Monday, May 24, 2010

Retro and Race

Beyonce released a new video recently that set off a fascinating discussion about the relationship between race and retro fashion. In "Why Don't You Love Me?", the beautiful Ms. Knowles plays B.B. Homemaker, who is a sort of melange of two famed Betties: Betty Draper and Bettie Page. Let me state for the record before I get into the discussion: I loved this video. I think Beyonce does both Betty Draper and Bettie Page better than the originals! The scenes of her crying into her martini are truly priceless.

Feministing's response to the video was interesting. They looked at both Beyonce's video and the (far inferior, in my opinion) new video by Sade for "Baby Father." Their thoughts on the two:
At first both videos seemed pretty straightforward-retro to me. Some cute vintage styling choices, that's all. But given that these are two women of color are playing roles commonly associated with upper-middle-class white women (Betty Draper being the most recent reference point), I wondered: What makes me call this "retro"? I know there were certainly upper-middle-class women of color in the '50s and '60s, but this image of the happy-but-secretly-unhappy housewife is stereotypically white. By virtue of race, Beyonce and Sade are twisting that stereotype. (Granted, Beyonce is a more pin-up than straightforward homemaker -- but hey, that's transgressive, too, as pin-up girls were almost all white.)
Hmm. I found this whole idea vaguely disturbing. Is it really so transgressive for a woman of color to do retro? It's quite true that the retro and vintage subculture is predominately white. But why? It's not like women of color didn't live through the eras we celebrate. And, you know, they wore clothes and did their hair. As LaToya Peterson writes on Jezebel, it's more likely that images of these women have been somehow erased from the history books. A snippet:
It is occasions like this that remind me how complete and total segregation was, and how white washed history can be. If these images are associated solely with whiteness, it's because the history of women of color has been systematically erased, deemed unworthy of inclusion in the general framework of "the way we were."
Indeed, vintage fashion images of women of color in can be hard to come by. (Look at the B. Vikki Vintage blog for some great photographs.) I'll admit that it is momentarily disorienting to look at these images. I personally didn't realize how closely I associated whiteness with retro. And that's a disturbing realization for me, just as it should be for all of us who are feminist vintage-lovers.

We've talked here about the fact that the misogyny at heart of the mid-century era can be an uncomfortable paradox for the modern day feminist retro-seamstress to face. And this discomfort with the era is deepened considerably when race is brought into the discussion. The pain of the Jim Crow era coupled with the sexism at its core makes it easy to understand why the contemporary woman of color wouldn't necessarily see this as a time to be celebrated.

Can we separate the styles from the time? Lots of feminist retro-enthusiasts (myself included) seem content to be well-informed dissenters to the idea that wearing clothing of the era is equivalent with condoning the misogyny of the period. Can we say the same of race? Often the idea of choice is brought up to defend the decision to wear retro fashion: "I don't have to wear a girdle now. I have the choice, so it's feminist of me to take advantage of that choice either way." But that argument falls on its head when you consider race. Has there ever been a choice to participate in a racist culture or not? (Update: by this last comment, I only meant that women of color did not - and still don't - have the choice of whether to live in a racist society of not; they had to navigate those waters no matter what.)

So, what do you think?

Also, as a reminder: I'm looking for readers to contribute to my Op/Ed column, and I'd be especially interested in further perspectives on race and retro fashion. Please e-mail me if you're interested! Write to gertie [at] blogforbettersewing [dot] com.


Also, the whole video!

74 comments:

  1. I think women of color were more likely to work outside the home in the 50s than white women. Emphasis: I think. I don't have a statistic to point to; I'd love it if a better informed reader would jump in here.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think there was more of a stigma with race back then than it there is now. In vintage ads, I rarely see non-white women -- I never see asian women, or any other ethnicities. It would be interesting if there was more information about why this was so... (just an observation, I have no historical data here myself).

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think you are right on the button here. I think the very reason we don't see women of color in retro photographs and such is because the segregation was so great. We have completely white-washed history as you say. It's incredibly sad and incredibly disgusting. I don't know that we really know a whole lot about what black women did in this time period, because white people didn't even see them as worthy of mention, which is sad in itself and puts an even clearer perspective of where women and especially women of color really fell into place back then.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't think loving vintage makes you participate in white-washing the history, as long a you keep in mind that there's another side to the coin, that those ads, books and films of the era we seek today do not enclose the whole story.I would think reading books/articles from that time would be more problematic than merely wearing clothes. All in all, I think we should remember that while we like (even love) the fashion, decor or sense of elegance of those times - we don't have to worship the era itself and can (or in my opinion, must) disagree with many of what was going on then, like misogyny, racism etc.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think the issue isn't so much did there exist black women wearing awesome clothing during those time periods, clearly there were. But rather the idealized version of the past which many vintage fans like to recreate.

    An idealized all white past is a way to avoid dealing with issues of racism both in the past and now.

    I also think the whitewashing of retro fashion is due to the same forces which white wash mainstream fashion. Black women aren't seen as being fashionable. Curly coily natural hair, is too untamed. Facial features common to black women are not seen as having the right aesthetic, etc. etc.

    Also, I think the whiteness of the retro fashion scenes is amplified online. I know there are lots of latinos and latinas who are big into retro fashion, but I rarely see them on retro fashion blogs or in retro fashion catalog photos.

    On a more personal note, as a black woman, the retro fashion scene feels some what alienating. I already have many spaces in my life where I stick out due to my race, why get actively involved in a social scene where that would be true? Being exoticized in my time off is not fun.

    Did you see the movie Jezebel linked to about an aspiring black fashion model? It was amazing and depressing: http://jezebel.com/5536301/when-big-lips-dont-work-the-struggles-of-a-black-model

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, as the B Vikki Vintage blog shows, images of African-American women and men dressed up in the 50s and 60s did exist, but today's vintage scene does probably over-represent whiteness as LaToya pointed out. It does depend on the era though - I came to vintage through learning to lindy hop, and the majority of the images from that music scene are of African-American people (although I guess the fact that most of the people in my class were white tells us something about cultural appropriation.. I do live in the UK though)

    I should note though that I am white and as such may be blind to whether women of colour do feel excluded or unrepresented by today's vintage scene (which we should remember doesn't begin and end with Betty Draper. Personally I felt that Ann at Feministing's comment - that it's weird to call a look 'retro' if it involves a woman of colour - was a bit too much of a broad brush stroke). I would be really interested to know more about whether this is the case - does anyone have any links?

    I actually think it's really interesting to talk about the history associated with fashion styles; I've never really seen retro clothing as celebrating a particular era (since there's nothing I'd dislike more than being sent to live in the 50s, aside from the clothes), but it's a really important point that glorification of an era where racism was institutionalised (which is not to say that it isn't now, of course..), is actually not really a very good thing.

    Finally, I agree that the choice argument isn't really relevant in this case, but I actually think it's not relevant when speaking to sexism either. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but choice feminism makes me really uneasy - just because someone is a woman and chooses to do one thing or another, doesn't make that choice inherently feminist. It's just a choice - feminism is another layer on top of that. Getting down off my soapbox now..

    ReplyDelete
  7. Check out NewVintageLady (http://newvintagelady.blogspot.com/), who makes and sells some beautiful vintage-inspired stuff.

