Hyperfemininity S/S 2012: Do women want to look like that again?

[fashionista-ta]

^ I'm not sure anyone's disagreeing that the 50s were 'a bit oppressive.' I think that's true ...

 

[softgrey]

thankfully---
there are a lot of other options available to choose from if this isn't your cup of tea...

 

[Not Plain Jane]

^ Yes, we'll always have Paris!

 

[softgrey]

the belgians and the japanese rule paris~
that's where the gold is...



i think rick owens just graduated from milan to paris this season...
i think he should show in paris next season...
or NEW YORK......
that d*mn guy is american!...
he should come back here and give us something interesting for a change...!!!...
...

 

[neonsprinkles]

Thats really insightful. I really loved the last sentence too. Because maybe when it all comes down to it nostalgia/memory is what makes people react the way they do towards a designer collection or even to other events in history. It's all a matter of perspective. And the way one person remembers something may be vastly different then how others see it. Which is why I love threads like this- while we might not all agree we are all able to state our opinion. And to me the 50's was a bit oppressive whereas to other people they don't see it that way. It's quite interesting really.

^Definitely.

Nostalgia and post-WW2 has been gaining more and more momentum the past 6 months. I live in LA, and there's this weird strive back to "Western Americana" thing I see.

I do agree that the 50s (to live in that era), I would've hated it but the "idea" of it (so quaint) has an appeal. To skip ahead a little over 50 years later and look at the U.S. now...not everyone's happy, China is gaining financial momentum, U.S. dealing with the middle east and the idea of "terrorism" in our society, there's hardly any production in the U.S., dirty politics, the extreme wealthy taking advantage of the economy, the middle class of America is slowly getting squeezed out of existence, tuition for college/higher education is constantly rising, culturally the midwest exists in a completely different culture/time frame from the west coast or east coast. Everything in the U.S feels chaotic.

....It's really interesting to see another person of a different background/ethnicity/race do their take on American history. Prada Spring/Summer 2012, the commentary (from style.com) mentioned...

"it's an interesting idea that the 50s might have been the last time that people could be unambiguously optimistic about the future"
- Tim Blanks

"...Post war modernity is the beauty of things, the beauty of cars, and in the way, the beauty of America..."
- Carlo Antonelli (Rolling Stone Italy)

....the memory of America, the golden era of America, the 'new-ness' of 50s America is a historical element that in 2011/2012, designers play with. You see it in fashion, you see it in (American) media...to see that synchronization is really interesting and I'm still trying to figure out what it means. There's "hyper-femininity" but there's a lot of other things that it encapsulates (on a world wide, as well as local scale)....

...what's interesting is that you hardly see this 50s Americana dialogue in NYC fashion week....it's sad....(with the exception of Rodarte, they're doing something a bit different and their sensibilities and ideas are SO incredibly West Coast America).

 

[Not Plain Jane]

It's like we want to go back to a pre-lapsarian state that (let's face it) never really existed. The real and the ideal are always impossibly distant. And denial is the river in between.

Woody Allen has Mariel Hemingway say it best at the end of Manhattan: "Everyone gets corrupted." Yep, and might as well add "everything" to that too.

Can't go back... but I suppose we can (re)envision that time as some sort of "ideal" and/or "sweet" golden age about "the beauty of things." After all, that was a time when things sold really, really well. Seems rather bankable then.

 

[rosiecheeks]

^ I'm not sure anyone's disagreeing that the 50s were 'a bit oppressive.' I think that's true ...

I do.. sort of. They were perhaps a bit, but I think it is a mere detail in mass of things that defined the era as opposed to the main 'theme'..

 

[tigerrouge]

I suspect the 1950s were full of an oppressive post-war yearning for simplicity and normality that, in terms of a lifestyle, could be indulged and enacted by a certain social class in a certain country, but underneath all of the marketing, the stay-at-home moms in America, and the wish for social inertia, everything was changing for everyone, and no-one could prevent it.

