing old with dignity, I think it’s fair to say that John Cale showed you can grow old disgracefully and still be cool. I’ve seen him perform a gig wearing leather trousers whilst in his sixties and somehow get away with it. Even Lou Reed might have struggled to do that. Also, like comics maestro Grant Morrison, John Cale is someone I would have thought was too cool to accept honours from the Queen, but he did. However, he did it with style, by dyeing his hair pink especially for the occasion. Now, having pink hair all the time at the age would not be very cool but I think when you do it as a one off to meet royalty you have to respect that. I mean, if you’re going to dye your hair when you’re old, at least make it obvious rather than follow the embarrassing examples of Paul McCartney and Tom Jones.

Generally, though, John Cale’s later period style choices are well chosen and subdued and he quite often dresses in a way befitting his age, in suits and fitted jackets, only throwing in acts of sartorial defiance for special occasions. That, I think is the solution to the ‘rockers-growing-old’ dilemma. If you wear leather and denim all the time it will just be wrong but you can get away with it on select occasions. The hockey mask is probably optional, though. Still, it might have been funny if he’d worn that to Buckingham Palace.

Biker Jackets, the Fonz, and Considerations of the Extent to Which Clothes Influence Your Personality

Whilst unpredictability has never exactly been a character trait we expect from Peter Griffin, I still fondly remember an episode of Family Guy I saw many years ago where he notices that Happy Days is showing on TV and excitedly announces ‘Hey! This is the one where the Fonz goes ‘Eyyy!!!!’’ Indeed, this episode sprung to mind recently when I took the plunge and bought my first ever biker jacket.

I know that everyone’s wearing them at the moment (of which more later) but my most pressing concern about my purchase was this: we all know it’s scientifically proven that if you have surgery in which you receive something transplanted from a dead criminal (executed or otherwise) you will then find yourself uncontrollably acting like said dead criminal, so if, for example, you were given his corneas you will start seeing crimes he committed or if you received his hand you’d find it would go off and try to murder people when you weren’t looking, probably.

So, my query is this: does the same principle apply with clothes? If you wear a garment either owned by or closely associated with a particular person do you develop their character traits? Specifically, is it possible to wear a biker jacket and not walk around doing the thumbs up sign and going ‘Eyyyy!!!!’ ?

I have to say that it’s difficult. I dare you to try it. In fact, it’s pretty much like trying to eat a Fruit Pastille without chewing, which is to say virtually impossible unless you’re very strong willed. (Indeed, in my case wearing a biker jacket seemed to take over my entire personality, and before long I was standing outside a school smoking a cigarette, looking effortlessly cool and rebellious and just waiting for some sexy girls to notice me. However, after four hours someone pointed out the school I happened to be outside – Eton – is in fact a boys’ school. Who’d have known that?!?)

Still, regardless of concerns about Fonz impersonation, my main issue with biker jackets is that they’re very popular at the moment. Now, I know they have a timeless quality and for decades have been worn by people who aren’t concerned with fashion but I was worried that at the moment they’re actually too popular, to the extent that I wondered if I should leave it in the cupboard for six months until the trendies have grown tired of them. Basically, it’s the exact opposite of wearing something because everyone else is. So does that make it cool or, because you’re still choosing clothes based on what others are wearing, just as predictable, uncool and, therefore, morally reprehensible?

Who knows. I don’t see them going away, though. So does this mean that we’re only a few months away from not being able to walk down the high street without being faced by a terrifying mini-zombie apocalypse made up of teenage girls whose biker jackets have taken over their fragile eggshell minds and led to them collectively emitting an eerie banshee wail of ‘Eyyyyyy!!!!!!!’ ? My God.

Worrying Style Trends: Twats in Flat Caps

I’m not sure why it took me so long to notice the creeping prevalence of young men wearing flat caps on the streets of trendy London Town; indeed, I think it must be that so many recent trends – bow ties, elbow patches, tweed jackets – seemed to be borrowed from the Olden Days that my conscious brain eventually became too horrified to register anyone it noticed wearing them and I began to subconsciously block them from my vision, so when the time came that the same offenders decided to go full out and dress like old men by adding a flat cap into the mix I no longer noticed.

