I don’t recall when I actually began to dress up. Nor do I remember simply waking up one morning decked out in pleated bow dresses and leopard pumps. What I do recall however, is that the sartorial prescriptions of major retail chains and those of my unwitting peers were like gospel to me, and as such, I blindly followed said prescriptions until much soul-searching (and closet-purging) led me to, what author JJ Lee aptly coins, “dressing with intention”. As Lee suggests in his memoir, The Measure of a Man, the mere act of dressing makes one prey to public scrutiny as everyone from arbiters of style to your colleague in the next cubicle is waiting to carefully comb your presentation from head to toe.

“If you choose to dress with any sort of intention or sense of purpose – with style – you really can’t win. That’s why people who take risks with the way they dress are thought of as brave. ”

While someone who dresses with intention comes to expect such scrutiny, nothing can ever prepare someone for the misjudgments others will make, not about the clothes that they choose to wear, but the content of their character.

And this very realization leads to an infinite numbers of questions. For one, are our sartorial accoutrements loaded with information like we’ve always firmly believed, or lack thereof? Dressing is a form of self-expression, but how is it that the message we wish to convey gets so grossly misconstrued? Is our chosen mode of self-expression built to fail, or, much like with the advent of technology, specifically web 2.0, have we become at a loss for how to think about, or properly respond when faced with certain propositions without an ostensible set of rules, or compass to help us make sense of the burgeoning shift from conformity to individuality happening within our collective sartorial domain?

Essentially, while the clothes that we wear do speak about our demeanor, evidently, they do not tell the whole story. Simple as that.

The re-appearance of the tuxedo on the catwalk this fall instantly sent images of a young Marlene Dietrich in Morocco (1930) to my mind. In her debut film role, Dietrich stood on stage, a magnificent androgynous sexually charged female, dressed in long black pipe trousers, white shirt and smoking jacket, and was rocketed to international fame in an instant. This was to be an iconic moment in history where fashion and gender clashed and confronted one another on an international stage. Flashes of the German starlet in the famous Moroccan smokey room were certain to occur whenever a lady attempted to wear a tuxedo thereafter. Her exotic wardrobe in the film styled by Travis Banton was to become one of the greatest star and designer collaborations in the history of film. It is referenced and recreated time and time again, as we can see with Gucci, Jean Paul Gaultier and Prada this season. Contemporary designers are echoing the trend with their tailored feminine suits, accentuating the female form with their powerful clothes and silhouettes in homage to this time in film history.

How could it be that by wearing a suit, all definitions of what it was to be a woman were suddenly being challenged? Questions were raised in the public hemisphere as to why such gender stereotypes in clothing existed all together. An enormous buzz surrounded the film upon its release. Women did not wear trousers at the time; they wore pretty dresses and skirts. A traditionally male uniform to which a man’s connotations of economic worth and nobility were attached through the aesthetic quality of the fit and material, the tux would only be worn by men to formal affairs. For a woman to masquerade with such pseudo masculine messages was perceived by her contemporaries as actively seeing herself as equal to man. In this defiant moment, Dietrich stood strong and bold, completely comfortable in her sexuality, almost predatory as though she dominated the men and women around her. The comfortableness in her sexuality whilst confused messages were being disbanded around her gave the illusion that Dietrich was overly aware of a secret that those around her, both on screen and off screen, had yet to discover. This proved to be sheer magic on screen. Perhaps her comfortableness derived from cross dressing being relatively normal amongst certain circles at the time for both male and females in Dietrich’s hometown of Berlin. She was no doubt immersed in a thespian-fueled bohemian atmosphere that prevented her from foreseeing the global shock resulting from the film’s release.

