Fig. 1. Evening Dress. (From Claire Wilcox. The Golden Age of Couture: Paris and London, 1947-57 (London: Victoria & Albert, 2008).)

New Look or Old Look: Fashion and Women in Western Culture

Betsy Dragoo

Europe from the Cold War to the European Union

Dr. Katharine Kennedy

April 27, 2012

Dragoo 2

The hourglass shape highlighted in Christian Dior’s “New Look” design of 1947 came to

define fashion for women in the early 1950’s. Although the look appeared to be new to some, the

wasp-waisted look recalls an earlier era. Dior’s “New Look” defined women’s place as a piece of

ornamentation, rather than as a working individual. The design forced women to alter their

bodies to a mold, literally constraining them to the home. Thus, Dior’s design was not a “New

Look”, but rather a very familiar one. The “New Look” returned women to a “New” role, both

of which were old looks that were simply repackaged.

Western fashion has often placed emphasis on accentuating the small waist. The most

obvious way women shaped their bodies was through the use of corsets. Although the corset

began as a medical device to support the spine, it quickly became associated with the elite. With

the industrial revolution and the invention of the front-busk corset, women could dress

themselves in their corsets without assistance. Western fashion has incorporated corsetry on a

massive scale since the 1800’s.1

The corset fell out of fashion with the sexual liberation of the 1920’s. According to

Steele, “For centuries, the ideal had been the fat woman, who symbolized the family. Corset-less

dress conveyed a different conception of love”.2 The different conception of love Steele refers to

hints at the 1920’s flapper movement and sexual liberation. The obsession with the corset

reflected ideals conveyed by Queen Victoria. Increasingly fat, she also symbolized the family. It

is not surprising that the corseted woman is associated with times of sexual and female

repression.

1 Valerie Steele, The Corset: A Cultural History (London, England: Yale University Press, 2001), 4. 2 Ibid., 148.

Dragoo 3

The breathable silhouette of the 1920’s

transformed into the Utility Look. The Utility

Look, popularized in the 1940’s, reflects

freedom for women in clothing and work. The

sharp lines and thick fabrics mirrored what

women demanded. Art reflected life and with

the Utility Look came increased freedoms for

women. Women in the 1940’s rushed to the

factories to assist with the war effort and to

work in place of their husbands. However,

when World War Two ended, women returned

to the home. In this way, the corseted and full

shape of the “New Look” reflected restrictions

for women in society. If women had no need to be physically active, their bodies were free for

corsets to shape.

After decades of fashion without the corset, women began corseting again in the 1950’s.

Christian Dior drew inspiration from Belle Époque and Edwardian styles— both eras demanded

corsetry.3 Unlike his contemporary, Coco Chanel, Dior’s designs were uncomfortable. Chanel

criticized Dior for this flaw.4 Despite the need for underwire, Dior’s shape persisted. Corseted or

not, Dior’s New Look birthed the iconic shirtwaist dress of the 1950’s.

3Nigel Cawthorne, The New Look: The Dior Revolution (London, England: Reed International Books Limited, 1996), 19. 4 Ibid., 162.

Fig. 2. The Utility Look. (From Nigel Cawthorne, The New

Look: The Dior Revolution (London, England: Reed International Books Limited, 1996), 43.)

Dragoo 4

Christian Dior was born in 1905 in France. From an early age, he was involved in the

arts. His wealthy parents originally encouraged him to become a politician, but, in 1928, Dior

opened an art gallery with his partner instead.5 Dior’s family fell on hard financial times in the

1930’s, and Dior was forced to sell his gallery and take a new job as a fashion sketch artist.6 Dior

worked for Robert Piguet until he was called to serve in the French army in 1940.7 After his

return from service in 1942, Dior joined Lucien Lelong’s couture house as a full time designer.

Lucien Lelong was incredibly important to the French fashion world during World War

Two and immediately after. He is credited with maintaining thousands of jobs during the War

because he provided the funds and face behind the politics of Haute Couture. Lelong managed to

convince the Nazis that the presence of couture workers was necessary to produce the garments,

which the Nazis’ wives required. When Dior joined Lelong’s house in 1942, he learned, from

Lelong, how difficult the fashion industry had become. Dior was forced to dress the wives of

Nazi officers as the French fashion industry nearly evaporated during the war.

5 Alexandra Palmer, Dior: A New Look, A New Enterprise (London, England: Victoria and Albert Publishing, 2009), 10. 6 Ibid., 12. 7 Ibid., 13, 15.

