# 1970's Preppie vs. 1980's Preppy



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

Star blogger Heavy Tweed Jacket has been musing much frequently about 1970's. He seems to advance a thesis that there was a hippie-ish version of Ivy wear during that decade (referred to by the Japanese as Heavy Duty Ivy ) and that with the publication of the OPH, this rugged style was supplanted by a more colorful yet more conservative Preppy style.

Interesting, but I think the timing is wrong. It seems to me that Preppie was a style that emerged organically as the country turned right during the late 1970's.

Confirming this, here is a Washington Post article from March 5, 1978 showing *all *of the elements were in place at Duke university fairly early in the Carter Administration.

Fashion Notes By Nina S. Hyde

_One professor at Duke University calls the topic of fashion fascinating, but says, "we like to concern ourselves with serious things." Another hesitates, then says boldly, "talk to Dr. Susan Schiffman, she dresses nice." Students chorus their accord. "I don't pay much attention to clothes. I wear what's warm and comfortable," says a junior from Connecticut._
_They protest too much. College campuses today - and Duke's a good example - care a lot about fashion. They use fashion to align themselves with sororities or fraternities, ingratiate themselves with potential employers, and express themselves as individuals (jocks, grinds, preppies, outdoorsmen, intellectuals). Overall, they mark themselves as the new conservatives of the late 1970s._
_

At the Duke University, a private institution with a few more students (41 percent) from the northeast than from the south (39 percent) and an annual tuition package, including room and board, of $6,300, the conservative swell reported on other campuses across the country is as clear in the classroom as in the dress._
_The Ivy-League, preppie look has taken a battering since the 1950s, but it has actually survived the jeans generation well. The shetland sweater is around, but now it's trimmer and comes in bright colors as well as the old derigueur beige, gray and navy._

_Camel's hair boy coats are longer, softer, often belted. Clogs and Topsiders have replaced the penny loafer. Circle pins have given way to gold chains, tiny gold pendants or stickpins. Hair is long, with occasional Farah Fawcett curls, or short a la Dorothy Hamill, but far from the rigid sets of 20 years ago. Though some seniors say they wear eye makeup less regularly than four years ago, you'll still see it at breakfast in the dining room (called the Blue and White)._

_The button-down shirt is still around rarely buttoned at the top. It's now often a layer that includes a sweater, even an alligator shirt. If a guy wears a tie, it's because he has a job interview, or his fraternity pledge requires a one-day-a-week tie - even with his tennis shorts, if that's on his schedule._

_Jeans are no longer anti-establishment but cleaned up and integrated as part of the classic gear because they are comfortable, practical, strong, reasonably priced, a neutral color - and sexy._

_The parka is universal. Its only serious competition, a latecomer, is the quilted vest, sometimes worn as a layer over or under something else. "The vest has the double advantage of being macho, and yet enhancing the figure," says Duke history professor Peter Wood. Steve Givens, a graduate student, sees the women in quilted parkas as saying, "This coat may be pretty ugly and make me look fat but I can wear it because I know I look pretty. Underneath it all, I'm really beautiful."_

_Parkas are the classier, more expensive update of the army surplus gear of the late 1960s. Like the plaid shirts, hunting boots, sweatshirts, backpacks and the rest of the L.L. Bean-style paraphernalia, they suggest an alliance with the outdoors, a traditional chic, an expression of awareness of the energy shortage, ecology and inflaion and a demand for long-lasting, quality clothing. How you wear these clothes is often dictated by fads. Currently, a hooded sweatshirt should be worn under a down vest or a jeans jacket, with the hood worn outside._

_Such quiet clothes, like quiet classrooms, let the independents stand out. At Duke, it can be just an unusual hat like a feed cap, the traditional baseball-like cap won by farmers, usually touting the brand name of a tractor or feed instead of a team. These days some endorse beer brands or even college insignia._
_"Very macho," says Prof. Wood, recalling the recent farmers' protest in Washington, where an entire parade of tractor drivers wore caps. "It's like a kid from the farm putting on his armor and saying, 'you can take the boy out of the country, but . . . '"_
_"I guess it shows my rural connection," laughs James McMahon, who owns several and says he sometimes wears them to hide his messy hair the first class of the day."_

