what clothing/shoes/similar related items should a "gentleman" "have"?

[verdict]

It's not often that I totally disagree with other posters here (except for Fozzy!).

A gentleman (or a lady) is not defined by what he owns but rather by his behaviour. So my list:

1. Manners
2. Compassion
3. Empathy & Sympathy
4. Drive, Motivation, Initiative
5. Integrity
6. Patience
7. Understanding
8. Maturity
9. Grooming

Granted, age old definitions of Gentlemen and Ladies were based upon refinements that only came with wealth but only the manners and the grooming are purchasable with just a little money. And even that is arguable. A person who shows up to a funeral, a wedding, a graduation (etc.) dressed in a t-shirt, shorts and flip flops has little manners. But, I've met many a gentleman wearing bib overalls.

Great post. Oh how wonderful it would be if people my age would act like this.

So what the OP is saying:

1. Nice, proper clothes, shoes & accessories.
2. Grooming items
3. Tools - screwdrivers, pens, flashlights, etc.

I have a little of everything but I'm slacking on all three fronts too. I need to buy a full sized SAK!

What is a flask for though? Why can't you go out and drink?

 

[The Knize]

I thought this would be an interesting thread!

<A gentleman (or a lady) is not defined by what he owns but rather by his behaviour.>

I know, I know. I admitted a definitional problem at the beginning. "Gentleman" has a variety of meanings, and I think part of the problem is that there was a time when some strata of society thought that only those with money, social standing, "things," could truly have the human qualities MS lists. There are such definitions as a "gentleman is never unintentionally rude." And sometimes when I see references to "gentlemen" on this forum, and what gentlemen do, etc., I think that back in the day a lot of what gentleman did was to oppress and live off the hard work performed by others!

So I do not know what descriptive word to use for what I am trying to get at. I suppose a man (not a woman) of some means, beyond a certain age, with a reasonable income, that interacts with society and community on a regular basis, in a somewhat well off way. If one never has to wear anything but jeans or has taken a vow of poverty, caps off. This exercise is not intended to be a moral one. Or to lay out rules for defining the social classes. No aspirtins being cast here.

But this exercise is directed to mostly "things" one should possess if one is a particular "way," even if that "way" is hard to define!

And I do think it is fun to think about what a "gentleman" was once supposed to have and what one "has" now! I also realize that for fun we are switching back and forth between what most gown-up mean should have, and what a rich guy might think he has to own!

<a selection of angling gear, at least three shot guns, one for skeet, one for trap and one with which to hunt."

Of course. And the angling gear must include, if not be composed entirely of fly fishing gear. And the shotguns should be bespoke, along with much that a gentleman owns!

And a selection of rifles, too. The right tool for the jo in every case. And clothing and boots suitable for each manner of hunting.

And a set of dueling pistols!

<A gentleman ought to be proficient in fisticuffs, with a sword, a knife and a sword.>

Yes, except not "knife." A gentleman does not take a chance on getting his hands bloodied! Knifes are for folks who cannot afford swords or are not allowed by law to have swords. Gentleman were once largely knights, and only persons of a certain status were allowed to possess swords. Proficient in epee and foil too. I assume by "sword" is meant "saber."

Depending upon where one lives, a gentleman should be able to pilot a sail boat, and play a reasonable game of cricket. A gentle in the States has a working knowledge or the rules of baseball and football. The latter, for one thing, because he prepped and went to an undergraduate school where football was played, and likely one of the schools where it was first played.

Yes, and darn right, I surely did leave out a well-made umbrella. Actually four. "One to leave at home, one to leave at the office, one to leave in the car, and one to leave on the train"! <g>

<I'm afraid, TK, a properly filled wine glass is never half-full. Red wine should be served in a Burgunder, and only filled 1/4 to 1/5th, depending on the size of the glass (which should be a pint in volume). White wine should be filled about 1/3 full for the appropriate glass, which should hold about 3/5 of a pint.>

Well, fair enough. I was first trying in part to get past juice glasses. And I do not think wine glasses of a smaller size and different shape are necessarily gauche. But the glass should still be stemmed. If one is in a cafe, or say a picnic, or on the boat, one is not likely to break out the Burgunders. And I think a smaller glass could be filled as much as 1/2 full, but no fuller. And we are not talking port, madiera, or sherry here, of course. Or sparkingly wine. I suppose a gentleman should know how to open a bottle of any of those, for instance without taking a chance on blinding someone with a sparkling wine cork, and when to serve them, and with what.

