For people to understand fashion trends and their evolution and presence in the modern world, they need to have a keen understanding of fashion in the previous eras. Men’s and women’s clothing has changed and evolved from a particular kind, to what it is today, because of many fashion giants working together to make them work. It may seem that it is women whose dresses and attires have evolved the most; however men are not behind in this too. The typical dress code for men since the past century, up till now is the suit. The suit is not an invention of the 21st century rather it has been in vogue since ages, changing its forms from decade to decade in order to fit the requirements of the men of that particular age.
Looking back at the 20th century, it is one of the most widely and analytically documented times of history. This is because it was the 20th century that saw the intellectual and corporate expansion of man and the occupation and designation of man in the workplace had begun to change dramatically. (Crane 173). Earlier, there were only a handful of men who were literate and worked in high offices; this being more common in the English than the Americans. However taking note of the good fashion sense across continents, famous designers began to align their work in those same steps to meet the requirements of men working in offices and larger industries. Thus, the suit was chosen as the formal and occasional dress code of men because it had a history of being the kind of dress which accentuated man’s presence and added to his decency and grace. . (Crane 174).
Men have always been known to wear clothes which reflect their masculinity and their authority over others around them. This can be revealed by the fact that it was in the 20th century when the form of work and earning changed with the emergence of the Industrial Revolution. (Crane 173). Men moved away from the frock coats and decided to dress in ways that suited the term ‘masculine.’ (Crane 173). Masculinity was thus defined by certain clothing behaviors that became typical of men. These included wearing such apparel that would not require much adornment, changing or constant renovation to it. It would also define and conform to a subculture, be it their lifestyle, work or a fashion trend that needed to be set and followed. The most important aspect of their clothing was thus its affiliation to a particular lifestyle they had and thus, their dress needed to be produced by popular clothing firms. The overall idea of the dress code typical for men thus became a dress that would make them reveal and display their masculinity while at the same time, suiting their occupation and letting the world know of their position and strength, meanwhile also set a fashion trend that would perhaps display a more egocentric and self-possessed look. (Crane 175).
Taking a glance at the general interest in fashion, women have always been more interested in fashion than men. Male shoppers have always been of typically three kinds. (Crane 184). Firstly are the fashion foregoers; men who do not care particularly about how they look and what they are wearing. The second are the progressive ones who occupy a certain kind of lifestyle and belong to a typical subculture; young and middle-aged men with a good, reasonably lavish lifestyle. And the third kind is the ones with the highest of incomes, who are the risk-takers and usually step up in society, setting forward the trends for others to follow. (Crane 184). A study conducted on French males of ages 20-35 revealed that men liked to purchase clothes that were convenient for them. (Crane 184). However, another part of their desire to dress up was to impress and become a part of an in-group, which thus made them rely on the popular and most distinguished brand names that were available in the world. (Crane 185). This evolved men’s sense of fashion aesthetically as they began to perceive that the clothes produced by the high-end fashion designers of the world depicted a lifestyle and wearing those clothes meant that these men were in the line for fashion.
The evolution of men’s fashion sense began when in the 19th century they began to change their dressing. The 19th century saw a more eccentric way of dressing up because the clothes gave more daring, bold looks for men with clothes such as green velvet trousers, white duck trousers and colored bows. (Crane 185). This is related to the men’s occupations as well because these men came from backgrounds of work as artists, novelists, painters, poetry or were involved in the film and theatre industry of the time which required them to look eye-catching in public. Their clothes thus carried a sense of femininity in them because of the colors, use of bows and handkerchiefs, ruffles and flowery prints in their dresses. (Crane 185).
Moving forward into the 20th century, men’s taste in clothing changed as well. They moved from their dandy and fancy dresses to what seemed more formal and their clothes began to lose the color they had acquired in the past century. They became less adventurous with their dressing, and their clothes became more monochromatic as the 20th century progressed. (Crane 186). This adhered less to men’s own personal sense of fashion; rather there were many social as well as cultural changes taking place which led to a change in attire as well. A major social change that occurred in the 20th century was the amount of money that was being spent on clothing by men as compared to what they had spent on them in the previous century. The per capita expenditure rose to the highest levels in the 1960s, where men became more conscious about what they wore in public. (Crane 187).
The changing trends, business methods and most importantly, the industrial revolution brought with it two major kinds of lifestyles and thus clothing styles: classic and sporty. (Crane 190). Men that fall into the classic category became more prone to wearing suits and various other accessories that were associated with them, whereas men that belonged to the latter, associated with clothing that represented sports and more leisurely dress up. Thus, the aesthetic sense in man had begun to evolve as what would deem social prestige and authority and what would represent a low class or ordinary. It was in the 1950s in France, men that belonged to all spheres of every social class considered purchasing clothes and clothing items that represented the classic group. (Crane 190). Thus, the fashion sense in France in the 20th century had moved to the suit as being the kind of dress that gave a man a proper sense of masculinity, irrespective of his social standing, affordability of the suit and his earnings.
