wide phenomenon influencing lifestyles and creating the main stream fashion of
the late sixties.
This was a form of anti-fashion as revolt. It was untidy and spontaneous and
radically different from the chirpy neatness of the earlier years of the decade and
the futuristic fashions of the previous few years. Boutiques such As ‘I was Lord
Kitchener’s Valet’ or ‘Granny Takes a Trip’ in London, both reflected the sartorial
anarchy of the times with their bright riotous designs.
Hippie women reacted against the dolly bird image of the early sixties that with
the arrival of the mini skirt had been designed to free the young woman from
sexual stereotyping. With its thigh revealing length it confined her in a look,
which aimed directly at the male’s libido. Although the late sixties have been
criticised for its naïve belief that free love and marijuana would solve the worlds
problems, there was a lot of creative activity which led to permanent social
change. People felt free to break down taboos. The woman’s, civil and gay rights
movements all started in this decade. Sexual stereotypes were being broken
down and ‘free love’ was on the agenda.
Men and woman began to look alike with unisex jeans and long hair, the older
generation felt increasingly alienated from the young. Experimenting with gender
was part of the revolution. As woman took up the banner for sexual equality, men
began to reject the fifties ideal of muscular machismo. The old mores of what
constituted male dress were broken down and men experimented with less
obviously masculine looks.
Much of the late sixties was, for many spent in a haze of drug induced euphoria.
The use of LSD was a powerful influence on ideas and dress. People
experimented with their lifestyles in the belief that they were somehow on the
road to a greater awareness and under standing, fuelled by the sensory
experience of acid and its ability to distort the senses, creates hallucinations and
vivid colours.
Fashion has always had it’s social conscience and can be the perfect vehicle for
powerful political messages, from the iconisation of Che Guevara’s portrait to the
anti- war slogans of Katherine Hamnett’s T-shirts. But the truly unexpected that
flies in the face of fashion its self can carry as powerful a signal as the blatantly
written message. Anti-fashion by definition is the opposite of fashion, so if it
exists, it should be different every time fashion changes. But its rules stay the
same because what it all represents is all negative- anarchy, destruction of order
and instigation of chaos.
By the mid 1970’s woman had discovered that that trousers gave them a sexual
neutrality that allowed them to compete in the work place. The 1980’s career girl
was now an executive who had business lunches and held boardroom meetings.
She was confident, independent and more liberated than ever. Designers created
outfits especially for these woman. Denim jeans were re-designed to fit woman,
and the designer’s name on a visible label became all-important. This period
launched ‘power dressing’.
Women's trousers have always reflected social change and women’s growing
confidence in their place in society. This was especially true during the seventies.
Now every woman has a pair of trousers of some kind in her wardrobe, whether
part of a suit or a pair of faded denim jeans. This continues to illustrate women’s
increasing sense of equality and freedom of choice in society, of which women's
trousers have been a constant measure.
Alongside this licence to choose from a range of styles regardless of the context
a more serious fashion aesthetic existed. The androgynous clothes many women
choose to wear expressed the growing women’s movement and their desire
to be taken more seriously they entered the work force on a more equal footing.
The seventies represented the twilight of an era of sexual liberation, over
indulgence and decadence. The sexual revolution may have been discussed at
length in the sixties, but it could be argued that it actually happened and
exploded in the seventies, especially in increasingly jaded ways. The chic new
sexual conventions of the day denied that a person’s sexuality could be neatly
classified.
During the 1980’s, fashion became integral to the newly emerging concept of the
lifestyle. The new wealth and prosperity hyped in the media were ever more
evident throughout the decade. In this decade there was a deregulation of the
stock market and an explosion in property prices. This helped establish the
culture of the yuppie.
There was enormous wealth around, but it was spent with a corporate mentality,
so that even the most exotic trophy wife appeared to be dressing not only for her
man, but for boardroom approval. Power dressing- dressing to show your
importance and bank balance, dressing for success, was in. Even if you were a
supermarket shelf stacker, you would still wear your impressive power suit in
Your spare time.
In the 1990’s Princess Diana of Wales, was a major influence. She had the rare
gift of combining aristocrat grace with the stature of a catwalk model. She
championed the interests of British fashion at home and abroad and had her own
unique international stage. Her style emerged over the years into a more
sophisticated and confidently intuitive one. Having Diana wear your outfit was a
priceless piece of publicity, but even for those who copied, she was a strong
influence and a tonic to the industry. She gave hope to a whole new generation
of couturiers and mainstream designers, and a new out look to many girls who
could now wear such clothes without having to be debutante.
