Return of...............

[Plus-Four]

Last year there was some news in the media about the 'return of the flapper'.




A (little) bit different from the old ones, but still (when you wish) a flapper.
It's a fact that i love the old flapper dresses. (evening gows)

One of the articles: http://womens-dresses-skirts.suite101.com/article.cfm/flapper_dress_fashion_for_2008


Another article: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/features/fashion-return-of-the-flapper-800388.html

And: http://www.fashionising.com/trends/b--1920s-flapper-fashion-returns-839.html


Did you see anything of a revival?
I didn't see any of the flapper-return here in the Netherlands. It seems to me that the articles are a little bit...........what shall i say.................too possitive?

In other words, are we going back to more elegance? To more feminity? :eusa_clap

Do you think that common people like you and me have any influence upon fashion at the streets?




Regards.
Taco.

 

[David Conwill]

Isn't it kind of sad that the flapper is more feminine than what we've got now?

FWIW, the prevalance of drop-waisted and flapper-y dresses and jewelry resulted in my wife's costume choice this Halloween. We just walked into TJ Maxx and assembled a costume off the rack. I'm still not seeing most of those fashions on the street, though.

-Dave

 

[Paisley]

Even in the swing dance scene, I haven't seen anything flapper inspired.

When ragged clothing starts to be associated with poverty and unemployment, we'll see a return to good style.

 

[ShoreRoadLady]

I've seen a bunch of photoshoots and articles announcing the return of the "flapper look". I've spotted a few semi-kinda-flapper-inspired pieces, but not a whole lot. Maybe I just haven't been looking.

Isn't it kind of sad that the flapper is more feminine than what we've got now?

Excellent point.

Do you think that common people like you and me have any influence upon fashion at the streets?

But of course! It's often assumed that fashion is handed down from on high by couture designers. In fact, fashion tends to follow cycles driven by general trends in society. Marketing plays a role in those cycles, of course, but styles come to designers from off the street all the time. In fact, they actively seek them out to see what's up-and-coming. I think we *are* experiencing a resurgence of interest in vintage-inspired styles. At the very least, I think we'll see neater, more professional clothes in the next few years.

 

[arthur]

Now excuse me but didn't the flapper look consist of being a size 0 with no visible feminine form our at best being very adept at the use of duct tape and ace bandages.I for one must give a resounding hell no,I for one being in favor of the female form.I for one finding the voluputous curves of my size 16 wife to be the very roadmap to my soul.And really how many men would prefer Calista Flockheart To Jayne Mansfield.

 

[HadleyH]

Flapper Fantastic!

I love the twenties and I love this 1920s fashion revival ! So easy on the eye!:eusa_clap
Thanks for posting Plus-Four!

 

[arthur]

You can keep the Twenties,now the Fifties thats when women looked like Women .Give me a Bullet bra over an Ace bandage any day

 

[Tomasso]

I love the twenties and I love this 1920s fashion revival ! So easy on the eye!

I'm right with ya, Had.

 

[WinoJunko]

You can keep the Twenties,now the Fifties thats when women looked like Women .Give me a Bullet bra over an Ace bandage any day

Haha, I'm with you on that one!

 

[HadleyH]