Trying to pause time is an understandable social reaction - both then and now - to recent events too complicated to process, and a future that cannot be predicted.

But to be nostalgic about stereotypical 1950s fashion - it's an illusion about an illusion, compound layers of commercialism, clothes being marketed now that refer to a lifestyle that was marketed then.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^Definitely.

Nostalgia and post-WW2 has been gaining more and more momentum the past 6 months. I live in LA, and there's this weird strive back to "Western Americana" thing I see.

I do agree that the 50s (to live in that era), I would've hated it but the "idea" of it (so quaint) has an appeal. To skip ahead a little over 50 years later and look at the U.S. now...not everyone's happy, China is gaining financial momentum, U.S. dealing with the middle east and the idea of "terrorism" in our society, there's hardly any production in the U.S., dirty politics, the extreme wealthy taking advantage of the economy, the middle class of America is slowly getting squeezed out of existence, tuition for college/higher education is constantly rising, culturally the midwest exists in a completely different culture/time frame from the west coast or east coast. Everything in the U.S feels chaotic.

....It's really interesting to see another person of a different background/ethnicity/race do their take on American history. Prada Spring/Summer 2012, the commentary (from style.com) mentioned...

"it's an interesting idea that the 50s might have been the last time that people could be unambiguously optimistic about the future"
- Tim Blanks

"...Post war modernity is the beauty of things, the beauty of cars, and in the way, the beauty of America..."
- Carlo Antonelli (Rolling Stone Italy)

....the memory of America, the golden era of America, the 'new-ness' of 50s America is a historical element that in 2011/2012, designers play with. You see it in fashion, you see it in (American) media...to see that synchronization is really interesting and I'm still trying to figure out what it means. There's "hyper-femininity" but there's a lot of other things that it encapsulates (on a world wide, as well as local scale)....

...what's interesting is that you hardly see this 50s Americana dialogue in NYC fashion week....it's sad....(with the exception of Rodarte, they're doing something a bit different and their sensibilities and ideas are SO incredibly West Coast America).

It may be an interesting idea, but it's also BS. It was the Cold War era ... instead of red and orange alerts, and zombie warnings, the government then was into nuclear war drills (climb under your desks, kids--these are actually amazing nuclear shields).

 

[fashionista-ta]

I do.. sort of. They were perhaps a bit, but I think it is a mere detail in mass of things that defined the era as opposed to the main 'theme'..

Certainly a 'mere detail' if you were lucky enough to be a Caucasian male vs a minority or a woman. Considerably more of a 'main theme' if you were not ...

 

[CaitlinC]

I've always dressed in a feminine way, no matter what trends I shift to. I enjoy fun, bold and lady like type looks. Being a lady doesn't mean you are weak or boring. My strength comes from God, within myself, loved ones and my life experiences. I dress for God and myself, not for male or female approval.

Fashion allows us to dress how we want. Different strokes for different folks. If a female wants to dress super feminine, that's her business.

 

[blueorchid]

But it's interesting, isn't it, that during the 1920s and the 1960s, clothing was very freeing for women at the same time that women were allowed more social freedom, whereas during the VIctorian period and the 1950s, when women were "angels in the house" and Betty Crockers, then they also wore corsets, and white gloves, and cinched in bell skirts, and pill box hats. To me there is a correlation that speaks loudly and clearly.

I know this post is a bit old, but I just noticed this thread.

It's interesting that you mention that in the Victorian period women were expected to be "angels in the house," I think that it's important to remember that first wave feminism began in the 19th century, so while there was this cloistering of women, in a sense, there was more to the picture. Women often argued that the vote was necessary for them to protect their role in the private sphere. There's a great difference between what was expected of women and what actually occurred.

 

[kimberwyn]

There's nothing wrong with wearing and loving the fashions; women have choices these days, and shouldn't be judged on how they choose to dress. It is, however, problematic when you romanticize the 50's and take on that "born in the wrong era" mentality.