It’s not as if the act of a young person wearing a flat cap is even that new, though. I do believe one of the egregious characters in the Shoreditch satire Nathan Barley wore one when that show was on back in 2005 so I assume that real life Hoxtonites were also wearing them at the time (quite possibly thinking they were being incredibly groundbreaking in doing do yet somehow neglecting to take into consideration that they had previously been worn by, I don’t know, every man who was alive in the 1920s and 1930s?).

Hats are always a bit controversial in this day and age. You can try a baseball cap but whilst you might think it makes you look like a hardcore gangsta rapper from da hood it’s also a strong possibility that it will make you look like a twat who lives with his mum. Or you could try one of those Pete Doherty hats, which you might think makes you look like someone who lives the edgy and carefree existence of a bohemian symbolist poet on the fringes of society, caring nothing for the petty mores of the world and living only for art and freedom but will more than likely make you look like a twat who lives with his mum. I did see a man wearing a top hat the other day, which I supposed earned him some points for originality. And it didn’t give me any clues as to whether or not he lived with his mum.

But anyway, I can’t see any justification why anyone would wear a flat cap unless they were in their eighties. My reasons are thus:

1)     You will look like an old man. Remember the Top of the Pops performance featuring Dad’s Army’s Clive Dunn performing Grandad We Love You? Well, you probably don’t because that would make you pretty old, but it’s on Youtube. And you know how you see archive footage from the 1920s and it’s full of men wearing flat caps and smoking Woodbines? Plus Victor Meldrew used to wear one. And he’s an old man. And, yes, I know Brad Pitt has been seen wearing one recently but he’s nearly fifty so that hardly disproves my point, does it? Also, Brian Johnson of AC/DC also wears one but, once again, he is old. So, to clarify, my point is that flat caps should only be worn by old men.

2)     Actually, that’s the only reason.

The Life of Geek Pie

The problem with most fashion blogs, I think it’s more than fair to say, is that they generally consist of little more than self-taken photos (in a mirror) that show the writer proudly showing off that afternoon’s purchases, whilst the ‘writing content’ rarely stretches beyond ‘OMG!!! Look at what I got in New Look/Gap/Miss Selfridge today!!! OMG!!!’

If, by contrast, you take a – shall we say – more critical approach to the world of fashion, you’re not only largely ruling yourself out of ever receiving any freebies from style PRs eager to buy your support but you’re also in a more compromised situation if you want to take the approach of taking photos of people you see in the street. For example, you might be successful if you approach someone resplendent in whatever’s fashionable that week and say ‘OMG! You’re so cool! Can I, like, take a photo of you for my fashion blog?!’ in a way that you won’t be if you slide up to someone and say ‘Excuse me, sir, but I couldn’t help noticing that you are, by and large, dressed like a gullible twat. Do you mind if I take a photo of you and then slag you off on the Internet?’

Not that I’ve tried that yet, I just have a feeling it might not be entirely successful. I suppose I could approach people and claim I love their style but I don’t think that morally I’d be able to forgive myself. After all, someone in this world needs to have standards.

Still, over the last couple of days I’ve been wishing I could find a way to at least try to photograph people I see on the street in a surreptitious manner. The reason is that over the weekend I’ve begun to notice a new male hairstyle cropping up. It’s been entirely in Dalston and Shoreditch, so I’m assuming it’s so cutting edge that it’s not even appeared in any mainstream magazines yet and so far has only graced the pages of uber-trendy publications that I’m simply not cool enough to even know about, like Cheekbone, the magazine that Vince Noir reads in the Mighty Boosh, a magazine so cutting edge that it’s delivered by ninjas and goes out of date every three hours.

(And to prove the point about this new hairstyle, I’ve just tried to Google a picture of it. Nothing! That's why the article is illustrated by an old school photo of some guy probably out of a Kurosawa film)

So, the hairstyle in question is a topknot. But the back and sides are shaved. I imagine it’s got a name along the lines of the nu-mullet (remember that?) so is possibly called the nu-samurai as I can only imagine the wearer believes it makes him look like some sort of modern day samurai. Sadly, I fear, it makes the wearer look more of a modern day twat.