    Mikhaela wrote about her recently:

    http://www.polkadotoverload.com/2010/04/polka-dot-crush-new-vintage-lady.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. I have to agree with Belly! Just because we like the styling or clothing of an era, or even are interested in other things it doesn't mean we are condoning the treatment of people back then. I have a huge interest in the colonial period in Africa... do I agree with what was done, no.

    I think a knowledge of the flip side of the coin needs to be there, but I certainly don't feel that vintage lovers/retrophiles are participating in a racist culture.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have lurked here for quite a while, I enjoy this blog so much. However on this topic, I feel compelled to comment. Being a woman of color and having grown up during the end of those times (early 60's), I enjoy the vintage blogs and movement but am highly aware of the bigotry so prominent in those times. I lived it. When I look at pictures and sewing blogs, I get a lot of enjoyment out of seeing what people are doing with their art. But I have no nostalgia for those times, other than for my mother and grandmother and the other people I loved and how they loved to dress up. I grew up in So. Calif. which was a pretty prejudiced place, esp. in suburbia. Nope, the fashion is fun but the times were not if you were a person of color. Hope this comment isn't a downer. Love this blog.:-D

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'm following the conversation with interest, as it's something I know very little about.

    But I have to agree with Clare about the "choice" thing - it rankles me every time. Yes, I have more choice than I would have had 30 years ago, but the term is often used to stop further progress rather than to help - all of the careers I am interested in "require" long education, long hours, and much dedication. I get to "chose" between using my talents in a career properly, or taking a "mommy-track" job in order to have the family life I wish for. I get to choose between two heart-wrenching options. There is no reason for these jobs to be set up that way, except that's the way they've always been done. But because I have the right to choose, it's my fault if the choice doesn't suit me.

    And this time I'm going with "anonymous", because these kinds of comments can kick you in the behind come interview time!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lozzen, not a downer at all! I appreciate your perspective. Thank you all for your insightful comments! Julia, I'm on my way to check out that Jezebel post!

    Just in general, I want to be clear that I didn't mean that by enjoying retro one is participating in a racist subculture. What I meant by that was that women of color didn't have the choice of whether or not *they* would live in a racist society; they had to navigate those waters no matter what. (Participate was perhaps a misleading word.) It's not as simple as deciding whether to wear a girdle or not. Hope that makes sense, and sorry if my comments were unclear!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I've done some vintage style pin up modeling and I got alot of this comment, "Wow for a black girl you really do pin-up well". I was a little confused, but when you look at old pictures you don't see woman of color as the "Monroes", so it does seem like I am out of the box. Getting into the retro scene you don't see many faces of color attending events, and really being into that scene. I've really only started to find common grounds through blogging.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I BLEED PINK, the comment you got about pinup modeling makes my eyes bleed - how awful!

    I have to say that I feel NONE of us, even today, have a choice about whether or not to live in a racist society. We've gone from segregated diners to having an African-American president, but racism still pervades our culture. Of course, we all have the choice about our own behavior -- but the fact that the image of a black pinup model could be so surprising shows how ingrained images of "whiteness" and "blackness" are in our culture. I speak as a white woman who grew up in a multi-racial family (my brother is Mexican-American). Believe me, the things he experienced growing up taught me that being white allows us a VERY different experience in this country than being a person of color.

    I hope this comment does not come off as inflammatory. I'm not accusing anyone of being racist. I'm just trying to say that we live in a culture steeped in racism -- and even as a person committed to equality, there are times I catch myself doing the equivalent of reacting to a black pinup model with surprise and thinking "Yup, there it is again!"

    ReplyDelete
  14. If one wants to see some amazing vintage pictures of black women, check out Google Books archive of Jet magazine or cruise Flickr.

    And also remember that "Jet" ran an article on how in 1952 there were no lynchings for the first time in 70 years (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vieilles_annonces/1199512710/).

    You're on point Lozzen. While I love certain periods of fashion, I don't have that nostalgic desire to actually *live* then or recreate it. Why would I want to return to Jim Crow or a time when the KKK basically ran the state my dad's family grew up in?

    New Vintage Lady (http://newvintagelady.blogspot.com/) is an awesome vintage fashion blogger and sells repro patterns. I'm finishing off a 1930s dress from one of her patterns.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Last anonymous, love your points and I don't think they're inflammatory at all. Thank you for pointing that out.

    Wow, really good discussion everyone. Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ok, I think I begin to understand what you (or somebody anyway) meant: since the actual decade was more "fun" for whites, and blacks were oppressed and discriminated against, blacks shouldn't want to dress 50s vintage. Or something like that.

    Well, I think it's a question of perspective.

    Because the older people in my family have pix of the great-grand-mothers dressed as Gibson girls and the men in celluloid collars and coattailsand all wearing mustaches...and they were black.

    My grandmother and her sisters had great hats and those cool 40s skirt suits with the chunky heels.

    My mother and the women of her generation in the family have oodles of pix wearing petticoats and really tight bodices, catseye glases, pearls, even!

    As well as shift dresses, super minis and bellbotoms.

    Then again, I live on a predominantly black island so...perspective is everything?

    ReplyDelete
  17. LaKaribane, that is not what I meant at all. I was presenting possible answers to the question of why is it transgressive to see a black woman (Beyonce in this case) do retro? As we've talked about here before, the 50s weren't "fun" for a lot of people: women, people of color, gays and lesbians, political dissenters - oh the list could go on! I'm not suggesting that any of these groups should not want to wear vintage fashion. Quite the opposite. I'm just looking for the reasons that we often associate retro with whiteness.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ok, now I get it. Just to be clear, I wasn't accusing you of anything.

    But I still don't get the transgressive part. Except maybe that there were VERY few black Betty Drapers in the 50s? And I find it hard to believe all the pin-ups were White!

    Is it transgressive because we lack material proof of the "reality" of the non-White 50s, online anyway?

    I think we need more bloggers, LOL! And they need to visit their grand-parents attics and/or thrift stores and post online, too!

    Interesting discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Several commenters have astutely pointed out why women of color might not be drawn to pre-civil-rights era fashion, but I suspect that one can find images of WoC in 30s-50s fashions in black newspapers and magazines from that era. For example, Jet, founded in 1951, included fashion coverage. And numerous cities had (and still have) newspapers by/for black communities that would likely have society photos, if not fashion articles.

    ReplyDelete
  20. As a swing dancer, a good portion of the vintage images and video clips that are passed around in this community are of African American dancers and musicians. While i understand that white white white in advertisements was the way to go, kids of the 40s were already well on their way to emulating their black counterparts who were leading the way culturally.
    I wish i could dance like Whitey's Lindy Hoppers and Norma Miller -- the gods of the swing scene are not the white kids who watered down the dance for Hollywood screens. Ain't nobody wants to be in an Arthur Murray clip - those cats ain't hep at all!

    ReplyDelete
  21. I don't generally comment, but here goes.

    I think this TYPE of retro dress draws comments/attention because its an era that came right before the Civil Rights movement. So it's more obvious. But you don't see anyone getting upset about race when it comes to people who are obsessed with Jane Austen or people who do re-enacting for Medieval Times in the SCA. There are many different groups that glorify specific historical periods. Some just happen to be more mainstream than others and thus get more attention. History has never been fair to every culture. There's been a massive amount of subjugation. I don't think you're participating in that when you dress up. Are you a racist if you dress up like Cleopatra? She was a Roman ruler in Egypt. What about Jefferson and the Colonials? They owned slaves. But there are people who do dress up like them and no one points fingers.