Dragoo 5

Wartime restrictions were so severe that miniature dolls, rather than models, were dressed

in the latest Paris fashions in order to comply with the fabric rations. The Chambre Syndicale

Fig. 3. Theatre de la Mode. (From Claire Wilcox, The Golden Age of Couture: Paris and London (London, England: Victoria and Albert Publishing, 2008), 37.)

organized a show, called “Theatre de la Mode”; with the intention of raising money for, and

increasing awareness of, the French fashion industry. 8 Although the dolls sported some angular

pantsuits, many exhibited Dior’s “New Look”. Through examining these dolls, we may note that

Dior was not the creator of this hourglass line. Exaggerated hips and bust were used in eras

before Dior as well as by many of Dior’s contemporaries. Dior was designing at a time when

French fashion was looking to reassert its dominance. Simply because the designer created the

“New Look” does not mean he actually conceptualized the lines before any other person.

Although Christian Dior used his New Look lines when he worked at Lucien Lelong’s

couture house, it was not until Dior operated independently that the shape reached notoriety.

Dior’s hourglass design was one of the best-sellers in Lelong’s collection. Other designers, such

as Schiaparelli, Molyneux, and Mainbocher, used the design well before Dior’s New Look in

8 Palmer, Dior: A New Look, A New Enterprise, 18

Dragoo 6

1939. 9 In high fashion post-World War Two, hemlines were lowered and gowns made full again.

The emergence of Dior’s New Look was indeed a return to the early 1900’s corseted hourglass

shape. In hindsight, it does not seem so unlikely that the hourglass shape would re-emerge as the

New Look. After a period of the straight-lined Utility look, fashion searched for new inspiration.

The hourglass line pleased their appetites. Although the shape of the “New Look” existed well

before 1947, it was in this year that Carmel Snow of Harpers Bazaar officially declared the

look.10

Dior’s New Look won over western fashion not because it was comfortable or

revolutionary, but because it was a return to a recognizable shape. The look is particularly

reminiscent of a 1900’s shape, during which the woman’s role was relegated (mostly) to the

home.11 It was also incredibly convenient for the revival of the textile industry. The New Look

required more fabric and artisanship than two wartime outfits combined, resulting in the

employment of countless embroiderers, tailors, designers, textile manufactures, and dozens of

other beneficiaries. In this way, the “New Look” is self-defeating in name. Touted at its best as a

revelation, at its worst anti-woman, the creation was attributed to a man who did not create a

“New Look”- he simply repackaged it. The look was anything but revolutionary.

Some scholars have argued that a desire for luxury goods post-World War Two was

inevitable.12 For “fashion-starved post-war women, his image of femininity, which reigned

supreme during the 1950’s, did not make them blush. It was a revelation of beauty and luxury,

with long, full, fluid skirts, cinched-in waists and soft shoulders— the antithesis of militaristic

9 Cawthorne, The New Look: The Dior Revolution, 33. 10 Palmer, Dior: A New Look, A New Enterprise, 26. 11 Steele, The Corset: A Cultural History. 12 Palmer, Dior: A New Look, A New Enterprise, 25.

Dragoo 7

wartime fashions.” 13 The look did not embarrass

women because it was a return to the fully

covered body. Citizens were tired of rations, and

the lengthy, fabric-laden New Look gave women

what so many could not have during the war.

Lush accessories like feathers, rhinestones,

ribbon, and beads were restricted during the war.

The New Look called for all of these accessories

and even gave women back the nylon they so

desired. It was also instrumental in reviving the

French fashion industry, and eventually, assisted

companies in the United States by giving them

fashion direction.

For Dior, and others who survived World War Two, his gowns were reminiscent of the

Belle Époque era.14 Here are the roots from which the New Look’s hyper-feminized lines

emerged. As in Belle Époque’s styling, Dior emphasized the hips and bust of a woman. In his

later designs, he incorporated a bustle. Dior used extravagant embroidery, lush fabrics, and

jewel tones to give an ethereal, impressionistic feel to his styling. Renior and Degas supposedly

inspired Dior.15 Although Dior was inspired by artwork, the artists who he admired inevitably

featured fashions of the time in their work. The fashions featured by Degas were particularly

restrictive and elaborate (e.g. ballerina scenes). Dior was “inspired” to create a virtual copy of a

13 Ibid., 26-27 14 Ibid., 32. 15 Ibid., 32.

Fig. 4. Ball gown detail. (From Claire Wilcox. The Golden

Age of Couture: Paris and London, 1947-57 (London: Victoria & Albert, 2008), 137.)