I wondered if this style came about in the same way as Geek Pie, the hairstyle in Nathan Barley that I’ve already discussed, which is accidentally invented when Dan Ashcroft falls asleep in some paint and then has to flee the barbers when his hair is only half cut, only for Nathan to think it’s the latest trend and get his hair styled in exactly the same way. I can only assume a modern trendy had to flee a salon in similar circumstances when just the back and sides had been shaved and hastily tied the rest at the top of his head (for some reason) only to find people thought it was the latest cool thing and blatantly copied it. I mean, that sounds like a far more plausible explanation than one involving people having their hair like that through choice. Doesn’t it?!?

My suspicion is that this ‘do will vanish from the streets for a few months (as these things tend to) only to return later in the year once mainstream fashion magazines and their gullible followers have become aware of it. So before that happens, I’ve decided to give it a name. It’s a topknot, worn by twats. So I’m going to christen it… the twatknot!

The World of Sportswear - the Graveyard of Style

When I was out for a run the other morning I had a slightly worrying realisation when I looked down at the all-purpose legwear that I’ve worn for pretty much every form of exercise I’ve done in the last six years or so and experienced a eureka moment surely worthy of the machines gaining sentience in the Matrix. ‘Hang on…’ I thought. ‘Are these… shell suit bottoms?!?!’ Now, it’s a worrying thought to be out in public and suddenly think you may be accidentally wearing a shell suit but I resisted the temptation to throw them away and run home bare-legged and instead finished my jog and went home to examine the garment more closely.

In hindsight, I don’t think my running trousers are made of shell suit material, but it’s maybe a bit close for comfort. Still, it got me thinking about the uneasy relationship that there’s often been between the worlds of fashion and sportswear. They normally stay segregated from one another but every now and then something from the world of sports sneaks into the world of fashion and hangs around for a while, hoping it will fit in and become accepted before anyone notices it’s gatecrashed the party. The shell suit tried and failed (though let’s not forget that it was inexplicably successful for a while), as did the bumbag (which I assume was originally worn by marathon runners and probably still is). And I’ve a vague feeling that there was once a time when lycra was worn by some people in a non-sporting capacity (even if it was only at raves).

What invariably happens is that these garments have their cover blown and are subsequently exiled from the world of fashion so ignominiously slope back to whence they came, in a similar way to how some UK actors occasionally find success in America only to slink back a few years later when their popularity has declined, to eke out a living during their twilight years in panto or Emmerdale. A kind of collective mania seems to occasionally take over the world and lead a large number of people to think that an item of sportswear is acceptable attire for everyday life only for people to awake from this madness and hastily throw away said garments, leaving them to continue to be worn only by a few confused souls like chavs (and their all-purpose tracksuits) or portly tourists from the American Midwest (visiting Europe resplendent in their shellsuits and bumbags.)

Essentially it’s a case of pieces of clothing getting ideas above their station, only to be put firmly back in their place. The garments may have qualities that make them ideal for sportswear but that certainly doesn’t mean they’ll automatically work as everyday clothes. Indeed, often the qualities we value in sportswear are exactly what prevents them from working in the everyday world. Lycra’s stretchiness makes it ideal for, say, gymnastics, but how stretchy do you need your clothes to be if you’re going to the pub? Plus it’s a bit tight. If you’re out on the pull do you want everyone to see the outline of your cock and balls?!?

I’ve written before on how I strongly believe sportswear should ever be worn for anything other than sports but that raises a kind of opposite question of whether we should strive to be stylish when exercising. Personally, I don’t think you should be too concerned about how you look when you’re doing physical activity anyway; whilst I did trade in my formless baggy swimming shorts a few months back for a sleeker pair, I can’t do anything about the fact that my hair takes revenge on me whenever I subject it to a swimming pool by rearranging itself so it sprouts off in all directions in bizarre cross between Jim Carrey’s ‘do in Dumb and Dumber and the crazed barnet sported by Australian comedian Yahoo Serious in the historically questionable Young Einstein. And if you’re out running you can expect to get splattered with mud. Martial arts are even more problematic as you’ve got blood and bruises to contend with. So I really don’t think it’s worth it. If anything it suggests you’re not fully committed to exercising anyway.

So it’s pretty straightforward: there are sports clothes and there are normal clothes and ne’er the twain shall meet. Would you wear a tuxedo to play tennis? Probably not. But, more importantly, once you start entertaining the idea of donning sportswear when venturing into the outside world you have to bear in mind it’s a slippery slope. Today you might decide to nip to the corner shop in your running gear but what’s to say that in a few weeks’ time you won’t have decided it’s okay to pay a visit to Sainsburys wearing nothing but a pair of Speedos?