_The interview-bound job applicant boasts another kind of uniform. Out come the three-piece corduroy suits, shirts and ties; the women turn up in class in blazers and skirts, just like books like John Molloy's "Dress for Success" tell them to wear. Vogue magazine and Gentlemen's Quarterly, normally hidden under phone books, surface and are scoured before job interviews._

_Because jobs are scarce - the Bureau of Labor Statistics says that between 1975 and 1985 there will be 950,000 more college graduates than jobs requiring degrees - students sign up for far more interviews than they are genuinely interested in. They wait hours just to sign up and then cut classes for such meetings._

_But Prof. Ann Scott of the history department advises otherwise. She cites one male student who has been to 12 interviews, never wearing a tie, and has been offered a job each time._


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

I doubt very much that this style appeared out of thin air at Duke on March 4th 1978, suggesting that basically OPH preppy was in fact just a slick media manifestation of a trend that had developed years earlier.

Digging further into the Washington Post archives, I find that fashion designers like Ralph Lauren hopped on the "Preppie" bandwagon in Spring of 1980 for their Fall lines. The OPH wasm't publishied until December 1980. By October 1981, Preppie was already becoming passe. This is from the NY Times of that mo_nth.

''For some people,'' she said, ''the preppy look is kind of a uniform and for others it's a kind of costume. People expect us to have things like that. Basically, most of the stuff you buy from us is stuff you can wear for years. You can wear it to class or to punch at the master's house - lots of different ways.''

To judge from the prevailing appearances on Connecticut's campuses, the preppy look, indeed, goes everywhere, though in the last few years it has been so ''blasphemized'' - to use the term of one Wesleyan student -that people are quick to deny that they themselves have been affected by it. ''Alligator shirts'' are everywhere, but students wearing them are inclined to explain them away by saying they like the look, or the fit, or the color - not the alligator. They say that Ralph Lauren shirts, featuring an embroidered polo player, are growing in popularity and add a classy and expensive touch without being blatantly preppy.

Though most students say they feel that preppy attire is so basic it is impossible to avoid entirely, a lot of upperclassmen, especially, find the uniform look to be just plain tiresome. Tammy Rosengarten, a Wesleyan junior, said: ''The reason I personally started dressing better this fall was that I was in Paris last summer. Women there are very fashion consciou s, and I felt that I stuck out like a sore thumb. I came to Wesley an as a prep but startedshedding it. I don't think it looks as nice a s the look that I've come to establish more now. I don't think of preppy as being a feminine way of dressing.'' Karen Adair, who abandoned her preppy image for a more sophisticated one after a su mmer spent managing a clothing store, added, ''I guess people want to grow up more.''
_


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

What I think of as 1980's post-OPH prep (what I wore as a kid) is really more of a high fashion retake featuring a lot of pastels. Here is the May 2, 1982 NY Times

_The fall clothes - available commercially in July at relatively stable prices - range, at one end of the fashion continuum, from the patently American looks of Perry Ellis, Alexander Julian, Calvin Klein, Sal Cesarani, and Gene Pressman and Lance Karesh for Basco All-American Sportswear to the frankly Anglified clothing of Ralph Lauren, Alan Flusser and Jeffrey Banks.Using fabrics that are mostly English, Irish or Scottish, Ellis has designed clothing that has, he says, a ''hybrid American look.'' There are romantic, calf-length overcoats; boxy, post-preppie jackets; rugged, extremely wide-wale corduroy trousers; his signature hand-knit sweaters; hand-knit ties and tab-collar shirts. All of it is electrified with color -pink, ocher, navy, lavender, a sobering yellow-green and something that Ellis, with characteristic whimsy, calls ''thistle.''

''I think men's clothing basically has to be familiar,'' he says. ''But it has to strike you as new at the same time. It's a challenge that I confront every time I design a collection. Men's clothing is harder to design because there are more limitations. It boils down to how many new ideas can you bring to an Irish tweed? I try to do it with color. I try to push the colors a little, so they go beyond the expected. I never want my clothing to look put together, like an outfit. And they must always be designed so khaki pants can be worn with anything.''

