Dior's New Look and Parisian Fashion Supremacy

Posted by on

 Emily Nelson investigates the extent to which Dior’s New Look was the cause of Parisian fashion supremacy post-World War Two.


The impact which Christian Dior had upon the fashion world in the 1940s is unmistakable. His ‘New Look’ is almost synonymous with late 1940s and early 1950s fashion. It could be argued that Dior single handedly catapulted Paris to its position as the leader of Western fashion. However, Dior was not alone in his quest to promote haute couture and innovative design. Other houses, such as Balenciaga and - previously in the 1920s - Chanel, became legendary and contributed towards the advancement of Parisian fashion. Furthermore, this advancement was juxtaposed with the stagnancy of other nations’ fashion trends, which ground to a halt during the Second World War. This culmination of factors allowed Paris to emerge as the centre of culture and haute couture post-World War Two. However, Dior’s New Look was the defining factor of success for the international popularity of Parisian haute couture.

There’s just something about Paris...

The fashion house system was established in 1858 by Charles Frederik Worth. These are the roots of Parisian couture and essentially gave Paris a foothold on the global fashion scene. For France, fashion houses are not merely another shop on the high street. To be accepted as a member of the Chambre Syndicale, houses had to meet a minimum number of employees (around 200) and make a collection twice annually with a minimum number of garments. Fashion has been an important industry economically and culturally for France since the inception of houses by Worth, and possibly tracing back to King Louis XIV. In the 1670s, fashion ‘seasons’ were established and later, when department stores opened in the 1800s, this sense of competitive fashion which had been confined to the courts burst out and covered society in a patchwork of lavish textures and vibrant colours. Even though Worth was born in England, he moved to Paris to work in textiles at a young age then branched out to create the first fashion ‘house’. Many more accomplishments are also attributed to Worth, such as the invention of the fashion show and sketching of couture garments before sampling material. Therefore, for centuries, fashion has been at the heart of French culture. This gives Paris a certain edge over other fashion centres of the world -  Milan, London, New York - as many of the early innovations within the industry were conceptualised and enacted first in Paris. Relating to the post-war period, it could be argued that the strong sense of fashion history within Parisian culture cemented their supremacy early on, and no country could foster a national identity that so strongly incorporated fashion as France had. However, fashion is a mercurial field ruled by changing trends that shift with hastening speed as one moves through history. 

The importance of trends cannot be underestimated when assessing the significance of particular fashion designs or movements. For example, Coco Chanel revolutionised women’s fashion in the 1920s by breaking women free from the constraints of a corset for the very first time. She also created the iconic and timeless LBD (little black dress) and popularised female suits. This opposes the idea that once a nation establishes its dominance in a certain area, that area will be enshrined in their national identity. Chanel proved that to stay at the metaphorical top of the food chain, Paris had to consistently generate new ideas and trends that captured the zeitgeist of the Western audience. Since the 1850s, when Worth opened the first fashion house, Paris has indeed been evolving ahead of the times to produce the fashion that people - particularly women - felt suited their lifestyle and mindset. This first great trend was Chanel’s liberation of women from uncomfortable, form-fitting garments. Chanel’s quote ‘luxury must be comfortable, otherwise it is not luxury’ captured the spirit of the time and her simple, comfortable garments became a worldwide sensation. This coincided with the roaring twenties, which shows how circumstances affect the popularity of certain fashion trends. Also, the question of cause and effect is raised. Did Chanel design the clothes to fit the time, or were the social trends drawn from the cultural and artistic movement towards liberalism? Furthermore, if Chanel was the first French designer to create a new fashion movement then Dior was the second. Arguably, after Dior, Yves Saint Laurent revived the Parisian fashion scene in the 1960s. This chronology of iconic fashion designers creating sweeping movements that affect Western society always seems to stem from Paris. Is this a coincidence, or is the intrinsic value of fashion within France so deeply rooted that since Louis XIV, creative minds have flocked to Paris? This is both a reason in itself why Paris retained its status as the global fashion supremacy post-World War Two, and a contributing factor towards the success and rise of Dior himself. 