Thoughts on Which Day of the Year the Shops are the Quietest, Plus Why River Island isn’t That Bad (Though It Does Stock Some Shocking Things)

Towards the end of February each year the BBC generally reports that there’s a particular date around that time that has been deemed by someone to be officially the Most Depressing Day of the Year. Whenever I hear of something like this I’m reminded of Frankie Boyle’s piece about how scientists clearly have too much time on their hands, where the first scientist says ‘Shall we have a go at curing cancer?’ and the other replies, ‘No, I’m going to see how many fruit pastilles it takes to choke a kestrel.’ But if scientists have indeed established a single date as the most depressing of the year, which other dates have they flagged up as being significant in a similar way?

More to the point, have they made any discoveries regarding the Best Day of the Year to Go Shopping? I would imagine someone in the retail world has done research in this area, but whilst there are the obvious times when it’s going to be busy on the High Street, say for example any time between October and January, just when will it be the quietest? Well, I’d like to throw in my suggestion: the 10^th of April. I went shopping on that day and, by God, I’d never seen the shops so quiet, and my trip included Oxford Street. The crowds were still out in force on the street itself, yet the shops seemed almost eerily empty. It was true of every one I went into. All I can imagine is that there is some quantifiable reason, or a number of reasons for this, possibly something to do with payday having been nearly two weeks ago along with spring not having kicked in enough to send people out to buy a spring/summer wardrobe or us not being far enough away from winter for people to have tired of their winter wardrobes. Who knows? Not me, that’s for sure. All I know is I had perhaps the least stressful mainstream shopping experience of my life, part of which I shall relate to you now.

Now, I know people slag off River Island – I remember it particularly in an episode of Fresh Meat where uber-nerd Howard attempts to look cool and his housemates immediately identify his new threads as being from there, and insist he doesn’t wear them again, but, if I can throw a slightly controversial idea into the arena of thought, I think it’s okay! In fact, I bought a few things in there. Now, I don’t want this to turn into one of those blogs where the writer just rambles on about whatever they’ve bought, but I did buy a winter coat in the sale, reckoning that whilst I may only get a few weeks’ use out of it now, I will then put it away until next winter and then have a brand new winter coat I got for a steal. (Actually, the security tag dropped off whilst I was trying it on so now I think about it I could actually have stolen it, funnily enough.)

What I didn’t buy, however, were these two things:

A Onesie

I will be writing an extended essay on the Onesie. But for now, can’t you see this is just a romper suit? I can only assume the Onesie is a massive practical joke being played by the fashion industry to see how gullible people are.

Cutaway Jeans

I can think of two fictional characters famous for wearing these. The first is Daisy Duke. Which is why, when worn by a woman, these are sometimes called Daisy Dukes. But I would refer back to the point where I mentioned the word ‘woman’. I’m pretty sure no man could look sexy in these, no matter how shapely his legs were.

The second fictional person I can think of who wears these is Tobias in Arrested Development. And the reason he wears them is because he is a ‘never-nude’, someone with a psychological inability to ever be completely naked and who even wears his cutoffs in the shower. So, if you’re thinking of buying these, can I just check which of the two it is you’re looking to emulate?

Geek Pie

Not really reading the papers or watching the news very much, I get much of my comment and reportage on modern society from Viz comic. And an entry in the Top Tips section of this month's issue pretty much sums up my thoughts on Paul Weller's hair far more succinctly than I could manage:

'Get that expensive Paul Weller hairstyle for free by simply running out of the barber's shop before they've finished'

Actually, now I think about it, that's the same as what happens in an episode of Nathan Barley where Dan Ashcroft goes to get his hair cut but accidentally drops some scissors into the proprietor's dog's head so hastily scarpers when the haircut is only half finished. His colleagues praise his original hairstyle and he hastily christens it 'Geek Pie'.

(One more thing: I just googled Weller and the second suggestion when you type his name in is indeed 'Paul Weller Haircut'. Is this trending?!?)