<Collar stays? Really?>

How can a gentleman possibly get by without collar stays/bones. No gentleman would wear a shirt with collar stays sown in, for instance!

<I've cut a cigar perfectly using a Mora Clipper >

Maybe a gentleman should have the skills to be able to cut a cigar perfectly with a Mora Clipper! Or to uncork a bottle of wine even if a cork screw is not available!

<In fact, gentlemen in the age of the horse would almost never water or groom a horse- he would know whether it had been done right, even if he didn't know how to actually do it right.>

I agree that a gentleman would not normally do these things himself. But I think a real gentleman would be able to do these things as well as to recognize when they are done right. A gentleman does not have a servant do things for him because he is incompetent or lazy, but because he chooses to have things done for him rather than do them himself. At least that is the fiction. A gentleman has a valet, but that does not mean he is incapable of dressing himself!

Actually a true gentleman (I think we are starting to confuse gentlemen with aristocratesor men of leisure, but what the heck) does not have a wallet, because he never has a need to touch money directly. Handling actual money or coins would be too pedestrian/gauche. I am confused on this one. A gentleman/aristocrat does not have a watch because he is a man of leisure not concerned about the time, as his time is his own. On the other hand, a gentlemen is never late. Or better put arrives at exactly the right time after the time stated for the start of an activity.

A gentleman is able to tie a bow tie. (It is assumed that a man can tie a regular tie!) For that matter, a gentleman knows how to tie knots, whether for maritime, equestrian, or other gentlemanly pursuits.

It may be that a true gentleman is able to play the piano to some extent. He certainly should be familiar with classical music and opera. Know when to applaud and when not to, for instance!

And again, a gentleman is never unintentionally rude.

 

[scottish steve]

I've also opened a bottle of wine with a British Army Knife (not a Swiss). It's a wonderful multitool but try to get an original from the '40s or '50s.
But yes I agree a gentleman of yesteryear probably wouldn't carry a knife.
Nowadays he probably does, but not a full-on tactical assualt weapon and not in stealth coating!
So
For continuing discussion, my best effort:
A gentleman of today is....
"capable of presenting himself in all social situtations without looking or acting out of place; self-reliant enough to accomplish everyday maintenance to his person, property and home; willing to exert sufficient effort to keep said property and person in good order, such that an unexpected guest does not prove embarassing; respectful of tradition and learning sufficient to be an interesting companion; humane enough to be willing to act when circumstance presents a choice between indifference and compassion; free of rancour when dealing with those of greater accomplishment and/or wealth; free of contempt when dealing with those unable to appreciate refinement; desirous of opportunities to increase his understanding of himself and the world around him"

 

[KM-instructor]

I think all a real gent needs is Manners and INTEGRITY, and a good pair of boots.

 

[Kazeryu]

More seriously, I have always thought this to be the most concise summation:

"This is the first test of a gentleman: his respect for those who can be of no possible value to him."

 

[verdict]

More seriously, I have always thought this to be the most concise summation:

"This is the first test of a gentleman: his respect for those who can be of no possible value to him."
-Originally Posted by William Lyon Phelps

Even if the ones who are annoying? I met a few kids like that in college, and I can't say I have any respect for them.

 

[Kazeryu]

Even if the ones who are annoying? I met a few kids like that in college, and I can't say I have any respect for them.

There are several ways to approach your question, perhaps the oversimplified version would be "Treating someone with respect Vs. Holding them in high esteem."

Don't mistake my meaning -- It's very difficult to smoothly and genuinely treat someone with respect if you are looking down your nose on them all the time - that sort of thing leaks out in unconscious actions and decisions. You must have actual regard for others. However, that doesn't mean that you must be some sort of Mother Theresa - If someone is behaving anti-socially, there is no reason for you to continue to interact with them. The trick is to disengage without resorting to their level or stereotyping them in the future.

 

[Tim_McD]

Cash