    I'm not saying that being aware of racism in different time periods is stupid--I'm a feminist and I think being educated about race is very important. But I don't think it makes very much sense to pick on the 1950s as the worst time to be a person of color. I don't think it makes very much sense to feel ashamed or guilty for liking the clothes of that period.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I know very little about racial issues in the US (I'm Australian) but might part of the association between whiteness and 'retro' looks have a socioeconomic factor as well?

    Many of the images we see of this era are of middle-class or wealthier women who didn't need to work, and who had lovely houses and disposable income to spend on attractive wardrobes. Again, I'm not 100% sure on my American history, but wouldn't the women who were wealthy enough to live this lifestyle have been mostly white?

    It seems to me that this involves the interaction between race and class.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I'm not sure if this posted so sorry if it duplicates!

    I know very little about racial issues in the US (I'm Australian) but might part of the association between whiteness and 'retro' looks have a socioeconomic factor as well?

    Many of the images we see of this era are of middle-class or wealthier women who didn't need to work, and who had lovely houses and disposable income to spend on attractive wardrobes. Again, I'm not 100% sure on my American history, but wouldn't the women who were wealthy enough to live this lifestyle have been mostly white?

    It seems to me that this involves the interaction between race and class.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I think it's the same issue anyone faces when presented with clothing and costuming of another culture/time period. Personally, I adore Victorian and Medieval/Renaissance clothing and culture and music, in addition to the clothing, poetry, history, etc of what we refer to as the middle east, despite being a woman and an atheist.

    For several years I played in the SCA (society of creative anachronism) and every time I slipped into my persona (Fatima) I was very aware that if I had actually lived as a woman during the time period (or even a modern woman of the places I researched for my character and costume), life would be very different and the privilege of being able to slip in and out of character, rode my shoulders (and pretty much every other woman's there.)

    We can't change the past, we can't erase the racism or the misogyny or the homophobia, because that is part of our history. History isn't black or white or male or female or atheist or religious, in my opinion. I'm white, queer, atheist and a woman, but the Civil Rights Movement belongs to me as much as the Crusades and the Indian Wars and the Revolutionary War and all the rest.

    However, just because we own it, the good as well as the bad, doesn't mean we have to make the same mistakes, which is why retro and steampunk and the SCA and other recreation societies and groups are so important. It's a way of learning from the mistakes of the past without forgetting the good parts as well and hopefully - because sometimes I'm an optimist - bring the good things into the future and avoiding the mistakes of the past.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "The pain of the Jim Crow era coupled with the sexism at its core makes it easy to understand why the contemporary woman of color wouldn't necessarily see this as a time to be celebrated."

    This is my very issue with retro looks prior to the 1960s. And I've noticed that younger black women are more fascinated with the retro looks of the 40s and 50s and wearing them than black women my age.

    There is a generation that separates them...it is their great-grandmother or a very old grandmother vs for me its my elderly aunts & uncles, my mom & dad and my grandmother that experienced segregation and wore these types of clothing.

    This is not to say that we didn't have beautiful role models during those times, Lena Horne, Dorothy Dandridge, Billie Holiday, even Ruby Dee BUT whenever I see a younger woman dressed in an outfit from the 40s I want to ask her if she really understands the struggles and the day-to-day realities of racism and how it shaped & affected a black woman's life at the time.

    I don't watch Mad Men and it's set during the early 60s because there aren't people of color celebrated on the show. I like the clothing but not the time period it represents.

    And to anyone who thinks that race still doesn't matter in this day and age, ask yourself this question. Besides Louisiana & Florida has our President, Barack Obama, been to any of the southern states since he's been elected? Kentucky, Alabama, Tennessee? And then ask yourself if it's because the Secret Service is worried about protecting his life.

    I know I've deviated some from the original question but to me this is all tied together because I daily live the experience of being black in America.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Can I leave one more thought ~ the idea of segregation as the reason we don't see more pictures of black women & men in retro fashions is an easy out. There were black magazines at the time that featured black women & men in fashionable attire. They were in movies - maybe those scenes were cut out in the south - but they existed and can be viewed today. There is archival footage from newspapers...you just have to look for it and include it.

    It isn't looked for or included so it's assumed not to be available! I just have to go to old family photos and I have a wealth of information available to me...and I'm sure there is more available on the web now...look for it!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Maya, you're right -- class plays into this issue as well. There was a sizable African American middle and upper middle class in the U.S. in the 1950s, largely invisible to white America then and today. Suburbs like Baldwin Hills in L.A. were primarily African-American.

    To tie it back to sewing, I'm sure these women used the same patterns as white women of the time -- but it's not until the 1970s that you start to see black women on the pattern envelopes. White women have been held up as an ideal of beauty in this country for centuries. Skin lighteners and hair straighteners didn't come out of nowhere.

    Since I haven't been tarred and feathered, I'll come out as the last anonymous above. I'm protective of my family and was sensitive about posting about them!

    ReplyDelete
  28. This is a somewhat oblique comparison, but my brother, back when he had time, used to be an avid Civil War reenactor. He always says that the best way to turn somebody into a pacifist was to teach them in detail about the realities--the racist, bloody, inept, disease-ridden, dark-ages-of-medicine, realities--of the Civil War. I think that the same could/should go for retro clothing/lifestyle enthusiasts.

    Granted, in all hobbies (not to trivialize, but for lack of a better word), there are people who participate with different levels of intensity. Some are just in it for the cute clothes, but those who are in it for the bigger picture, if we are at all sane, can't help but be appalled at the prevailing attitudes toward both minorities and of women.

    (Yes, Janice #2, there was a HUGE stigma about race, which is why there were basically no prominent minority actors, and those that were successful played a lot of stereotypes--maids, mammies, vixens, etc. Also, the most "beautiful" always looked the most white. Think Lena Horne and Dorothy Dandridge, who looked a lot like Halle Berry. Gorgeous, but you can almost not tell they were African-American in black-and-white photos.)

    I find the idea that people associate "retro" with "whiteness" weird. Yes, I am aware that most retro enthusiasts seem to be white, but I don't got so far as to think that it's "transgressive" for non-whites to get into retro stuff. Most white women weren't Betty Draper or Bettie Page, either; my grandmother had a college education but still lived in a tiny house and raised and canned her own food, because they were freakin' poor. If people are taking retro images and the popular image of history at face value, then they're only looking at the most superficial things.

    While I agree that white didn't have to face the consequences to the same degree that did minorities, I don't think that there was ever a choice to not live in a racist culture. Well-to-do white people could avoid it by only associating with other whites and knowing as little as possible about their hired help, but anyone who really wanted to live a racially integrated life was going to have a rough time of it.


    While it was undoubtedly a lot better for white women, it wasn't ideal for any women. I doubt any of us want to go back to having less access to education, far less access to employment, even more drastically unequal pay, and fewer rights.

    (Sorry this is so long.)

