It is as though there was an intent to add more buttons to have it be able to close the coat up to my neck, but there are no buttons up around the neck as there are no buttons to match the holes.
And, before I bought the coat, I made sure it was not a one-off mistake; every coat of the same design on the rack had these started.
Lastly, if asked why I am buying a wool coat in August: I live in San Francisco and we are having our coldest summer ever. It was 58° degrees yesterday and worthy of a wool coat!
They’re there for reasons of form, not function. Same reason my suit coats have pockets that are sewn shut–you’re not actually supposed to put anything in them, because it destroys the line of the jacket.
How is sewing in unopened buttonholes on a lapel part of form?
And I always thought that pockets which were sewn shut were meant to be opened after purchase. Why else would they be made fully lined? If they aren’t meant to be used, then just the external flap could be created with no actual pocket inset.
Perhaps they are to give you the option to put buttons there if you like. Having buttons there to begin with might look slightly less attractive, so they leave them off. But they recognize some people might really want to button it up higher, so they leave that an option.
Because they want a coat that *looks like *it could be buttoned all the way up, without actually giving you the capability of doing so, because the style dictates that the coat be worn open at the neck.
It’s so you can give that rakish air of wearing the coat for it’s great looks, but actually not needing to keep yourself warm by buttoning it all the way up. . .
But then, wouldn’t they supply me with the same style buttons that are already on the coat? What would be the sense of giving me holes without the buttons? I actually wouldn’t mind buttoning it up higher and now have to hunt out similar-looking buttons…
They gave you holes without buttons because the coat is meant to be left unbuttoned at the top. Depending on the style, as it’s left unbuttoned, it’s entirely possible that no one will ever even *see *that there are no buttons across from the sealed holes.
Yeah, those are for replacing any buttons that fall off… not for affixing across from purely decorative holes that are never meant to be used.
Uh, no…they sew they pockets on suit jackets to make it easier to press the suits after it is made but before its are sold. You should take the thread out and use the pockets.
I am also a woman and my Armani suits came with the pockets closed. But the thread was removed to reveal pockets large enough for a compact, lipstick, drivers license, or more.
You can go ahead and put things in them, then. Stuff too much in there and they’re still going to look like ass. (Same with a guy putting much other than a pocket square in a chest pocket.)
Because they’re just for looks, so they’re sewn shut, to make it clear that they’re purely decorative and you shouldn’t try to cram any buttons through them.
Unless I’m sadly mistaken, with button holes (different from pockets) it’s not that they’re sewn shut, but that the hole is never cut in the first place. It essentially amounts to decorative stitching that exactly mimics a buttonhole, but without cutting the slit for a button to go through.
(Same with a guy putting much other than a pocket square in a chest pocket.)