My first shirt from S & F

My arms are too long.

They’re too long for the rest of my body.

Disproportional.

Always been a fan of asymmetry.

Maybe that’s why.

And, I’m not short.

I’m six feet tall in my bare feet.

Six one with socks and typical shoes.

I’m not fat.

One eighty-five. Maintained that weight for over thirty years.

Last time my body fat was measured, within normal limits 18-24%.

Purchased my first custom made shirt in 1983.

It was the only way to get sleeves long enough and have the rest of the shirt fit correctly.

Custom made shirts back then were less than $100 each.

Now they’re over $200 each.

A few months ago, I met a guy online with whom we share some friends in real life.

He and his partner have a “made-to-measure” shirt company by the name of “Short and Fat.”  It’s a “dot com.”

Their shirts are $97.00 each.

I was able to pick every feature with their “build-it-yourself” software.

Material, collar, cuffs, fit, pockets or not, pleats in the back, monogram, color of thread for buttonholes. Every design element of the shirt was my choice.

Even the length of the shirt tail. (I can imagine short and fat guys having a problem with “off-the-rack” shirts causing plumber’s crack or a Bellywink TM. Ugh!)

I couldn’t locate my choice of fabric on their website and one of the partners (Blake Adams) helped me via Facebook Messenger to find just what I wanted.

My first shirt arrived and every aspect of it has exceeded my expectations. Color matches the background of my newest suit.

I picked thread color for the buttonholes to match the lining of the suit.

It has the same features I look for in a top shelf custom made shirt.

Side/body seams and sleeve seams are double stitched.

All fabrics offered are 100% wrinkle resistant Egyptian, Italian & Swiss Cotton.

French cuffs and collar reinforced for durability and a smooth, precise, wrinkle-free finish.

All S&F shirts are made with “non-iron” material. I prefer to iron my shirts and that’s fine, too.

Every shirt comes with free monogramming and an unconditional, “No Bullshirt” guarantee.

There are special times and places where I’ll always wear one of the custom made shirts in my wardrobe.

There are many more situations in which I’ll wear my personally designed S&F shirts–even though I’m tall and almost slim.

Thanks to ShortandFat.com, I’ve added “men’s clothes designer” to my resume.

If you’re a dapper dresser, it’s time you did as well.

I never said he stole money.

Well, the truth of the matter is, “I NEVER said he stole money.”

No, wait, I meant, “I never SAID he stole money.”

But really, I said, “I never said HE stole money.”

And so on.

Changing the word that gets the emphasis, the meaning of the sentence changes. It can change six times.

What did the person hearing it perceive? Perception is reality.

Suppose the hearer was a reporter with a bias against whomever said it. How would it be reported?

Before publishing their story, would the reporter have taken the time to investigate what happened to cause the subject to use the above six words?

If you’re old enough to remember Watergate, you remember Ben Bradlee of the Washington Post would not publish anything Woodward and Bernstein wrote without two corroborating sources.

Now, suppose you heard someone of importance use the above six words with NO emphasis on any particular one.

And suppose you had a personal bias against the “he” who may have stolen. We all hear what we want or expect to hear. Those six words would delight our senses and confirm our suspicions.

What is the truth?

Can reality be relative to the perceptions of the hearer?

What about the speaker?

Whom do you trust to tell you the truth?

Recently I shared an item on Facebook from a friend. It was a link to a website and featured a headline expressing surprise that in light of what appears to be a popular tax cut, the opposing party announced plans to tout a tax increase in their efforts to gain influence in  congress in the 2018 midterms. It quickly provoked a comment from a real life friend of mine questioning the source. I asked why that would be important if the information turned out to be true?

To be fair, it has been my contention for over sixty years that all news outlets and media are biased. As polarized as the country is now, it’s hard to find a middle of the road source of information (notice I avoided the word, “news?”)

If you listen to or read readily available (notice I didn’t say “main stream?) information, you can rely on two things:

1. It will be biased.
2. Regardless of the bias, it will conform to the age old motto of news media, “Never let the truth interfere with a good story.”

