1927 British Menswear IN COLOR

[Feraud]

We're so dull today.

So true.

 

[cookie]

Fantastic! Thank you Marc, for the reminder that the world wasn't gray, just the film it was (often) recorded on.

Today's sock selection in any department store is dull dull dull. I think the world of the early twentieth century, while recorded in shades of plain gray, was quite colorful. Our world is recorded in billions of colors, yet tends to be quite gray by comparison. Maybe Orwell was right.

+1 . Those socks have texture as well as design...today they would almost only be a hiking type sock...

 

[benstephens]

I suspect in years to come, people will look through on line archives such as http://www.newandlingwood.co.uk etc

and make the statement "we are so dull nowadays"


We have to be careful whilst making our assessment of the past that we use a number of sources. There is a lovely photo of a just post war London. It looks no less, or no more colourful than it does now. Most of the men wear dark over coats; the cars are predominately a dark colour. The street signage and lights are nice and bright.

The 1920s was a very colourful era for those who could afford to be fashionable (In this country), where as most people had to make do with, like Marc points out with the French, drab colours.

Today, shops offer a plethora of wonderful colours in shirts, ties, suits and shoes, however, it does not mean that is what people will wear as their mainstay. Look at the coloured socks offered by New and Lingwood for example.

I suspect America may have been quite different, being that clothing was more available to a wider spectrum of people.

Kindest regards

Ben

 

[cookie]

Traditional Socks being made Down Under

Old machines blend with new efficiencies at Nundle

Nundle Woollen Mill plans to build its efficiency and increase its output after securing a $50,000 grant through the TCF Small Business Program.

"The grant allows us to access an industry-based consultant to assist us to run a more efficient plant; they'll look at every process we do and at new products we could add as well as current products to determine whether they are viable and should continue," said the firm's Nick Bradford.

"The idea is to look at the whole business from the bottom up and analyse everything we do to be commercially competitive."

Bradford said the business was benefiting from a return to knitting, as it produces woollen yarn, and a swing back to valuing items that personified a heritage and tradition.

"We are unique because our spinning mill uses machines that are almost 100 years old which is a great benefit to us because it attracts tourists into Nundle," he said.

"We get around 40,000 people coming through our plant each year."

Bradford, however, stressed that the product generated from the older machines remained "world class" but he said the firm could not compete with less expensive imports from the Asian region and had to work on other aspects of the business to gain an edge by, for example, adding value to the finished goods.

"We have seven employees in a town of only 250 people so we are a major employer," he said.

"We feel we have some social responsibility to our employees to be commercially competitive."

The firm has recently started producing socks as a new product line using a machine from the 1950s.

"We'll be sharing a few other new product ideas with a textile consultant," he said.

Bradford claimed the firm's selection was unique as it offered 40 colours in its selection which, he described, as bright fun and exciting capable of standing out in store displays.

- Dawn Adams


released: Thursday, July 16, 2009


Copyright © 2009 Boston Publishing Pty Ltd

 

[Evan Everhart]

That's a fantastic set of images. Thanks, Marc.

Griffer, your airy assertion that the past was necessarily grim and washed out seems pretty threadbare set against the high colour of those catalogue pages. Yes, it's just your opinion, but it seems to be based on little more than a sense that the world of synthetics is somehow brighter. And it's a fairly standard monochrome judgement of the past as a muted, faded, less colourful version of the present.

Let's let the past speak for itself.

Actually the majority of fabrics and clothing from the Victorian era on were rather dark and even drab. Bright colours were considered vulgar and frivolous and usually only reserved for the most informal of occasions, and Summer wear, and Tropical wear (the last two which were the provenance of the financially affluent or military enlisted in most cases). Dark colours were the norm as they hid stains and the work of laundering and cleaning clothing was much more labor intensive or expensive depending upon how you cared for your garments, then than it is now. Men might wear a dark blue, green, red, brown or gray shirt with perhaps even a pattern such as a check, stripe, dot or plaid, but they were still dark and were meant for work wear and nothing else and no one who was respectable or who had any money would have worn such shirts for anything but physical work. Hence such phrases as "Sunday Best" and "Go to meeting clothes" et all which usually refers to a white or light coloured shirt and yes, still dark clothing!

The only area where any "vibrant" colour might be in any way permissible for many decades, was in the area of neck-wear. Neck-wear was a luxury item, especially before the advent of artificial silk substitutes and if more expensive dyes were used in production, it would make the subsequent neck-wear that much more expensive and hence unattainable due to the inability of the majority of the population to pay for such expensive neck-wear. Hence, dark neck-wear has been the norm and accepted standard for more than a hundred years and has further been sponsored by the general rules of business-wear etiquette adopted by the British and fostered still in America and really, world-wide.

(Bartender edit: removing unnecessary remark)

 

[Creeping Past]

In the absence of illustrations, my remarks still stand.

CP

Edited in light of bartender edit ^ to remove response to unnecessary remark.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Actually the majority of fabrics and clothing from the Victorian era on were rather dark and even drab.

True, but Creeping Past's comment was in reference to the 1927 catalogue, which is (need I say it?) post-Victorian.


.

 

[Dr Doran]

Beautiful pics, Marc. Thanks.