Color also plays an important part in Alexander Julian's new collection. Long a master of what is known as the ''Old English drape,'' a phrase used to describe a jacket silhouette that is full in the chest and shoulders and slightly suppressed at the waist, Julian is perhaps the master colorist of all the men's-wear designers and a pioneer, albeit at 34 a young pioneer, of bringing a kind of modernist's excitement to men's clothing.

His new clothes reverberate with colors borrowed from the paintings of Klee and Kandinsky, which he uses to update argyle-patterned sweaters or to enliven traditional weaves. A black-and-white herringbone, for example, will be flecked with yellow, purple, orange, teal, red - as many colors, in fact, as the warp and woof will bear.
_


----------



## White Birch (Sep 26, 2008)

*ca ching*

"Though most students say they feel that preppy attire is so basic it is impossible to avoid entirely, a lot of upperclassmen, especially, find the uniform look to be just plain tiresome. Tammy Rosengarten, a Wesleyan junior, said: ''The reason I personally started dressing better this fall was that I was in Paris last summer. Women there are very fashion consciou s, and I felt that I stuck out like a sore thumb. I came to Wesley an as a prep but startedshedding it. I don't think it looks as nice a s the look that I've come to establish more now. I don't think of preppy as being a feminine way of dressing.'' Karen Adair, who abandoned her preppy image for a more sophisticated one after a su mmer spent managing a clothing store, added, ''I guess people want to grow up more."

You hit it exactly on the nod Alden. After just finishing preparatory school I'd like to add something.

I didn't even know what the word preppy meant, had never herd it, or if it existed until I came to college and saw how different everything was. It was very weird at first, and this awkwardness and my search for weejuns led me to this board. I heard people in the my hallway saying "oh so preppy this so preppy that". I saw people come to class, looking like how we dress at the pool on a sunday afternoon barbeque, but way to perfect.... It was weird, and I eventually learned all the whys after a few weeks.

Now, we don't call each other preppy or never did. Looking back on it though, it is very much a middle school and high school thing. the bright colors, shorts in every color etc..

In college now, it is very much like that senior quote saying they want to look more sophisticated. What other's consider preppy, we think of as "high school stuff" or that reserved for family gatherings and the beach. When it comes to Polos it is almost always a brooks that has white or blue as the major theme. brown braided belt, penny/tassel loafers, button down tattersall or check(incorporated with white, blue, pink). It's just about dressing well..within a frame work of taste


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

Now in my late 50s, I was around during the late-1960s, early 1970s, and lived adjacent to Columbia (granted not the preppiest of the Ivies) and was an active witness. The social forces were inevitable, especially on the Ivy campuses. There may have been some diehard Republicans around who stubbornly adhered to the 1950 dress code in defiance, but nearly everyone was affected. While some students broke their ties with the past and went full counter-culture, most others made concessions with varieties on a theme. So you'd see Levis, work boots, with OCBDs and tweed or cord jackets. Or flowered shirts, khakis and bucks with contrasting laces. There was, I think, much less choice. Hair, certainly, was the most significant element to change with the times, long bushy sideburns, mustaches, before pretty much unknown, became common. I remember as as a high school student in St. Louis in 1968 older friends coming back on break with long hair, 'staches, funny hats. The transformation was nearly all encompassing.


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Two quick notes in support of this very interesting posting:

1. OPH published in December 1980 means that the book was completed sometime around September or October of 1979, with much of the research and writing done well before that. Publishing then and even today usually moves at a resolutely sedate pace. (By the time a book on a trend is published the trend has already passed, something most publishers aren't keen for people to fully comprehend.) So indeed the publication of the OPH was not a commencement but more of a capstone to the enlarged awareness of "preppy" fashion. In addition, the oft-mentioned fact it was penned as a satire usually means that it had to be satirizing something already long in existence and pretty well established. Satirists are by definition reactionary and they have to react to something, in this case a something that had to have been going on for a fair amount of time.