Good stories sell.

Choose your poison.

Are we any closer to the truth?

In court, it’s long been commonly accepted that eyewitness accounts are unreliable.  When there are more than two, they seldom agree. Now, with the advances in video technology, is video tape trustworthy? I recently heard even the Zapruder film had been altered.

Can we trust online fact checkers?

My friends on the left like Snopes while my friends on the right prefer FactCheck. They both cite major funding sources as their reason not to trust.

What about a situation in which someone you trust throws you a curve? An old friend sent out and email to his list of friends.  I quickly identified it as a joke. It was masquerading as a newspaper article. Some recipients thought it was factual and replied with concerns for a professional who had supposedly been caught in a dalliance with a patient. He reports to his own amazement about half of the recipients thought it factual–despite the inherent absurdity.

Is the truth relative?

I’ve always appreciated the axiom that “perception is reality.” If how we perceive information is in fact what we interpret as truth, then whether or not something is in fact true, is like beauty.

It’s in the eye of the beholder–no matter the source.

==============================

[NOTE: Special thanks to my good friend Art Hoffman for suggesting this topic.]

==============================

How do you feel when you’re wearing your favorite clothes?

How does it make you feel when you attend an event and receive compliments on your attire?

Now put the two together.

Isn’t it great when you receive compliments and you’re dressed in your favorite outfit?

For some of us, that outfit consists of jeans, an oxford button down boasting your favorite college football team, and dark brown penny loafers.

For others, it’s a custom made,double breasted blue suit, French cuffs, subtle cufflinks, and black Allen Edmonds toe cap lace ups. Don’t forget the tie and pocket square.

Clothes make the man?

How about accessories? A nice assortment of pocket squares, neck, and bowties, increases the number of outfits exponentially.

Carly Simon said, “These are the good old days.”

With an awareness of historical fashion and the genealogy of today’s trends in menswear, you can make the present your own “golden age” of gentlemanly attire.

In his book, Gentlemen of the Golden Age, Sven Raphael Schneider offers readers valuable insight and interesting historical facts to enlighten, entertain, and inspire.

What was the “golden age” for men’s fashion? (It wasn’t the roaring twenties.)

Did you know that today’s business suit wasn’t always the preferred attire for executives? (There was no such thing as casual Fridays.)

What’s the difference in a “lounge suit,” a “leisure suit,” and a “travel suit?”

Which is more formal, a single or double breasted jacket?

Who were the pace setters in the States whose influence earned a moniker of its own?

Can you wear white in the winter?

Which men’s magazine started in 1933 and soon became the most influential publication in the menswear industry?

The author provides the answers to these and many more questions in an easy to read conversational style.

While some historical trends are outdated (think corduroy tennis attire!) Schneider says, “…knowing what is historically correct will often make you look more refined.”

Gentlemen of the Golden Age is divided into four sections, each illustrated with classic images from the era by Laurence Fellows. After the introduction, readers are treated to details on suits, combinations, overcoats, and sports/leisure. In the chapter on combinations, we learn how to break the rules and still look smart. Learn which overcoat to buy if you plan to own only one. (It’s important for those who want to look dapper.) In the chapter on sports and leisure I asked myself, “What do you wear when you’re watching L.S.U. football games?” (Seersucker and white bucks of course!)

Do you own a “TV jacket?”

In the end, Mr. Schneider encourages those concerned about “over dressing,” with this reminder, “The point of dressing well is to enjoy it while expressing yourself and your personality.”

Gentlemen of the Golden Age is currently available only as an e-book and is available online, in some cases at no charge.
Interested in learning more of the rules, so you’ll know which ones you want to break, and when it’s alright to do so? Check out Schneider’s site, Gentleman’s Gazette for hundreds of videos and articles. If you’re ready to beef up your wardrobe with attention-getting accessories, check out the offerings of Fort Belvedere HERE.  Posters of Fellows art can be purchased HERE.

