From South Ken to Shoreditch, from Jermyn Street to Mare Street – these days anyone that’s anyone is wearing red trousers.

If you want your leg-coverings to let the world know that you’ve got a few quid and don’t care who knows it, or that you have some big ideas about what’s on at the ICA right now - or simply that you are completely insane (but in a mainly non-stabby way) - then you’d better get your wife or girlfriend to take those jeans and chinos down to the charity shop post-haste!

Because there’s only one type of trousers you’ll be wanting to wear, and that’s RED TROUSERS. In fact - if you can’t wear red trousers you’d be better off wearing NO TROUSERS AT ALL. That’s what I say.

Monday, 5 December 2011

Traveling trousers

Thank you to Debbie who spotted this fellow at Heathrow recently.

A nice plush velvety corduroy offset by a solid tweedy coat. Also: trousers pleasingly a couple of inches too short.

(Although - and not wishing to be unkind here - I'm not sure the small-bag-over-shoulder look is quite the thing for a true Terracotta Warrior...)


  1. A couple of inches too short? I think you need to get your eyes checked.

  2. RT wearer, BA flyer10 January 2012 at 20:40

    he is defiantly not terminal 5, therefore not flying BA, therefore a fraud?

  3. They are. Should fall on the shoe, just breaking the crease ( never crease jeans!)

  4. In full agreement with the above. These are definitely NOT 'a couple of inches too short'. Cords are supposed to be close-fitting, with little or no break around the ankles. In this case, then, I'd say this wearer has got them just about right.

  5. I concur. Nice fit. terrible bag.

  6. Concur on the very proper fit.

    Don't know why everyone hates on the bag, though. In Manhattan we call it a canvas shopper, and it speaks pleasantly of a) yuppie sustainabilism and b) don't give a damn mentality.