I'm right with ya, Had.

~~~ Thank you sweet Tomasso ~~~

 

[Diamondback]

Let's put it this way, darn near anything (well, anything this side of the Dark Ages anyway) looks better than today. And I'm sure there were some flappers with a little meat on their bones, too... Ms. Hadley, go ahead and add some degree of serpentine fire-support from me for your position.

----------------
Now playing: Jerry Goldsmith - The Landing
via FoxyTunes

 

[Sydney Loren]

Now excuse me but didn't the flapper look consist of being a size 0 with no visible feminine form our at best being very adept at the use of duct tape and ace bandages.I for one must give a resounding hell no,I for one being in favor of the female form.I for one finding the voluputous curves of my size 16 wife to be the very roadmap to my soul.And really how many men would prefer Calista Flockheart To Jayne Mansfield.

You, sir, are my hero.

 

[HadleyH]

Ms. Hadley, go ahead and add some degree of serpentine fire-support from me for your position.

Why thank you Diamondback


Here a photo of Louise Brooks, icon of the 1920s. Yes, the figure is boyish but...I don't know,she looks good to me. May be I'm wrong ...then again, may be I'm not [huh]
All and all, a return to 1920s glamour is always welcome here!

 

[Dexter'sDame]

Yes, more "flapper inspired" than literal though

Yes, in L.A. this past summer I saw the flapper-inspired fashions among young actresses...You had to closely to notice it; here in L.A. it's more flapper-inspired rather than a literal translation, and it's never the whole look with hair, makeup, shoes, etc.. It tends to be a flapper-inspired detail such as a certain kind of beading, or strands of pearls, or long fringes, or 20's style ruffles on whispy little chiffon tops worn with expensive jeans and Laboutin shoes and 2008 hair and makeup. I also saw a lot of little tops that look like bodices of '20's tea dresses worn with expensive jeans and expensive heels, or sometimes a drop waist on an ice-cream colored cocktail dress but in a 2008 interpretation with more shape. Another thing I see a lot is wide, art deco style bracelets worn with something definitely not deco. The L.A. interpretation has not yet trickled down to street fashion all that much here...(the details are expensive). It's a look you see out at the kind of club or restaurant Paris Hilton would frequent.

Sorry for the long post; it was difficult for me to explain! (Edited for clarity in fact!)

 

[Mojito]

Isn’t it great that we can draw on a lengthy history of style to choose what we love best? I’m a twenties girl, and one of my best friends – gorgeously voluptuous – loves the 50s. I don’t think either of us has ever been thought of as anything other than feminine in our vintage attire. It’s for others to judge of course – I’ve posted photos in which I’m wearing 20s vintage elsewhere on TFL – but when I’m wearing a spectacularly beaded and sequinned dress, have smoky eyes and scarlet lips and am trailing a gossamer shawl, dangling a dainty Mandalian bag from my fingertips and a holding a lush feather fan, I don’t think anyone is going to mistake me for anything other than female. I’ve never been a size 0, nor have I needed to resort to ace bandages or duct tape. I *do* use foundation garments to get the right look for the clothes, but that is true of virtually any era – Jayne’s bust, however beautifully endowed, was not naturally that shape, and not every woman is blessed with ample bust and hips and a teeny-tiny waist…hence the popularity of bullet bras, girdles and waist cinches. I don’t look like either woman, and each is absolutely stunning in her own way, but if I had a choice I’d go with Louise with her lithe dancer’s body rather than the lush Jayne. But that’s the beauty of diversity – women’s loveliness is not confined to one body type or fashion, and I respect those who prefer the Jaynes of the 50s. The 20s had its curvy stars as well - I don't think anyone could doubt that Clara Bow was all woman.

There were many styles within the decade - it wasn't all Deco-edged rectangular shapes. The soft, draping tabards popular in the first half, the more snug fitting bodices and flared skirts of the robe-de-style, the soft, floating chiffons that fluttered in the breeze, the petal skirts...none of these could be regarded as other than feminine. Then there was the popularity of embellishments like ribbon flowers and streamers...and all the beautiful, flirty, frou-frou boudoir wear that is today so collectable - these certainly exposed a feminine form!

Hadley, love your posts – I can only second them wholeheartedly. And Dexter’s Dame, I think you’re absolutely right about certain elements of 20s design rather than replica outfits being the main manifestation of its influence on current fashion. The return of the 20s has been heralded for a few seasons now, but it’s not as dominant as it was during the 60s, 70s and 80s revivals. I was delighted to see some window dressing in a shopping centre this past weekend that had a bit of a nod to my favourite decade – bandeaux style headdresses worn with party dresses that had some familiar beadwork on them – but the dresses couldn’t be mistaken for the 20s. There are a few near replica outfits around though – last season I bought a satin Lee Mathews dress with a straight cut neckline, dropped waist and floating chiffon panel that I’ve been asked a few times if it’s vintage, and I saw some day dresses that could almost work.

 

[Lillemor]

So far I've only seen a bit of 1920s influence in evening wear and not on the streets during the day but I don't live in a very fashionable area, thank goodness! I bought two 1920s inspired dresses that fit right in length for the era because they're supposed to be modern over the knee length and I'm very short.

I've already stated how versatile and feminine I think the styles of the 1920s are in the 'Powder Room' even though my figure possibly suits the 50s better. I'm fine with people using an inspired retro style where the red thread is vintage pieces or a vintage "feel". Some just like it that way and for some it's the only way to afford a little of what they dream of. I fall into the latter category.

But that’s the beauty of diversity – women’s loveliness is not confined to one body type or fashion

I whole heartedly agree with this but I'm not a man.

 

[David Conwill]

I whole heartedly agree with this but I'm not a man.

I am a man, and I also agree. I hope nobody got the impression that I don't appreciate the styles of the 1920s. I love the flapper look, even on a woman with curves. I was just pointing out the historical irony of it.

Quite frankly, as long as a woman (or a man for that matter) puts some effort into achieving a look, I can appreciate that. Though I prefer looking at the ladies, and especially in vintage-y styles.

-Dave

 

[shortbow]

Hadley, thanks for the photo of Miss Brooks. If she's "boyish" I must be gay.

 

[Mojito]

I didn't take your remarks that way at all, Dave - and I'd love to see your wife's Halloween ensemble! Have you posted pics?

Lillemor, I think you'd pull off the touches-of-twenties well...I do both full head-to-toe 20s vintage for special events, and also the tip-of-the-hat in my daily wear with just a nod to the decade in the odd real vintage piece or "inspired by...." element to my outfit.

The interesting this is that when you actually look at 20s outfits they're decidedly feminine from our perspective today - with some exceptions. Even the smart tailored suits of Chanel and her immitators are very female. There was a bit of cross-dressing in certain circles - women wearing full top-and-tails - and some of the sports-wear such as flying gear and ski wear is modelled quite closely on masculine styles, but otherwise what they called "mannish" at the time strikes the modern eye as entirely female. Even styles borrowed wholesale from the male wardrobe - like fedora hats - don't look masculine with the whole ensemble they used to wear, at least to my eyes. The most extreme bob, the Eton crop, when worn with the makeup they favoured in the decade and a typical dress of the period is still feminine, just as some of the shorter styles of the 50s were as well.

Susan Lenglen raised many eyebrows when she took to the courts in her loose "short" dress and bandeau, but that was because her attire contrasted so sharply with what went before - to most of those sportswomen coming after, she'd be indubitably womanly (even with that enormous stride), and perhaps those skirts might seem far too long and "feminine". When you were accustomed to a fairly large bosom, small waist, long skirts, voluminous petticoats and assorted other undergarments, copious long hair etc etc as a fashionable ideal, then a woman wearing a light sleeveless shift style dress that goes to just below her knees, with no definition to the waist to speak of, and just a few light undergarments, the difference is going to be very marked and perhaps rather masculine. But to those who came after, while the outfit might seem a bit old fashioned depending on the style of the season, it will overall be recognisably "modern" and feminine.

 

[David Conwill]

I didn't take your remarks that way at all, Dave - and I'd love to see your wife's Halloween ensemble! Have you posted pics?

Oh good. Alas, I have no pics of either of our Halloween costumes. I was so busy getting ready, I didn't take any. There are some in existence however, taken by family and friends, and if I get them I'll post them up.

-Dave