The tuxedo itself was customized by Dietrich’s husband’s tailor in Germany, purposely accentuating her female attributes. This would be a trend that would not take off on a mainstream level until the 1940s with the practical militant inspired fashions of World War II. It wouldn’t be until 1966 that Yves Saint Laurent introduced the tuxedo to women with his ‘Le Smoking‘ campaign famously shot by Helmut Newton. It would seem Dietrich and Banton were incredibly fashion forward and together, perhaps unintentionally, broke gender barriers. They took some of the first public steps that led the way to the more liberal world that we live in today. Yes, this film did incorporate the same sex kiss where Dietrich openly flirts with another lady in the audience. However, I still stand by the notion that it was the suit alone that truly mesmerized the crowd and made film history. Her overall agressive and male demeanor whilst captivating her audience with her effortless angrogyny would not have been as powerful if the suit had not aided her in this disguise. A cocktail dress never would have had the same desired effect. The Tuxedo’s symbolic representations of gender combined with her character’s female strength worked together to empower women very early on in the 20^th century.

If you do decide to wear your tuxedo this season, please do consider Dietrich and Banton when doing so. After all these years of supposed sexual equality, is it possible for a woman today to feel this same sense of empowerment when she wears stereotypically male clothing?

Photo credit: Bundesarchiv, Bild 102-14627 / CC-BY-SA via Wikipedia, collider.com

Related articles

• How Yves Saint Laurent Revolutionized Women’s Fashion By Popularizing The “Le Smoking” Suit (businessinsider.com)
• Charlize Theron co-Stars With Marilyn Monroe, Marlene Dietrich and Grace Kelly in Dior J’Adore Short Film (shoppingblog.com)
• Marlene Dietrich screen test 1929 (dangerousminds.net)

Does clothing hold the power to conceal as much as it reveals about any one person?

Suppose you’re somewhat of an exuberant dresser. When you walk down the street, you command attention simply by virtue of the clothes on your back. Yet, you’re not an attention seeker like your sartorial choices would suggest. You’re more of an introverted character but to observers, your wardrobe choices illustrate just the opposite.

A psychologist, with whom I shared my inherent lack of extraversion, reasoned that perhaps I was fooling myself about my disposition, since my style of dress did not fit with my “perceived” reserved and introverted nature. She did not think someone prancing around in 4-inch heels, skin-bearing halter dresses, and at-one-time pompadour hair could possibly be “shy”, and that perhaps I hadn’t yet come to the realization that I was just the opposite. Otherwise, I wouldn’t dress the way that I do, she concluded.

So is it  misinterpretation? Misrepresentation?  Or simply an example of how wardrobe can conceal one’s true temperamental makeup as much as it can serve as a vehicle of self-expression, thus pointing to the notion that wardrobe tells only part of the story?

And if conspicuous style of dress and personality do not always go hand in hand, does it render the wearer whose personality “conflicts’ with this expected ideal any less engaging?

Photo credit: Eirik at streethearts.com

Related articles

• Clothing, Identity and the Case of the ‘Genderless’ Baby (lemonochromatic.com)

The end result is a collection of some of the most fanciful and innovative dresses, and one swimsuit, made of everything from car parts, to shotgun shells. While the gowns are without a doubt breathtaking, the accompanying videos- informative windows into the environmental implications of the waste we generate yearly – serve as a stern reminder that we must urgently pull the brake on hyperconsumerism and begin discarding of unwanted goods more intelligently (recycle, recycle!) for the sake of our planet, and our survival. This is one mesmerizing but also thought-provoking exhibit.

One: Outfits from a New Era runs until December 3rd, 2012 at the Biosphère

I now leave you with some images to mull over.

Can you guess which waste products these fashion concoctions are made of?

Photo credit: Camille Gaior

As much as clothing serves as a means of identification, it is equally useful as a way to conceal, or at the very least render ambiguous one’s identity, which illustrates just how deep-seated our sartorial markers of class, gender, and identity are, and that, in spite of the changes fashion has undergone throughout the decades. Certain colors, and specific garments strongly suggest sex and gender identity as much as others’ point to class and group affiliations. For instance, somewhere down the road, pink has come to symbolize the female sex while blue is strictly reserved for boys. The story of Storm, the 4-month old Canadian baby whose parents have chosen to keep his/her sex hidden – “a tribute to freedom and choice in place of limitation, a stand up to what the world could become in Storm’s lifetime (a more progressive place? …)”, explain the parents – has sparked a heated debate on gender identity and conformity; inadvertently illustrating how the way we dress shapes public perception.

