Many of them were dressed up like the typical patrons for the
Boston Early Music Festival. Wearing tennis shoes, blue jeans, unkept hair, and many were overweight. I would like look up to older people as role models, but where can I find exemplars for good fashion sense? I know of some seniors who do have an appreciation of looking good (which is not the same as buying expensive clothing). And I really doubt these movie-goers are poor--how can they afford to watch a movie at 1:00 in the afternoon if they were? Blue Jeans are good in so far as they are durable, and those who have to walk great distances may have a reason to wear them, in addition to those who are engaged in manual labor. And yes, in cold weather, a pair of slacks may be insufficient to protect one against the cold. But what about the supposedly "leisured" classes, who have transportation?
I wouldn't mind wearing "finer" clothing, semi-formal wear, but who is going to pay for it? As a grad student, I have no money to spend on expensive clothing. And who will pay to replace the dress pants or slacks, which will suffer the inevitable wear and tear that comes from hiking up and down the hill to campus? Still, I must confess that I hate the modern suit--particularly the coat and the pants. I would like to see the return of a heavier vest/waistcoast, rather than the very light vest that comes with the standard suit. Defending the use of the suit as a part of the dress of the bourgeoisie by calling it a 'uniform' or referring to tradition seems to me to be wrong-headed. (Jeffrey Tucker
recommends convention.) After all, it was not selected through a democratic process, but in the
U.K. at least was imposed from above. (Perhaps in France as well.) It was adopted by the new monied class, which gradually replaced the traditional elites. I am opposed to the uniformity that comes from centralization, and which is based upon a certain taste in fashion prevailing over others among the elites, while the rest of society is forced to keep up with the fashion tyrants.
Who can afford to replace their wardrobe year after year? Perhaps one can still submit to fashion trends and save money by purchasing the knockoffs from Target. Still, even to do this considerably seems extravagantly wasteful. As long as one's clothing can still be used, should not one keep it? What sort of economy (and exploitation) makes it possible for a minority (and a minority, even if we compare the popuplations of Western Europe, the United States, and the elites of other countries that benefit from them with the rest of the world) to have "fashion trends"?
Fortunately, the design of the basic coat has remained rather stable for the past 60 years or so. Why innovation for men's fashion has decreased, I do not know. Is it because the basic design (with some variations between the Italian, British, and American suits) has been spread all over the world? Yet, Western women's fashion remains considerably more differentiated, and it has achieved dominance in many non-Western markets as well.
These days my complaint about the modern coat tends to be more about the aesthetics than class identification and the pressure to conform to fashion trends (though I think those are valid points to make, especially when one looks at the moral issues involved in constantly changing fashion). I find the modern dress shirt and modern coat and the modern tie to be ugly compared to their 19th and 18th ce progenitors. I don't understand the continued attraction of contemporary designers to the modern coat. Couldn't someone be retro and lengthen the coat a bit? (For a day wedding I generally think a coat with "tails" is more attractive than the modern coat which is shorter in length. On the other hand, I wonder if I really like how they are open in the front...) It's too bad that one cannot return to the occasional use of a robe, unless one is a cleric and can wear a cassock or something similar. There are very few coat designs between the 17th and 20th designs that I would like, though the coats around the Regency period are good. Some styles during the 17th century definitely exhibit a certain triumph of appearance over function--if a coat does not keep one warm, what good is it? (I am thinking especially of those coats that apparently cannot be buttoned up and thus are useless for insulating body heat.)
As for the imposition of the Western suit worldwide as the uniform of office place and business class. I find it tragic that people, in their rush to adopt Western technology and practices, have given up their own native clothing. Among industrializing nations some attempts have been made to preserve something distinct, in part a reaction against Westernization. Indians have their Nehru jacket; the Chinese have their own version with a Mandarin collar, in addition to the
Zhongshan jacket? There are also the more
traditional-looking jackets or coats (which were actually derived from the
fashion introduced by the Manchus?)...
An
article from last year on
Blanc de Chine. Is the store in NYC open now? I tried visiting it a couple of years ago, but it did not exist. Perhaps it has opened since then. I will try looking for it next time I am in NYC.
I don't know if Jackie Chan is still affiliated with Blanc de Chine, but he often wears clothing inspired by traditional designs.
You can see more examples in his official
photo gallery.
Wiki's
History of Western FashionThe Costumer's Manifesto:
Costume History,
Links on Men's Fashion HistoryGoogle Directory01.04.11: A Chronological Look Through Fashion History: A Trip ...If I knew more about clothing and the proper fitting, perhaps I could answer the question of whether clothes of a certain style look better for one body type rather than another. Can anyone provide an answer?
Misc:
Roman Clothing -- Men
