Returning to our discussion of the Golden Age, and why we think of the 30s as a pinnacle period in menswear, let’s look at what happened during the 30s and how that might have influenced our perceptions of its typical styles.
The 1930s saw the intersection of advances in tailoring (drape, principally) with social trends (more casual), industry (mass production techniques), distribution (catalogues, department stores) and attitudes (still fairly conservative, meaning that suits, jackets and ties were required). In addition, movies allowed for the transmission of models (e.g., the famous Clark Gable undershirt controversy). Finally, mass marketing and the designer – consumer relationship was still heavily weighted towards the former, meaning that the market followed tailors and designers.
So the 30s was a new sort of decade in many ways. However, at least in western Europe and North America, the 30s was also a period of terrible poverty, as the great depression, arguably starting in 1929, grew worse and worse, bottoming out in the middle of the decade. Breadlines, hunger marches, hobo camps and general, grinding hardship meant that there was little left over for luxuries, particularly among the middle and working classes.
In spite of that, it is known for what are arguably the finest and most enduring menswear designs and products. Why did subsequent periods not deserve the title “Golden Age”? The 40s gave us the bold look, brash, big and bright. Associated with post-war bravado and the return of peace (at least, for most of the world), it brought back 1930s styles after wartime rationing, but in a youthful and, above all, bigger way. Featuring bright neckties, wide shoulders and full cut trousers, the 40s was the 30s with attitude (see an upcoming piece on the bold look).
The 50s brought us the continental suit, on Italian principles, and saw a marked difference between youthful styles (leather jackets, jeans) and those of adult men. The 60s followed this, with nothing particularly new: the 70s, 80s and 90s brought us more of the same. In fact, since the 1930s, barring a few novelties such as the leather bomber jacket (in its civilian version), there has been little since 1939 that is new. Trousers get wider, then narrower, longer then shorter. Jackets, likewise, are shorter, narrower, tighter and looser, and so forth.
What is obvious, after some investigation, is that menswear has, in many ways, become a lot duller since the 30s. Suit and odd jacket fabrics have become more homogenous, with less variety in textures and patterns. Trousers are shorter and narrower, with little of the flare and sense of fun that characterise those of the 30s. Shirt colours and patterns are definitely more conventional. In other words, the 1930s offered more interesting styles, colours and patterns, and thus set a bar that has been reached, but not exceeded since.
Another point here – shoes were more interesting, and available in a wider range of colours (e.g., green, blue, maroon). Fabrics were heavier and tailoring was, in general, of higher quality, even ready to wear – more examples of what makes the 30s a great decade.
In conclusion, the jury may still be out, but the 30s is definitely a period from which to draw inspiration and use as a reference point when planning a wardrobe or designing garments. AskOkey certainly believes this.