NORMAN HARTNELL SAYS: Men’s Clothing Pointer To New Women’s Fashions

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31633, 20 March 1968, Page 2

NORMAN HARTNELL SAYS: Men’s Clothing Pointer To New Women’s Fashions

LONDON.

"The stratosphere of high fashion is thick with question marks. Will the mini-skirt last another season? Can the maxi-skirt, after a thunderous blast of publicity, oust its little sister? Are we in for a big fashion upheaval in the coming months?

If I knew the answer to such questions, I would be in. business as a clairvoyant, not a couturier. And yet there are pointers for which those with their eyes on the fashion scene keep a wary look-out. And one, strange though it may seem, is the clothes men wear. I have created my own ranges of men’s clothes, so perhaps I have looked into this phenomenon more closely than most. But it does seem true that male clothes are an uncannily reliable guide to female fashion. When there is a great upsurge in male fashion interest, women are usually quick to follow. The “new look,” for instance, followed a craze for Victorian male fashions.

Today, all men, and the young ones particularly, have an interest in imaginative clothes that I have rarely seen before. So, does that mean there is about to be a major fashion upheaval in haute couture? There could well be.

Remember, it is just 21 years since skirts last plunged towards the ankles and feminity returned to women’s clothes after the harsh realities of war. “New Look”

Christian Dior, who was a personal friend of mine, invented the “new look” in an attempt to banish those shortskirted, tubular dresses which appeared just after the war—and to get women to cover up their knees. “No lady,” he once told me, “ever bares her knee—which happens to be the ugliest part of her body.” What he would have thought about the mini-skirt I dread to think. What he would have thought about the maxi-skirt makes me tremble even more.

I think he would have hateo it. I must confess I am not all that keen on it either. Of the two syles, the “new look” was far prettier, in my view. Not The Same

The truth of the matter is that there is very little similarity in the “new look” and the “maxi.” They are both long, but that is about all. The 1947 dresses were moulded, full-skirted and enormously feminine. You

can not just lengthen a straight dress from the kneebone to the calf bulge and expect the same silhouette to look right Yet that is what we are doing with some “maxis.” Clinging dresses should be fitted to the natural waist be strongly darted, and flow out to the hem, as the “flapper” dress did in the early 1920 s This fell with a bang to carpet length. This was reaction from the austerity of war, as was the 1947 drop in hems and as the “maxi” is a reaction to all the grim financial strictures that surround us now.

Resistance Is the “maxi look” going to last? Is it really worth investing in “maxi” coats and skirts, which are, by no means, cheap? Certainly, the women who have to buy clothes on a budget and can not just dash out and buy anything that takes their fancy are treating the “maxi” with extreme caution. I might tell you that in my own salon l have found cnn-

siderable customer resistance to the more extreme "maxi" styles. I produced two maximum-skirt garments for my recent collections, and writers and photographers swarmed around them. But when the collections were over, there, swinging sadly on their hangers, were the two dresses all the fuss had been about. None of my customers would buy them, so I chopped the hems off—and sold them at once.

My customers shy away from extreme styles, and so do most clothes-buying women over the age of 30. It is the young who start trends and create fashion’s new lines. Then, along come the more down-to-earth designers, who take the best from the new trends and modify them for ordinary day-to-day wear. The funny thing about the “maxi" is that the young trend-setters have not exactly fallen overboard for it—even as a winter fashion—in the way they fell for its ancestor, the “new look.”

Of course, » lot has happened in fashion and else-

where since those distant days of 1947. Women took a lot of persuading to wear the “mlnl-sklrt," but, once persuaded, they found they liked showing off their legs. And men are doing all they can to keep the "mini-trend,” because they want to go on seeing those legs for as long as possible.

Despite this, will the “maxi” catch on In a big way and sweep the “mini” off in a welter of swirling coats and dresses? The world of couture would give a lot to know the answer.

But I think we can get some sort of clue by remembering what happened after the “new look,” and seeing whether there is a chance of any parallel reaction this time. Before the “new look” came along, war-time women had to be content with austerity and utility dresses. I designed some of these. It was the first connection we designers had with the wholesale gown trade, and I remember I was a bit dubious about doing the job. Restless Women Eventually, I mentioned my problems to the Queen Mother. She thought about the matter for a moment, then said: “Yes, you should certainly do this. You have made so many beautiful dresses for myself and my daughters, if you can do the same for the women of my country, we should all be very grateful to you.”

Even so, women were nat-

urally glad to get out of their austerity clothes and into something more glamorous. By the end of 1948, many were becoming restless with the more outlandish aspects of the "new look” and some of us began to modify the styles. Waists became slightly less waspish and skirts, although still full, were lifted to calf length, and later the fullness was concealed in pleats and panels. Soon the whole concept of the new became "old hat,” and we went on to such curious creations as the “sack,” the "A-line,” and later the “H-line.”

“Minis” Again

These were known in the trade as “post-erists” dresses, and, who knows, once the world has struggled from its present financial plight, these trends may oust both “maxi” and “mini.” For the immediate future, 1 see modified “maxis” making further inroads into next winter’s fashions. But when the sun shines, out will come the "minis” again. And, of this, I fully approve—so long as your legs are nice enough to warrant such exposure. If they’re not, then be brave enough to admit it—and just cross your fingers and hope that the "maxi” really dqes catch oh.

This Is the first of a series of articles on fashion by Norman Hartnell, the Queen’s dressmaker.