This is an encyclopedic, gorgeously illustrated coffee table size book on noted movie costume designers, from the dawn of American motion pictures to the present
The book is organized into four chapters "The Silent Era," "The Golden Age," "The Modern Era," and "Conversations on Design in the Modern Era" - within each are sections dealing with individual designers. Names the reader may be familiar with include Natacha Rambova, Valentino's wife, and Erte, in the Silent Era, and more well-known names such as Coco Chanel, Bonnie Cashin, Cecil Beaton in the Golden Era, and Bob Mackie in the Modern Era. Chapter Four is interesting in that the reader gets some glimpses into how "franchise" films are put together these days, how they may be years in the making (such as films based on graphic novel characters) and so forth.
Readers have seen these wonderfully inventive designs, which are key factors in the presentation of a movie, since they were born, and this book gives some wonderful insights into the heyday of the studio system, as well as the development of the movie industry early in the 20th century - it is easy to overlook costume design, or design in general, in cinema, since the movie-goer may be transfixed by a performance or the unfolding of plot. However, the look of a film, and costume are key elements - how the many team-members who contribute to a film, such as the screen-writer, the director, the producer, the actor, may give feedback to the designer - is also examined.
Most of the volume focuses on the Golden Age - and since most of the personalities and designers from that era are gone, it may seem elegiac after a while, almost like a collection of obituaries. That is, until you realize that the designers under discussion, who often had interesting life stories, have left permanent testimonies to their art form, and many times, may have contributed to fashion trends and iconic costumes, such as the ruby slippers from the Wizard of Oz etc.
This TCM-published book was the perfect book for me since I love TCM and remain a cable TV customer in order to continue to receive TCM. There really is something about the world of old movies - both the design and the world-view - that is, to me at least, missing these days. I suppose people expect more special effects these days, and studios are happy to supply product to satisfy this demand. The past is gone, and I was part of the generation that destroyed the perhaps phonier, more "genteel" era. I was part of the generation that rebelled against things like skirts for girls in school, wearing crinolines and white gloves, makeup or having your hair styled. The things that went into movies since their inception, or "genteel" society, we rebelled against, and won. Since our time, the norm has been jeans, and if it were up to us, we would still have simple long hair and no makeup. There was a slight reversion to a more styled look in the 80s - actually, the destruction of past styles was never complete even in the heyday of the rebellion ("youth-quake") in the 60s or 70s. But now, 50 or 60 years later, you can look back and somehow appreciate the instant social signifiers, and possible social armor, that a well-tailored suit conferred. All this is absolutely finished these days, especially with the advent of casual dress at work. People do not seem to care to wear dress clothing these days unless absolutely necessary; the preferred style is casual. So a glimpse into a former world of tailored clothing, the social structure that enabled it, even an artificial glimpse into it via the movies - is always interesting. I lived through an era where it was destroyed. When I was a child, I was put into ladylike hats, gloves, outfits for holidays and church. As an adolescent, I began to rebel and prefer wearing Levis. When I was in HS, we managed to get the NYC Board of Education to let us girls wear pants to school - but that was just the tip of the iceberg. The contradictions were extreme between what the older generation thought of as "style" and what we considered our uniform "anti-style." Demographically, the baby boom generation had the edge - and so our style, which upended the established norm in so many ways - still, in many ways, prevails. At one time, as a child, I had to carry embroidered handkerchiefs in a small handbag in my gloved hands with me to church, where my family and I would be judged by all the other similarly dressed families, as to who was up to snuff and so forth. I still have a couple of those handkerchiefs - and once in a great while, I'll look at them, emblematic as they are of the destroyed dreams that my parents' generation had for their kids, that they would turn out to be obedient "divots" following the exact same socially accepted path as everyone else in their generation. Well, it did not exactly turn out that way for many of the kids I grew up with, although some did follow the conventional "story-line"of life. Probably, although we didn't realize it at the time, we didn't want to be like our parents, considering what our parents generation values had led to - war, near-mutually assured mass destruction, slavery/Jim Crow, inequality, fascism. We didn't want their world, once we understand what their world meant. And the easiest way to break the pattern, to destroy (for one example) the patriarchy, was to overturn social norms including social signifiers like makeup, hairstyles, white gloves/crinolines/embroidered handkerchiefs, etc.
Ironically, that world - of social theatricality perhaps - is still fascinating, even to me, although I was admittedly a social rebel from childhood on. This volume describes the key role played by costume design in producing films - for anyone interested in film studies, or cultural studies, it's worth reviewing, if not actually reading the entire volume like I did.