Dior

(Sourced from Christian Dior's New Look 1940's - Vintage Dior Fashion Photos)


Similarly to Chanel, Dior managed to capture the zeitgeist of his time; which happened to be just after the Second World War. Dior opened his house in 1946 and became an overnight sensation with the release of his first collection, the ‘Corolle’ - commonly referred to as the ‘New Look’ - in 1947. This collection drew upon the glamour of La Belle Époque, to break free from the militaristic, uniform-style clothing of the Second World War. The designs’ nipped-in waists, rounded shoulders and sweeping skirts marked a decisive change in the direction that fashion had taken since Chanel in the 1920s. After the Second World War, people wanted to forget the hardships they had been through and bask in the magic and glamour of traditional silhouettes. The return of the corset also symbolised the shift from women who had worked in jobs such as munitions factories coming home to traditional wifely or motherly roles. Dior provided this change, and it was not so much that he was pandering to an audience desperate for a fresh new trend; rather, Dior’s personal design style aligned perfectly with the mood of the time. In a feminist critique, Pamela Church Gibson wrote that the New Look collection was ‘designed to reassert Parisian supremacy in the world of couture’. Of course, as all arts are subjective, no fashion trend can please everyone. In particular, feminists took issue with the reinstatement of the confinements of women’s garments, which designers such as Chanel had stripped away, calling Dior’s work impractical, expensive and classist. However, in the grand scheme of the couture industry and the French economy, this critique was a mere drop in an ocean of praise. 

In addition to being a revolutionary fashion designer, Dior was a logical businessman. He secured his fashion empire by forming eight independent companies and producing his garments using sixteen firms, bound through franchising agreements. Dior also made up more than half of Paris’ couture exports. This was possible through the employment of 1200 workers by the mid-1950s; a large workforce that produced 12,000 dresses a year in one branch alone - generating $1m of income from abroad. Dior had branches all over the world, from California to London to Caracas. Time magazine reported that Dior’s annual turnover was £18m. This was an incredible success for Dior and shows how successful his house was in comparison to others that faltered during the war and in the post-war economy. In 1939 there were 70 registered houses under the Chambre Syndicale, however by 1943 this number had decreased to 43. One casualty of the Second World War was Schiaparelli; a rival of Chanel who never recovered from the stylistic changes in trends brought about by Dior. Furthermore, how many of these houses exist in living memory? Certain names, such as Dior, Balenciaga and Balmain remain relevant to today and are remembered for their cultural impact in the 20th century. However, many early houses have been lost in the sands of time. In contrast, Dior is still revered for the decade in which he was the architect of Western fashion. To this day, exhibits at museums around the world showcase Dior’s masterful designs, such as the 2019 exhibition ‘Christian Dior, Designer of Dreams’ at the V&A in London - which inspired me to write this piece. In summary, Dior’s strength is shown through the profitability of his companies, caused by a combination of excellent commercial leadership and design knowledge. In this way, Dior takes great responsibility for Paris’ resurgence as the Western fashion supremacy during the mid-twentieth century because he produced half of France’s international couture market and is rightfully named the saviour of haute couture. 

Dior was particularly successful with the North American market. This greatly helped Paris to regain its supremacy because during the Second World War, France’s trade with the US had ceased. Prior to the Second World War, the US was an important trade partner with France, therefore the blow of the Second World War massively affected the Parisian haute couture industry. Furthermore, during the war, the US assumed the deserted fashion designing post, and American fashion gained popularity and recognition. Whereas Paris had always been the home of true couture garments, the US had expanded and capitalised on the lucrative ready-to-wear market. Some designers, such as Schiaparelli, relocated to New York during the Second World War because the German occupation of Paris meant that the haute couture industry greatly suffered with rationing and lack of production. American Elizabeth Hoyte, living in Paris, for British Vogue in 1943 wrote that it was impossible to dress ‘comfortably - or even adequately’ . This shows that Parisian couture was a dismal affair during the war, which had the greatest effect on its trade with the US as they did not have the same wartime issues as European countries. However, as hard as the Americans tried to make New York into the world centre of fashion, the crown could never be taken away from Paris. New York was a city of production and mass-marketing, rather than innovative, authentic design. It was a fantastic trade centre but could not compete with Parisian history of couture, which one could claim is woven into the fabric of each garment produced under the Chambre Syndicale. Admittedly, after years of buying original Parisian pieces, Americans grew tired of paying high prices and instead bought replicate garments from American vendors. However, Dior revived the American market in 1947; two years after the war had ended. His designs were seen across Hollywood and his innovation inspired many Americans to return to the Parisian couture scene, as they were enthralled by the prestige of the collection that resembled a ‘blooming flower’. 

