Inauguration & the Suits of the Presidents of the United States

Hal - January 22, 2013

I like Taft’s coat and hat. Sadly, I can’t imagine I’ll ever get my hands on a fur trimmed coat or silk topper at a price I can justify to myself.

On the subject of top hats, is it just me or does the hat band of Coolidge’s extend most of the way up it? Only the top quarter or so appears to have the shiny quality one would expect. Does anyone know why that is?

As for the dress of presidents, I agree that the use of standard business or lounge suits is hardly surprising. Politicians want to appear to be rather like the rest of us. They don’t want to appear to be stuffy or remote from ordinary people. In the UK we have an old Etonian Prime Minister who often doesn’t wear a tie and won’t wear morning dress to weddings for fear it will make him look like the privileged individual undoubtedly he is: such is the strange dance of controlling public image.

As for Obama’s outfit at the ball, I’ve just looked that up. The white bow tie with dinner jacket is eccentric, the quality of the dinner jacket itself disappointing. Obama clearly isn’t someone overly concerned by clothing as part of his image. And Landry, I can see the objection to wearing a belt with white tie but oxford shoes are perfectly acceptable, surely.

Cajetan - January 22, 2013

“Fancy dresses” are worn these days, too. The difference to the good old days is that they look ugly, have a brand, and are manufactured by children in underdeveloped countries. Oh, one more difference, the money spent on these dresses wanders to some overly rich “designers” in France, Italy, or some place else; it does not support some earnest, middle-class craftsman/woman in your neighborhood (like seen in Astairs’ classical “Swing Time”)…

Personally, I think the President is paid well enough to buy some good-looking clothes!

Charles Stanford - January 23, 2013

RE the apparent mourning band on President Calvin Coolidge’s top hat – he assumed the presidency, as vice-president, upon the sudden death of President Warren Harding in 1923. One expects his first inauguration was performed quickly and privately. He was elected president in his own right in 1924 and the photo above is from his formal inauguration, held in 1925. One can only assume that he, out of respect and deference to the recently dead president, was observing a sign of mourning for President Harding.
Looking at the various photos (thank you Sven) there were really only two presidents who seemed to have a heightened sense of style – Presidents Woodrow Wilson and John Kennedy. I believe it is safe to suggest they were dressing in a more formal fashion by choice rather than the seeming habits of the others, by convention, given there are many photos of both of these men in formal dress at various occasions, e.g., Wilson at Versailles Treaty signing, Kennedy at his wedding.
I’ll also give a nod to President Ronald Reagan, who, for his first inauguration, listened to his wife, Nancy, who insisted on formal attire for the event. It was well-publicized at the time that Mrs. Reagan was the person who made the decision to request formal wear for the gentlemen.
Lastly, regarding President Barack Obama’s choices – he famously wears an American maker (who used to be headquartered in Chicago) for all of his suits, Hart Shaffner and Marx (now Hartmarx). I’ve never considered them to be of very high quality but, given the pressures of politics now and how every decision is scrutinized, the choice is understandable. I’m quite sure President Obama’s tuxedo was made by Hartmarx. However, there is no excuse for the white tie – in 2009 or 2013! I attended one of the inauguration balls in 2009 and remember thinking when he walked out on the stage, “what is he thinking?!?!”

rodes - January 24, 2013

The President has a fine figure for clothes. He would have done well to wear a stroller, or black lounge, for it is so close to the customary lounge suit that no undue attention would have been called to the occasion. I always look for the right moment to wear this semi-formal day coat for it is old world, yet modern and deserves a return to favor.

D Newman - January 27, 2013

Great article. I understand many of these comments but I agree with your summation completely. Formality appears to be lost to many in the modern era and this is the perfect event to return to it.

Cormac - January 29, 2013

A rich discussion here. I would add one observation: There is an old saying that in a democracy the people get exactly the leaders they deserve. This goes for the leaders’ clothes as well. As Mr. Jollans observed, Presidential wardrobes have generally been long on convention and short on novelty. They reflect the dominant cultural values of their times as, indeed, Presidents themselves do.

Mr. Obama’s comments (related by Mr. Stanford above) perfectly sum-up the pose of dismissiveness towards all things sartorial that characterizes American males of our times. His wince-inducing appearances in both black and white tie is convincing evidence that he likewise shares his constituents fear of formality.

Regarding the implied question of whether the preferences of Mr. Obama or his predecessors reflect political calculation or personal taste, the obvious answer is “both.” Take Mr. Obama. A natural outsider whose whole life can be viewed as a quest for acceptance by his country, he is unlikely to have an appetite for being deliberately “different” through his dress. He is also politically astute enough to know that those Americans who are most likely to perceive him as “the other,” white working-class males, are also the demographic most likely to bridle at both male elegance generally and formal wear specifically.

Indeed, when we reflect on the exceptions to the rule of mediocrity identified above, we find the same melding of personal background and political branding.

Wilson was the snobbish son of a churchman steeped in the myths of Southern gentility, president of Princeton University and an Anglophile of the first order. He instituted the State of the Union address as a sort of rep version of the UK’s Queen’s speech at the opening of Parliament and introduced the notion of Government as a technocratic enterprise best carried out by experts. His preference for “dressy” clothes was no doubt legitimate, but it also fit with his political image as a incorruptible, above the fray reformer.

JFK, who adopted Wilson’s “best and brightest” elitism, combined the immigrant scion striver’s taste for visible markers of success with a lifetime of affording the very best tailoring. His wardrobe reflected what he was comfortable in personally. But he also knew his wardrobe was part of the prince charming/male Cinderella narrative that powered him to the White House.

Mr. Reagan was a Hollywood actor from the elegant days of studio-enforced style. But he was also the leader of political movement built around nostalgia and a promise to return to the conventions of previous generations. His stepping things up to a Stresemann (or stroller if you must) played to both his stardust image and his cultural pose.

I think these examples demonstrate is that the only time leaders rise above the norm sartorially in a democracy is when doing so reflects the politicians’ endearing public persona in an authentic way.

(Sorry for running on…)