An Essay on the Purchasing of an Expensive Suit as a Deterrent to Putting on Weight

I think it was Yves Saint Laurent (or someone) who once said (something like) ‘fashion is temporary; style is eternal’ (or something). And do you know what? I believe he was right. I’ve never been more aware of this than when, a few years back, I went to an exhibition of fashion through the ages. I forget what period it covered but all I can remember was that almost every exhibit from the 20^th century was uniquely awful, a catalogue of stylistic horrors, with the predictable roll call of fashion monstrosities too numerous to list but which included the predictable shell suits, flares and satin jumpsuits. In fact, all that stood out as still looking good was an elegant 1920s cocktail dress and a suit from the 1960s.

Whilst most people, if not everyone, accept having embarrassing photos of themselves in their teens in atrocious clothing to all be part of life’s rich tapestry, there are certain sartorial mistakes that can never be forgiven. For even if you have a wardrobe of shame filled with all the fashion mistakes you’ve made over the years, one thing that should never go in there is a suit. This is because a good suit is eternal, and if you spend money on buying one that attempts to mess with the winning formula then you deserve to have your money wasted and you deserve to look stupid. The whole point of a suit being timeless is that you’re meant to keep it for years. If you buy one in orange and yellow neon you may find that a few years down the line you find you like it a bit less than you did when you bought it.

I was looking at suits once and the shop assistant unwisely told me that the reason all the suits they had in stock had unusually long jackets was because Preston from Big Brother and the Ordinary Boys had worn them. Now, call me naïve, but I would think that when buying a suit (something you want to keep for many years, remember) it might be wise not to make your purchase based on the look of someone whose career, it could reasonably be assumed, wouldn’t be a particularly long one.

Tom Ford recently complained about a trend for suit jackets so short that you can see a man’s backside, and he was right to do so. It’s not unusual to see the style pages of men’s magazines feature letters from people asking whether they should invest in a suit that shows clear signs of bandwagon jumping (like the vogue a year or so back for suits with surprisingly short trousers). The advice is usually to avoid them, and it always should be.

So, for avoidance of doubt, this is what you should go for when buying a suit:

Single breasted (double breasted comes in and out of fashion; if you wear one when they’re out of fashion people will assume you’re going to a gangster and molls party, which is fine unless you’re going to a funeral. Unless it’s the funeral of a gangster, I suppose).

Normal length trousers that break at the shoe (sounds obvious but let’s not forget the trend for wearing shorter ones; doing that will make you look like your trousers shrank in the wash or that you’re wearing your brother's hand-me downs).

Normal length sleeves where you can see a bit of the shirt cuff (sounds obvious, but if suits can be made with shorter trousers, don’t rule out a similar trend emerging for sleeves).

It sounds obvious, I know. But, going back to the point about people writing letters to men’s magazines asking about the latest suit developments, the reason people write these letters is because they genuinely have no idea. You’d think anyone could tell that a suit with trousers that stop at the ankles will look stupid, but it’s stranger when people ask if they will look stupid in the future. Well, of course, the answer is yes, because they look stupid now. As for the emerging trend for men wearing suits with shorts, well, I'm not even going to lower myself to comment on that.

And one more thing: always spend more on a suit than you can afford. This is only partly because it’s something that will give you many years of usage; it’s more because if you buy an expensive suit you’ll then have very strong motivation not to put any weight on as then it will be rendered useless. And, on top of that, if you buy a really expensive one you’ll be so poor that you won’t be able to afford much food anyway, and are guaranteed to always fit into it. It’s a win-win situation.

On Button Flies

Button flies on trousers. I don’t like them. I mean, I’ll accept them if I otherwise like the trousers but I don’t really see the point. There’s always one at the top that’s all but impossible to get to when you do up your trousers, meaning you’re technically walking around with your flies undone. And then there’s the temptation to not bother doing the next one down. It’s a slippery slope.

I suppose there are some benefits; you can open your flies just by pulling your trousers apart and letting them pop open but as time saving measures go it’s hardly a great one. Then again, I once had a pair of trousers on which the zip fly would seemingly work itself undone of its own accord, occasionally providing social embarrassment. I suppose button flies don’t do that. Maybe that’s why they were invented.

Some Surprising Spottings of Dungarees

A few years back a friend and I idled away some time in the pub trying to come up with ideas for strange or offbeat television shows that, whilst made up, had to be just about plausible enough to have actually existed. In the same way that you might have trouble convincing a young person today that the Black and White Minstrel Show was a genuine piece of Saturday night entertainment or that there was once a time in which Jim Davidson not only appeared on television but was apparently given money to do so, we attempted to come up with the most boundary-and-decency-pushing idea for a TV show that we reckoned we could convince people had actually existed.