If you have more than one necktie in your closet, this book should be on your Kindle, I recommend it enthusiastically.

===============

(Images used with the written permission of Sven Raphael Schneider.)

Have you heard it yet?

I haven’t.

But then, I have been neither to the mall nor any big box retail stores.

It won’t be long.

When you do, it probably won’t sound like David Ian’s new CD, “Vintage Christmas Trio.”

Ian fans will recognize this as the long-awaited follow up to his debut, “Vintage Christmas,” and appreciate his minimalist approach.

We long for the opportunity to take a seat in a small village restaurant/speakeasy and find the entertainment is a jazz trio: piano, drums, and bass.

Slip this CD into your player and be transported to just such a location.

Ian’s performance and arrangements take the listener to another era, the same one from which our favorite Christmas songs were born.

Ian selects a group of familiar tunes–you’ve heard them all.

The ten track instrumental-only collection opens with a swinging version of “Deck the Halls,” and ends with “O Come, All Ye Faithful.”

In the middle, he covers the Kings (We Three and Wenceslas) and the bells (on Christmas Day and Silver) along with a nice blend of religious and secular pieces.

The trio is completed by bass man, Jon Estes and drummer Josh Hunt.

Jazz aficionados will delight in Ian’s arrangements (with a bit of Bach and blues) while the casual listener will appreciate the ease with which they discern the melodies.

Don’t wait to hear it in the mall.

Treat yourself to some happy sounds today, HERE.

In the age of instant gratification and e-books, it seems as though today’s readers feel the two most important words in any book are, “The End.”  

Long books never bothered me.

I’ve been a fan of James Michener since the mid-seventies, and books with 500 plus pages don’t scare me off, although I’ve read neither War and Peace nor Gone With the Wind.

Some readers like excruciating detail.

Many readers require facts ad nauseam to be convinced.

And some of us, who may already be leaning in the direction of the author, need bare bones evidence to resolve the doubt.

Here then is my take on two best sellers.

¡Adios, America! by Ann Coulter

This book reputedly helped shape President Trump’s policies on immigration. Readers whose views are contrary to Coulter’s right-wing conservative point of view will discount the source and mostly choir members will hear her sermon. [My thoughts on consideration of sources will be the topic of a future blog.]

Hers is a simple message:

1. Secure the border
2. Decide what to do with illegals already here.

She advocates logical, clear cut solutions to these issues (including why she opposes amnesty.) Her fellow travelers will need little convincing. For everyone else, there’s almost four hundred thoroughly documented pages.

Dereliction of Duty by H.R. McMaster

The current United States National Security Advisor wrote this scathing indictment of a previous president in 1997. He presents undisputed evidence (much of which only became available in the mid-nineties) to show how President Johnson, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff got us into the Southeast Asian quagmire commonly referred to as, “Viet Nam.”

McMaster’s opus (hailed with numerous accolades from his peers and historians) reiterates two points clearly:

1. A sitting president will do anything, ANYTHING, to get re-elected.
2. The first casualty of any war: the truth.

If you’re in the aforementioned category who likes details, you’ll be delighted to find McMaster gives lengthy examinations of the personal relationships and interactions of the characters involved.

I recommend both books.

Wes Montgomery / Wynton Kelly Trio

=====================

Montgomery died in 1968.

Wynton Kelly died in 1971.

The Penthouse (in Seattle’s Pioneer Square) was demolished in 1968.

A parking lot took its place.

Talk about paving paradise.

John Coltrane’s performance in September of ‘65 was a watershed for the club which is also remembered for shows by the likes of Bill Evans, Miles Davis, and Stan Getz.

Which brings us to John Leslie “Wes” Montgomery, an icon in jazz guitar who followed in the footsteps of Django Reinhardt and Charlie Christian.

Montgomery with his unique technique of using the side of his thumb to pluck the strings became an influence on many succeeding guitarists. In fact, his influence could be said to have spawned the genres of fusion and smooth jazz.

