Hello, Open Thread. Monday is Martin Luther King’s Birthday. Let’s take a moment to honor his legacy. This week Saks did, indeed, file for bankruptcy protection. If you want to know what that means for you, we have some answers here. In a truly Shakespearean turn of events, however, the new group that’s funding the store through the restructuring has named Geoffroy van Raemdonck, the former chief executive of Neiman Marcus who lost his job in 2024 after Saks bought Neiman, as the new Saks Global chief executive — essentially replacing the guy who replaced him. (He’s also bringing back his two top deputies. Same story.) Revenge is a dish best served cold and all that. Anyway, Mr. van Raemdonck is also the chief executive who was running Neiman Marcus when it declared bankruptcy during the pandemic lockdowns. So this is not just revenge, but another chance, and a validation of his earlier tenure. Still, it reportedly took a big signing bonus for him to come back. It’s a complicated way to start a new gig when part of your job is shuttering stores, with the related job losses and the handling of relationships with vendors who aren’t getting paid. During the Neiman bankruptcy, Mr. van Raemdonck was criticized for not using the opportunity to close underperforming stores, thus setting the company up for more trouble down the line. We’ll see what he decides this time. NUMBER OF THE DAY 136 millionThe money Chanel is owed by Saks as the department store files for bankruptcy — the most of any brand that sells at Saks Global, which also includes Neiman Marcus and Bergdorf Goodman. In other, happier news, Lanvin is having a striking moment on the red carpet. I can barely remember the last time this many celebrities — or any celebrities — wore Lanvin clothes during award season. Maybe back when Alber Elbaz was in charge. (One of the great designers, he left Lanvin in 2015, started a new line and died during the pandemic in 2021.) Anyway, in the last two weeks I have gotten at least eight emails about celebs in Lanvin looks, including two very similar dresses worn by the “Hamnet” director Chloé Zhao and the actress Jessica Biel on subsequent days. (That’s them, above.) I also can’t remember the last time that happened. This is especially striking since Lanvin doesn’t pay anyone to wear its clothes, and these days the red carpet has become largely a pay-to-play adventure. But I suspect it’s because the clothes have a vaguely 1920s insouciance without looking remotely like flapper cosplay; they are nostalgic and contemporary at the same time. And while they look cool, they don’t announce their origin. You don’t see them and think: “Ah! Lanvin, fall 2025.” You think: “That woman looks good.” It feels like something of a surprise. And it’s a sign that the Lanvin designer Peter Copping, who took the creative reins of the house last year, and Siddhartha Shukla, the deputy chief executive, are doing something right. Think about that. Then consider the hot pants legacy of Bob Weir of the Grateful Dead, get a gander at what everyone wore on the Golden Globes red carpet and check out the latest Balenciaga collection. It’s an interesting one. Get ready: The men’s wear shows started in Europe this week, and Jacob Gallagher will be there reporting on it all. This year we are starting a special show-specific newsletter and kicking if off with the men’s collections. Expect what Jacob called “a brisk dailyish tour through all the runway shows, celebrity cameos, little-known brands and, you know, actual clothes that make up fashion week.” Now everyone can get the latest straight in their inbox. We’ll send you his dispatch from the Ralph Lauren show tomorrow, and sign up here to keep getting them. Have a good, safe weekend!
Make someone’s day and forward this email. Share your feedback on Open Thread by email. Check out our full assortment of free newsletters.
Your Style Questions, AnsweredEvery week on Open Thread, Vanessa will answer a reader’s fashion-related question, which you can send to her anytime via email or X. Questions are edited and condensed.
When I first started wearing suits, I had cuffs on my trousers. I had cuffs on my khakis, wide-wale corduroys and everything else except jeans. Recently, at the tailor, I asked for cuffs. The salesperson frowned. I gave in and went with plain bottoms, but the whole thing looks and feels incomplete. So what’s the deal? Do we cuff or not cuff? — Mark, PhiladelphiaThis is a question Hamlet would have understood. To cuff or not to cuff one’s pants is, for men and women, both a practical and a philosophical question. If cuffing was once simply something you did to show a certain adult finish (or, in the case of James Dean and his jeans, to rebel against it), it exists these days in the more complicated realm of personal taste. To understand how that happened, it helps to understand some history. Cuffs were invented, or at least popularized, in the 1890s by King Edward VII, who reportedly wanted a solution to the problem of wearing his pants in rainy English weather, which made the bottoms all muddy. (In England cuffs are called “turnups”; “cuffs” refer to the turnups at the end of the sleeves.) By the turn of the century and the golden age of men’s wear, they were de rigueur in most suits. That was in part because they provided an elegant trouser counterpoint to the jacket lapel, and because, by adding some weight to the hem, they made pants hang better, keeping the drape straight. Though cuffs briefly disappeared during World War II because of fabric rationing, they returned in the 1950s with the rise of the company man. As suits became slimmer, however, cuffs fell out of favor. In this case, all that weight at the hem ruined the line. And though they rallied in the 1980s with the Masters of the Universe, cuffs, along with the Windsor knot, became, like most dressing choices, simply one option among many. According to Jacob Gallagher, our men’s fashion reporter, “I don’t see them on the runways or from brands much.” So how do you know if they are right for you? “I don’t think cuffs ever truly go out of style,” said Maxwell Osborne, a founder of the label Public School, but as he also pointed out, “It’s really a pant by pant decision.” “Right now, my favorite trousers are high-waisted with double pleats and a cuff,” Mr. Osborne said. “The cuff adds weight and intention and completes the silhouette. A slimmer khaki or cleaner, straight cuts may not need a cuff at all, while a wider leg or more tailored trousers can look better and more balanced with one.” Pleated pants often work better with cuffs, while flat-front styles tend to be uncuffed. Also, he said, it’s important to consider the shoe. Ideally, trouser cuffs should break on the shoe or sit just atop it, not puddle all over it. Cuffs also change the optical illusion of the leg: The shorter and heavier they are (if they show some ankle, for example), the shorter your leg looks. And they indicate at least a modicum of effort, which may be why Mike Amiri, the founder of a namesake fashion line, is an anti-cuffer. When asked for his feedback, he simply said: “No cuff. It looks more effortless to just let it be.” This is also why preppy style often involves no cuffs, allowing the hems on khakis to become slightly frayed. It’s part of the whole not-trying-too-hard thing. In other words, if you want to communicate respect and care with your clothes, both in a professional and social setting, consider the cuff. If your aim is to suggest nonchalance and a focus on higher things, no cuffs may be the way to go. Either way, there is one thing everyone agrees on: Tuxedos should definitely be a cuff-free zone.
|