Dragoo 8

shape that already existed. He simply recreated that which had already run its course— women

spoke out against the corset before and they would again.

Dior’s house flourished because of its luck, not originality. Dior emerged at a wonderful

time in French fashion, when couture houses buzzed with the excitement of new investors and a

fresh start after the war. What follows is a description by a reporter on Christian Dior’s February

12, 1949 fashion show, which exhibited his “New Look”:

The first girl came out, stepping fast, switching with a provocative swinging

movement, whirling in the close-packed room, knocking over ashtrays with the

strong flare of her pleated skirt, and bringing everyone to the edges of their seats

in a desire not to miss a thread of this momentous occasion… We were given a

polished theatrical performance such as we had never seen in a couture house

before. We were witness to a revolution in fashion and to a revolution in showing

fashion as well.16

This description touches on the size alone of the New Look— the massive gowns

knocked over ashtrays. Dior’s design has come to symbolize the 1950’s. This era is associated

with conservatism in politics but also in fashion. Although many (like Snow) called the look a

“revolution”, Dior created a sense of drama and excitement to add to an already stagnant

community. His “New Look” simply incorporated more fabric and cinched the waist, a virtual

return to what had already existed in fashion. The look was now new; rather, it was a genius

move commercially because it utilized gender stereotypes and the supposed desires of women to

16 Marie France Pochna, Christian Dior: The Man Who Made the World Look New (New York, NY: Arcade Publishing, 1996), 25.

Dragoo 9

sell gowns. Hence, the irony in the “New” look- it packaged women in both an old look and an

old role in the home.

Immediately after Harpers Bazaar declared the “New Look” in 1947, women reacted

negatively to it. Britain, in particular, was still under postwar rationing. Some fashionistas

believed the heavy fabric and length in the New Look were excessive. The look forced women to

attach multiple recycled fabrics together to create the necessary volume. For instance, one 1942

piece was created from three dresses. Dior’s demand for many yards of fabric in one piece does

not seem so unlikely if we consider the serious fabric restrictions enforced during (and after)

World War Two. Fashion designers were resigned to dressing dolls, and it seems reasonable that

they would incorporate increased fabric to compensate for their wartime lack of material.

The “New Look” was controversial because it was uncomfortable and, arguably,

excessive. Furthermore, most women could neither afford nor acquire French couture gowns.17

The gowns themselves were accessible only if one had an invitation to a Couture show and the

funds to purchase a gown. Dior increased in popularity because of its corner on the American

market and its exclusivity. Although the fabulous ball gowns that Dior designed were not

accessible to most women initially, the look itself was adopted (stolen, according to French law)

by the Americans on a massive scale in the late forties. Women in the United States had funds

for high fashion and demanded the gowns produced in Paris. With the aid of the Marshall plan,

the persistence of Lucien Lelong, and Dior’s creation, Haute Couture survived the war and

emerged a champion in the 1950’s.18

17 Cawthorne, The New Look: The Dior Revolution, 44. 18 Palmer, Dior: A New Look, A New Enterprise, 22.

Dragoo 10

The French fashion industry’s success after the War was related to the power of the New

Look and Couture’s prestige in the minds of wealthy Americans. Theatre de la Mode and the

persistence of French opinion on fashion asserted to Americans that France still dictated the

direction of fashion.19 Theatre de la Mode, in particular, self-defined the French as an

unstoppable fashion force. This is especially important because it displayed French dominance in

a particular field even after negative post-war sentiments towards the Vichy government.

Furthermore, it dominated an area in which Americans, with their increased purchasing power,

had particular interest. In this way, the New Look and its impetus renewed French strength in the

fashion industry internationally. Although the Americans could copy the design of Dior, the

workmanship of French couture, juxtaposed to American mass-production, confirmed that

handmade fashion was superior to that made in a factory.