Montgomery had two noteworthy performances at the Penthouse in April of 1966 along with the Wynton Kelly Trio.

Fortunately for jazz aficionados, and music lovers everywhere, these performances were recorded on tape.

Smokin’ at the Penthouse was released in May of 2017 and is available on both CD and in digital format.

Modern day jazz guitar icon Pat Metheny writes, “The news that another example of that band in action had surfaced was headline news for those of us in the hard-core Wes community. The incredible revelations contained in Resonance’s previous releases of Wes’s early work have been thrilling. This release adds yet another dimension to the almost impossibly brief ten years that Wes was the jazz world’s most renowned guitarist, particularly to completists like me who want to hang on to and cherish every note Wes played.”

This 10-track album is indeed a “smokin’” musical exchange between Wynton and Wes, swinging with fire-cracker energy. The Wynton Kelly trio opened each set of the 9-night engagement with a couple of tunes before Wes joined them on stage. The album opens with “There Is No Greater Love,” an upbeat rendition of Isham Jones’s well known jazz standard. Wynton glides through seven choruses filled with his trademark lyrical legato lines, with bluesy twists and turns along the way. His joyous playing is apparent from the start. In an interview with Kenny Baron included in the liner notes, he says, “Wynton was kind of in a class by himself. His touch, his feeling, his sense of time, sense of rhythm… For me it was just very, very unique.” Often underappreciated as a player, despite his years with Miles Davis, Wynton remains an iconic figure, for jazz fans and next generation of jazz players.

Get your copy today.

Every spring I visit friends in Louisville, Kentucky.

Last year it was for Passover.

This year, Easter.

About an hour out, somewhere between Lexington and Louisville, I called to give Art my estimated time of arrival.

“You’re making good time,” he said. “If you can get here by 7:15, we’ll take you for a special treat on the way to our folk dancing group.”

“Ok,” I said, “what’s up?”

“The woman whose great grandfather invented the seersucker suit is attending a special showing of their clothes at Rodes. It’s right next to where we dance.” En route to the event, I read a newspaper clipping and learned that the woman I was about to meet was the CEO of a New Orleans based company, Haspel.

I’m a Louisiana native and lived most of my adult life just a stone’s throw from the LSU campus. A loyal Tiger fan, I had planned to wear LSU team apparel all through my stay in Louisville, especially in light of our big bowl win over the Cardinals and their Heisman Trophy recipient.

I wore a purple, gold, and white plaid button-down to the event.

As we walked into the menswear section of Rodes, Art approached  one of their representatives and announced the arrival of a Cajun seersucker fan. While we were treated to cocktails, they brought Laurie Haspel Aronson over so I could meet her. She commented on my LSU attire and said she lives in Baton Rouge. We know several people in common. Finally, she said, “I know you from somewhere, I just can’t quite put my finger on it.”

“I was a pharmacist for Winn Dixie in Baton Rouge before moving to North Carolina.”

“That’s it!” she said with a bright smile. “You filled my prescriptions.”

A light bulb went off in my mind and we chatted more. She grabbed a seersucker blazer off the rack (with pink stripes) and we posed for several photos together. As a parting gift, she gave Art and me each a copy of a new book about her grandfather’s business and the famous material that is seersucker. Watch for my review of Milk and Sugar: the Complete Book of Seersucker by Bill Haltom in this space soon.
It was great to see Laurie again and I’m looking forward to adding to the seersucker in my wardrobe.

Some of my friends consider me to be an anachronism.

In  some ways, they’re correct.  

In many ways, I’m stuck in the sixties.

Some of my mannerisms and behavior from the past  have  carried over into the new century. In fact, that’s one of them—my constant references to the “turn of the century.” It drives my proofreader nuts. He thinks that most people our age (baby boomers) will think of the 1800’s when I say, “…before the turn of the century.”  A topic for another blog.

I don’t like the new age management jargon…

that has become prevalent in the last ten years. I prefer the old way of talking.

It was clear.

It was direct.

It wasn’t concerned about being politically correct.

