Thatcher’s Trousers: Feminism in Fashion S/S15
A Review of New York Fashion Week for Spring and Summer 2015
October 2014
A wave of young women, megaphones in hand and pickets held high, marches, skips, and runs down the street to loud applause. Dressed in suits of grays, purples, and tans, some scantily clad others fully covered; they are a formidable crowd. This is not just any riot of fashionable women; this is the finale to the Chanel Spring/Summer 2015 Fashion Show. Gisele and Cara Delevingne lead the pack of long-legged girls marched down the makeshift “Boulevard Chanel” chanting “Féministe mais Feminine” and “votez Chanel!” In this dramatic display, Karl Lagerfeld really hit home with what it means to be a Chanel girl. A Chanel girl is more than a pretty face. A Chanel girl is practical, slightly rebellious, and independent. As one of the founders of feminist fashion with her freeing silhouettes and practical buttonholes, we can hope, maybe even believe, that Coco Chanel would have been proud of the statement made by Lagerfeld this October.
Throughout history there has been a tradition that “clothing dictates the role of women”. This was true of the sewn on leather garments of medieval princesses and the constricting bodice of Marie Antoinette’s court dress and even of the nipped-in waists and ballooning skirts of Dior’s New Look. Such garments defined the role of women in society. These constricting, limiting types of clothing most certainly would have made it hard to do much more than sit at home and serve as decoration. Today, it appears as if the paradigm has been switched and the role of women is now dictating clothing, rather than vice-versa. And for that we can thank trousers and Thatcher.
This upcoming spring season is littered with subtle references to the 1970s. From a bohemian patterned mini skirt by Louis Vuitton to the monochromatic pantsuits by Acne, designers are pulling on a whole array of 1970s aesthetics. The color palette, mustard yellows, bright cobalt blues, and caramel browns, is reminiscent of shag carpet and large plaid jackets. The re-introduction of 1970s silhouettes and colors re-circulates not only the style, but also the statement of the time. Fashion is a system of signification; it does not matter so much what the cut of the dress is or the color of the sweater, but what it signifies is what will make it important. Fashion, like art or literature, serves as a symbol of the world—they are part of the zeitgeist, the spirit of the times. Certain styles are in fashion at a certain time or place because of the significance they hold for that time and place. Therefore, when clothing comes back in style, the whole idea behind those fashions come back in style too. Like time travel, sans complicated physics.
The 1960s and 70s were a great time in the feminist movement, second wave feminism. This era was characterized by demonstrations at a Miss World beauty pageant, women winning the right to serve in combat positions, and Margaret Thatcher becoming the first woman prime minister, as well as other such events leading up to greater social equality.
As women began to gain more power in the work place, the time came to dress in a manner that reflected the new role—thus a switch in that original paradigm. Designers such as Thierry Mugler and Georgio Armani epitomized this era with the introduction of power dressing: long, monochromatic suits, with strong shoulders, understated tailoring, and minimal decorations. Silhouettes similar to these were rampant on the Paris runway this October. Haider Ackermann’s elegant suit of taupe and silver, with oversized pockets and one button to clasp the front, was simultaneously fluid in movement and strong in stature. A model dressed in a navy, three-piece suit by Christophe Lemaire determinedly strutted down the catwalk with the rigidity and strength of a successful business associate. Raf Simmons showed a suit that, while staying true to the traditional femininity of Dior with an emphasized waist and sloping shoulders, was sharp and masculine in stiff grey cotton.
These powerful, masculine designs remind us of the 1970s. They remind us of Margaret Thatcher in her royal blue suit. They remind us of teased up hair and Farrah Fawcett. They remind us of the power of feminism. Fashion does not have to be the enemy of the feminist. Nor does fashion have to be purely feminine. The square, masculine styles create an image of androgyny. Rather than separating the genders by clothing, designers are bringing two into one—is this a sign of greater equality? Fashion does not have to confine women, but can liberate them. Fashion does not have to define us, we can define fashion. With the calls for greater equality everywhere, it is only natural that fashion should start to reflect this. The fragility of fashion is that it can transcend time. While we may not wear exactly the same outfits as those power seeking women of the 1970s, the idea can transcend the nylon suits in the recycling of cuts and colors. Where fabric ends, the idea continues. Thank you Lagerfeld for reminding us of this.
Throughout history there has been a tradition that “clothing dictates the role of women”. This was true of the sewn on leather garments of medieval princesses and the constricting bodice of Marie Antoinette’s court dress and even of the nipped-in waists and ballooning skirts of Dior’s New Look. Such garments defined the role of women in society. These constricting, limiting types of clothing most certainly would have made it hard to do much more than sit at home and serve as decoration. Today, it appears as if the paradigm has been switched and the role of women is now dictating clothing, rather than vice-versa. And for that we can thank trousers and Thatcher.
This upcoming spring season is littered with subtle references to the 1970s. From a bohemian patterned mini skirt by Louis Vuitton to the monochromatic pantsuits by Acne, designers are pulling on a whole array of 1970s aesthetics. The color palette, mustard yellows, bright cobalt blues, and caramel browns, is reminiscent of shag carpet and large plaid jackets. The re-introduction of 1970s silhouettes and colors re-circulates not only the style, but also the statement of the time. Fashion is a system of signification; it does not matter so much what the cut of the dress is or the color of the sweater, but what it signifies is what will make it important. Fashion, like art or literature, serves as a symbol of the world—they are part of the zeitgeist, the spirit of the times. Certain styles are in fashion at a certain time or place because of the significance they hold for that time and place. Therefore, when clothing comes back in style, the whole idea behind those fashions come back in style too. Like time travel, sans complicated physics.
The 1960s and 70s were a great time in the feminist movement, second wave feminism. This era was characterized by demonstrations at a Miss World beauty pageant, women winning the right to serve in combat positions, and Margaret Thatcher becoming the first woman prime minister, as well as other such events leading up to greater social equality.
As women began to gain more power in the work place, the time came to dress in a manner that reflected the new role—thus a switch in that original paradigm. Designers such as Thierry Mugler and Georgio Armani epitomized this era with the introduction of power dressing: long, monochromatic suits, with strong shoulders, understated tailoring, and minimal decorations. Silhouettes similar to these were rampant on the Paris runway this October. Haider Ackermann’s elegant suit of taupe and silver, with oversized pockets and one button to clasp the front, was simultaneously fluid in movement and strong in stature. A model dressed in a navy, three-piece suit by Christophe Lemaire determinedly strutted down the catwalk with the rigidity and strength of a successful business associate. Raf Simmons showed a suit that, while staying true to the traditional femininity of Dior with an emphasized waist and sloping shoulders, was sharp and masculine in stiff grey cotton.
These powerful, masculine designs remind us of the 1970s. They remind us of Margaret Thatcher in her royal blue suit. They remind us of teased up hair and Farrah Fawcett. They remind us of the power of feminism. Fashion does not have to be the enemy of the feminist. Nor does fashion have to be purely feminine. The square, masculine styles create an image of androgyny. Rather than separating the genders by clothing, designers are bringing two into one—is this a sign of greater equality? Fashion does not have to confine women, but can liberate them. Fashion does not have to define us, we can define fashion. With the calls for greater equality everywhere, it is only natural that fashion should start to reflect this. The fragility of fashion is that it can transcend time. While we may not wear exactly the same outfits as those power seeking women of the 1970s, the idea can transcend the nylon suits in the recycling of cuts and colors. Where fabric ends, the idea continues. Thank you Lagerfeld for reminding us of this.