I've never been a die-hard fan of belts. To be honest, I used to not even consider myself a fan at all, actually quite the opposite. I asked the actor Diego Martín about it and as he expressed his opinion, a little voice within me repeated his words, reaffirming them. I quote verbatim: “No belt. Basically, no. I have a special hatred for them. It seems to me that they cut the silhouette and they seem uncomfortable to me. There is nothing more beautiful than a clean waist, and pleats are perfect for that. Even with jeans, I prefer to touch-up the waist to make it correct than to wear a belt ”.
I remember having a co-worker who always asked me why I wasn't wearing a belt. Not that yours truly was showing off his butt or brand of underpants; the skater or similar era went down in history a long time ago. Her question was on a purely aesthetic basis, and I, channeling Diego Martín, responded in a similar way to the actor, although somewhat more concise. "Side adjusters, partner. There is no need to cut the silhouette, not like it's lacking”.
When, to make matters worse, it was a question of dress pants, the question came to be considered hurtful. My eyes would bleed and bleed when I saw those suits with a huge belt accompanying them. No, by God. We all remember that innumerable list of brands that stamped their large logos on belt buckles that famous grupettas of footballers and singers wore... But in recent years I have been relaxing -not so much with these-, and I am no longer so intolerable to those who wear them or to belts themselves. What's more, I even like some, a lot.
We could both classify them as vintage or under the aesthetics of vintageism. Because on the one hand I like the thin belt, typical of those 40s and 50s; sober, clean, in leather and with a subtle buckle, without fanfare, which seems to be a trend and which has been recovered by a multitude of firms to reproduce it; and on the other hand, the western-type belt. It is in this second type where the range is extensively expanded to offer multiple options depending on how snobby or how much a lover of vintage one is. Also these, by the way, have also been recovered and reproduced by many other current firms.
After reading this you will probably be thinking that one is far from the other and that it is strange that someone can feel admiration for both. They are indeed different belts, but that does not imply that they are not admired by the same subject. I would love to have a Matisse and a Cézanne at home. Fauvism vs Post-Impressionism. Different? Yes, and?
After the miniscule art lesson -I am a layman in the matter, but admirer-, I can say that either of the two belts can be used almost interchangeably, although more and more, and despite the recommendations of my colleague Manuel, aka @orenim, and his long collection of vintage belts emulating his (our), revered Ralph Lauren, more and more I like the first type, and among them, those of Berg & Berg, have definitely taken over yours truly's heart.
Berg & Berg belt in black suede
Today I have in front of me his big calf leather black in size 85 - yes I am slim -, and I am willing to gut it. Not with a plan destroy it, of course, with the plan to make as exhaustive a review as possible.
I have been wanting to have something from the Swedish firm for a long time. Today it is one of the firms with which I find myself closest, in terms of ideas. I suppose that the figure of Andreas Larrson, creative director and partner, has something to do with it. That ability to create casual looks, but tremendously elegant and clean, is enviable. But let's get on with the belt. As I have been commenting, I like thin belts, and this one in particular is characterized by having a width of 25 mm. A perfect measure and very consistent with what I was looking for. Something narrower would bring it closer to a somewhat feminine abyss and something wider would bring it closer to the tacky belt that we want to avoid completely. Above all, if we are going to use it with looks like those proposed by our Swedish colleagues, and that, frankly, we have no buts about it. If you like the classic Ivy look, passed through a Scandinavian blender from the nineties, you will like the looks that Larrson proposes.
Berg & Berg belt
Styling: Andreas Larrson.
Most of the doubts arose in the choice of color. It's an important detail to know the use that you are going to give a belt and based on that, choose one color or another. The rules dictate that the color of the belt is directly linked to that of your shoes. That is, brown to brown, and black to black. In my opinion it's a rule more in line to if you are going to wear the belt with a suit. In that case, yes. In the informal case, I don't think it's that relevant, although if you have doubts, you know, buy both. I chose black because my idea is to wear it with beige, cream or off-white jeans and black calf loafers; or unwashed selvedge jeans with white sneakers without a logo or the same calf black shoes.
The brushed metal buckle is circular, which I appreciate because I have always found those more elegant than the rectangular ones. But I also doubted the buckle, and I also did so with the color, whether gold or silver. And although lately I really like incorporating gold pieces into my looks, since most of my watches have some gold details, I opted for the silver buckle. Berg & Berg has 4 models of belts, with identical designs, but different characteristics. Two of them go with a gold buckle, and both are in suede, brown or black. The other two models have a silver buckle and grained calfskin to the detriment of suede. A leather from Italy, touching it is enough to realize the unquestionable quality that it treasures.