An unfortunate element of mankind is our inevitable penchant for conflict. It is long traceable and woven into our history for as far as we have been recording it. Despite technological advancement it remains, with some fifty conflicts going on globally as this article is being written. Some are quite large and a few have been ongoing for almost a century. It is of no surprise that this aspect of our activity finds itself expressed in even relatively benign aspects of culture. The presence of war in clothing takes on multifaceted connotations depending on how those elements are being introduced. Looking at the source can clarify the reason.
The war years of the first half of the 20th century saw military more entwined with the public. The honor of fulfilling duty made the wearing of military garb into a badge of respect, something that Hollywood supported and glamorized in tandem with government campaigns when conflict reached more international stages. There was a romantic and heroic element portrayed, even though military clothing was restricted to actual uniforms and not decoration.
Post-war in the 50s the military had respect and honor within countries that were on the winning end, and the technological leaps connected with the Cold War kept the respect high. And again clothing was more limited to actual uniform. However, a new generation started to question the ethics of war and did not share the same romanticized views and I the protest years of the 60s and 70s rebellion opened the doors to incorporating military clothing in the wardrobe. Initially an act of making a statement, it grew in popularity and, as all trends do, eventually lost their meaning in favor of general popularity.
The punk culture that followed in the later 70s and 80s embraced the militant aura of fatigues and camouflage and incorporated those elements and again this caught on with the general culture, with the 90s revisiting military as fashion edged its way into minimalism. The 70s resurgence within that decade carried forward military elements into casual wear and from that point on it has never really left, especially as involvement in conflict in the Middle East was being marketed in a favorable way similar to the earlier century.
Our culture has found itself in full circle with our entertainment, now expanded from passive forms such as television and film alone to also include video games, all glamorizing military conflict as governments promote patriotism much as was done before, especially in the post-9/11 years.
There is another aspect where military-isms find their favor; being on guard harmonizes with where more people feel . The colours are associated with order and conformity. The cuts lend itself to command and structure in the face of chaos and unpredictability to be on guard and ready for battle, even if the battle is with the intangible.
Not only do we have more conflict and more emotional involvement with international conflict, we also have upcoming anniversaries to revisit conflict. In particular, the anniversary of World War I is coming soon and of course fashion is only too happy to start celebrating early as being first matters. But even though military elements have been present in a few collections off and on over the last decade, there was more prominence of military elements in collections this season amongst the multi-influences that collections now have. Elements were seen at Belstaff, Karen Walker, Prabal Garung, Rag & Bone, Reed Krakoff, Richard Chai Love, Vivienne Tam, David Koma, Andrew Gn, Chloe, Christophe Lemaire, Junya Watanabe, Lanvin, Maiyet, Sacai, Sharon Wauchob and Veronique Branquinho.
And where the obvious militarisms weren’t found, the general flavor of the decade of conflict i.e. the 40s was lingering in many collections. While back then it was limited use of textile inspired by wartime rationing restriction expressed as the simplicity of cut, here it is limitation of textile to maximize profit. The combination of more conservative practicalities with more awareness of growing tension in the Middle East and Korea and increased public encouragement from governments to support the troops bring s more war on the minds of the public and so strong shoulders, peplums and textiles popular in that decade have found their way into recent collections. In various ways traces of 40s were seen amidst the current retro hybrids at Alexandre Herchekovitch (peplum play), Badgley Mischka , Calvin Klein Collection, Caroline Herrera, Creatures Of The Wind, Douglas Hannant, Jenny Packham, Marc by Marc Jacobs, Michael Kors, Thom Browne, Twenty8Twelve, Aquilano.Rimondi, Blumarine, Bottega Veneta, D Squared, Francesco Scognamiglio, Luisa Beccaria, Marni, Prada, A.F. Vandevorst, Carven, Guy Laroche, John Galliano, Louis Vuitton, Manish Arora, Olympia Le-Tan, Stella McCartney and Veronique Leroy.
The need for order and structure, expressed beyond the obvious in many ways over the past few seasons, and the awareness of growing conflict (recently highlighted in a study undertaken by Cornell and Stanford Universities in partnership with Yahoo studying the correlation between conflict and communication boundaries grounded in cultural and religious groupings) may cause us to subconsciously anticipate societal divergence, and consequently dress for battle, although our war is with the threat of a way of life rather than a tangible enemy. And given that the World War II has more surface-relatable elements compared to World War I (which has more of a social congruence to where we are today) it’s no surprise that designers for now draw from that decade with ease. Either way, while some are revving up to stand guard, others are anticipating less promising results and that’ll be covered later. Until then, pack up your troubles in your old kit bag and smile, smile, smile.