Clothes for chaps

Short trousers

In something of a scoop for this column, here is a leaked question from this year's GCSE maths paper. If a 40-year-old Englishman of average weight goes for a 1.5km walk in temperatures between 26 and 27C, what is the probability of his appearing ridiculous in a pair of short trousers?

The answer, of course, is extremely high. I'm no fan of cultural stereotyping but there are some truths that remain stubbornly resistant to sympathetic interpretation. And chief among these is that the English do not look good in shorts.

There are several contributory factors involved in this aesthetic shortcoming. Pasty or pink skin makes for awkward colour coordination. The familiar combination of drooping stomach and skinny legs presents another challenge. And, as has been exhaustively documented, the sock-and-sandal look is one that no amount of irony can salvage from the depths of poor taste.

There is, though, a further problem, and one that is often overlooked: the shorts themselves. There is much that can be said in defence of khaki empire-builders, but they are a garment on which the sun should long ago have set.

And if you remove them from the equation, there isn't much left. For some years the hip-hop-inspired short has been involved in a quest to reach the top of the training shoe. It's now got so close that there's only a jock-sock in it and the short ought rightly to be reclassified as a trouser that's slightly too short.

Linen shorts are OK as long as you don't put anything in the pockets, which sort of renders them indoor wear. Sports shorts, unless worn by an athlete, are laughable. Yet none of this will prevent the ranks of English supporters from baring their legs and bellies in this World Cup. It seems our summer's just too short to worry about the right shorts.

Today's best video

  • Oscars Fashion Interactive

  • The NSA files trailblock image


Today in pictures