Interestingly, keeping Storm’s sex a secret is simple enough as parents Kathy Witterick and David Stocker have demonstrated. Avoiding pink, fuchsia, and blue, they have instead opted to dress the 4 month-old in gender-neutral clothing, like a red-fleece jumper which contrasts so beautifully against Storm’s flaxen hair in the above picture. Without any clear sartorial cues, we are left wondering, since attempting to guess a baby’s sex based on the assumption that a name refers to one sex or the other – which this parent who also withheld the sex of his two children in the 90s calls “the flimsiest of evidence”- is no substitute for the strong sartorial markers that have come to shape our concept of gender. Aside from illustrating our apparent obsessive need to classify individuals according to predefined social constructs, or perhaps our far too conventional views on parenting, Baby Storm’s story also exemplifies how wardrobe can serve to either promote or eschew these same social constructs simply by virtue of how it is utilized.

Photo credit: thestar.com

The fashion gods continue to bestow upon us intellectually stimulating fashion fare with yet another exhibition gracing the city of Montreal. The Fashion World of Jean Paul Gaultier: From the Sidewalk to the Catwalk, presented by the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, is the latest exhibition to showcase the body of work of an esteemed couturier, the first of which was Love, a retrospective of the work of the late Yves Saint Laurent in 2008.

Beginning June 17^th, museumgoers can marvel at Jean Paul Gaultier’s eccentric, avant-garde creations spanning the course of his 35  years in the business. Some 120 haute couture and ready-to-wear pieces will be on display, alongside costume sketches, video clips, and fashion photography with never-before-published prints by the likes of world-renowned artists Andy Warhol, Bettina Rheims, Paolo Roversi, Mario Testino, David LaChapelle, and Steven Klein, among others.

The exhibition will also explore the works of art, and artistic realms from which Gaultier draws inspiration. Film screenings, lectures, and special events accompany the exhibition throughout. Be sure not to miss, “Fashion Forward: Directional Fashion From 1980 to Now”,  a special lecture by Valerie Steele, Director and Chief Curator of The Museum at Fashion Institute of Technology (FIT), New York and founder/editor of Fashion Theory. The Fashion World of Jean Paul Gaultier: From the Sidewalk to the Catwalk runs until October 2^nd, 2011.

For more information, please visit mmfa.qc.ca

Photo credit: theblayreport.com, selecticism.com

For decades, Bill Cunningham has chronicled New York streetstyle and the sartorial feats of soirée attendees for the New York Times. Now, the man on the Schwinn bicycle is the subject of a documentary aptly titled, ‘Bill Cunningham New York’, an endearing portrait of the creative mind behind the famous, “On the Street”, and “Evening Hours” style columns.

Through, ‘Bill Cunningham, New York’, we get to relish in Cunningham’s creative process, as we witness how he inconspicuously observes passersby, and then pounces on his sartorial prey, quickly snapping away with his trusty camera before his subject even notices. But aside from that, we learn about the man behind the camera, one greatly admired and respected by industry insiders, high society, and common folks alike, but whom we know very little about. A milliner in his early days, Cunningham has since built a career around documenting the aesthetic of New Yorkers from all walks of life. His passion for beautiful clothes and the creative ways in which people interpret as well as create fashion trends provides the very fodder for his work.

While some critics have pointed out the sadness in that, aside from traveling the world to cover fashion weeks, working the New York charity circuit, and roaming the streets of New York in search of his next subject, Cunningham seems to lead a solitary life; in all honesty, that’s exactly what I found most endearing about him. His passion is what sustains him. It is in effect all that he wants and needs. When I look at Cunningham, I don’t see a sad or lonely man. I see a cheerful, truly lucky man who’s found fulfillment and happiness in pursuing his greatest love. Perhaps, it seems sad to us only because we can’t fathom the idea of not having anyone to share our greatest accomplishments with, but for some people, like Cunningham, they needn’t share their emotions privately, especially when they already do so very publicly. Cunningham communicates his innermost feelings and ideas through photographs, and shares his love with his collaborators, his many acquaintances, and the public. He doesn’t at all feel sorry for himself. Hence neither should we.

