The Ethics of Vintage Styling
There has been some interesting posts popping up on the fashion blogosphere lately, examining the ethics of vintage fashion (see Gertie's New Blog for Better Sewing and the Renegade Bean as a starter). In particular, they've been concerned with the ethics of wearing vintage clothes from eras such as the 40's and 50's where women and minorities were very oppressed.
The topic interests me because as much as I hate the "I wish I had been born in the _______ era" sentiments that crop up occasionally, I really do like 50's and 60's clothing. I don't have much, but given a larger clothing budget, I probably would, and I'm not entirely sure why, nor why it's so prevalent these days.
To some extent, as many of the bloggers and commenters have mentioned, vintage styles idealize a different body shape than modern fashion, and for those who have that larger, curvier body shape it can be nice to wear clothing from a time when "flattering" doesn't mean "makes your body look like something it isn't". That's not the only driver, though, or we wouldn't see a similar trend in men's clothes or the general fascination with the 50's and 60's that makes Mad Men so popular.
I don't doubt that part of the allure for some people is a white-washed nostalgia for some mythical era where they imagine men were men, women were women, and everyone was happy happy happy. However, part of the draw of Man Men is that it doesn't cover up the seedier side of era, and shows the homophobia, the glass ceilings, and the sexism (although very little of the racism for some reason).
Maybe it's just a wish to bring forward the parts of that era we admire, while leaving the parts we don't. The appreciation for a time when Uggs and sweatpants were not appropriate for attending class, and where jeans at the opera were unheard of is a sentiment that shows up a lot in these discussions, and one I somewhat share. The New York Times men's article above and another of Gertie's posts both touch on the idea that fascination with vintage is the modern generation's rejection of their parents' society where ultra-casual dressing is a sign of prestige and "sexy" is represented by the Playboy logo. This seems a likely explanation, at least in part, to me. Fashions (in clothing and other things) tend to see-saw like that, as each generation tries to differentiate from the ones before, like the corsets of the 1900's giving way to the ultra-straight silhouette of the 1920's, which was rejected with the floofy skirts of the 50's.
Another reason, I think, might be the longing for an anchoring "culture" that I think is felt by a lot of North American youth today. Some seem to fulfill that desire by appropriating "more interesting" cultures in a disturbing bit of colonialism. Others, maybe, are trying to connect with their own history by wearing the outfits their mothers, grandmothers and great-grandmothers wore. The idea of connecting with history was mentioned both in Gertie's post and in the Renegade Bean, as well as other sites like b.vikki vintage. It's a history full of sexism, racism, and various other types of violence and oppression, but so is the history of pretty much any culture, era, or organization. Our current western culture is still tainted by inequalities. I'm not sure that the proper response to that is to shut everything before 1970 into a vault labeled "Bad Time: Do Not Touch". I'm not really sure what the proper response is, really, because while I think getting caught up in the style of a woman's skirt is kind of missing the point, I do think fashion is a pretty important part of culture and it's hard to separate the clothes from the attitudes.
The topic interests me because as much as I hate the "I wish I had been born in the _______ era" sentiments that crop up occasionally, I really do like 50's and 60's clothing. I don't have much, but given a larger clothing budget, I probably would, and I'm not entirely sure why, nor why it's so prevalent these days.
To some extent, as many of the bloggers and commenters have mentioned, vintage styles idealize a different body shape than modern fashion, and for those who have that larger, curvier body shape it can be nice to wear clothing from a time when "flattering" doesn't mean "makes your body look like something it isn't". That's not the only driver, though, or we wouldn't see a similar trend in men's clothes or the general fascination with the 50's and 60's that makes Mad Men so popular.
I don't doubt that part of the allure for some people is a white-washed nostalgia for some mythical era where they imagine men were men, women were women, and everyone was happy happy happy. However, part of the draw of Man Men is that it doesn't cover up the seedier side of era, and shows the homophobia, the glass ceilings, and the sexism (although very little of the racism for some reason).
Maybe it's just a wish to bring forward the parts of that era we admire, while leaving the parts we don't. The appreciation for a time when Uggs and sweatpants were not appropriate for attending class, and where jeans at the opera were unheard of is a sentiment that shows up a lot in these discussions, and one I somewhat share. The New York Times men's article above and another of Gertie's posts both touch on the idea that fascination with vintage is the modern generation's rejection of their parents' society where ultra-casual dressing is a sign of prestige and "sexy" is represented by the Playboy logo. This seems a likely explanation, at least in part, to me. Fashions (in clothing and other things) tend to see-saw like that, as each generation tries to differentiate from the ones before, like the corsets of the 1900's giving way to the ultra-straight silhouette of the 1920's, which was rejected with the floofy skirts of the 50's.
Another reason, I think, might be the longing for an anchoring "culture" that I think is felt by a lot of North American youth today. Some seem to fulfill that desire by appropriating "more interesting" cultures in a disturbing bit of colonialism. Others, maybe, are trying to connect with their own history by wearing the outfits their mothers, grandmothers and great-grandmothers wore. The idea of connecting with history was mentioned both in Gertie's post and in the Renegade Bean, as well as other sites like b.vikki vintage. It's a history full of sexism, racism, and various other types of violence and oppression, but so is the history of pretty much any culture, era, or organization. Our current western culture is still tainted by inequalities. I'm not sure that the proper response to that is to shut everything before 1970 into a vault labeled "Bad Time: Do Not Touch". I'm not really sure what the proper response is, really, because while I think getting caught up in the style of a woman's skirt is kind of missing the point, I do think fashion is a pretty important part of culture and it's hard to separate the clothes from the attitudes.