|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources |
|
|
|
Suiting Oneself
| Article
# : |
13276 |
|
|
Section : |
LIFE
|
| Issue
Date : |
10 / 1987 |
1,674 Words |
| Author
: |
Elgy Gillespie
Elgy Gillespie is a free-lance writer living in San Francisco,
California. |
The bespoke suit accompanied the beginning of the industrial age, conferring the camouflage of white-collar status upon whomever wore it. Practical and egalitarian, it concealed the potbelly and spindly legs of the inactive and unathletic. It spoke of commerce and bourgeois values and became as much a necessity of postindustrial urban living as the car.
Compared to women's clothing, men's suits are sadly lacking in color and seduction. But this is because the suit must reflect the metropolitan landscape, sounding the keynotes of function and practicality. It was not always so; in the early nineteenth century, the Beau Brummells of the dandified classes tried to outstrip females in ever more extravagant and outrageous costumes.
When and why did men opt for conformity and uniformity? It was in the mid to late nineteenth century, when they often worked more in offices, and could buy affordable off-the-rack ready-mades.
The lounge or sack suit began its life as leisure attire emphasizing practicality and masculine "detachment" from the "feminine" interest in fashion. No more foppishness for the modern man! Some sociologists, like George Darwin, even tried to match cultural Darwinism with the suit, saying that it was a sign of progress in its uniformity and drabness (1872).
Very acceptable modernity
It has been a long haul to the eighties' suits worn with red braces and bow ties with flying ducks, however. Jo Barraclough Paoletti, fashion historian at
... (1999 of 9799 Characters)
Read Full Article
|
|
