lifestyle leader

Does the health of macroeconomy have an impact on fashion? That's a question I've been wondering about recently. I don't know anything about fashion, but intuitively it seems that there must be some sort of connection between what sort of clothes people wear and the overall health of their economic situation. I mean, wealthy people tend to dress "better" than poorer people - that is to say, their clothing is more aesthetically appealing, judged by the standards of the day. Can we extend that trend to the whole economy and compare between eras?

Well that's exactly what I'm going to try to do here. My idea is that people tend to be more stylish during periods of economic boom. It's not an airtight theory, but it's Friday so bear with me. I realize there's a problem from the outset. I'm subjectively biased towards fashion in that I'm more likely to favour current fashion trends over older ones - it's what I'm used to wearing and seeing around me. But I think, even with that in mind, it's not too difficult to look back at history and say: yes, those people looked sharp, or, oh God! something was horribly, horribly wrong. Also, I'm sticking to North-Atlantic economies because I know less-than-nothing about fashion in the rest of the world. So let's start with post-WW1

1920s
The Roaring Twenties - a few minor recessions notwithstanding, economic growth in the twenties was impressive. It was the Jazz age, there was the jitterbug, and of course there was the infamous stock market bubble. Everyone owned stocks. From Wall St. barons down to their limo drivers, stock tips were being shared and discussed in everyday conversation. Everyone was getting rich.

What do we see? For the women: some funny-looking stockings & bathing caps, this is not bad, nor this. A little, er, old fashioned but classy nevertheless. Same goes for the men: the three piece with hat & hankerchief. And of course Al Capone: badass.

1930s
The Great Depression. Clearly some people managed to stay largely unaffected by the extended economic downturn, but with unemployment at 20%+, things tended to be a little more sober. Or worse. Enough said.
1950s - 1960s
Post-war recovery was remarkably rapid, even in Europe. Economic growth, particularly in the 1960s under Kennedy and Johnson, was averaging around 5-6% per year - that's unbelievable by today's standards. This was the era of cheap oil & boat-sized sedans, big industry and safe union jobs. As Patrick at zzzeitgeist pointed out, it was a period of unrestrained consumption.

And man, they looked sharp. The fedora continued to reign supreme. No complaints about the introduction of the mini-skirt, either. Or maybe I've just been watching too much Mad Men.

Of course, I'm forgetting the hippies. But the hippy movement didn't really take off until the late 60s and early 1970s - and by 1968 the economic policies of the previous decade had begun to hit the wall....

1970s
Let's take the period from January 1970 until the end of 1982: that's thirteen years or 156 months. According to economist Timothy Taylor, the US economy spent 49 of those months in recession (re: negative growth). That's almost a third of a decade n' change spent in recession. Yikes.


As for the fashion, well - there are no words. Like monks flagellating themselves to atone for their sins, people in the 1970s attempted to make up for their previous economic excesses by forcing themselves to wear horrible, horrible things and listening to disco music. I can't even begin to... what were they... the fat tie... David Bowie!? Make it stop. Please, make it stop.

1980s - early 1990s
The 1980s were sort of a hangover from the 1970s. There were a couple of recessions and government debts rose rapidly. Conservative politicians in the US, UK and Canada implemented neoliberal economic policies, which led to economic pain and social displacement in many areas of the economy.


As my theory predicts, the 80s is known for some pretty questionable fashion taste. We've got the Big Hair, exhibit A, B and OMG. Of course the MC Hammer parachute pants and the hip hop square-cut. I could go on.

But, you want to counter, the 80s was awesome and so was the music!1! Well, you're wrong.

Mid-1990s to present?
Since the rapid economic growth of the mid- to late-1990s, it's my general impression that people have started to dress better again. We've left some of the crazy experiments of the last two and a half decades behind. Granted, the suit & fedora-wearing gentleman has all but disappeared, but I'm noticing that at least pinstripes are making a comeback.

I recognize that this is a huge generalization, and that clearly different groups within society have different tastes. Moreover, this is not to say that we don't have some laughable fashion items of our own these days. My housemate has nominated board shorts with floral patterns. My personal choice is Ugg boots - you want to know who was wearing those boots 20 years ago? That hideous woman from the Shining, that's who. Feel free to add your own in the comments section.

Conclusion
This is, admittedly, not a particularly robust thesis. Nevertheless, I think the idea that fashion reflects the economic zeitgeist is a plausible explanation for the ups and downs in fashion history over the past century or so. As we enter into what many people are labeling "the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression," this is something worth pondering. During the 1930s, President Roosevelt proclaimed that there was nothing to fear but fear itself. But back then, Roosevelt was not yet aware of an even scarier possibility: the return of polyester.