2. Ralph Lauren was able to react very quickly and come up with what seemed like an entire preppy lifestyle overnight because he was able to send a large staff to raid the overstuffed warehouses of Sotheby's, where they simply pulled out old suits, clothing and articles from the 20's through the 70's and had them replicated very quickly. Not much actual design except for some updating but a very, very successful bit of timing and marketing. Many other designers were able to do much the same thing, especially at Perry Ellis and Basco. The preppy fashion wave of the 80's owes a great debt to the tailors of Hong Kong who inspired the mass-market copycatting that took over in New York fashion houses at the time. When the American designers saw the pink and green wave coming they literally had the past at their fingertips waiting to be torn apart, examined and replicated. Quite ingenious and no small part Roman in some ways.


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

*Ah, the Dorothy Hamill cut. I remember that.*

What a cool thread. I appreciate this quote:

_''I think men's clothing basically has to be familiar,'' he says. ''But it has to strike you as new at the same time. It's a challenge that I confront every time I design a collection. Men's clothing is harder to design because there are more limitations. It boils down to how many new ideas can you bring to an Irish tweed? I try to do it with color. I try to push the colors a little, so they go beyond the expected. I never want my clothing to look put together, like an outfit. And they must always be designed so khaki pants can be worn with anything.''_

I think AP nails it: The 80's preppy was was set off by pastels especially. And of course the hair became over the top BIG in a severely styled way.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

xcubbies said:


> Now in my late 50s, I was around during the late-1960s, early 1970s, and lived adjacent to Columbia (granted not the preppiest of the Ivies) and was an active witness. The social forces were inevitable, especially on the Ivy campuses. There may have been some diehard Republicans around who stubbornly adhered to the 1950 dress code in defiance, but nearly everyone was affected. While some students broke their ties with the past and went full counter-culture, most others made concessions with varieties on a theme. So you'd see Levis, work boots, with OCBDs and tweed or cord jackets. Or flowered shirts, khakis and bucks with contrasting laces. There was, I think, much less choice. Hair, certainly, was the most significant element to change with the times, long bushy sideburns, mustaches, before pretty much unknown, became common. I remember as as a high school student in St. Louis in 1968 older friends coming back on break with long hair, 'staches, funny hats. The transformation was nearly all encompassing.


Wow! This thread, indeed this post, brought back some very poignant memories for me...almost like a flashback! Attending Penn State on an AFROTC scholarship in the late 60's, I continued wearing my OCBD's, chinos, etc. and continued keeping my hair cropped rather short, as the student population and even many of the professors took leave of their sartorial, personal grooming and (to me it seemed) their political senses. The extreme shift in "fashion" and hair styles was but the tip of the iceberg. The practical demonstrations of civil disobedience(?) was what most rattled me, leaving what seems an indelible imprint on my psyche. Members of our local SDS chapter napalmed a small dog. Out of control students destroyed many thousands of dollars worth of university and personal property. I was one of several ROTC cadets chased by a rather large and emotionally out of control group of "Hippies" when we dared wear our uniforms, while walking across campus to attend a late afternoon/early evening formation. For a period after that, we were ordered to wear civilian clothes going to and from military formations.

Think what you will of the fashion shifts of the time but, the personal conduct of many of those making such sartorial shifts, left much to be desired!


----------



## hbs midwest (Sep 19, 2007)

*What memories, what memories...*

I first encountered the word "preppy" applied to clothing/grooming in the summer of 1977, when a female college intern (a vice-residnet's daughter) in our office took one look at my khakis, loafers, OCBD, and foulard tie and exclaimed, "Hey, preppy!" She was arrayed in the feminine equivalent, mostly from LL Bean.

I had updated my wardrobe style little from the early/mid 60s.

The OPH came out three years later.

Entertaining (and informative) thread...Thanks, AP!

hbs


----------



## stainless (Aug 27, 2007)

Wait, they wore 3-piece _corduroy_ suits to interviews?


