Dress Codes part 2

• Evening Dress Codes

(D)evolution of Formal

	“Formal”	“Semi-formal”	“Informal”
Pre WWI	tailcoat	(not applicable)	dinner jacket
Interwar (Classic)	tailcoat	dinner jacket	suit
Post WWII	dinner jacket	dark suit	sports jacket & tie
Modern	dinner jacket or dark suit	dark suit	varies; often confused with “casual”

Comparative Evening Dress Code Interpretations

As previously discussed, evening dress codes were simple in Victorian and Edwardian times. Any occasion where women were present was implicitly considered formal and called for men to be attired in a tailcoat and appropriate full-dress accompaniments. Stag affairs, on the other hand, were regarded as informal and permitted the use of a dinner jacket if gentlemen preferred.

Following World War I standards were relaxed and only the most ceremonious and prestigious of affairs were regarded as formal enough for a tailcoat. The dinner jacket consequently became the default apparel after six o’clock and by the 1930s was increasingly being referred to as “semi-formal”.

World War II prompted a further loosening of social mores one of which was the acceptance of the common suit at casual evening affairs and the consequent elevation of the dinner jacket to special occasion attire. While some communities maintained the pre-war categorization of formal tailcoats, semi-formal dinner jackets and informal suits, other segments of society that had little reason to wear white tie began classifying the tuxedo as formal and the suit as semi-formal. This new interpretation became increasingly popular during the Peacock Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s when the appearance of such casual attire as the leisure suit and turtleneck bumped the suit even further up the dress code ladder and all but guaranteed the redundancy of full dress.

Today, in an age when it is not uncommon for men to wear T-shirts to the office and sandals to the theatre, the concept of formal is even more ambiguous. While the traditional codes are still held to by pedigreed authorities and the upper class in general, mainstream web sites offer numerous contemporary definitions more suited to those that choose their dress based on what is tolerated instead of what is preferred.

Evening Wedding Dress Codes

Now that dress-up events have become the exception rather than the norm, the traditional terminologies are rarely used for anything other than weddings, the last bastion of middle-class formal ritual. In these circumstances the code sets the expectations not just for dress but for all other aspects of the event ranging from invitation format to ceremony venue to reception size. For this reason, the dress code is usually not made explicit but is implied by context or by word of mouth.

In the United Kingdom weddings are only performed during the day so evening dress codes do not apply. In the North America the interpretation of dress codes for evening weddings has changed over the years - just as with other types of special occasions - and today different communities adhere to different standards. The traditional American protocol is represented by the guidelines from Emily Post's Etiquette:

	"most formal"	"semi-formal"	"informal"
male wedding party (groom, his attendants, father of the bride)	formerly white tie; revised in 2004 edition to allow for black tie as an alternative	black tie	tuxedo if bride wears dinner dress, otherwise dark suit in winter, lighter suit in summer
male guests	tuxedos if women wear long dresses, dark suits if short dresses	dark suit	dark suit

U.S.Traditional Evening Wedding Dress Codes

Contemporary American etiquette sources, on the other hand, prefer the post-war or modern interpretations of the various codes but divide the most formal category into sub-categories to allow the inclusion of both the tailcoat and the tuxedo (and sometimes even the dark suit). These sub-categories are often explicitly designated as White Tie or Black Tie. As with the traditional guidelines, male guests usually dress one category below the groomsmen.

Afternoon weddings with evening receptions pose a particular problem in that evening wear should not be worn before six o’clock. If you are planning such a wedding and don’t wish the ask the wedding party (and guests) to change before dinner then the traditional rule is that morning dress (formal daytime dress) is allowable in the evening on such occasions. Alternately, you may wish to take advantage of the etiquette exceptions that allow for evening wear to be worn prior to six. One exclusion is that “evening” can be defined as 6 o’clock or dark, whichever comes first. Another is that it is allowable to wear evening dress prior to six provided that a person is on his way to an evening function.

For summer or tropical weddings that require tuxedos a white dinner jacket is a popular – and correct – alternative. At all other times only the traditional form of black tie should be worn to a wedding; both conventional and modern authorities agree that this is not an appropriate time to be “creative.”

Of course, many unsophisticated wedding planners will be ignorant or even disdainful of conventional protocol. This means that as a guest or groomsman you may well find yourself invited to dress in evening wear in the middle of the day or to don a “formal” outfit that is more suitable for a Halloween costume. In such situations the only polite response is to grin and bear it.

• Gray Areas

Clearly, interpreting dress codes today is far more complicated than it was in years past. About the only sure thing nowadays is that attending a formal wedding will require formal attire. As A Gentleman Gets Dressed Up explains:

When invited to an evening wedding, a formally worded invitation engraved on heavy, stiff card stock is a very likely indicator that black tie is appropriate or even expected. A gentleman is well advised to wear his dinner clothes if he is also invited to the reception following an evening wedding, especially if the site of the reception is an upscale country club or other swell establishment.

Of course, as the book also points out, the best solution for uncertain guests is to ask for clarification:

If a gentleman has any doubts as to what he should wear to a wedding – or any other ceremonial occasion, no matter how formal or informal, - he feels free to contact his host or hostess, simply asking “what do you think most of the fellows there will be wearing?” He does not content himself with asking uninformed friends, “Well, Jack, what do YOU think I ought to do?”

When such clarification is not possible, experts are divided on whether to risk being underdressed or overdressed. One school of thought includes the authors of A Gentleman Gets Dressed Up and Men’s Style who feel that “the former may be interpreted as a simple misunderstanding [while] the latter suggests conscious premeditation.” In the opposing camp are pundits such as Debrett's author John Morgan who advises that it is better to take the high road:

The first step is to forget the old British adage that it is ill bred to be overdressed. This guideline has outlived its shelf life, as it was conceived in a period when it was the accepted norm to dress up for any activity more than gardening. At this time overdressing meant being got up in a flashy, overly elaborate or embarrassing way and took no account of the modern invasion of sports-inspired clothes that has enslaved whole swathes of the nation into sweats and trainers.

As previously noted, Morgan's view is that erring on the over-dressed side is a sign of appreciation towards a host who has put considerable effort into arranging the evening’s festivities.

Ultimately, though, there is absolutely no reason for the confusing gray areas caused by ambiguous traditional dress codes: Thoughtful hosts can always make their intentions crystal clear by using alternative codes that literally spell out the required attire.

• Black and White Clarity

As mentioned in the discussion of contemporary wedding dress codes, many authorities now prefer to replace or enhance traditional relative terminology with precise attire-based codes.

As the interpretation of formal and informal became progressively more subjective following World War II, hosts have increasingly turned to much more specific alternatives out of consideration for their guests. At the dressiest end of the scale, the appearance of White Tie (or Evening Dress in the UK) on an invitation announced that male guests were required to wear a tailcoat with the appropriate accoutrements while the ladies were expected to wear ball gowns. Black Tie (or Dinner Jackets in the UK) declared that traditional tuxedos and evening gowns were required. For the least formal evening affairs, Business Attire (or Lounge Suit in the UK and Europe) allowed guests to attend in conservative suits.

This black and white system worked perfectly for decades until declining dress standards introduced a slew of variations. The advent of “business casual” in the 1990s muddied the universal concept of business attire and party hosts consequently grasped for more descriptive alternatives forcing guests to decipher such ambiguous guidelines as Dressy Casual or Cocktail Attire.

Similarly, the 1970s reinvention of formal attire led to a number of confusing variations of the Black Tie theme that were counterintuitive to the dress code’s role as a tool for precision and clarity. The following page defines these variations and, more importantly, explains why they are to be avoided.