(Sourced from AnOther Magazine)

As well as taking back the American market, Dior had a strong foothold in Britain. London was known for its tailoring, rather than its innovation in sketching new trends. This culture of precision and reliability did give Britain a strong fashion system. In 1942, the Incorporated Society of London Fashion Designers had 12 houses. The centre of this institution was London’s Savile Row. The elegant garments which emerged from these houses attracted international attention, as many designers across Europe - but particularly from Paris - opened branches in London. Dior was one of these designers. Whilst Britain had a blooming business dressing a typical British audience who enjoyed the quiet elegance of Savile Row’s craftsmanship, Britain could never compete with the authenticity and history of Parisian haute couture. The French government supported the Chambre Syndicale but London houses were, for the most part, self-financed. Furthermore, the post-war trends favoured Parisian extravagance, namely the glamorous silhouettes created by Dior. Celebrity endorsements were also an important indicator of what was popular and fashionable. Princess Margaret was arguably one of the first ‘celebrities’ and was certainly one of the first royal family members attuned to current fashion; whose choices influenced how society dressed. In 1951, Dior dressed Princess Margaret for the first time (pictured below) for her visit to Paris, and in 1954, Dior opened his London branch and dressed her once again, in Blenheim Palace. These were extremely significant events in the restoration of Parisian supremacy because Princess Margaret was so high profile and one could not have achieved a more prestigious model than a princess. The influence of British royalty wearing Dior can be seen in 1957, when during the Queen’s state visit to Paris, many visitors wore Parisian couture. However, the Queen herself elected for a British gown designed by Norman Hartnell, as one would expect for the British head of state. Overall, London undoubtedly had a successful fashion house system and its own influential designers. However, the master of the time was Dior, as he created an international fashion empire stemmed from his own groundbreaking collection. Paris was already the ‘home’ of haute couture and some might say fashion, but Dior’s fresh innovation provided Paris with the rejuvenation it needed to convert this history into spreads on pages of the latest edition of Vogue and Time magazine, and therefore into saleable goods contributing to the French economy.

(Sourced from Princess Margaret's Christian Dior dress | Museum of London)

World War Two

The Second World War, as well as briefly freezing the supremacy of Parisian couture, had some benefits to the French fashion market. Firstly, fashion had come to a standstill in countries, such as England, during the war. Although there was rationing of textiles and other supplies that made it difficult for Parisian designers to continue working to a world class standard, designs still evolved and trends emerged in Paris during the war. The same cannot be said for England, as the people wore - in some cases - whatever clothes they could get their hands on. Fashion was not a priority for British people; practicality was a more significant factor in deciding what to wear each day during the war. Granted, some French women wore slightly shorter skirts during this period, as they had to due to rationing of fabric. However, most French women surfaced from the war wearing tall bonnets, high heels and full skirts. This contradicted the British rules of how many buttons, how much fabric and which textiles designers were allowed. Therefore, it was quite a shock to the British when magazines printed photos of French fashion post-1944. Whilst they had stuck to the restrictions placed upon them by austerity, French designers had made fewer pieces with the little resources that they had available. Furthermore, the Chambre Syndicale had encouraged houses, such as Balenciaga and Balmain, to continue the work of couture - in direct opposition to the occupying Nazi regime’s orders. 

This shows that Parisian supremacy was not derived from one singular house or collection, but that Parisian natives regarded fashion as a necessity rather than a luxury. It is this identity that gives Paris the international dominance over fashion throughout history. In addition to the Chambre Syndicale placing couture upon a pedestal, the French government knew the importance of fashion in relation to the French economy. Therefore, they issued subsidies to the houses, which allowed them to pay rent, wages and supply costs. This greatly aided France’s post-war economic recovery, thus contributing towards their global economic position within the fashion sector.


Conclusion

In conclusion, Dior was responsible for post-World War Two Parisian fashion supremacy to an exorbitant extent. The creation of the ‘New Look’ captured the post-war zeitgeist to utter perfection both nationally and internationally. This can be seen socially, through high profile figures - such as Princess Margaret - being adorned in Dior, and economically, through Dior’s production of half of France’s international couture market. Dior designed the garments that Americans desired, which reconnected the bond between the American buyer and the Parisian couturier that had been a substantial loss during the Second World War. Furthermore, it could be argued that Paris’ history as the point of inception for fashion houses and haute couture guaranteed that it would always be the centre of fashion in Europe and the Western world. However, momentous trends conceived by Chanel and Dior himself prove that new blood and innovation was necessary to remain the supreme force of fashion - as is the nature of the beast. Whilst other houses, such as Balenciaga, also worked hard during this period to put Paris back on the map, Dior was by far the most influential. This is shown through his blueprint of the New Look, which other designers imitated closely abroad and loosely in Paris. Another argument is that the stagnancy of other markets provided Paris with an opportunity to capitalise on the global market, as their trends had progressed during the war. However, the American market flourished during the Second World War and it was Dior who took back control of the fashion narrative by appealing to American clients. This increased France’s share of the global fashion market, therefore reaffirming their pre-war dominance. All evidence points towards Dior being the grand designer of the years 1947-57. This decade is known as the ‘golden age of couture’ for one reason: Dior.



Bibliography



Comments

Post a Comment

Comments with names are more likely to be published.