    Do other "retro" enthusiasts get accused of idealizing a racist and misogynist time? Guys who restore antique cars? Museum curators? Preservationists of buildings? (I confess I have two uncles who idealize a far-from-ideal time, and who also happen to like antique cars. It seems to mostly be, though, because they are jerks.) I work in a medical archive: I have no interest in returning to the days of 1930's medicine, but I do think it's important to preserve the record of it. Retro dressing/living is taking it a lot further than that, but things that have followings tend to be things that get saved and researched, which is never a bad thing even if the truths that come to light are not what we wish.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Thank you, Carolyn for your wonderful comment. Like you, I too, do enjoy the vintage/retro sewing that takes place on line, but I find it very difficult to actually participate in the sewing of the garments. I also enjoy the clothing of Mad Men, though I just started watching the first season, but I doubt I can go beyond that. That era is/was.....How realistic was "Friends" or "Seinfeld."? And that took place in NYC! Even in reading some of these comments I can sense a level of discomfort. Gertie, I am glad you brought this up. Racism is one of the hardest issues to discuss no matter where you stand. It and many other "isms" still exist in all parts of the world. Yes, even in Australia. For many centuries, now. Being "privileged" does exclude one from experience things that many of us have to live with every day. But someone had to rip the plaster off so healing (discussions?) can begin. Now everyone, inhale...exhale and get back to sewing. Maybe we can start to change things. One beautiful outfit at a time.
    Angela

    ReplyDelete
  30. Let's not forget that we remember the 1950s (really late 50s, early 60s) as an era of intense bigotry partially because it was an era where heroic people were resisting segregation and bringing bigotry to light. Clothing was a tool of that struggle - if you read interviews with Rosa Parks, Ruby Bridges, and many of the other very brave people who desegregated buses, schools, and public places, they often mention that dressing in ways that coded as "respectable" or "well-brought-up" to onlookers was something that was done deliberately and purposefully. I don't mean it in a "kids these days" sense - I'm just interested by the fact that the Betty Draper and Ella Baker both own pillbox hats.

    ReplyDelete
  31. You guys are the best! So many good comments!

    Carolyn, I totally agree on Mad Men. I was just reminded this morning that there was ONE black character who wasn't a maid or elevator operator. It was Kinsey's girlfriend, and they pretty much threw that storyline away. I think they generally handle gender issues in an intelligent (if disturbing at times) way, but they've really dropped the ball when it comes to race.

    ReplyDelete
  32. @Amy: What about Jefferson and the Colonials? They owned slaves. But there are people who do dress up like them and no one points fingers.

    I point fingers. All the time. I'm quite sarcastic about the idealization of plantation culture, and Civil War reenactors, and so are many people that I know. Colonial Williamsburg has devoted a lot of time and energy to this issue.

    Medieval/Renaissance and Victorian I would argue are substantatively different, in that they are not part of US history, and while there were many more black & Asian people in England/Europe then than one might think, they were not a foundational segmented group as black people were in the US.

    But it's irrelevant, anyhow. I don't mean to pick on Amy because there are 3 or 4 comments in this vein---but we should all beware of the defensive claim "well, other people are worse!" It's no excuse to avoid self-examination.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Amy, I agree with daiyami - I certainly think about the racial underpinnings of Jane Austen's England, and am surprised at the idea that other people don't - that was smack in the era of the Middle Passage, which was the source of much of the British wealth of the era. (See, for instance, one of the more recent tv adaptations of Mansfield Park, which deals with the topic explicitly).

    Gertie, thank you for raising this topic.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Is it really so bad to say "I just like the clothes?" I don't really think about gender or race issues because I am not trying to live in that time - I just think the clothing is more aesthetically pleasing and elegant than what is on offer today. I don't watch mad men and think "gee, I would have loved to live back then". I don't look back on the time with rose coloured glasses - I generally think "how awful would it have been to live like that"? But that does not make the clothes any less fabulous!

    Is it becoming a requirement of dressing vintage to have a carefully considered comment on gender and race politics of the time? I wear a vintage kimono in the mornings, but I don't think about how to distance myself from the xenophobia and poor treatment of immigrants in Japan, or their 'comfort women' in the war. Adopting another culture or another time's style of dress does not mean you also accept/adopt everything about that era. I don't see why that separation is so hard to understand.

    I think too much emphasis is being placed on women's clothing choices here... it doesn't mean we've thought about such issues, and chosing to wear such things doesn't actually mean we should have to either. Wearing a full skirted shirt dress does not make you a lifestyle enthusiast or a reenactor (the people who should take such issues into consideration).

    ReplyDelete
  35. The reason you don't see very many Black people advertising clothing from the 30's-50's is because who would buy a product modeled by a Black person back then... other than other black people. They were courting the white dollar not the Black one.

    My grandmother was a seamstress and she made all kinds of clothes but for other Black people since Most stores allowed Black people to purchase, but not to try on or return. She made clothes from patterns and by eye. And who was modeling on the envelopes and magazines......


    Peace

    ReplyDelete
  36. I think it's great to think about issues such as discrimination (whether toward women or racial groups) However, I find it really strange to do so because of the clothing you wear. If I want to wear vintage clothes all it means is that I like those clothes not that I idealise that time period and want it back (some do of course but that's a different issue altogether.) I think you are over analysing here - sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

    Re-enactment groups are similar. Most of us don't "idealise" the time period. After all the more you learn about a time period the harder it is to idealise it (I enjoy re-creating the medieval and renaissance period but I don't want to live in a time which condoned the persecution and at times the extermination of the Jews, discrimination and persecution of women and other races etc.)

    ReplyDelete
  37. To Anon 7:38 and Anon 8:09: So---environmentalists wear natural fibers and earth shoes, and goths dress all in black, and corporate businesswomen wear heels and tailored skirts, and "butch" lesbians wear trouser suits, and all these things are part of signaling their self-identity and social location within the US---but vintage clothing means nothing but that one likes the clothes?

    What makes vintage operate so differently from all those other styles?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Hi all,

    As an Australian I think this debate means something a little different to me. The images on B. Vikki's blog seemed familiar rather than shocking... perhaps in our local historical context, we see images of American life presented in a less biased way. For example, I have a keen interest in the history of jazz music and I've come across many images of dancers, singers and performers of all races.

    In Australia, 'blackness' is usually associated with Aboriginality. Until very recently Aboriginal fashion models were very rarely seen, but lately Samantha Harris has achieved commercial success and wide acceptance. I've actually never seen editorial coverage commenting on her race. Perhaps there is a cultural difference at work between Australia and the US?

    ReplyDelete
  39. If I can make one more comment. I agree with cmarie12. I do enjoy the artistry of the vintage looks but am clear that what was happening in terms of segregation to Mexican American and Amer. Indian peoples during those eras. The U.S. Southwest was segregated too folks. When the times and struggles are personal to you, you don't romanticize it. But I just love.to.sew so I am fascinated by everyone's imaginative reinterpretation of period clothing. Oh, and Gertie, I didn't think you meant enjoying vintage and retro meant enjoying a racist subculture. Okay, that's enough. I am stepping off the soapbox now.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Curious, I've been watching the Beyonce and Sade videos for a little while now and thought it interesting to see any retro statements presented in a more globalized mainstream accessible way, especially as 50s (but not fully fledged retro) has been featured in a couple mainstream R&B videos, and these two present different sides of two very different coins for me.

    Whilst Beyonce's is a blend of styles encompassing those of the two Betties, there are stylizations I recognise from D&G and John Galliano, as well as the the kinds of syndicated American shows like Bewitched that made it onto UK telly. I did snort with laughter though at the pin up idealisation of Beyonce since she is, at one point, dusting all the grammies(?) she's won, asking 'why don't you love me'. Fair play, there are so many levels to this one.

