September 25, 2020

OK - so in a couple of days, it's my birthday, and I always like to do something entertaining on my birthday - it's a celebration, and this year isn't different.

To join our conversation, tune in here: iTunes; Google; Spotify; Stitcher, and YouTube.

 

This podcast (check the bottom of this link for ways to listen on many different platforms) is literally to die for, and it's one of my favorite subjects. Lots of time folks say to me, how can you tell things are going to change and to what? Well, when you know where we've been, you can clearly see where we're going....to a point. Cause, after all, I can't totally see into the future, or else I'd be doing at the race track! No, I probably wouldn't be at the race track, but I would be investing in something to do with sewing!

 

 Suzy Menkes is one of those fashion reporters like Christy Binkley, and Cathy Horyn (Past NY Times fashion editor) - they absolutely know, hands down, what they are talking about and can cover anything clearly and with insight that the rest of us often don't/can't see.  Of course, Suzy sounds like an erudite scholar when she's talking, making it sound even better. She's been doing "Creative Conversations with Suzy Menkes" podcasts, and this month she's starting season 2 with Valerie Steele, the Director and Chief Curator of the Museum at FIT. And the two talk about the history of fashion.

 

I highly recommend you listen to the podcast because you can't help but be drawn into the world of fashion from a completely different perspective. But what's even more fascinating is studying the history of fashion that these two experts talk about.

 

As a short little primer into fashion history, I thought I would take us through the time machine and bring us up to modern times in fashion history.

 

Even though clothing is one of the 3 essentials of life (clothing, shelter, and food), fashion hasn't really been an integral part of our clothing until really more recently. Even going back to Egyptian, Ancient Greek, and Roman fashion, it was more or less draped on people. 

 

My cousin did the costumes for Julie Taymor's Titus movie, which was one of Shakespeare's earliest plays taking place in Roman Times.  Julie Taymor was the creative force behind the whole stage look Broadway version of Lion King. For the bath scene in the movie, Milena simply went in with a bunch of safety pins and white cloth and did a lot of draping on the actors and actresses. And this was probably pretty close to what the actual ancients did.

 

From antiquity to Enlightenment, most clothing was purely functional; even the royals' or leaders' costumes were for function. During the Enlightenment, style and fashion began to enter into clothe wardrobe of people. Especially as time progressed, there is more disposable income for fashion to be considered than simply functional clothing.  

 

 

See how we go from man-like fashion to vive la différence back and forth...from Empire waist (long and slim) to Victorian (bustle and cinched waist) to Coco & Elsa (long and slim) to Dior (the New Look) to the Swingin' Sixties (long and slim) to Alexis Carrington (shoulder pads and waist) to Grunge (long and slim) to.....you guess what's next.  It ain't that hard, and this gives you a whole new heads up on what's next. 

 

During Enlightenment, there's more than merely draping, there's more fit to the costume, and even an effort made at an armscye. There's the development of the middle class in the Netherlands. The most identifiable garment worn by Elizabeth I, with beading and the bejeweled fabric was the norm for a monarch, and Elizabeth wanted the world to know that England was as wealthy as any other country, so she dressed it.

 

 

In the 18th Cemetery, France, and French type fashion from hoop skirts to the Empire waist govern fashion. And personally, I consider Josephine Bonaparte's Empire waist gowns a perfect example of the change in fashion so much that she really began a "fashion movement" or "trend".  Looking at QEI's full over-embellished gown of as many jewels as the fabric could hold and the monarch still able to walk and stand in the gown, and the look of Josephine's gown.
 

 

Here the silhouette is completely different.  They are both luxurious and reflect the style of the monarch and leadership - one has a cinched in waist with the over exaggerated breast plate to further elongate and accentuate the small waist.  Then poof - no waist and all that structure thrown out the window with the whispiness of a soft breeze.  This is a total change in the profile of the style. 

 

Fashion always turns the opposite of the previous style, and that's one thing to note as we go further.

 

Enter the Victorian profile, progressing from that flimsy up-and-down silhouette of the Empire waist, to the more feminine profile again.  

