Editors' Blog

Every once and a while even the most die hard fashionistas (like myself) give up reading fashion news for more bleaker territory. I’ve recently been stopping at Finance rather than clicking through to Style to get the scoop on the dire economic outlook. This downward spiral has got me thinking about another type of downward spiraling, specifically hemlines and how their length can predict the future economic situation (so the longer the hemline the worse off the economy and vice versa).

Ok, it’s sound nerdy, I know. Why is she wasting her time with this, you ask. But honestly this myth (?) has been wafting through the fashion industry like the scent of stale perfume. I want to get to the bottom of it and find out if fashion forebodes financial crisis.

Are you serious?

I am totally serious when I bring this up, and I’m not alone. Some big time fashion scholars have debated this veritable “hunch” for years, including Harold Koda, the curator of the Costume Institute at the Met. Back in July Suzy Menkes of the International Herald Tribune was already digging up info on the theory.

This summer’s collections - shown last October, when the stocks were still riding high on a bull market - were filled with long skirts. From classic Chanel to cool Christopher Kane, dresses were long and languorous or a waterfall of frills - but always scraping the floor… Why wasn’t Wall Street noting the sartorial changes? Although designers always dismiss the correlation between skirt lengths and financial markets as a fashion historian’s fantasy, the parallels are striking.

And her thoughts are rooted in history (is it not the best barometre for the future?).

Up went hemlines to dizzying heights in the financial and social whirl of the roaring 1920s - revealing women’s legs for the first time in recorded history. Then came the bear market and bare was out - except for low backs on the floor-length gowns that dropped hemlines just before the 1929 Wall Street crash.

To add fuel to the fire, Cathy Horyn put forth this idea in a recent blog post (direct from Paris).

I think we will see more and more clothing and accessory design shaped by global market factors rather than singular sensibilities… it had better be clear to consumers that it’s worth it. I think Giancarlo Giammetti was right about many clothes being useless. He nailed the problem. We see a lot of interesting, colorful, embellished clothes — all supposedly positive qualities — but something in them makes us realize we don’t actually need them.

So with the fashion weeks nearly over (the frenzy is culminated in Paris as I type). Why not take a look at the catwalk and see if the theory holds true and, more important, what the financial future holds… (after all this theory posits that hemlines predict the economic future not the present).

To date there have been little signs of the ubiquitous maxi dress of summer ‘08. Rather we are getting a hearty dose of just-below-the-knee and knee-length hemlines and lots of trousers. True, designers are creating more mainstream marketable designs (like Frida Giannini for Gucci, Galliano for Dior, DSquared2). As Horyn would suggest this may be to ensure that their wares sell come spring when we will be knee deep in an economic downturn. It will be interesting though to see if any pundits go out on a limb proclaiming a sea change in the economy (for the better) since the pillars of design have skirted around longer hemlines (no pun intended).

On another note thought, I have to admit that all the depression-inducing news about global markets is changing my shopping habits. I had to think twice before investing in my latest pair of MICHAEL Michael Kors flats (just so you know I did buy them and love them!). I calculated their “wearability factor”* before handing over my credit card. This does not bode well, even for this seasoned bargainista (you say sale, I say where!).

*Wearibility factor, according to Julia: This is the value I place on a garment or accessory to determine how much wear I will get out of it. What do I look at? 1) Versatility: Is the item able to be dressed down, dressed up? Will it work for work and play? Can it last more than one season? 2) Comfort: Does the item feel good on? Not cause any discomfort? 3) Fit: Similar to comfort but also encompasses the look of the fit, is it flattering? Does it make me look good? 4) Durability: Is the item a high quality item that will not rip/fray/discolour/crack/break in a month’s time.

PHOTO: Imaxtree/Chloe