Moving into the 1980s, the middle class moved its expenditures lower although it still went for the classic suit to match their needs. (Crane 191). However, it was the working class that moved away from the trend of wearing suits in spite of the drop in the price of suits and the purchase of the sportier form of clothing became their style instead. Therefore, what became a norm in the country was that business clothing was supposed to be worn in offices and businesses, and there was no need to wear them for field work. The casual and more carefree kind of dressing became the trend for the working class. (Crane 191). This also became a similar trend in America where the middle class was seen buying suits more frequently than men of the working class. Working class men were noted purchasing leisure clothing such as jeans, polo shirts and sporting clothing in comparison with middle-class men. Thus, it can be said that man’s interpretation of their fashion sense was more deeply ingrained in their social status and class, and this showed in the choice of apparel for each respective class in the mid-twentieth century.
The 20th century saw the rise of the suit for men, and this was accentuated by the use of the suit in the higher classes of society, especially by royalty. (Crane 193). It was at this time that Armani, a leading name in designer clothing became the representation of class, elegance and grace for man. (Crane 194). The suits by Armani were designed to perfection because of their perfect collars, labels and designs that became the cutting edge fashion for men who belonged to the higher classes in society. However the cost of these suits has restricted the use of the suit by men who belong to the corporate sector- law, finance, management; generally consisting of the upper middle class of the country. (Crane 194). The use of the suit in America has become the most important and traditional dress code for people who work on Wall Street, and this is present even today as it existed in the 19th century when Wall Street was booming, and all the upper classes were associated with its functioning( Crane 194). Armani thus, designed suits not just for one occasion but the suits became designated for different purposes according to the purpose of wearing them by their owner. For instance, a grey suit could be worn for meetings with the board of directors or for going to a construction site a more up to date kind of dress up would be appropriate however an old jacket would do for going to meet a communist mayor. (Crane 196). This trend in the 2000s, however, changed according to the changed social and traditional norms. The suit was limited to formal occasions and was to be worn for events that mark an important date. There are certain jobs that have a requirement for the employees to wear a suit such as a bank, a law firm or other corporate offices however other places and occupations do not require such formal dresses in the 21st century. (Crane 196). This trend caught on from the 1960s were the antithesis of the formal suit was invented and in vogue at the time. It was until the 1960s that college students wore suits to their college. Thus, the change in clothing behavior became obvious from the youth of the time, whose trends shifted to jeans.
An example of the change in an aesthetic sense came from the representatives of art in America itself. In 1951, the Abstract Expressionists were photographed for Life magazine where all 14 of them wore suits. 42 years later when another group of artists and mainstream men were chosen for a shoot, only one out of the chosen twelve was seen in a suit. This kind of drastic change shows that a change in fashion sense was on its way in the 20th century. Salvatore Ferragamo was also a blooming fashion sensation of the 1940s and above, and the store is still popular, and much wanted a designer brand in the present day. Ferragamo began with shoes, and his shoes were a blazing fashion trend of the time. In the 1970s, the company began making men’s clothes and shoes. They began a trend with suits as well because suits were a major following for men in fashion. The brand offered luxury clothing that was only affordable by a certain class, usually consisting of actors, celebrities and important personalities. Gradually, as the per capita income of the masses increased, so made the money spent on their attire and clothing. The 1960s saw a high trend of purchase power amongst men. (Crane 197).
The evolution of fashion sense, even after decades of change and transition, did stick to the former ways of the fashion sense. In the 1980s and 90s, advertisers made use of the patent fashion sense that was persistent in 1950 to give a sense of dominance and power to their current fashion. (Crane 198). Fashion has not only evolved from the point of view of the giant brands in the fashion industry; but it has also more importantly been influenced by the artists and musicians of the various eras, especially the trends which spread from the emergence of cable. There have been certain kinds of garments which have been popular in the 1950s such as jeans, T-shirts and black leather jackets. (Crane 199).When these garments were introduced in that era, their basic purpose was to show submission and adoption of a popular culture of which these men showed they were an integral part of once they accepted the fashion of the time.
Changes in clothing have been greatly influenced by celebrities as well as the social circumstances. Gender subversion, science fiction and the choice to conform to the prescribed gender roles became challenges for those who wanted to be a part of the in-group in society. The gradual sense of masculinity thus began to decline when males only wanted to be expressive about who they were in terms of individuality. Where once the trend of males subverting from the feminine style of attire to the more masculine suits was a need for masculinity, the 1970s saw male artists such as David Bowie displayed their image on screen with wigs, jewelry, makeup and this kind of get up was not despised, rather it was even copied by the macho elements of society. (Crane 187). These looks travelled across continents, and even the same attire was copied in the clubs of London. The trends kept changing where in the 1980s men’s interested shifted to metal where they began keeping their hair long, wearing jewelry, rings, bracelets, tight jeans, boots and helmets as well. However, one trend that is still present amongst men, is they from the 20th century or the 21st, that the youth has always been ready to conform to any new trend in fashion, whereas older men like to stick to a particular kind of style, and they expect people of their age to dress the same. (Crane 187).
Conclusively, the trends of men’s clothing have greatly differed from the past till the present. The most widely documented era of history in the 20th century, mainly because it was a time of rapid development for mankind. Men had shifted from their frock coats to suits, which were worn as a symbol of prestige and masculinity. Various brands and trendsetters set for the kind of suit, the fabric and color that would suit the needs for different occasions. Soon the working class shifted its attention from suits to casual fabric, wearing jeans and then moving to the trends that actors and stars portrayed on screen. This trend is still followed today, with suits remaining the apparel for prestige and masculinity in men.
Work cited
Crane, Diana. Fashion and Its Social Agendas: Class, Gender and Identity in Clothing. The
Ibid. 173
Ibid. 185