 

The Victorian era the further progressed into Edwardian profile which was much the same only much more ornate.  Whereas Victoria was more moderate in her dress (and therefore the style of her era), the Edwardian era is much more flamboyant (more reflective of her son, King Edward VII)
 

But also you have the entrance of the father of couture Parisian fashion, Charles Frederick Worth. Hes started fashion shows or style shows, had models who wore the designs to show them off, appearing in fashion magazines, and had his clients come to his establishment, instead of the seamstress coming to the clients' homes, and putting labels in clothes.  These were all the hallmarks of the modern couture houses in Paris and then copies throughout the world.  

 

 

Sure enough next phase is completely opposite. So far we've gone from the androgynous Empire Look to the ultra feminine Victorian/Worth profile, now back to -- you guessed it - the exact opposite....

 

Flappers, Chanel and Schiaparelli, oh my!!!!
 

These designers all felt that the constricted look of the Victorian/Edwardian/Worth profile was for the birds, and loosened things up considerably. Chanel and her use of jersey for outer wear was revolutionary. But also Chanel's profile of a leaner, easier look in her "little black dress" was equally as revolutionary.

Not playing second fiddle, Elsa Schiaparelli also had her looser and more natural profile. Schiaparelli use a sleek, classic canvas of a suit, dress or garment to display her artistic elements, such as shoe hat, and other magnificent appliques or designs that made her garments so eccentric.  

 

And here we have a fascinating phenomenon. The Schiaparelli suit was so classic and easy to wear, that it became a main-stay in most women's closets. And by the time World War II started, rationing became a way of life. As such this classic pared-down suit became the main garment from the 20's to the late 40's - for almost 20 years. There has never been anything else that affected fashion to prolong a fashion style like this, till much later.

 

But finally the war was over, rationing was ending, and fashion needed to reflect that end, and it went nuts!

Dior, almost single-handedly brought back the capital of fashion to Paris.  During the way the fashion capital moved to New York, and they were bound and determined to keep it.  Unfortunately they didn't have what Dior had. BTW, this is a fabulous video on the innards of the Dior suit and what makes it such a beautiful garment.  I believe this is the original one.  There were a lot made by the House of Dior after his death, but I think the V&A got the original version.  

France had pretty much been devastated by the war, both as a participant in the war and as a occupied country.  What the French had was either used up or stolen by the occupiers to the point that very little was left.  Rationing stopped almost immediately after the war, but was re-instituted again after about 9 months because the resources were so limited.  Whereas the other Axis countries had access to the Marshall Plan, France (even though it was occupied) didn't because it wasn't part of the Axis powers.

But what Dior knew is that there was a population that had skills and the knowledge of those skills and the knowledge of how to use them.  These being the same skills that had brought France such remarkable works of art in the past, including fashion works of art.  Once he could tap those resources, he knew he could have a beautiful collection, and that he did in 1947.  It was revolutionary and started the Golden Age of Couture in Paris with designers like Balenciaga, Balmain, Fath, and later Givenchy, Yves St. Laurent, and Marc Bohan. 

 

Yards and yards of fabric were used to make this lush feminine look. The Dior waist could compete, inch for inch, with the Victorian waist. And although that was an exaggeration and hugely unrealistic in both circumstances, it was in reaction to the previous style. In the Victorian waist it was a reaction of the Empire straight profile as was the Dior waist a reaction of the Schiaparelli androgynous war-time profile. 

 

This profile morphed over the ocean to the US and became about as American as apple pie.
 

 

 

But as fashion does....it's time to change about 9 years later when Coco opens up her Maison in Paris again and shows her first show since the beginning of WWII, when she closed her salon. 

There is so much history tied up in this one garment that's it's hard to write it all down. 
 