Now, how can I find socks like that? Does ANYONE make them today? Anything? Links would be appreciated. I'd pay decent money for socks like that.

 

[Evan Everhart]

True, but Creeping Past's comment was in reference to the 1927 catalogue, which is (need I say it?) post-Victorian.


.

Even post Victorian clothing was predominantly dark and drab for many years with only very brief interludes of brightness and those interludes, only for those with expendable finances.

 

[Evan Everhart]

Well, now I've gone and done it. Evan Everhart, I owe you my sincere apologies. I meant to quote what was a lengthy post and make a point, but inadvertently deleted it. I'm truly sorry. No harm meant.

- scotrace

 

[Creeping Past]

Lots of generality, very few specifics. Illustrations, please.

Edited: In the interests of forum harmony.

 

[BellyTank]

Hello-

Yes, we don't want to be found guilty of being excitable boys.

I can understand the presumption behind a statement along the lines of:
"...20thC mens suits being, generally, of darker, or more muted colours"-
although I cannot accept that as a complete truth.
Beyond that, to say that mens clothing, in general, from the end of the Victorian era; 1901, to, say,
1940, was generally drab, is surely not true.

A cursory glance over a small sampling of early/mid century menswear catalogues will show that it is simply not true.
Catalogue "fashions" from this time period were surely not just for the "affluent".

In the '30s, especially, mens "fashion" was really being pushed, with some colours, textures and styles,
which seem totally outlandish to the sensibilitiesof the 21stC observer.

Maybe Mr. Everhart could spend a little effort in defining, refining,
or delimiting his assertion and a little less defending whay now seems a little fuzzy, in order to find
a problem which is more amenable to discussion and solution...

It could prove a very interesting discussion but it need not become a fight over opinions on what now
seems to be a difficult topic to nail down.

Can we prove, or disprove such an assertion which seems so vague?
Using "In General" as criteria makes things a little tough.


B
T

 

[draws]

Bellytank ---- "...20thC mens suits being, generally, of darker, or more muted colours"

Just a thought. When one views film/movies from the eras prior to 1940 being black and white for the most part, I can understand how our view of color is relagated to the imagination. Being fascinated by these films since I can remember, I have always wondered if their clothing, house fixtures, cars were all black, white or some shade in between. That is until movie producers started colorizing some of these old films. After all is said and done, I think I still prefer the old black and whites. At my age, keeping the imagination working is good.

I too find the colors and textures very enlightening.

 

[BellyTank]

That was me paraphrasing someone else and trying to be understanding of such an assumption, to which I do not subscribe.

But as you point out- there does seem to be an assumption of doom and gloom and shades of grey, associated with the portrayal of society of the early to mid 20thC in the media of the time.


B
T

 

[Alexi]

+1 . Those socks have texture as well as design...today they would almost only be a hiking type sock...

they are shooting and golf stockings, pretty much outer-wear, not designed to be tucked under pants or (well possibly) into high boots. So they are to keep you protected from the weather and look good doing it!

 

[Feraud]

It's a gutsy move to make a pitch that menswear was generally black and drab for the masses in a thread called, "1927 British Menswear IN COLOR"
Granted the timeframe in question was moved back a few decades but still...

 

[BellyTank]

It's a gutsy move...

Well, maybe not gutsy but definitely something.

And thanks for that timely reminder about the thread title-
folks do tend to lose the drift.


B
T

 

[Evan Everhart]

Well, now I've gone and done it. Evan Everhart, I owe you my sincere apologies. I meant to quote what was a lengthy post and make a point, but inadvertently deleted it. I'm truly sorry. No harm meant.

- scotrace

Indeed? That is most unfortunate. I shall keep that in mind in future and always keep a secondary CC in Word from now on so as to avoid such mis-happenings. I also thank whichever moderator it was who compelled Creeping Past to edit his rather curtly worded response to me. I did still receive a copy in email but regardless will let the issue drop. I assume that he has received a copy of my initial statement in email. It is to be hoped so at any rate.

As a final point, I wish to iterate, or perhaps more accurately re-iterate that while I do love colour in menswear and while it has been present in small doses throughout more recent history say from the latter-mid 1800s on (and was vastly popular amongst the upper classes prior to the Victorian era during the Regency era), it has for the most part had a very strictly curtailed place in men's attire since the aforementioned period and for the most part has been relegated to use upon accessories and even then, this use has been subject to the various vicissitudes of changeable taste by decade, year, or season, and the fashion trends of the moment with very few out-bursts of colour and those amongst the rarefied upper classes who could afford such extravagance. Indeed, the coloured fashion plates of 1927, accordingly are rather appealing and interesting as almost a curiosity accordingly as so much of the colour of men's wear till then and since has been coloured exclusively by dark blues, dark browns, grays (mostly dark), black, and dark green pared with white shirts. Most extra-ordinary.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Indeed? That is most unfortunate...

You're an interesting bloke, Evan. When will we see you in person at the Cicada Club? It's in your city. www.clubcicada.com


.

 

[Creeping Past]

I also thank whichever moderator it was who compelled Creeping Past to edit his rather curtly worded response to me.

No one compelled me, I did it of my own accord since your remarks were removed.