Post # 1
We’re in the midst of debating the pocket square for FI and his groomsmen. I think it gives a nice finished look, but FI is worried it would be ‘too much’ with the boutonniere. FI and his groomsmen are wearing identical black suits, white shirts and ties that coordinate with the bm’s sage dresses. Will/did your groom wear a pocket square?
Post # 3
Mine are wearing pocket squares, but not bouts. My fiance requested that he not wear flowers.
Post # 4
Same. Pocket square, no flowers. $$$ saved!
Post # 5
Pocket square. No bout. Too cheap to pay for them and too lazy to make them myself 🙂
Post # 6
We haven’t decided whether we will go with boutonnieres or with pocket squares, but we will not do both. I agree with your FI that both is too much.
Post # 7
My DH never wears a sport coat without a pocket square. So her certainly had one for the wedding, LOL. He also sported his bout. I don’t think it looked like “too much” at all, but the bouts were VERY simple. I think as long as the bout isn’t gigantic or too ornate that it would look fine.
Post # 8
I guess there are a couple answers to this… In the classical black-tie world, a boutenniere and pocket square are perfectly acceptable. But in the classic black-tie world, they are contemplating a simple white linen or silk pocket square and a simple bout that is placed through the button hole. So technically it’s not too busy. Certainly not too busy for sartorial geniuses Cary Grant, Tom Ford and Fred Astaire. Just Google those fellows. Or take a look at how they dress this scruffy model in his tuxes in one of The Rake Magazine’s issues focussing on black tie:
Some of those looks are a bit out there for me in terms of bowtie proportion and man-jewelry, but you get the idea. You’ll note that in these types of photos, they don’t use what I’ll term Wedding Industry Boutonnieres. Those large combinations of flower and babies breath and ribbons, etc, that are pinned to the front of the lapel with a large stem showing. In my opinion, if you want to do boutonnieres plus a PS and maintain a clean look, choose a very simple flower and see if you will be able to place the flower through the button hole. (Problem: these are often sewn shut or non-existant on modern suit jackets).
Of course, you’re just doing suits, so the tux pics above may not help much. But check out Cary Grant in some of his suits with boutenniere and PS combinations and you may be able to convince the future hubby it won’t be too busy. Nothing that man ever did was too busy. That’s precisely how I came on board, as I initially did not want to do both for my wedding either.
The other answer is that Wedding Industry Bouts can be too much all by themselves, and adding a PS just adds even more. So if your fiance is imagining a deceased parakeet pinned to his lapel and then you’ve asked him to throw in a PS, his head could be spinning for good reason. If you guys do go with a PS/Bout combo, I personally would prefer white linen or cotton and folded in a TV fold so that it is nice and conservative (ad feels part of the suit) sitting behind/below the flower. That will minimize busy-ness mistakes that could result from getting too colorful, adding patterns, and playing with the shape of the PS.
Post # 9
We’re using pocket squares. The groom insisted apon it…and the tuxedos for that matter.
The groom’s is just a black square on his black tux that will be the puffy fold. He’ll have a boutoniere to match my bouquet.
I got the bridal party a nice patterned pocket square. I hadn’t even thought about it w/o a boutoniere that’s a money saver.
Post # 10
I guess we were the opposite — bouts and no pocket squares. There’s just something “old man” looking about pocket squares, in my opinion. (Sorry – don’t mean to offend anyone.) I kind of agree with your FI that the square AND the bout is overkill. I’d definitely only do one or the other. Good luck deciding!!
Post # 11
The guy at the tux place says it’s usually one or the other. We already order the bouts so that is what we are doing. I do love the look of pocket squares though.
Post # 12
Just for posterity, here’s a fella who manages to wear both with eveningwear. And he dresses James Bond 🙂