• Mme. Chanel had cavorted with a low-level Nazi intelligence officer during World War II, then after the war moved to Switzerland with him, when she couldn't stand the forced, contorted look of the Dior silhouette and finally wanted to do something about it.
• In the meantime the French government was not happy with Mme. Chanel, and brought her up on conspiring with the enemy and wanted to send her to prison after the war.  Churchill and the Duchess of Windsor intervened and persuaded the French not to prosecute her.  That very odd duo, probably led me to believe that Chanel did some connecting work between Churchill and the Nazis toward the end of the war.  That's one very nice conjecture, but probably more realistic is that she knew how chummy the Duke and Duchess of Windsor had been with Hitler and his buds during World War II.  She knew some information that could actually hurt the British royalty, and Churchill would avoid that like the plague.  Remember it was during the World War I, that the British royalty changed the name of their house of lineage from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to Windsor.  Remember the Hanoverian Georges (include good ole #3 who lost the colonies), came from Germany after there was no clear heir for Anne Stuart.  The newly-named "Windsors" were very sensitive about their German roots and didn't want there to be any confusion that in both world wars, they were not German sympathizers.  But the Duke and Duchess of Windsor were out and about openly courting and socializing with Hitler and that really panicked the royals in England who were going to end up fighting Hitler.  Enter Mme. Chanel in all the middle of this, and probably had enough blackmail on the duke and duchess to turn any British royal really pale.  Enter Churchill and the duchess to save the day.
• That made the French even further mad and anything that "traitor" Chanel did wasn't worth beans to the French. 
• Then come the Americans.  By this time, the middle class in America is well-established and they have disposable income.  The American fashion magazines (Vogue and Harper's Bazaar are regularly covering all the fashion in Europe), are all a-ga-ga over this new, easy-to-wear, totally chic suit that the new jacket Chanel has offered in 1957.  And it's off and running, even though the French hated the suit and panned it.   It was the Americans and the American press that made Chanel's comeback and success and Mme. Chanel never forgot that.
• The jacket is based on the Geiger Jacket which is the classic Austrian jacket worn in the mountains by the natives.  It's a simple jacket and very basic in style and of course these native folks have to work in it, so it's very easy to wear.
• But Chanel does her own take with the jacket and it's not only fabulous looking, it is a dream to wear, as you will find out when you try one on or make one for yourself. She develops a construction technique that is unlike anything other technique by which she takes the loosely woven bouclé fabric and attaches it to a tightly woven, but equally draping silk, and voila.  The result is a stable jacket that is dreamy to wear but has enough structure to it to make it last forever as well as feel like that wonderful warm sweater that you wear around the house all the time.
• Additionally she decorates it will jewelry type buttons so that you really don't have to wear any jewelry with it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

As much as the Dior "New Look" suit was revolutionary in the 40s, Chanel's jacket was just as revolutionary in the 50s. In the later 50s.  The suit she designed is so classic that when Karl Lagerfeld came over in 1985 to revive the Chanel brand, he took the same design, updated to the 80's profile, and boom, the suit was back in style again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Chanel suit was the preamble to returning back to a more androgynous look with hip-huggers and mod styles of the 60s and 70s, that long lean look was once again in.

 

 

And again fashion changes....back to the more feminine silhouette only this time, it's the "Power look" with strong shoulder pads and strong waist, so definitely a woman is a woman, but with shoulder pads that will keep her looking like a woman while she rolls right over you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not only where the shoulder pads out of this world huge, there was glitz like only Elizabeth I could have, only it was everywhere.  It was glitzy, blingy and the ornamentation was over-the-top glorious.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This really was a beautiful time in fashion when ornamentation rivaled that of the Rococo Period of Italian Renaissance.  Each season the designers seem to encrust more and more beading, with more and more elaborate styles of beading.  The magic embroidery House of Lesage (with a soft "g") in Paris became the epicenter of fashion with magnificent examples of the artistry of jeweled embroider. 

As much as I loved this time of fashion, I knew it was time for change.  The change was inevitable, even though I knew most likely I wouldn't like it, and I was right.

In 1992, Marc Jacobs showed the first designer runway of Grunge for his premier show at Perry Ellis.  This was the first show after Ellis had died and Perry had picked Marc Jacobs as his successor.  The beancounters didn't think so and Jacobs was fired.  But here's the thing, it put Jacobs name on the fashion radar, and he hasn't left since.  Jacobs was also the genius behind the revamping of the Louis Vuitton old label with the Takashi Murakami happy designs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is almost the antithesis of Grunge, cause it's so happy and positive, and brought the Vuitton label back from the depths of obscurity.  Jacobs today does his own line, and makes his mark every season with his new looks. 
 