----------



## paper clip (May 15, 2006)

GREAT thread. Nice work AP and others.:aportnoy:


----------



## Reddington (Nov 15, 2007)

Thanks AP for the great articles. The piece about Duke made me think of Franklin Ford III from the film 'Paper Chase.'

Cheers.


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

xcubbies said:


> Now in my late 50s, I was around during the late-1960s, early 1970s, and lived adjacent to Columbia (granted not the preppiest of the Ivies) and was an active witness. The social forces were inevitable, especially on the Ivy campuses. There may have been some diehard Republicans around who stubbornly adhered to the 1950 dress code in defiance, but nearly everyone was affected. While some students broke their ties with the past and went full counter-culture, most others made concessions with varieties on a theme. So you'd see Levis, work boots, with OCBDs and tweed or cord jackets. Or flowered shirts, khakis and bucks with contrasting laces. There was, I think, much less choice. Hair, certainly, was the most significant element to change with the times, long bushy sideburns, mustaches, before pretty much unknown, became common. I remember as as a high school student in St. Louis in 1968 older friends coming back on break with long hair, 'staches, funny hats. The transformation was nearly all encompassing.


Something like this maybe?


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

Reddington said:


> Thanks AP for the great articles. The piece about Duke made me think of Franklin Ford III from the film 'Paper Chase.'
> 
> Cheers.


That was a cross-post. Great minds think alike, I guess.


----------



## Reddington (Nov 15, 2007)

Precisely. The long hair, tweeds, corduroy, OCBDs, Izod Lacoste shirts, etc. Great film and TV series. 



AldenPyle said:


> Something like this maybe?


----------



## Reddington (Nov 15, 2007)

AldenPyle said:


> Great minds think alike, I guess.


"Mr. Pyle! That is the most intelligent thing you've said all day. You may take your seat."

:icon_smile_wink:


----------



## mcarthur (Jul 18, 2005)

RED,
On that bases, you should offer AP an employment opportunity.(two winks)


----------



## bd79cc (Dec 20, 2006)

AldenPyle said:


> Something like this maybe?


_Now_ I get it! The look was so ubiquitous when I was in college that I didn't think it _was_ anything in particular.


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

So maybe then there was a 1970-1975(?) hippie era where a Mr. Ford or Mr. Hart, Paper Chase style of hidden Ivy was the most you could ask for; the full preppy period from 1976-1981 by which time it had filtered down to the high school level (though not much in my very blue collar high school). I guess one way you could track this was revenues at L.L. Bean. Apparently, they grew by 30% every year between 1967 and 1980 from 3 Million to 120 million. They sold the Maine Hunting Boots and the Chamois shirts before LL died in 67, but I think OCBD's and chinos not really. Seems to roughly track broader political trends as well.

There was then a California pastel preppy period that ran from 1982 through 1987. Probably the Hollywood version of Prep is from here.


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

Those Paper Chase photos are a study in desirable dishevelment. You have to have some kind of base sauce of good clothes to make it work -- stuff that you can fling around, get wrinkled, and grow your hair over.


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

Just some additional thoughts:

I don't know when I became conscious of the term 'preppie' but do recall the scene in Love Story when the Ali McGraw character refers to her boyfriend as ' preppie.' That was, approximately, 1973, I think. I'm sure that the term predates the book and movie by many years.

In reference to the OPH, I distinctly recall that the initial reaction to it was offense, in that it was a gentle parody of the look, and not a guide, as some on the Forum seem to think. But the look was popular enough on campus that it struck a vein.


----------



## paper clip (May 15, 2006)

Joe Beamish said:


> Those Paper Chase photos are a study in desirable dishevelment. You have to have some kind of base sauce of good clothes to make it work -- stuff that you can fling around, get wrinkled, and grow your hair over.


Good call. In this era (or any other era) I agree with the "base" of classic clothes idea - khakis, flannels, blazer, tweed, cord coat, shetlands, OCBDs, weejuns. Wear these same pieces often to get them 'broken-in' so they fit you and look like they are a part of you. Then add other pieces - ties, other sweaters, different shoes - to round out your wardrobe.


