Dress Codes: Meanings and Messages in American Culture

by Ruth P. Rubinstein

Rich with illustrations, this revised and updated second edition of Dress Codes systematically analyzes the meaning and relevance of clothing in American culture. Presented here is an up-to-date analysis of images of power and authority, gender, seduction (the sexy look, the alluring look, the glamorous look, the vulnerable look), wealth and beauty, youth and health, and leisure and political hierarchy. Taken together, the chapters offer to the student and the general reader a complete "semiotics of clothing" in a form that is highly readable, very entertaining, and thoroughly informative. The illustrations provide fascinating glimpses into the history of American fashion and clothing-along with their antecedents in Europe-as well as a fine collection of images from the more familiar world of contemporary America.Rubinstein has identified six distinct categories of dress in American society, upon which Dress Codes is based. "Clothing signs" were instituted by those in authority, have one meaning, indicate behavior, and are required attire (police uniforms, or the clothing of ministers and priests); “clothing symbols," on the other hand, reflect the achievement of cultural values—wealth, beauty, you and health. The wearing of clothing symbols—designer clothing or jewelry—may have several meanings; ‘clothing tie-signs,” which are specific types of clothing that indicate membership in a community outside mainstream culture (Hasidic, Amish, or Hare Krishna attire). They were instituted by those in authority, have one meaning, they indicate expected behavior, and are required attire; “clothing tie symbols” emanate from hopes, fears, and dreams of particular groups. They include trendy styles such as hip-hop, hippie, and gothic. Another category, “contemporary fashion,” reflects consumer sentiments and the political and economic forces of the period. “Personal dress,” refers to the "I" component we bring in when dressing the public self (bowtie, dramatic, or artistic attire). Many of these images have their roots in the “collective memory” of western society. Written in a lively and entertaining style,Dress Codes will fascinate both general readers and students interested in the history of fashion and costume, fashion design, human development, and gender studies.

Genres: Fashion, Sociology, Psychology, Anthropology, Pop Culture

320 pages, Paperback

First published January 12, 1994

Reviews

[Morolake · Rating 4 out of 5]

Recommended for readers/academics interested in understanding the many faces of fashion/clothing and dress. It takes a historical and sociological approach in understanding the symbolic understanding and interpretation of dress in different contexts.

[Jecka Marie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have mixed feelings about Rubinstein's book. While this tome contains a HUGE amount of information, carefully and meticulously compartmentalized into 5 parts and 18 chapters, which are then subdivided even further into choppy paragraphs with individual subject headings, I think she simply tried to cover too much information. By doing so, she was unable to dedicate to any subject more than a paragraph or two, so the end result reads more like an encyclopedia than an extensive discourse on the subject presented (which is fine, but I do not think this was her intention).

As for the information itself, I think Rubinstein fell prey to a fashion history faux pas, which would not sit well with Dr. Lourdes Font: she attempts to interpret an era in which she is still living, so she is too "close" to her subject. This work has a copyright date of 1995, and in her analysis, she takes on trends from the late 1980s and early 90s that were still evolving when her book went to print. Any artistic analysis needs some distance to see clearly. Even in 2012, we are still trying to contextualize much of what happened in the 1960s, so it will be some time before we can tackle the ensuing decades of the late twentieth century.

I also take issue with a few of her claims. She perpetuates a few myths that fashion historians are now trying to correct (i.e. the incorrect/misleading usage of the term "flapper" in fashion; the notion that designer Paul Poiret was solely responsible for "freeing" women of the corset in the first decade of the twentieth century, etc.). She also makes some fairly bold analytical statements that sound interesting, but might be difficult to defend if pressed further. For instance: "The female fashion during the Bush presidency, with its flattening of the breast, long stretches of revealed body, and easy access to the torso, conveyed vulnerability ." (pg. 233). Really? How so?

I did appreciate her many annotations, end notes, index, and extensive (and useful) bibliography, but then again, I expect nothing less from a fellow graduate of FIT.

[Biju P.R.]

Well, a good read. it was useful for me. i referred it for my upcoming book on love and India. I have a chapter on Dressed Nation. The premises of this author was a useful entry point for my chapter. Its a nice and useful read. particualrly the idea of dress and how it makes meaning and expression i na cultural context. Lovely book.