On the 1950s Redux, Bustiers + Sexuality

Fashion truly does come in full circle. Or in a figure eight of infinity, rather. It’s amazing, isn’t it, how just a few months ago the world of high fashion—and later its commercialized counterpart—was crazed, obsessing (with exaggeration!) over studs, grommets, the torn, the ripped, the Balmain-meets-Alexander-Wang rock chic aesthetic. For two years I prayed this trend would phase. I waited. And waited. And tapped my feet impatiently.

There may have even been some thumb twiddling.

The first sign of hope came with Spring/Summer Fashion Week of 2010 in spurts of pastel, chiffon, and pretty dresses reminiscent of damsels in distress (amidst the rebellious Joan of Arcs). It was a start, and now fall collections hail to a bygone era of unprecedented femininity (halleluuuujah!), making it quite the dramatic change from the badass grunge to ladylike and sesual.

It’s a fifties redux, and by golly, I love it. A-line skirts, bustiers, and all.

While I’m not a proponent of following trends, and may render myself a hypocrite by even endorsing in such a topic, I promise you my indulgence in the trend has more depth than mere excitement at having my [favorite] era, fashion-wise, brought back. But first, on the fifties redux trend of this upcoming season: after all, this is a fashion blog.

We’ve gone back in time, back to a time period of long gone, classic femininity: an era of pin-ups, white picket fences, domesticated housewives living in suburbia  with two kids, and costumes à la Mad Men—and also an era in which women were marginalized as sexual objects.

Marc Jacobs took it rather literally; for Louis Vuitton, he sent down the runway a collection consisting entirely of ladylike pieces whose main intention was to dress and emphasize the woman unabashed of her curves (yes!)—dedicated to the Scarlett johanssons, Salma Hayeks, and Lara Stones of the world. It was a beautiful collection: beige gloves, classic, lady-like bags, little floral bustiers (I’m eyeing them rather greedily, right now), regardless of the lack of contextual interpretation. I’ve become a fan of Marc Jacobs—Louis Vuitton especially—as of late; the designs have become cohesive to LV’s image rather than an extension of Marc himself.

Where Louis Vuitton lacked interpretation, Miuccia Prada’s collection was a fifties redux with a spunky, Lolita-esque twist to both humor and modernize the trend. The A-line skirts were there, of course, but paired with bustiers and Gina Lollobrigida-inspired ruffled bra tops. It was far less serious than Louis Vuitton; lighthearted, human, wearable. After all, it is Miuccia we’re talking about.

And then there’s Dolce: the house that couldn’t not be included in an article whose title included the words “bustier” and “sex.” The bustier—the bustier—has been D&G’s signature piece since its runway debut in 1985. In leopard print. It hardly gets more sexy, feminine, or classic than that.

I’m eating it all up (figuratively, ish), with a cup of coffee to wash it down no less.

There are those who despise the fifties throwback, unsurprisingly, for its candid reference to an era in which females were suppressed and objectified. I may or may nto have given a false impression that I’m a feminist with a previous, public proclamation of my abhorrence for the color pink. I suppose I am one, to some extent, yet also not.

Sexuality in dressing has always been of controversy. Before the nineties, safely speaking, women were always objectified. We still are. But it was then when we were domesticated little creatures whose sole purpose was to cook, clean, rear the kiddies, and look pretty. Nothing more, nothing less. But today, we’re (nearly!) eye to eye. Throw on a pair of Jimmy Choos and we’re looking down on their near-balding heads.

So the question is: Is it so wrong to take advantage of what we have? To some extent, as with all else. But I see no wrong in dressing to fit the part we’ve defined for ourselves, rather than that of the man’s idea of who and what we should be or once were. We’re pin-ups. We’re housewives. We’re high profile Wall Street women and executives in the corporate world. This is all a part of who we, as a collective, once were, still are, and could be. There’s no use in denying sexuality or avoiding it altogether especially since sex is an integral part of our culture both past and present.

Embrace femininity, and indulge it.

.   .   .

x

{images via}