To understand the constant changes in fashion, it is important to understand that
fashions are always in harmony with their era. As a famous designer expressed it
“Fashion is a social phenomenon which reflects the same continuing change that
rides through any given age.” Changes in fashion, he emphasised “Correspond
with the subtle and often hidden networks of forces that operate on society…In
this sense, fashion is a symbol”. Different views exist on how fashion changes
are started. Sprole & Burns categorised these views into two groups as follows-
- Because the fashion industry thrives on change, this idea suggests that
different segments of the industry force change on the consumer by dictating
new trends. Traditionally, European fashion houses exerted a powerful
influence; the trade media such as women’s wear daily, shaped the industries
choices. Therefore, consumer’s choices and retailers dictated what would be
worn by what they carried. Although all these forces are important, Sproles
noted “Changing fashion is a far more complex phenomenon that those with
the industry- centred views may wish to believe”. In recent years, many
consumers have become increasingly resistant to having new fashions forced
on them. Often consumers now exert a spirit of independence in their dress
by wearing what they feel is right for them, regardless of what the industry
promotes.
- Others who study fashion change, believe consumers are responsible for
what becomes fashionable. Given an array of products from which to chose
certain trends develop because a group of consumers establish that these
fashions are right. Four major theories suggest how consumers determine the
course of new trends; some trends may begin with the upper socioeconomic
consumers. Others may occur within all socioeconomic groups. Sometimes
fashions rise from subculture groups such as urban African- Americans, youth,
blue collar workers and ethnic minorities such as Native American. Nearly any
creative or initiative individual can launch fashion trends if they are consistent
with the social climate and lifestyles of the times (Sproles 1981).
Men and women are complex creatures whose actions are seldom governed by
reason alone. Change comes about for psychological reasons. People grow
bored of what they have, the eye wearies of the same colours, lines, and textures
after a time. What is new and different appears refreshing, and what has been on
the scene for a while appears dull and unattractive. Changes for such
psychological reasons occur also in the fashions for products other than clothing.
Auto manufacturers introduce new colours and shapes because potential buyers
tire of the same colours an shape.
Changes in fashion are also caused by rational reasons, such as environmental
factors that create knew needs. A classic example of social change that brought
about drastic change in fashions occurred in the early decades of the twentieth
century, when women sort, gained and enjoyed new political and economic
freedom. Their altered activities and concepts of them selves encouraged them
to discard the constricting garments that had been in fashion for centuries and to
adopt shorter skirts like those of Mary Quants, relaxed waistlines, bobbed hair
and other fashions more appropriate to their more active lives.
Generations later, as women moved into top executive positions in the business
world, the tailored suit, soft blouses and attaché bags became the ‘dressing for
success’ fashion of young career women in the late seventies and eighties.
The physical fitness movement in the 1970’s and 1980’s brought about the need
for exercise clothing, and as the interest in jogging, hiking, tennis and aerobics
grew, also did the need for new and different fashions appropriate to each of
these active sports. Casual Fridays and a shift towards working at home have
changed the way many people dressed for work in the 1990’s. Even
environmental concerns influenced fashion by avoiding the use of certain dyes
and finishes harmful to nature.
Conclusion
Although fashions change constantly and new ones appear almost every season,
a full-scale change over is never completed at any one time. In studying the
pattern in change in fashions, scholars have observed that changes in fashion
are evolutionary in nature, rather than revolutionary. It is only in retrospect that
fashion changes seem marked or sudden. Actually they come about as a result
of a series of gradual shifts from one season to the next. For example, when
women’s skirts became inching up from the mid calf in the 1960’s this gradual
shortening was not particularly noticeable at first. It was only when skirts moved
thigh high, in the form of minis and micro minis, that people took notice of the
approaching extreme.
Even today, when the rate of fashion change has execrated sharply, the pace of
change is really slower than it appears to the unskilled observer who has failed to
notice the early evolutionary movements in a new direction. The evolutionary
nature of fashion change is a fundamental principle that is recognised by fashion
practitioners, it provides them with a solid, factual foundation for forecasting and
identifying in-coming fashions. When planning and developing new styling ideas,
they always keep the current fashions and evolving directions in mind. Therefore
the expectance of a particular coat or dress fashion during a current season
becomes a straw in the wind for experts to search for clues to next seasons
trends.
The degree of it’s acceptance provides needed clues as to what will or will not be
welcomed by the consumer in the next season. Knowing that people do not
respond well to sudden changes, the fashion experts build gradually, not
abruptly, towards new ideas. Even the slowest most gradual of evolutionary
changes in fashion, do change eventually. Examples of this can be found in
history and recent times. For example when the mini skirts of the 1960’s moved
up to the micro mini skirts of the1970’s, hems began inching downward. Whether
it be skirt lengths, suit lapels, silhouettes or general fashion looks, all fashions
tend to move steadily towards an extreme, at which point a new direction
develops.
Bibliography
The fashion business- White and Griffiths
‘Don we now our Gay Apparel’ Gays mens dress in the 20th century- S.Cole
The face of fashion, cultural studies in fashion- J. Craik
Political History- P. Hadfield
The history of fashion- D. De’met
Fashion through out the ages- S. Paxton
Fashion Theory- H. Waterhouse
Word count
2564 words