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

xcubbies said:


> Just some additional thoughts:
> 
> I don't know when I became conscious of the term 'preppie' but do recall the scene in Love Story when the Ali McGraw character refers to her boyfriend as ' preppie.' That was, approximately, 1973, I think. I'm sure that the term predates the book and movie by many years.
> 
> In reference to the OPH, I distinctly recall that the initial reaction to it was offense, in that it was a gentle parody of the look, and not a guide, as some on the Forum seem to think. But the look was popular enough on campus that it struck a vein.


FWIW, a _Sports Illustrated_ article from 1962 about the Harvard Yale game mentions preppies.


----------



## Sartre (Mar 25, 2008)

Quay said:


> ...So indeed the publication of the OPH was not a commencement but more of a capstone to the enlarged awareness of "preppy" fashion. In addition, the oft-mentioned fact it was penned as a satire usually means that it had to be satirizing something already long in existence and pretty well established...


This is it exactly. I was in college from 1977-1981 and the OPH was certainly a description of what all of us were already wearing.

I also agree that what particularly distinguished "preppy" was its emphasis on color. I think this is still true. (Check out Bunny Tomerlin's blog.)


----------



## Reddington (Nov 15, 2007)

Sartre said:


> I also agree that what particularly distinguished "preppy" was its emphasis on color. I think this is still true. (Check out Bunny Tomerlin's blog.)


True. And perhaps the importance of wearing brands / logo wear such as Izod Lacoste and Polo Ralph Lauren.


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

Reddington said:


> "Mr. Pyle! That is the most intelligent thing you've said all day. You may take your seat."
> 
> :icon_smile_wink:


I was unfortunate enough to have had the real Professor Kingsfield in law school (or at least one of the professors who was suspected to be a model for the book/movie character). The first day he had a woman in tears because she couldn't tell him the difference between a fee simple determinable, a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, and a fee simple subject to an executory limitation.


----------



## lrd110 (Oct 22, 2008)

Wow, executory interests on the first day?


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

lrd110 said:


> Wow, executory interests on the first day?


He taught the second semester of Property. The first semester we had a visiting professor from the University of Chicago who told us property law was all about social and economic policy, and we didn't need to know all those outdated medieval rules. He only wanted to talk about externalities, the Coase Theorem and the Tragedy of the Commons. Needless to say, we were totaly unprepared for what was about to hit us.


----------



## Pale Male (Mar 24, 2008)

*Hippie-Prep*

Essential elements were: Thrift-shop Harris Tweed jacket; a little too short, or a little too big, just not-quite-right. Finewhale Levi's Cords in mousey browns and grays. Clarks Wallabees or Desert Boots.

At Yale-Harvard-Princeton, at least. And at Columbia, everyone was a Hippie or Eastern-European Poet.


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

I thought this was funny, from an account of an anti-war demonstration from the Harvard Crimson, 1970.

Little Ironies, Bloody Heads

Published On Thursday, April 16, 1970 12:00 AM

_Rioters broke windows in all the stores on Holyoke Street between Massachusetts Avenue and Mt. Auburn St., looting many of the stores as they went along. Saks Fifth Avenue was gutted, and window displays were stolen from Bobby Baker, the Andover Shop,and neighboring stores.

Looters were selective. Though its windows were broken, by 10 pan. *nothing had been taken from J. Press.*

Members of the Fly Club looked on from the club balcony, sipping drinks. A looter threw a pair of pink pants from the Andover Shop to the Clubbies._


----------



## Literide (Nov 11, 2004)

IIRC, 70's preppy ran the gamut of the Paper Chase, slightly hippie looks on colege campuses to whale logo'd pants at country clubs. It all evolved from what had been standard upper class gear for several decades on campuses and at boarding schools.