    Sade's video is much more tapping into that of the 60s and 70s, one that although it still has an American influence in the video but is much more peppered with images relevant to the influx of immigrants into Europe (especially the UK) at that time from the West Indies and Africa.

    As always art and culture are always subjective, and I should point out I'm speaking from the viewpoint of someone who has never lived in the US, and whose Mom came to the UK from the West Indies in the early 70s, which is probably why both videos speak different things to me, but a lot of my viewpoint on retro and vintage blogs especially UK ones, is they are always often traditionally USA-centric with only the best referencing backgrounds on their choices.

    There was a TV show on here called 'Small Island' last year which as a UK/West Indies based costume drama, was an extremely relevant for me in embracing an earlier oft ignored UK immigrant history here in the UK, especially as the big budget prime time costume dramas rarely feature any other ethnic cultures.

    I enjoy reading retro themed blogs, but am trying to be more aware that the relationship the blogger has with the materials they're using are probably quite divorced from the political and social structures of the time.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Such exciting dialogue! For my two cents, I think it may be somewhat more simplistic. It can be surprising to see a stylized/retro look on a non-white woman because until the 70s we simply did not see women of color in the mainstream (albeit "white") magazines that most of us are familiar with. Nor did we see much of it in the movies of the time, and beautiful black women such as the late Lena Horne were encouraged to "pass", so of course, there was an inaccurate homogenity presented to consumers. It is simply another example of a symptom of segregation that I suppose is easy for white women to fail to realize because it was not a part of our reality (if we were even alive yet at that time!). That being said, I think what is so exciting and interesting and ironic, is that although the era was woefully oppressive in many ways, the reason we are drawn to the fashion and the clothing style, at least for me, is because it is unapologetically feminine and sexy. Women did not have to be ashamed to be shaped the way God made us, and the styles exaggerated the hourglass figure. Of course, this is a stark contrast to modern fashion where models look more like very tall children and less and less like real women. To see women of all races choose to dress in homage to a time and era where it was beautiful and celebrated to look like a real women with boobs, butt and hips, I say how liberating for progressives, black, white, or even green to find something that inspires such interesting thought and conversation and looks dead sexy doing it. And of course, Beyonce could wear a paper bag and still put us all to shame!

    The ironic twist to this, is because I live in the deep south and work in a very conservative profession (and am a lawyer and a judge), all tatoos must be covered and it would be considered subversive or counterculture for me to dress in the retro styles! Ah, if I were younger and had to do it all over again.... Who knows? Thanks Gertie once again for getting everyone's brains and emotions working!

    ReplyDelete
  42. When looking at factors that might influence which people were featured in pictures and which pictures were then saved, you might consider the socio-economic level of the photograph's subject. Socio-economic status plays a very big part in who can afford fashions deemed worthy of being photographed. Aside from models whose pictures were taken solely as a result of their beauty, socialites and upper middle class women were more likely to be able to afford fashionable clothes and just as importantly afford the lifestyle that is also deemed important enough to being documented on film.

    Also, pictures are saved not only because someone deems them worthy of saving, but because there are people capable of saving them over a long period of time. Pictures from prominent photographers and/or pictures published in print probably have the best chance at long term survival. Pictures taken by family can also be preserved for long periods of time. But it seems that pictures from families that have some level of continuity, which is greatly enhanced by economic stability, would have the best shot of survival in regards to personal photographs.

    In brief, women who can afford fashionable clothes; who can afford to take care of themselves with hair, makeup, dental visits, and general overall health; who are not too busy supporting their families; and have access to quality photographers, seem to be the most likely candidates for fashion opportunities that might be captured on film.

    ReplyDelete
  43. To Daiyami. Sorry, your argument doesn't ring true to me. Yes, people who are going to work in a corporate area, who are Goths or any of the things that you mentioned do tend toward similar "looks" but these things are a kind of uniform for the subculture or job they are representing. Some people are representing something when they wear vintage clothes (those that belong to groups who do older styles of dancing etc.) however for others it is just a skirt or just a dress not a representation of anything. When I get up in the morning and put on blue jeans and a t-shirt I don't worry about the past of such items. I don't think that the fact that jeans were originally for farmers and that they weren't acceptable for women to wear should make me worry about whether or not I should wear them. The fact that my clothing is probably made in sweat shops is what makes me worry about whether or not I should wear them. (At least vintage wearers and seamstresses have the higher moral ground there!)

    I would also like to say that every time and place has it's problems. If I wear a sixties outfit today I am not embracing a time that in my country (Australia) had negative things like the continuation of the Stolen Generation but also had positive things like the fact that Aboriginals were finally counted as citizens and allowed to vote. I am just wearing clothes that were handed down to me by my mother.
    If I wear a fifties skirt tomorrow its the same thing. It really has no bearing on my feminist beliefs or my civil rights beliefs. Same with if I wear a Victorian corset on the weekend!

    ReplyDelete
  44. Last anonymous, you're pretty much dismissing wholesale the concerns that a lot of women are raising here. Yes, a lot of people who wear vintage do so because they like the looks and don't think twice about the historical meaning. But a lot of people who read this blog enjoy the dialogue and self-examination that comes with looking deeper into it. It doesn't mean that any of us are necessarily going to stop wearing vintage. It's just a small movement toward self-knowledge and historical knowledge, and I don't think either of those are bad things.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Also: violet, thanks for your thoughts on the videos! You're right, there's a lot more there than just generic retro.

    ReplyDelete
  46. In New Zealand many of our race issues are tied into the nature of our colonial history. But there is some interesting analysis that can be done on images of Maori from this time period.

    In NZ, the 1950s was a time when Maori (indigenous people of NZ) and non-Maori became vastly more urbanised, where previously nearly everyone had lived in rural/agricultural communities. In photos from this time period, Maori are usually dressed in traditional clothes on formal, public occasions, and usually only took a supporting role in the proceedings at public events. This conveniently promoted the idea of the "Noble Savage" which was a common British/white perspective on indigenous peoples at that time (and had been since the 18th century). In casual photos, Maori wear similar clothes to non-Maori, or a mashup of traditional cloaks with dresses/skits/suits etc.

    In the 60's this changed a little. The tourism industry was growing in importance and Maori culture was becoming a selling point for the country's image. Entertainment groups began to be formed, like the Maori Volcanics. These groups were glamourous! I wish I could show you some pictures, but basically they were in the same vein as the Supremes and other swing bands.

    So the retro images or Maori that I'm familiar with have this interesting paradox: the romanticism associated with traditional clothing versus the glamour and westernisation of the successful entertainment/cabaret groups.

    In either case, these two images were definitely a byproduct of the cultural imperialism that was a consequence of British Colonialism. The type of images we're talking about above are more specific to American culture, I can really only observe and analyse them from a distance. The history of race issues is a little different in my part of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  47. It's so interesting to read comments from Australia & New Zealand. Despite being a grad student in feminist studies and attentive to the intersections of gender, race and class, I haven't had much exposure to the operations of race in other countries founded by British colonists. And now I wanna hear from Canadian readers!

    ReplyDelete
  48. Gertie, I don't think that last anonymous was saying that such issues are irrelevant to everyone's experience of vintage dressing, just that it shouldn't be compulsory, nor should people be made to feel guilty for not having analysed whether or not it is okay for us to wear clothing that came from a sexist, racist time, and how that affects the validity of our current anti-sexism/anti-racism opinions. Sometimes we just like the clothes, and that should be okay too. I can't think of any other subculture who is regularly asked to justify the moral appropriateness of their clothing choices (especially when such clothing choices do not necessarily mean adoption of a full vintage lifestyle), and it seems really weird to me.