Women in the United States and Britain eventually added additional fabric onto their

dresses, adopting the New Look into their wardrobe. Sometimes they would incorporate several

dresses into one to adapt to the changing fashion. While the (re)emergence of the hourglass

shape in the form of the New Look seems plausible in the timeline of the history of fashion, it is

also reasonable that there was so much backlash against the look. First, the design was, at a basic

level, uncomfortable. Second, the New Look required an extravagant amount of fabric that most

women could not afford. Finally, some feminists believed that the New Look restricted their

bodies and thus, their freedom. World War Two incorporated women into the workforce, giving

them a new sense of importance. Out of functionality, women’s clothes were made sturdier and

more comfortable. Dior reintroduced the restriction of women (literally) through his New Look.

19 Cawthorne, The New Look: The Dior Revolution, 102.

Dragoo 11

Dior’s first design as an independent

house was the Corolla.20 The Corolla

emphasized the flowering look— as if the

woman was foliage. As Vaughan points out:

In The Second Sex (1949) Simone de

Beauvoir could have been describing

Dior’s commodified femininity when

she wrote: ‘woman dressed and

adorned, nature is present but under

restraint… rendered more desirable to

the extent that nature is more highly developed in her and more rigorously confined: it is

the “sophisticated” woman who has always been the erotic object.21

It is no coincidence that The Second Sex was published at the height of the “New Look”.

Simone de Beauvoir mentions nature here, which reflects the Corolla line that Dior

conceptualized. In molding and shaping the body, women reflect nature to a lesser extent.

Women would be closer to “nature” in Chanel’s loose fitting designs. However, the addition of

molding technologies, such as corsets, renders women closer to nature in the view of Dior. It is

clear that Dior’s conception of nature for women reflects an artificial hourglass shape. In

highlighting the breasts and hips, Dior’s “New Look” recalls Victorian notions of the corseted

woman as an object to mold.

20 Cawthorne, The New Look: The Dior Revolution, 109. 21 Heather A. Vaughan, “Icon: Tracing the Path of the 1950’s Shirtwaist Dress” (Journal of American Culture, 32, no. 1 (2009): 4.

Fig. 5. Women React to the New Look. (From Alexandra Palmer, Dior: A New Look, A New Enterprise (London, England: Victoria and Albert Publishing, 2009), 10.)

Dragoo 12

Simone de Beauvoir was not alone in questioning the “New Look” style. Many women

dubbed the look anti-Woman.22 French, American, and Canadian women protested against the

look, saying it was anti-Feminist and a way to force women to buy completely new wardrobes at

the whim of Mr. Dior.23 Men demonstrated against the look, forming the “League of Broke

Husbands” to combat the ridiculous prices.24 Although the “New Look” came to mark a fashion

era, it was neither accessible nor comfortable to most women. The gowns were so unrealistic that

one retail buyer (an intermediary between designers and stores) said the New Look was:

“Wonderful for a queen or a movie star who wants to stand at the head of the

stairs and be photographed, but quite useless to any woman who wants to do

anything, since the beruffled evening dresses were boned, wired, lined and

otherwise stiffened to flare out as much as two feet in all directions, preventing

their wearers from sitting down, dancing within arm’s reach of a partner, or

standing at a bar.”25

It is notable that a buyer said these gowns were extravagant. Buyers and designers

usually are the first to rationalize new looks due to profit. However, in this case, these

gowns were too excessive even for the fashionistas. This buyer also makes note of the

lack of availability for most women due to cost and extreme physical constraints on the

wearer. In this account, it appears that the gown has enveloped the woman. The woman

ceases to have importance as an individual; she is simply the mannequin, which holds the

fabric.

22 Marie France Pochna, Christian Dior: The Man Who Made the World Look New, 27. 23 Ibid., 44. 24 Ibid., 44. 25 Ibid., 44.

Dragoo 13

The idea of woman as mannequin to display man’s creation is not a new idea in feminist

scholarship. For example, Laura Cereta says that some women “wind strings of pearls around

their throats, as though they were captives proud of being owned by free men… another

woman’s breasts become larger when she wears a tighter sash.”26 Here, Cereta describes the

fashion habits of fifteenth century women— an ironically similar account to the New Look. It is

disturbing because Cereta is describing the

ownership men exhibit over women in the form

of fashion, which seems to occur under the New

Look. The cinched waist phenomenon is an

archaic representation of women as defined solely

by their sexual organs.

One particularly disturbing account of

how to wear the New Look was written in the

April 1947 issue of Good Housekeeping: “This

fault spoils your posture, and makes your hip

section look bigger than it is and causes a deep

curve in the back. To correct it, learn to turn your

pelvis down under you. When you stand and walk, consciously tuck your buttocks under as if

you were flinching from a spank.”27

26 Laura Cereta, Collected Letters of a Renaissance Feminist (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 84. 27 Heather A. Vaughan, “Icon: Tracing the Path of the 1950’s Shirtwaist Dress,” 32.