As a side note here, this is about the time that a change in fashion would have been natural.  This happened in 2000 about 10 years after Jacobs had presented his Grunge collection at Perry Ellis.  But something else happened to prevent that change.  In much the same way that World War II happened to prevent any change in fashion from the 20s to the 40s, is similar (not the same though) that happened to fashion from the 90s to the 2020s.

Grunge became a fashion style as well as a way of doing business.  It has so permeated the whole fashion industry that this business model and way of styling fashion has been with us now for almost 30 years - since 1992.   

It has become so addictive that even though designers, consumers and industry leaders want to change it, they can't......

....until now. 

We're going through another change in fashion.  Not since the Elsa Schiaparelli design of the lean suit was so prominent from the 1920s to the introduction of Dior in 1947, have we seen such a pent-up demand for change. 

Due to the pandemic and lock-down, the industry has an opportunity to restart, and my prediction is that it will restart with a huge bang.  We may have seen the beginning, but the real start is not yet there.

How do I know?  I've studied fashion.  It's time for the change and everyone wants it, and with the close of so many of the old Grunge-era stores, there's a chance to restart and that means that fashion will change big time. 

Of course the great thing for we sewists, is that we can turn on a dime.  But here's a few things to look for.

The Grunge was characterized by:

• Ill-fitting clothes
• clashing, mis-matched prints and graphics
• torn, ripped-up looks
• hip-focused pants - yoga cut, boot cut pants

Where we are going is the opposite:

• well-fitted clothes, but how will that fit manifest itself - it won't most likely be skin tight (too tight - more ill-fitting) and won't be too big (again the old ill-fitting look)
• coordinated, well-blended and well-thought-out pieces
• finished edges with lots of detail in the finishing
• away from the hip - probably to the waist, but away from the hip.

Exactly how this will display itself is uncertain, but you can see it in Rodarte, in John Galliano, in Jason Wu and certainly in Zac Posen.  It's coming. 

 

This is what studying history can give you (as well as ideas that can fill your head with all sorts of looks).  Yes, we will revisit the Opulent 80s, the Dior New Look, the Victorian cinched waist,  The Marilyn Monroe/1950s vive la diffèrence but it will be in a different way - the way that Alexis Carrington, Dior and Queen Victoria were all different, it will be different in the 2020s!
 

---

September's Feature Resource
 

Fitting With Proportion and Figure Flattering Tools

 

aka Apex and Proportion Tools

This is one of my best resources in the library as it collects the 40 years of experience I have i fitting all sizes, shapes and styles.  And I mean all of them.  A dwarf who was a bridesmaid - the bride brought me the fabric and trim and a photo of what the other girls were wearing - and she wanted something that would really last and it did!  Another debutante had scoliosis surgery (to correct her spinal curvature which would have eventually pressed against her lungs and kill her) 3 months before the ball and I designed her dream dress to wear on her special night.  Then countless grandmothers and mothers who watched their granddaughters and daughters be fitted by me and wanted the same treatment.  Their bodies weren't so complicated as much as having 30 to 60 years of living in them and like all of us wanted to look special. 
  These figures all taught me that we are all different, but it also taught me that we can all be fitted.  Usually clients showed up at my door with some problem that RTW couldn't solve.  But after I finished a few years of my clients, the word spread, that I could do anything (well, except read minds and defy gravity) and the challenges continue to today.  I love these challenges (I have one this fall that I will share with you later, that I'm really excited about).
 
And I love sharing these techniques and tools with you because there's more to sewing than simply perfecting construction techniques. There's the looking good in your garment;  there's the feeling good in your garment;  there's the feeling comfortable in your garment; and there's the being flattered in your garment.  As sewists we have so much more than simply making a garment when we can have all this comfort, flattery and fit too! 

You sorta feel sorry for those who can't sew - And no, you don't sew for others, unless it's for someone really special!

The Fitting With Proportion and Figure Flattering Tools Resource is available here and is at a 16% off.  I rounded the cents down so it's a little more discount this month.  
 

---