    ReplyDelete
  49. There are some inspiring images of black women (and men!) working their look in the footage of HMS Windrush's arrival in the UK. Also still images from the jazz clubs of London in the 1950's from photographers such as Val Wilmer.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "daiyami said...

    To Anon 7:38 and Anon 8:09: So---environmentalists wear natural fibers and earth shoes, and goths dress all in black, and corporate businesswomen wear heels and tailored skirts, and "butch" lesbians wear trouser suits, and all these things are part of signaling their self-identity and social location within the US---but vintage clothing means nothing but that one likes the clothes?

    What makes vintage operate so differently from all those other styles?"

    So an environmentalist will never wear heels and a suit to go to work; a 'butch lesbian' is purposefully making herself hard to identify if she dresses as a goth instead of in a pantsuit; and a cooporate businesswoman can't wear natural fibres due to her allergies (not to mention, I dare you to spot clothes made of ethically harvested, environmentally responsible fibres at ten paces!) There are so many other pressures at play here that you cannot safely say each of your examples dresses that way because she wishes to present that persona to the world as her particular identity. The fact that you have such trouble accepting that sometimes people just 'like' a particular mode of dress says a lot more about says a lot more about your need to categorize people into tidy little stereotypes based on the clothes they wear than clothing as a method of self expression.

    ReplyDelete
  51. LOVE love love the video. Never been a beyonce fan, but i might be converted. But, since when was Betty Page "Upper Middle Class"??

    Also, to weigh in on the race/vintage debate, I think the vintage image is based on magazines and not the exact reality of the times. Just like if someone was looking back at 2010 in 50 years time they might think we all look like the our current, sanitized and plasticized celebrities.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Mexicans and other Hispanic groups also experienced separation. Even in larger towns, like Houston. My father came from Mexico as a child, went to live in a small-ish German community with relatives to go to school. Now he looked white, German, with blond hair, blue eyes, fair skin, and recalls not knowing any better, went into the main part of the movie theater with the German kids. Afterwards his Mexican friends looked for him, and corrected him that he sat in the wrong section. They were not allowed to speak Spanish at school but the German kids could speak German. It was the sign of the times, early 1950's, rural Texas. I don't get too caught up in that in the present day or with my love of the vintage clothing. I cannot change the past, I just love the fashion. I am what I am (Popeye just came to mind typing that :)) and I don't worry about being a Mexican American married to a Polish Anglo with 4 kids in a small German/Polish town.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Who's saying this sort of analysis should be compulsory? That *would* be rather weird indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Anon 7:59am 25 May: I don't think you're engaging with my question, although I didn't ask it very well and did lean overly on stereotypes. Part of what I meant to say is that even when you think you are wearing something just because you like it (and I'm sure that goths, businesswomen, etc, also all *like* the clothes that they wear), you cannot help sending signals about who you are, because there *are* so many pressures at play. What we like is socialized. Clothing is not just self-expression but a public signal. I don't dress within any known subculture, I have a fairly individual look (colorful & frilly, because that's what I like) within the subculture I belong to (professors in the Northwest US), and yet, every time I get dressed it is part of a particular persona or impression that I will make. I don't think clothing can avoid being so, not even a tee-shirt and blue jeans.

    Does that mean I think vintage sends the signal that you're racist? Absolutely not! But to claim that vintage is *exempt* from this social interplay of meanings? I'm skeptical, and I'd honestly like to understand the counterargument. (Gertie, I apologize if this is a threadjack, feel free to shut me down--I know I'm a new commenter, been lurking for just a couple months)

    I don't mean to attack--maybe if I turn the question around....it's not about what it means to you when you put on the clothing, but how do you think other people perceive you when you wear vintage?

    And am also really enjoying the Australian, NZ, and UK viewpoints!

    ReplyDelete
  55. dayiami- I do not think vintage is exempt from what you called social interplay of meaning - I agree with you that every way a person dresses can lead to interpretation. I do think, however, that today vintage clothes show a lot of other things about the person wearing them, which do not include that s/he is a racist (and I know you agree with me, but for the sake of argument...). I mean, does loving '40s fashion make me identify with that era? because most chances are I would be dead or very close to dead if I were to live in Europe at that time. (Though I did cringe when Seth Aaron of Project Runway said he was inspired by the clothes of the German and Russian armies of WWII).
    I do agree that we need to be more aware of the history of the time, and to educate ourselves rather than rely on the partial info that we often get.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I find it interesting that in discussions about how race intersects with "fun" cultural output, there tends to be a lot of defensiveness and strawman arguments. No one said this analysis is mandatory, that people are forbidden from engaging in a hobby some people find problematic, or denouncing people for it.

    I sometimes find myself not wanting to engage in a discussion I find super interesting because of that.

    Which is *totally* not your fault Gertie. I'm glad you brought it up.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Just as a resource for real vintage snapshots of people of all types in clothes, Square America is a great resource.

    http://www.squareamerica.com/search/?tag=african-american

    I found it to be extremely useful when I was doing costume design, and it's also just a good way to see a cross-section of American life through personal photographs.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Gertie, comments like this make one think they have to defend their choices: "whenever I see a younger woman dressed in an outfit from the 40s I want to ask her if she really understands the struggles and the day-to-day realities of racism and how it shaped & affected a black woman's life at the time." Not so much your post, but the discussion that followed.

    ReplyDelete
  59. I have to say I don't know much, but I know a little about the time frame. It was a predominantly white culture. I remember watching a show about a black jazz singer who was one of the first black women in movies (not just as a side, or playing the role of a servant), she even said the only reason she got as far as she did in the time is because she looked white. It's wrong and we all know that now... but I will say pin-ups are popping up all over (of all races). When I was stationed in Texas, it was mostly Hispanic girls on the rockabilly scene. I loved it. I always thought pinup/ retro clothes were perfect for all women (regardless of race) because it is about BEING a woman. Yes, back in the day they had awful stereotypes and rules. We don't know. I think the thing we celebrate in the clothing is about being sexy women with curves. I think we should all wear it proud to show how far we have come when it comes to race and women's rights and liberties.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Wow, I feel kind of attacked now. Apparently I am dismissive of others points of view and guilty of stereotyping people who look like they may belong to a certain sub-culture. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I haven't heard you or think you don't have a right to your opinion - I just disagree with you.
    The stereotyping comment? I can't quite see where you got the idea that I want to put people in little boxes. What I was trying to say is that some people are trying to say something with what they wear but that I don't think most vintage wearers are. I could be wrong. Daiyami - your turn around - I don't wear vintage clothes. I often wear old clothes of my mother's or father's but they are not old enough to own anything vintage. The fifties skirt was an example not actually something I am likely to wear. If I did I wouldn't expect anyone to think anything of it. I met a girl at a wedding who was wearing a vintage inspired outfit. I thought she looked pretty.
    I'm not going to comment again and will stop reading the blog. It's not that I don't like social and political commentary - I read several blogs and belong to communities which are about issues of race, feminism and sexuality etc. However, in those blogs and communities, whilst the debate can get pretty heated, everyone is allowed to have their own opinion. Something I have noticed is not the case here - even for Gertie!