Photo credit: vancouversun.com, thefoxisblack.com

In Absence of Malice, Sally Field is Megan Carter, a reporter who makes mistakes, many mistakes. When a federal prosecutor, desperate for leads in an ongoing investigation into the disappearance of a local union leader, conveniently leaves the case file on his desk, she reads it and subsequently writes a story about the alleged suspect, Michael Gallagher (Paul Newman), local liquor wholesaler and son of a deceased Mafioso. But Gallagher is innocent, set up by the FBI in a desperate move to squeeze information out of him regarding what they believe to be a mob kidnapping. In a strategic ploy on the prosecutor’s part to have Carter leak news of the bogus investigation to the public, the unattributed story she proceeds to write is only the first of many misjudgments on her part, as she then prints another story exposing a devastating secret about Gallagher’s alibi, and also becomes involved with the very subject of the investigation, Gallagher.

To say that this film isn’t the most accurate depiction of investigative journalism to hit the big screen is a grave understatement. The many blunders Carter commits combined with the far too permissive, and sometimes complicit attitude of her editor makes for a far from credible depiction of the inner workings of a newsroom. While the absence of malice law protects Carter and the paper from legal retaliation, it is clear that she is a careless, misguided reporter, who lets her ambition cloud her moral judgment on more than one occasion. But in spite of her professional indiscretions, and despite the story’s lack of credibility, Absence of Malice still makes for a very entertaining drama about the ethics of the profession and the harm irresponsible reporting can inflict on innocent bystanders.

Carter makes lousy decisions, but at least, she’s judicious in her sartorial choices. In a world where hemlines are getting shorter, and where the only options for knee-length or just above the knee skirts lie in the astronomically priced Victoria Beckham arena of designer duds, Absence of Malice enables us to indulge in perfectly tailored blazers, billowy skirts, and beautiful silk blouses, an enviable timeless wardrobe that will have you hitting up the nearest consignment shop in the hopes of scoring similar smart clothing.  And while no respectable reporter would ever sleep with the subject of an ongoing investigation, when said subject is Paul Newman, well, clearly all is forgiven. But Carter deserves the hell that reigns down on her in one dramatic scene when Gallagher, visibly upset that her lack of judgment has resulted in the loss of a dear friend, assaults her. And we do gain utmost pleasure when Gallagher exacts his sweet revenge, in the end outsmarting just about everyone else.

Photo credit: cinemagia.ro, google

For more info, please visit www.metmuseum.org

Photo credit: luxuryculture.com

Related Articles

• Alexander McQueen’s Label Gets a Royal Boost (mediabistro.com)

Twin infants, unbeknownst to them, are made to sport the same attire. But usually, when they grow older, they want nothing more than to break free from sartorial sameness. But many grown men and women who haven’t shared time in the same womb do partake in the act of dressing exactly the same. Out on the town the other night, I asked two girls dressed alike, from the same black military wool jacket down to the same black knee-high boots, whether they had meant to dress similarly, and I was surprised to hear them say that they had left the house dressed virtually exactly the same by happenstance. Close friends for over three years, the girls explained that they often unknowingly dress alike. Is it possible that one’s style has rubbed off the other? Or does closeness create similar tastes?

It has been argued that the menstrual cycles of women who live together become synchronized overtime.  What’s more, people who work together also tend to dress similarly and studies have shown that couples, after several years of bliss not only begin to dress alike  but also begin to look alike. While most people get irritated or embarrassed when they are out in public and find themselves in the company of someone wearing the exact same attire, sartorial twins don’t seem the least bit bothered by sameness but rather seem to embrace it.

If the photos above taken from Rus Yusupov’s photo series entitled Street Twins are any indication, perhaps then, as writer David Sally argues, the converse to the popular adage may equally be true: “birds that flock, feather together.”

Photo credit: lavish-livez.com, commercialpop.com