What do you think?
Rate this book
Modesty in dress: An inquiry into the fundamentals of fashion
- GenresFashion
186 pages, Hardcover
First published September 1, 1969
51 people want to read
About the author
James Laver
205 books6 followersJames Laver, CBE, FRSA was an English author, critic, art historian, and museum curator who acted as Keeper of Prints, Drawings and Paintings for the Victoria and Albert Museum between 1938 and 1959. He was also an important and pioneering fashion historian described as "the man in England who made the study of costume respectable".
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 5, 2025
(This book would be so heavily censored in today’s environment.)
Couple interesting things:
In terms of people’s fashion, the author notes 3 principles: Seduction Principal, Hierarchical Principal and Utilitarian Principal.
In the case of Utilitarian Principal, the author noted that people do dress for utilitarianism, but not exactly and optimally. Many of the human dress codes are explained by two other principals:
In the case of Hierarchical Principal, the author argued that males dress to differentiate themselves from others by rank. It’s social signaling of the accomplishment and powers one possesses.The author noted that this not only limits to male. “Emasculated females”, the author noted, also dress this way.
In the case of Seduction Principal, the author argues that a lot of females dress to attract other males - thus to seduce. The difference between the Hierarchical Principal and the Seduction Principal is that the former is consistent, since the goal is rather the same whereas the former would produce rather inconsistent emphasis on different parts of the body (the author noted some of the prevailing theories of his time that such differences could be explained by absence of reproductive parts).
In terms of modesty - the author noted that it in itself is mostly a relative term. In a nudist society for instance, nudity is quickly numbed from others and will not garner any additional attention. In society as well. Historically modesty and indecency is merely the society construct of what ought and what not ought to be shown. When in the early 1900s showing female legs beneath the knee was frowned upon, as society progressed to show even more flesh, the society too, quickly desensitized with what once could be considered as indecent. In sum, indecency - as well as much of other human fashion construct - is about the messaging from the wearer, rather than the actual medium the wearer wears.
Couple interesting things:
In terms of people’s fashion, the author notes 3 principles: Seduction Principal, Hierarchical Principal and Utilitarian Principal.
In the case of Utilitarian Principal, the author noted that people do dress for utilitarianism, but not exactly and optimally. Many of the human dress codes are explained by two other principals:
In the case of Hierarchical Principal, the author argued that males dress to differentiate themselves from others by rank. It’s social signaling of the accomplishment and powers one possesses.The author noted that this not only limits to male. “Emasculated females”, the author noted, also dress this way.
In the case of Seduction Principal, the author argues that a lot of females dress to attract other males - thus to seduce. The difference between the Hierarchical Principal and the Seduction Principal is that the former is consistent, since the goal is rather the same whereas the former would produce rather inconsistent emphasis on different parts of the body (the author noted some of the prevailing theories of his time that such differences could be explained by absence of reproductive parts).
In terms of modesty - the author noted that it in itself is mostly a relative term. In a nudist society for instance, nudity is quickly numbed from others and will not garner any additional attention. In society as well. Historically modesty and indecency is merely the society construct of what ought and what not ought to be shown. When in the early 1900s showing female legs beneath the knee was frowned upon, as society progressed to show even more flesh, the society too, quickly desensitized with what once could be considered as indecent. In sum, indecency - as well as much of other human fashion construct - is about the messaging from the wearer, rather than the actual medium the wearer wears.
Displaying 1 of 1 review