    ReplyDelete
  61. Oh boy, I've lost track of which Anonymous is which! There are so many . . . I'm sorry if anyone feels attacked. That is a risk with sensitive topics like this, about which many feel passionately. I'm not even sure which comment you're talking about at this point, but I would like to add that I don't think it's fair to say I don't allow people to have their own opinions. I started the op/ed column with just that hope. (Still looking for more contributers . . . hint hint!) People may passionately disagree with each other here, or even feel offended by what one says, but that does not equate forbidding one to have opinions. (That's what the delete comment button is for :) Okay, that is all. I need to go have some ice cream and watch Glee.

    ReplyDelete
  62. "can we separate the style from the time?"

    what this can possibly mean is "can we separate the clothing from the history that took place when people wore it?"

    my first question is "are we sure we want to, and if we do, why?" not even from a good/bad or right/wrong perspective, but a place that truly examines why we find a particular style so fascinating. would one choose to wear a particular style in order to "reclaim" it somehow? are we, by choosing to wear a style, choosing to emulate the era that it came from?
    part of the answer of course lies in personal taste, aesthetics, and design. the other part comes from research and a wider breadth of knowledge.

    i think this question would be interesting to answer if it extended to more than just American fashion from the middle of the 20th century.

    for instance, what would you (we) think of if we saw someone walking down the street everyday in a full hoop skirt and corset and all the bells and whistles that come from a Civil War era gown- and this outfit was intended as daily clothing and not as a costume?

    what if someone chose to have their feet bound, in the name of interest in the fashion, despite what they would be doing to their feet?

    or if someone in public office stood at a podium wearing a ruff, doublet, balloon breeches, and a codpiece?

    how bout a suit inspired by an SS uniform? i'm pretty sure anyone wearing something like that would need to be prepared to defend their fashion choice whether they wanted to or not.

    while i believe that everyone is absolutely free to make their own fashion choices, and in my book, that includes mutilating their own body- if you wear clothing based on designs from an era that is not one you lived in, people are going to react. one cannot control what others' opinions would be.
    AND, depending on what culture they came from and from which you took your inspiration- some make not like it, and not understand why you would choose to wear clothing that for them heavily of something VERY unpleasant (as specifically in here- whitewashing, or women's lib issues). point is- not everyone will see your fashion inspiration the same you did.

    Fashion isn't about making other people happy. But when taking styles from other eras, and even other cultures- then making them your own- it would be very wise to consider all the cultures and eras that style encompassed- read: research. at the very least you've given yourself a history lesson if nothing else!

    Perhaps delving into vintage styles deserves more effort that saying "ooo! pretty!". (NTTAWWT) of course it's pretty! but- what *else* is it? For me, looking into the history and the cultures of the eras can either hinder my desire to wear clothing inspired by it, or fuel it even more. it makes fashion a far richer experience no matter what.

    EAC

    ReplyDelete
  63. Isn't history something that all people should learn? Not only that-girl-in-the-vintage-dress?

    Most women I see in vintage look elegant. (No matter what color her skin happens to be.) I so wish my english was better right now. I'll try to make myself understod.

    My grandmother is my greatest inspiration, not for how she looks, but for who she is. She is what all people should be or try to be, elegant, wise, accepting and understanding.
    She's been through rough times, instead of being eaten up by anger she took what she got and became a better person for it. This woman NEVER gets angry, not even a little bit upset. But she wont let people walk all over her. She talks, you listen.

    This is what I see in 60+ years old clothing, my grandmother. Even the simplest dress scream ELEGANCE. (..or maybe grace, maybe both.)

    We should all learn from the past, and to not wear that 40s dress because someone might not like how things were during the forties? We're all where we are because of history, the good and the bad.

    I will end my incoherent ramblings with this: All you women wear what you love whatever shape or color you are, if you are happy and comfortable with what you wear your confidence will amplify your beauty!

    ReplyDelete
  64. some of the best-dressed, most stylish, and gracious women i've met have been african-american. and other women of color. women everywhere like to dress up and be stylish.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Minorities are just usually not mentioned a lot for "style".

    ReplyDelete
  66. Okay, I am totally coming to this late, and although I didn't read everything, I tried to get some of what was being said.

    Having been 'in the vintage scene' for some years, I get asked this question constantly. And my answer is, respectively, people of color cant, or rather wont differentiate the nostalgia of the era with the reality of the era. And I cant blame them.

    It makes my teeth bleed when I hear people (white) say, "Gosh, I wish I could go back to 1945, dont you!?"

    NO! No I dont. Not at all. My love of the eras I choose (1930s-1945) lies with my understanding of the struggles that my people went through to get me the rights and privileges I have today. I choose to pay homage to that more so than simply mimic the style of yesteryear.

    Its not just black people. I remember last year I was at a vintage party with a few other women of color (one was Chinese, one Japanese and one Hispanic) and we just had a synergy about this whole topic.

    The nostalgia for how women (white) were treated during the time has fairly been overcome to the point of being romanticized. People of color, not so much.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Hi! I just wanted to say that I came across your blog from Definatalie's blog and I love love love love everything you've written. This post is so important to me (shallow aside: Beyonce is so ridiculously sexy and hot in this video!) and you've brought up so many wonderful and important issues about the implications and connotations of 'retro' and as well as the implications of vintage nostalgia. Thanks so much. xo Jenny

    ReplyDelete
  68. So glad to see this sort of discussion spreading and evolving. I've been thinking and writing about this for a little while too:

    http://iheartthreadbared.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/in-vintage-color/

    ReplyDelete
  69. A year late but not too late... I think I was looking for something on sewing and came across this....


    I am a beautiful American woman who's ancestors are from African and right here ... and I disagree... in the 50's 60's and 70's black women where the center for fashion and culture... hair style, choices of clothing was influence by music or the time and the southern style.... it is silly and sad that many women here think of 50's retro as white history ... I am happy to see many agree that it just not shown/ as with media today sometime the beauty of any culture is lost in the hype (afghan women are absolutely delightful gorgeous) yet all we see is that they are poor if we see anything at all… but they are rich in culture .

    The pomp!(and the flip) the style we use the bump it for today was an African American style made famous by Jacki o and other women and my grandmother. The cute little finger wave on Marilyn Monroe oh boy did we wear that one too it actually start on men of color who like to have waves in there hair and would use lye to start then a gel to wave it( hair dress history book) lol.

    My grandmother (born in the 20's in the upper middle class) while not a pin up girl (there was no market for her to be anything other as there where not even movie house for her until after the depression) was a beauty and her mother( American Indian) also... Both where the "cleaver type of mother"as was my mom and me today – neither work outside of the home until there children where in school.

    However my favorite picture is one of her in a red satin dress with gloves and a knock I dead clutch. She had her hair in cute little pomp style and side swept bang. Our family’s and style weren’t different you just didn't see it on TV just like today to make you believe that the black family was tired worked to death hungry and etc sadly but no! the truth is that we rock retro when retro was hot and mod when that was hot we rock the tan before many of you thought it was hot and in my family we embrace it all with grace and charm.


    I myself rock it retro or modern or what ever I feel that day I like to think of my self and embodiment of style theirs my own and the world.
    This week I am rocking an AFRO! And skirts and dress like the flower child I am.

    Beside where they buy there clothes - the same place all people did Montgomery Wards lol now that is retro.

