The Great Depression began in the United States in the summer of 1929, probably best remember by the Wall Street Crash. Depression dominated society throughout the 1930s and was fundamentally characterised by a decline in spending. The sources of the contraction in spending in the United States varied but this decline was transmitted to the rest of the world, largely through the gold standard, resulting in a global downturn. With major French fashion houses relying on their US export connection, brands were forced to quickly adapt to the new norm in order to “ride the Depression” (De La Haye and Mendes, 2021. p78). By reducing pricing and expanding clothing lines to target a wider variety of consumers, designers were able to survive the setbacks.
Many aspects of the fashion industry were hit and looked to Ready-to-Wear as a solution. In turn, higher end brands created more affordable lines. Labour-intensive detailing became too costly, resulting in designers opting for alternative methods such as textile prints, as opposed to embroidery, as they were both cost effective and easily reproduced. This sacrifice allowed skilled craftspeople like “Paris’s master embroiderer” (De La Haye and Mendes, 2021. p78) Lesage to manage through the crisis. Unlike Lesage, many working-class craftspeople were unfortunately made redundant, either because their role was replaced by machinery or companies’ inability to cover employment costs. Wealthier classes viewed Ready-to-Wear as lower quality and considered the French fashion houses to be luxurious. In an attempt to maintain the impression that the French and American houses were still connected and to make the transition period between Luxury and Ready-to-Wear smoother, American Ready-to-Wear designers did not disclose the identity of their French counterparts.
Figure 3: Coats and suits: Seaming, partial belts, aid in defining waistline, 1930. (The Women’s Wear Daily Archive, 2017)
With Labour-intensive garment production being reduced, Ready-to-Wear lines were essential to the success of the 1930s American fashion industry, particularly its accessibility. This market was all about “mass production of clothing in standardized sizes” (De La Haye and Mendes, 2021. p79) giving more people in the middle to lower classes the opportunity of consumption alongside the wealthier classes. As these lines were characterised by their ease of production and large-scale distribution, they were often worn with accessories (De La Haye and Mendes, 2021. p88) which added decoration to articles of clothing without the need of significant labour to achieve such a result. As the 1930s saw the return of the waistline, belts became very popular. They complimented the emphasis on the waistline which accentuated the female form. Figure 3 (The Women’s Wear Daily Archive, 2017) shows a belt being used to sinch the waistline of a coat. This added interest to the outfit whilst also remaining on-trend. The article featuring Figure 3, “Coats and suits: Seaming, partial belts, aid in defining waistline” (The Women’s Wear Daily Archive, 2017) was written to teach women how to define their waistlines by using accessories. Losing the ability to frequently buy new clothes, accessories added interest to clothing at a much lower cost.
Ready-to-Wear collections made up the vast majority of fashion in the 1930s, enabling people of all demographics to access clothing trends. This especially supports the Trickle down theory which, starting in the 30s, suggests that fashion begins with the upper-most class and is copied by the classes below it in a domino-type effect, until all classes are wearing the same style clothing (Reilly, A. 2014). Today, the technical ability to produce large quantities of low-end garments which fall within the mass and value market categories, contributes to this effect whereas Ready-to-Wear acts as the transitional sector between runway and middle-market clothing and as a consequence sits at a higher price point.
The National Recovery Administration (NRA) in the U.S. from 1933-1935 created a safety net for the garment industry. Stimulating essential company recovery, including maintaining fair trade, reducing unemployment and establishing minimum wages, the crucial component of the Administration was the National Industrial Recovery Act (1933) which empowered the U.S. President to enforce new working practices and therefore protect businesses throughout the Depression. The garment industry was included in Title 1 of the Act but failed to mention the pattern industry. Although excluded, some pattern companies added the NRA branding to their products to appeal to consumers, while others ignored it entirely (Emery, 2014). Figure 4 (Commercial Pattern Archive, no date) shows a 1933 Simplicity Menswear pattern featuring the NRA logo in the bottom right corner.
Figure 4: Men’s Pattern Simplicity 1331, 1933 (Commercial Pattern Archive, no date)
Companies had limited funds to market their patterns and with the lack of consumer spending, it was imperative that brands developed an advantage over their competitors. Simplicity’s founder, James J. Shapiro, utilised the company name along with the claim that its patterns were “easier to make than any other” (Emery, 2014) to become market leader, despite other companies offering similar products. Advertising, particularly in fashion catalogues, focused on their less intricate designs which also helped to set them apart from competitors such as Vogue.
Women had begun to reuse patterns, adapting aspects such as sleeves or fasteners, and they relied on accessories as a way to create new looks from old outfits. Realising this, companies developed a ‘more for her money’ range of patterns which appealed to the cost-conscious consumer, who could make up to 3 different styles from one pattern for $0.15, while increasing sales. Using their competitive edge and well-developed brand recognition, Simplicity was able to redefine this market with a ‘two styles per pattern’ offering and the introduction of a higher, “more refined” (Emery, 2014) pattern series called “Custommode” (Emery, 2014) which was priced at $0.25.
As a consequence of the Great Depression Ready-to-Wear came to the forefront of fashion during the 1930s, ushering in a fundamental change to how clothing was purchased. An expanded market accessed fashion through High Street stores, establishing the model which still forms the basis of our approach today.
Society and Politics References
De La Haye, A and D. Mendes, V. 2021. Fashion Since 1900. World of Art, 4. Third Edition. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd.
Spanabel Emery, J. 2014. A History of the Paper Pattern Industry. London: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC. Available from: https://www.bloomsburyfashioncentral.com/products/berg-fashion-library/book/a-history-of-the-paper-pattern-industry-the-home-dressmaking-fashion-revolution
Reilly, A. 2014. Key Concepts for the Fashion Industry Core. London: Bloomsbury Academic. Available from:
The Women’s Wear Daily Archive, 2017. Coats And Suits: Seaming, Partial Belts, Aid In Defining Waistline. 41(64), p1. [Online]. [Accessed: 20 November 2021]. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/wwd/docview/1653337177/1EB4BCF7B0F2444CPQ/1?accountid=14664
Society and Politics Image list
Figure 1: The Women’s Wear Daily Archive, 2017. Coats And Suits: Seaming, Partial Belts, Aid In Defining Waistline. 41(64), p1. [Online]. [Accessed: 20 November 2021]. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/wwd/docview/1653337177/1EB4BCF7B0F2444CPQ/1?accountid=14664
Figure 2: Commercial Pattern Archive, c2021. Men’s Bathroom and Smoking Jacket: Simplicity 1331. [Online]. [Accessed: 20 November 2021]. Available from: https://copa.apps.uri.edu/
Comments