Fig. 6. Woman as Mannequin. (From Marie France Pochna, Christian Dior: The Man Who Made the

World Look New, 34.)

Dragoo 14

It is not difficult to argue against a design that

“spoils” the natural curvature of your body and

literally forces one to bend to its will. Another

gross aspect of this description is the flinching

the writer describes. The woman in this

description seems literally to cower at the

physical force caused by the dress. In this way,

the New Look could be viewed as violent

towards women or at the very least unsafe to

wear. The New Look certainly was not healthy

for the body. Dior reintroduced a design so

uncomfortable, it is a wonder the 1950’s did not

require the need for fainting couches.

The “New Look” became associated with a return to the home— and for good reason.

The increase in machinery and automation in the home, particularly in the United States, paired

excellently with the restrictive New Look. In this way, fashion reflected gender norms. For

example, another magazine said this about the New Look: “We’re going to be ladies again.

We’re going to be feminine, with greater accent on a tiny waist, fuller hips, higher heels, hats

that are very much hat…”28 It is difficult to imagine how a certain fashion makes a woman a

“lady” or “feminine”. If being “feminine” only requires the trait of femaleness, all self-defined

women fit this category. It is disturbing that a male, in this account, gives a woman her gender.

Furthermore, the writer equates size with value. The individual is not a woman unless she has

28 Heather A. Vaughan, “Icon: Tracing the Path of the 1950’s Shirtwaist Dress,” 32.

Fig. 7. The New Look Flinch. (From Marie France Pochna, Christian Dior: The Man Who Made the World Look New, 41.)

Dragoo 15

extremely exaggerated features. Her waist must be cinched, breasts and hips large. The writer

does not give value to any type of comfort, instead focusing solely on the size of accessories.

The notion that one should be restricted in order to make their body more feminine is self-

conflicting. The “New Look” defines restriction to an hourglass shape as the definition of

femaleness- a potentially harmful conception of gender.

Dior’s successor, Yves Saint Laurent, took over Dior’s couture house after his sudden

death in 1957. By then, fashion had already moved past the New Look’s corsetry. Designers such

as Yves Saint Laurent and Claire McCardell came to represent the time immediately after the

New Look, when comfortable “Americanized” clothes flourished. Consequently, Dior’s look

was easily cast aside as women demanded wearable clothes.

Dior’s “New Look” reintroduced uncomfortable corsetry into mainstream fashion. Dior’s

greatest design is associated with an era of conservatism and stagnant rights for women.

Furthermore, the design itself was unoriginal and self-defeating. Ironically, Impressionists, who

were seen as revolutionaries in the art world, inspired Dior. Originally touted as “revolutionary”,

there is nothing new about the “New Look”.

Dragoo 16

Bibliography

Cawthorne, Nigel. The New Look: The Dior Revolution (London, England: Reed International

Books Limited, 1996).

De Beauvoir, Simone. “The Second Sex”. Marxists Internet Archive.

http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/ethics/de-beauvoir/2nd-sex/introduction.htm

(accessed April 27, 2012).

Laura, Cereta. Collected Letters of A Renaissance Feminist (Chicago: University of Chicago

Press, 1997).

Palmer, Alexandra. Dior: A New Look, A New Enterprise (London: V & A Publishing, 2009).

Pochna, Marie France. Christian Dior: The Man Who Made the World Look New (New York:

Arcade Publishing, 1996).

Steele, Valerie. The Corset: A Cultural History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001), 4.

Steele, Valerie, and Solero Irving. Fifty Years of Fashion: From New Look To Now (New Haven:

Yale University Press, 2000).

Valverde, Mariana. "The Love of Finery: Fashion and the Fallen Woman in Nineteenth Century

Social Discourse." Victorian Studies 32, no. 2 (1991): 169-188.

Vaughan, Heather A. "Icon: Tracing the Path of the 1950s Shirtwaist Dress." The Journal of

American Culture 32 no. 01 (2009): 29-37.

Dragoo 17

Wilcox, Claire. The Golden Age of Couture: Paris and London, 1947-57 (London: Victoria &

Albert, 2008).

X_______________________________________________________