    ReplyDelete
  70. A year late but not too late... I think I was looking for something on sewing and came across this....


    I am a beautiful American woman who's ancestors are from African and right here ... and I disagree... in the 50's 60's and 70's black women where the center for fashion and culture... hair style, choices of clothing was influence by music or the time and the southern style.... it is silly and sad that many women here think of 50's retro as white history ... I am happy to see many agree that it just not shown/ as with media today sometime the beauty of any culture is lost in the hype (afghan women are absolutely delightful gorgeous) yet all we see is that they are poor if we see anything at all… but they are rich in culture .

    The pomp!(and the flip) the style we use the bump it for today was an African American style made famous by Jacki o and other women and my grandmother. The cute little finger wave on Marilyn Monroe oh boy did we wear that one too it actually start on men of color who like to have waves in there hair and would use lye to start then a gel to wave it( hair dress history book) lol.

    My grandmother (born in the 20's in the upper middle class) while not a pin up girl (there was no market for her to be anything other as there where not even movie house for her until after the depression) was a beauty and her mother( American Indian) also... Both where the "cleaver type of mother"as was my mom and me today – neither work outside of the home until there children where in school.

    However my favorite picture is one of her in a red satin dress with gloves and a knock I dead clutch. She had her hair in cute little pomp style and side swept bang. Our family’s and style weren’t different you just didn't see it on TV just like today to make you believe that the black family was tired worked to death hungry and etc sadly but no! the truth is that we rock retro when retro was hot and mod when that was hot we rock the tan before many of you thought it was hot and in my family we embrace it all with grace and charm.


    I myself rock it retro or modern or what ever I feel that day I like to think of my self and embodiment of style theirs my own and the world.
    This week I am rocking an AFRO! And skirts and dress like the flower child I am.

    lol where else would they shop ... besides Ward or pattern shop! so yep we wore it did and made it ...

    ReplyDelete
  71. Wow, this was a fascinating post--truly fascinating!

    I've never associated vintage/retro images & glamour with solely White women, personally. It's never even begun to enter my mind to do so. The image of vintage glamour and style has always been emotionally tied in with my African-American grandmother, aunts and cousins on my mother's side. They were all very beautiful and stylish Black women who were the epitome of the middle to upper middle class 1950's housewife. My grandma was a seamstress who made the most beautiful clothes which would now be called "vintage". She passed on this love of looking good to her daughter, my mother, who passed it down to me! My mother is also a great seamstress and I love vintage/retro style! :-)
    One of my aunts was an incredibly stylish woman and was the wife of a prominent Black surgeon and lived that 50's American Dream--complete package; the home in the 'burbs, maid, social club membership, etc. So, for me, this era has always well-represented the lives & experiences of middle class and well-to-do Black women. Someone could've knocked me over with a feather if they had told me that vintage glamour was considered by some in society to be in any way, not the 'norm' for Black women!

    However, an interesting thing happened when I started to archive my family pictures into an online album...the images I shared of simply, my family members, particularly my Black female family from the 50's and 60's, seemed to draw a little more attention from some users compared to the countless White users who shared their own vintage family pics. I've had all these Flickr users email me, requesting to use my pictures for one project or another.

    I was even harassed by certain prejudiced individuals at one point, on a social network forum, who claimed that the vintage family pictures I had were scanned "from textbooks"! Unbelievable.

    So, after reading and learning a little more, I can only come to a similar conclusion as yours, that history has most DEFINITELY been white-washed and images of well to do, prosperous, beautiful, and coiffed Black women from past eras are not as well-represented as their White counterparts--not by a long shot! Therefore, some people in society find it harder to get used to when they do see these images.

    I've been trying to do my own little part and dispel stereotypes by sharing my vintage family photographs of my African-American female relatives, as well as creating something called the "Vintage Black Women" galleries, which anyone can see by clicking on my Flickr. These galleries have gotten a lot of positive feedback and I feel, does some good by presenting beautiful, truthful images of the Black woman of the past. BTW, anyone can see my own Black female vintage imagery by clicking on my name.

    Great and insightful post!!

    ReplyDelete
  72. Way too late here, but what the heck. First off: in no way do I mean to equate being lesbian with being a woman of color in this post. But my instinct with this discussion is of course to consider my own experiences and try to find common ground.

    That is, in the comments I recognize hints of the conflict I feel between my love of vintage fashion and the fact that I’m gay—I would in NO WAY want to go back in time and have to navigate old-fashioned sexual politics, I don’t want to glorify those politics, plus there can be a feeling of alienation in the vintage fashion world because if you’re dressing in a 50’s style skirt people automatically see you as girly and straight. For all these reasons, it can sometimes be confusing trying to dress “out and proud” and vintage at the same time.

    That said, I don’t think my draw to vintage is connected to political or cultural nostalgia so much as it is to my fascination with history, to those stand-out figures who landed into what was often some crappy stage-settings, but still managed to pull off an awesome performance. You say vintage, and I think of Marlene Dietrich in a tux. That’s definitely not straight!

    It also angers me, like it has other commenters, that when popular media remembers culture in the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s it doesn't publish images like those of the Savoy Ballroom. It’s no surprise vintage fashion is seen as straight, since gay women had to typically stay underground during this period. But African American culture was so monumental, how on earth is it surprising when Beyonce, a singer, films an homage to a period where women of color became some of the most influential artists of recent history, and had legitimate control over the direction of American (so, world) music, dance and style? Many of these singers faced tragic lives at the hands of caustic racism and sexism, but that only serves to highlight their remarkable personalities and achievements. Vintage fashion isn’t white, any more than it’s straight, and if this is how we see it, I think it’s high time that all of us set about changing the perception. History should belong to all of us.

    But…how does one do that? When I’m sporting girly Bettie Draper outfits, I do kind of relish holding hands with a girlfriend. It’s probably an exercise in futility, but it makes me feel better, like I’m snatching back some sliver of gay history. I think it’s natural for younger generations to seek role models among our predecessors, and it doesn’t mean we’re idealizing the times in which they lived. If young women of color feel like when they wear vintage they're implying support for racist politics instead of evoking the bravery of their grandmothers, there's something very wrong. Maybe Beyonce’s video helps merely by dressing vintage? It’s certainly prompted recognition of black history/fashion on this discussion board, and I think that means something in and of itself.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Fashion is for all of us. Wear want you want. In the world of fashion, you are free to have your own style.Be creative in your own way. Ignore those you thinks you bad on your fashion way. Fashion reflects your personality.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Quoting Beth: "Women did not have to be ashamed to be shaped the way God made us, and the styles exaggerated the hourglass figure. Of course, this is a stark contrast to modern fashion where models look more like very tall children and less and less like real women"
    If I'm not a real women because I'm tall at 5'10", would you please inform my uterus to stop sending me cramps every month? Can you also tell jack-ass men not to assume they should tell me how to workout at the gym because I am a girl and therefore "need" a man's help with athletics? Pear shaped body types are actually more common than hourglasses, although none of the common body types has a large predominance over the others. I like older sewing patterns precisely because they do have sizes that fit A and B cups instead of assuming I have enormous breasts like a lactating Holstein. What's so unfeminine about having a shape of someone like say Debbie Allen in the 80's in Fame?

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for your comments; I read each and every one! xo Gertie

© Gertie's Blog For Better Sewing. Powered by Cake