By the late 70's it had coalesced into what was detailed in the OPH. About the time of the Reagan election/inaugeration a certain interest in conventional (60's) hair styles and clothing was emerging as everyone was happy the miserable 70's were over and wanted to jettison the associated hair and clothing (I know I sure did). The clothing detailed in the OPH wasnt always easy to find unless your lived in a big city, tony suburb, college or resort town, which fortunatly I did (the latter)

Hense the fashion industry latched on and created a contrived, logo'd, pastel and pleated wet dream that took hold for a few years in the popular imagination, and was widley adopted by clearly non preppy young people. Someone above remarked on people coming to class dressed sort of like his family did for Sunday cookouts but a little too perfect. Pretty much captures the early 80's pseudo-prep who was much maligned in my part of the world. Hard to describe but you can always tell the real thing from the pseudo-prep. The former is a subtle combination of attitude, accent, accesories, expensive mixed with cheap items. The latter often over the top, too obvioulsy contrived, sometimes combining things that dont belong together (boat shoes and designer jeans FI) and betrayed by attitude and/or accent.

I wouldnt be described as very trad as I have a thing for British tailoring, side vents, spread collars, etc, but my casual wear, pretty standardized for decades now, can definitly be called preppy, (only pastel is 1 or 2 pink golf shirts and no polo ponies, just clubs I belong to)


----------



## Pale Male (Mar 24, 2008)

*A thing for British tailoring...*

Oh, that's very trad. It's just not very "TRAD".

In my day, the Director of the British Art Center, an American Aristo named Pillsbury set the tone and the Curators followed. All Double-Breasted with side vents all the time. Perhaps they all just followed Mr. Mellon's lead.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

Literide,

Can you help me with this comment: "The latter often over the top, too obvioulsy contrived, sometimes combining things that dont belong together (boat shoes and designer jeans FI) and betrayed by attitude and/or accent."

You talked about mixing somewhat incongruous elements earlier, which is often taken to be a hallmark of preppy-ness. Here you speak of things taht "don't belong together." Are you saying that despite wide-ranging freedom when it comes to mixing, an internal code existed that didn't allow for certain mixes (because they represent incompatible genres? or because they are just ugly together? or what?)? I'm neither concerned to be preppy, nor an owner of designer jeans, but I am curious about your comment.


----------



## Sartre (Mar 25, 2008)

Literide said:


> ...Pretty much captures the early 80's pseudo-prep who was much maligned in my part of the world. Hard to describe but you can always tell the real thing from the pseudo-prep. ...


And the differentiations could be incredibly fine -- to an "outsider." Examples I can remember include wearing Sebago or Dexter versions of Top-Siders; even today, I can ID true Top-Siders at a glance. Non-LL Bean blucher mocs, non-LL Bean gumshoes or Maine Hunting Shoes (esp. those in bright colors), uncuffed trousers, wingtips. We could even ID a Brooks shirt by the unique curve in the breast pocket -- which was unique to Brooks in those days.

tjs


----------



## Naval Gent (May 12, 2007)

P Hudson said:


> Literide,
> 
> Can you help me with this comment: "The latter often over the top, too obviously contrived, sometimes combining things that don't belong together (boat shoes and designer jeans FI) and betrayed by attitude and/or accent."
> 
> You talked about mixing somewhat incongruous elements earlier, which is often taken to be a hallmark of preppy-ness. Here you speak of things taht "don't belong together." Are you saying that despite wide-ranging freedom when it comes to mixing, an internal code existed that didn't allow for certain mixes (because they represent incompatible genres? or because they are just ugly together? or what?)? I'm neither concerned to be preppy, nor an owner of designer jeans, but I am curious about your comment.


You didn't ask me, but with Southerners, it's combining things like a crisply starched button-down with cowboy boots (but never a cowboy hat!) or khaki shorts and a camouflage hunting cap. But I think that it only works if the guy has a legitimate connection to a family farm (i.e. land ownership), or actual participation in the sport of hunting. Posers are pretty easy to spot. You can tell the guys who use the mountaineering parka in the back country, and the guys who wear it to the mall. Don't ask me how, you just can.

I'm thinking of my college days here - but I see the same thing with my boys who are high-school age.