I forget what the eventually winner was, but my favourite remains Adventures With Lesbians, an ultra-PC Channel 4-type show from the 1980s in which a group of inner city schoolchildren went around solving mysteries with the assistance of a group of lesbians. Whilst the pub conversation that led to this has now led me largely incapable of discerning which programmes of yesterday really did exist and which we made up, I think it was vaguely inspired by a programme in which children went around solving crimes with the help of some old people, and in the same way that that programme (if it existed) was meant to encourage children to see old people in a new light, Adventures With Lesbians was meant to do the same with members of the Sapphic community and show children just how much fun they could be. We even went as far as to come up with a theme song for the series, of which the only lines I can still remember are:

‘When you are a lesbian

You can wear what you please

But you may well choose Doc Martens

And a pair of dungarees’

Now, I couldn’t help but recall that catchy ditty last week when, within the space of a few days, I saw two young women wearing dungarees with no apparent sense of irony or self-consciousness (or, indeed, style). And they weren’t even the hotpant/dungaree hybrid that shows a decent amount of leg; they were full on dungarees, of the sort I had previous thought were only ever worn by those in the aforementioned song, or toddlers. (And I should probably point out that I do see women wearing dungarees fairly often but that’s because I live in the noted lesbian enclave of Stoke Newington; so if you think the lyrics to the song were in any way perpetuating a stereotype then I suggest you pay it a visit, and give particular attention to the newish retro shop with a whole rack of dungarees in the window.)

Now, I know this is a blog about male style but it’s still worth keeping an eye on female trends as, like viruses, they can mutate and jump from one species to another. So, what’s the deal with dungarees? I can kind of see the attraction of putting toddlers in them; they’re kind of a romper suit that you can wear outside. And for plumbers, they are presumably useful for having lots of pockets (though I’m only assuming that plumbers wear them, and I admit this is based on Super Mario). Similarly, I assume that Mumford and Sons wear them but can’t honestly say I have any pictorial evidence to back that up other than a faint suspicion that it’s the kind of thing they would do as part of their faux-Americana thing. But regardless of whether they do, we can still add inbred hillbillies to the list of dungaree enthusiasts.

Were the people I saw wearing them doing it for a bet? My suspicions tell me not. For I have overwhelming reasons to suspect that both those I saw are affiliated with some well known young women’s magazines, and those people aren’t really know for their developed senses of humour or irony. Now, whilst I don’t read women’s magazines with much regularity, I’m not aware that dungarees have been tipped as the next big thing; whilst though it’s possible that they have,

I’ve come to suspect that people who work in fashion feel under so much pressure to be ahead of the game that they try to be ‘early adopters’ of future trends simply by wearing everything they can possibly think of and hope that one of them comes into fashion a few months later. Of course, the downside of this is that whist on one or two occasions you may well correctly anticipate a style and be lauded for your forward-thinking cool, it will also be the case that some 97% of the time you well end up looking something of a twat.

Still, my suspicion is that whilst dungarees may indeed be the next big thing in women’s fashion they won’t affect the male scene. Or, at least, I pray to God that they don’t. Still, in a way I hope they do, simply because it would be so funny watching grown men walk around dressed as toddlers. But, then again, the theme tune from Adventures with Lesbians mentioned Doc Martens too, and they never seem to go out of style. They’re kind of the cockroaches of the post-apocalyptic style world; both the idea of them, and quite possibly the boots themselves, seem destined to outlive civilisation itself. So, if that well known 1980s children’s series was right about those then who’s to say it didn’t also predict the dawn of adult dungarees?

Heroes of the Style Vortex: Leonard Cohen (and a look at the perils of trying to be stylish in middle age and beyond)

It’s easy to be cool when you’re young. In fact, it’s pretty much a requirement that you at least try. After all, whilst a uniform of Marks and Spencer polyester slacks and nylon shirts is pretty much de rigeur for men in their forties and beyond, if you were to dress like that in your teens it would almost certainly mark you out as someone shaping up to be a sociopathic sexual deviant and probable future serial killer or, even worse, that you were going to development an unhealthily prepubescent obsession with politics and become the new William Hague.