[Some of my author friends may encounter this in their dealings with corporate types.]

Herewith, then, with tongue firmly planted in cheek,

is my interpretation of some of the more commonly heard newspeak terms and perhaps some comments about them.

Newspeak

reach out= ask   (Isn’t one word better than two?)

Ex. I’m so glad you reached out to me.  Why? Are you

drowning? I just asked a question, I don’t want you to touch me. This evokes memories of  The Four Tops.

going forward= from now on…

With the proper emphasis, this can be either a threat or a reassuring calmative.

best practices= “This is how I want it done,” or, “My way or the

highway, pal!”

dialog(ed)= talk(ed) Keep it simple!

(As in, “We dialoged about that yesterday. Sounds snooty.)

push back= disagreement, balked, whining (makes me think of

circumcision)

stakeholder(s) = employees (They’ve all got something on the line, or, at stake—their jobs.)

champion = responsible party (The person to whom you delegated a task or project.)

team = a time worn reference to a group of employees who doubt “team members” will  receive proper credit when it comes time for their annual performance evals.

takeaway(s) = (I tend to think of turnovers in football and basketball.) Anyway, a takeaway is what you eat with the coffee at a business meeting if you don’t like bagels.

And finally, an example:

Newspeak — “Going forward, assign some champions from your team and if you get any push back on the new best practices, reach out to me and we’ll dialog about it.”

Chip speak — When you show’em tomorrow how it better get done, if you get any complaints, call me and I’ll go up there and kick some asses.

When was the last time you used a dictionary to look up a word?

Not online.

A hardbound or paperback book that you hold in your hands and in which you turn real paper pages.

Been a while?

It has for me.

Other than using Merriam Webster’s online dictionary, I keep three books on my desk:

1. Word Origins and Their Romantic Stories by Wilfred Funk (yes, THE “Funk” of Funk and Wagnalls.)
2. Mrs. Byrne’s Dictionary of Unusual, Obscure, and Preposterous Words by J.H. Byrne (a gift from a close friend)
3. The Book of Hard Words – Read it, See it, Know it, Use it. by David Bramwell

What was the last murder mystery you read?

Would it live up to this description, “…the linguistic detective story of the decade?”  That’s how New York Times Magazine writer, William Safire described, The Professor and the Madman by Simon Winchester.

Did you ever wonder how, and by whom dictionaries were written?

The Oxford English Dictionary is perhaps the most famous of them all. For many, it is the gold standard. (It certainly is for lexicographers and members of the London Philological Society.) We would have never expected it to have been the product of mad dogs and Americans. Yes, an American madman played a significant role in creating the OED. These days, most Americans would define a madman as one who voted for the OTHER candidate.  Things were a bit different in 1871 London, and the States were still rebounding from their brush with being dis-united.

The story involves two protagonists eponymously referred to in the title. In a manner of speaking, there is also a third man–not Orson Welles’ Harry Lime.

Winchester treats readers to a sampling from the OED with a definition at the beginning of each chapter. The Preface is prefaced with the word, “mysterious,” and Chapter One begins with, “murder.”

And murder is where one of the two stories begins.

Dr. W. C. Minor was a battlefield surgeon (a Yankee)  in the War Between the States. As a result of his experiences in the war, he apparently suffered from what we know today as post traumatic stress disorder, a term likely not found in the first edition of the OED. In retrospect, researchers today speculate that his PTSD hastened, or perhaps even was responsible for a posthumous diagnosis of bipolar disorder. His untreated illness referred to in Victorian England as, “madness,” combined with a deep seated racism for the Irish. It eventually led to his choice of victims and the perpetuation of a crime that would result in his availability to volunteer an unlimited amount of his time to the research required to help write a literary masterpiece.

James Murray at work on the OED

James Murray was a Scot who, by the time he was thirty, in 1867, had learned twenty-two languages in addition to English. Despite a stellar resume, he was turned down for a much coveted job in a British museum. Eventually, he was chosen by the committee at Oxford to lead the project that would take seventy years  and define over a half million words. The first edition consisted of twelve tombstone-sized volumes.