What I find regressive is the notion that women should try to dress like eternal teenagers - or worse, like overgrown children - so I always welcome the return of any form of adult fashion.

IA, that's more anti feminist than anything.

I do.. sort of. They were perhaps a bit, but I think it is a mere detail in mass of things that defined the era as opposed to the main 'theme'..

Oh totally. If I were living in the 1950's I would be forced to sit in the back of the bus, attend a different school and basically be treated like a 2nd class citizen. I'm sure oppression would've been the last thing on my mind.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ Exactly ... mere details. The kind of things you'd hardly notice amid the joys of poodle skirts and watching 'Father Knows Best.' The kind of idyllic era where you can whistle in the wrong place at the wrong time (with skin the wrong color) and end up dead.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

I know this post is a bit old, but I just noticed this thread.

It's interesting that you mention that in the Victorian period women were expected to be "angels in the house," I think that it's important to remember that first wave feminism began in the 19th century, so while there was this cloistering of women, in a sense, there was more to the picture. Women often argued that the vote was necessary for them to protect their role in the private sphere. There's a great difference between what was expected of women and what actually occurred.

Well sure. A period of unhappiness and repression can often be a catalyst for change. But it takes the efforts of many, and those who are willing to break with convention, to actually create change. The "feminist" movement on the 19th C was spurred on largely, at least in England, by the abolitionist movement. The women who were arguing that it is wrong to enslave people started to realize that they, too, were oppressed and they used that same language to fight for the vote. But when did women actually get the vote?!! It took a while.

 

[YoninahAliza]

Well sure. A period of unhappiness and repression can often be a catalyst for change. But it takes the efforts of many, and those who are willing to break with convention, to actually create change. The "feminist" movement on the 19th C was spurred on largely, at least in England, by the abolitionist movement. The women who were arguing that it is wrong to enslave people started to realize that they, too, were oppressed and they used that same language to fight for the vote. But when did women actually get the vote?!! It took a while.

WWI also played a part in securing women's right to vote in Britain. Since so many women did their part to help out the war efforts by being nurses and whatnot giving them the right to vote was almost seen as a reward. In 1918 women over the age of 30 were given the right to vote (mind you they had to own a home, or be married to a man who owned a home, and/or university graduates). It wasn't until 1928 that universal suffrage was granted. Sorry I just had to add this to the conversation just to put it into perspective even more. But I also wanted to add that clothing during this era was also changing. So while women were campaigning for rights clothing was getting looser and less constricted. In the years after WWI the corset lost it's popularity in fashion. Some women even dared to wear bloomers! The correlation between the two should certainly be noted. And in the 50's women's clothing I think was much more conservative and constricted. Also, in the 1940's- early 1950's the corset made a revival of sorts. So to me the way women dress and how they are treated go hand in hand.

 

[lepetitcouturier]

^
And this is season, it's just, "bam!" images of women dressing for men, not themselves.
It's just a strange move. I guess it reinforces the fact that fashions fade...and we all know the rest.

I think you've got a good point. But this whole thread is about how times have changed. Women dressed for their men like this in the fifties. Now, some men want, is a girl wearing a thong. Only a thong. But women don't do that, they're more independent. The fifties for them is the way they want to dress, not how their husbands want them to dress.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

I didn't see a lot of women choosing to dress like this on their own, with bandeau tops, cinched waists, white gloves, etc. Rather, shows like "Madmen" and the nostalgia of a few designers - esp in Milan - have suggested that this is the "new look" for the future, i.e., Spring 2012. This thread questions if it's a good "new (old) look," taking into account all the baggage it carries.

YoninahAliza, good points.

 

[voguetoffee]

yep i think its all about how independent we have been becoming through the years

 

[Squizree]

If women want to base their dress around the 1950s then they're either unaware of the hostile social environment of the time and are dressing for the sheer fun of it, or they ARE aware but the current present is so horrifying that the 1950s seem like a haven to return to. I'm not quite sure which is worse.