Indeed, there are so many reasons to at least attempt being cool when you’re young that people are quite right to be suspicious of anyone who doesn’t: you have more time on your hands, more disposable income, a peer group to advise you, bands, actors and other figures to take inspiration from and a whole army of designers and shops aiming things at you.

But what happens when the years have performed their terrible dance? What exactly is it that causes middle aged people to stop caring about how they look? Is it the drying up of disposable income that comes with having a family? The difficulties of buying flattering clothes as the combination of too many M&S ready meals and not having any time to exercise mean there aren’t any cool clothes that will fit around your middle aged spread? Or do middle aged people simply abandon any pretence at looking good once they realise that, by and large, no one’s going to want to shag them anymore?

Well, whatever the myriad reasons, there’s no doubt that clothes designers feel little inclination to make stylish clothes for anyone beyond their thirties. Once you’ve hit the big 4-0 you’ll find that any sources of stylish clothes have pretty much dried up and whereas once you were easily able to wear skinny jeans and slim fit shirts, you enter a shop to find the only clothes available for someone of your age group are baggy and amorphous garments designed on the assumption that anyone over the age of 45 will require elasticated trousers and shirts with additional material around the stomach area. But what options are there for those people who manage to not only stay in shape as they enter middle age and beyond but also have the interest and income to attempt to stay stylish?

It’s pretty common to see rock stars attempt to continue to sport the look they had in their twenties into their fifties and beyond but I’m not entirely convinced the classic rock star look is all that dignified when you’re in your twenties, let alone as your approach pensionable age. Take the Stones, for example. Keith Richards may have cut quite a figure in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s but let’s not forget that they once all dressed up as sailors for a video. Mick Jagger deserves our respect for maintaining a 28-inch waist into his seventies but he’s certainly sported some odd looks over the years. And in recent photos the band looked like they’d been styled by someone who was expecting to be working with a band in their twenties but decided to use the same clothes anyway; the end result was vaguely reminiscent of an episode of Dr Who where the Master used an artificial ageing ray (or something) on the Doctor, causing him to shrivel up into a Gollum-type creature whilst still wearing his usual clothes. Just because you can fit into skinny jeans and fitted jackets when you’re seventy it doesn’t mean you should.

Fortunately, there are ways to remain stylish into old age and, happily, it’s a path that’s been trodden by several rock stars, with the most notable example being Leonard Cohen. Even if he wore nothing but clothes made out of bin liners, Cohen would qualify as being especially cool because of his work and unique career path: a poet and novelist who didn’t even release his first album until he was 33, and made successful comebacks in his fifties and seventies. (And, of course – OMG! – the X-Factor covered one of his songs! OMG! Etc…)

In fact, Leonard Cohen pretty much wrote the rules on being cool in middle and old age. And there’s only really one rule: well-fitting suits. You’d think that was obvious, but try telling that to the ageing rockers you see wearing snakeskin trousers and sparkly jackets. I was very young when Cohen’s comeback album I’m Your Man came out but couldn’t help but notice how cool he looked on the cover: understated shades, pinstripe suit worn with a t-shirt underneath and slicked back hair. And he was eating a banana, just to add humility to the whole get up. And he’s pretty much stuck with that since, albeit with the addition of a hat in recent years. But not a top hat with sharks’ teeth on it or anything like that; trilbies and fedoras, as befitting a man of his years. To be fair, his look was always pretty sharp; but it works, and has now become a kind of uniform for ageing literary rock star types (more recently with Nick Cave).

To be fair to the Stones, Keith Richards has managed to carve out a look that retains his outlaw rock and roller status without making him look like an idiot, but Mick Jagger seems to have adopted the Elton John method of throwing everything against the wall of style and hoping something sticks (witness his recent sparkly jacket and tie combo at their O2 gigs). Charlie Watts, by contrast, has done the opposite, going the way of Leonard Cohen and creating a constant, understated and dignified look based on well-tailored suits (even if he did also wear a sailor suit in that video). Neither Keef nor Charlie’s looks seem to have rubbed off on Mick, though. So next time you see him gurning and grinding onstage like a great-great-grandfather at a wedding, resplendent in spray-on silver trousers, a see through vest, a sequinned jacket and a leopard print hat, just remember: there are alternatives…