A rigorous dependence on gathering quotations to illustrate the use of the sense of every single word in the language sets the OED apart from most other dictionaries. The previously mentioned definition of the word, murder, consumes more than two pages in the paperback edition of The Professor and the Madman. It seemed a monumental if not impossible task requiring an unbelievable number of hours which were supplied by volunteers. Who better to volunteer than an incarcerated word savant who was also a prolific reader?

Murray soon became buried under thousands of handwritten notes from Dr. Minor (by far the most prolific contributor) and hundreds of other volunteers. As the timelines of Murray and Minor converge, readers see their denouement as the dictionary is created while developing an appreciation for the men and their relationship. Winchester leaves us with the conclusion of their lives (not a Hollywood ending) and an appreciation for how their collaboration was essential  to the success of the project.

Casual readers will enjoy the story; writers and other word aficionados will feel this book is essential to have in their personal libraries.

The Book of Hard Words – Read it, See it, Know it, Use it. by David Bramwell

It’s hard to remember now, years later, what I was doing.

A series of loud bumps on the front door signaled the arrival of a visitor.

On my way to the door, I noticed through a side window that it was my neighbor’s son.

Dad was waiting several steps back at the sidewalk by the street.

The kid continued to pound on the door and as it began to open, he shouted, “Open up! You gotta buy something!”

The Ernest Hemingway approach to sales.

Simple.

No frills.

Minimalist.

I bought whatever it was he was selling.

A Hemingway detractor, William Faulkner, once complained that Papa “…has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary.”

In a little over fifty-five years of reading, I’ve been motivated to look up many words in dictionaries while reading. One thing’s for sure, though, I never put down a “page-turner” and interrupted a captivating story to study vocabulary.

On the other hand, learning new words and making an effort to use them has always been of interest. A well-read person should have a deep vocabulary — shouldn’t they?

It stands to reason.

This seemingly worthwhile pursuit has on occasion caused me some grief. In conversation or informal writing, if the listener doesn’t know what you’re talking about, then you have to explain it. The requirement of stopping and explaining word usage takes a lot away from the original intent of the message. It also leaves the impression that you might be a bit “snooty.”

“Don’t come around here using no five dollar words on me!” was a warning I didn’t want to hear very often. It does, now, in retrospect, cause me to wonder, ‘How much is a hard word worth today?”  Hmmm…

Whatever they’re worth, David Bramwell has got 112 for you for just over ten dollars in his book, The Book of Hard Words – Read it, See it, Know it, Use it.

Bramwell makes it easy to learn about the words in his book. An entire page is dedicated to each word complete with illustrations, pronunciation guide, sample usages, etymology and genealogy. The layout includes three sections titled, “Hard,” “Harder,” and of course, “Hardest.” The author acknowledges that this is not intended to be a complete compendium because, for example, one reader may consider a given word as being hard and another would not, from previous experience.  In my own case, it was a pleasant surprise to scan down the list of words and find many with which I was familiar.  Some of them, I use every day.

Back in my direct sales days, when I lived in Louisiana, it was advisable to write marketing pieces and especially letters on an eighth grade reading level. That was thirty years ago. It would not surprise me at all to discover that writing for any demographic today would benefit with that same advice. An author friend of mine received the following comment in a review of one of his books: “Only 7 percent of the population is going to understand several of the words the author uses.” In my own case, I would be thrilled if seven percent of the population owned a copy of one of my books, but is that what an author wants to do in attempts to sell more books?  I don’t think Hemingway had that problem, but I’m certain that Faulkner did.

Authors who have a word that might be considered difficult by some can take inspiration from the late William Safire, New York Times wordsmith-in-residence. In several of his books, he would use the device of having a character use a “hard” word in conversation. During that conversation, he or she would discuss that word and how it had been used. Another viable option for today’s writers — write a blog about it.

That would be mellifluous!