Scott


----------



## Literide (Nov 11, 2004)

P Hudson said:


> Literide,
> 
> Can you help me with this comment: "The latter often over the top, too obvioulsy contrived, sometimes combining things that dont belong together (boat shoes and designer jeans FI) and betrayed by attitude and/or accent."
> 
> You talked about mixing somewhat incongruous elements earlier, which is often taken to be a hallmark of preppy-ness. Here you speak of things taht "don't belong together." Are you saying that despite wide-ranging freedom when it comes to mixing, an internal code existed that didn't allow for certain mixes (because they represent incompatible genres? or because they are just ugly together? or what?)? I'm neither concerned to be preppy, nor an owner of designer jeans, but I am curious about your comment.


There are things within the preppy canon and things not. The designer jean, popular with decidedly non-preppy young people in the late 70s, was suddenly mixed by those same people with Izod shirts and/or boat shoes once the preppy trend hit about 1980. This may have been a uniquely American, even uniguely NYC Metro area thing, but it was the essence of psuedo-prep, ie, mixing in of preppy staples with blatantly incongruous fashion items. In fact, wearing preppy items as fashion as well.

As Naval gent pointed out, you can always tell the posuers.


----------



## Literide (Nov 11, 2004)

P Hudson said:


> Literide,
> 
> Can you help me with this comment: "The latter often over the top, too obvioulsy contrived, sometimes combining things that dont belong together (boat shoes and designer jeans FI) and betrayed by attitude and/or accent."
> 
> You talked about mixing somewhat incongruous elements earlier, which is often taken to be a hallmark of preppy-ness. Here you speak of things taht "don't belong together." Are you saying that despite wide-ranging freedom when it comes to mixing, an internal code existed that didn't allow for certain mixes (because they represent incompatible genres? or because they are just ugly together? or what?)? I'm neither concerned to be preppy, nor an owner of designer jeans, but I am curious about your comment.


Its a subtle thing, some seemingly incongruos things could work, some not. And as I think I mentioned, its who's wearing it.


----------



## wwilson (Jul 13, 2012)

Not really trying to necro an old thread, just saw it down below as a "similar thread" and found it interesting enough to revive again. Has me wondering what's in store for the upcoming semester...


----------



## godan (Feb 10, 2010)

eagle2250 said:


> Wow! This thread, indeed this post, brought back some very poignant memories for me...almost like a flashback! Attending Penn State on an AFROTC scholarship in the late 60's, I continued wearing my OCBD's, chinos, etc. and continued keeping my hair cropped rather short, as the student population and even many of the professors took leave of their sartorial, personal grooming and (to me it seemed) their political senses. The extreme shift in "fashion" and hair styles was but the tip of the iceberg. The practical demonstrations of civil disobedience(?) was what most rattled me, leaving what seems an indelible imprint on my psyche. Members of our local SDS chapter napalmed a small dog. Out of control students destroyed many thousands of dollars worth of university and personal property. I was one of several ROTC cadets chased by a rather large and emotionally out of control group of "Hippies" when we dared wear our uniforms, while walking across campus to attend a late afternoon/early evening formation. For a period after that, we were ordered to wear civilian clothes going to and from military formations.
> 
> Think what you will of the fashion shifts of the time but, the personal conduct of many of those making such sartorial shifts, left much to be desired!


I was at the University of Washington at the same time in similar circumstances. You describe the campus environment accurately, and your view of the personal conduct of many... is mild compared to mine. In the thirty year academic career that followed, I was sometimes able to adjust situations, but that is another story.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

stainless said:


> Wait, they wore 3-piece _corduroy_ suits to interviews?


i happen to have a NWT 3 piece corduroy suit for sale:


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

Sartre said:


> And the differentiations could be incredibly fine -- to an "outsider." Examples I can remember include wearing Sebago or Dexter versions of Top-Siders; even today, I can ID true Top-Siders at a glance. Non-LL Bean blucher mocs, non-LL Bean gumshoes or Maine Hunting Shoes (esp. those in bright colors), uncuffed trousers, wingtips. We could even ID a Brooks shirt by the unique curve in the breast pocket -- which was unique to Brooks in those days.


Wow...old thread!

Sartre's memory concurs with mine.


----------



## boatswaindog (Nov 18, 2010)

Sartre was exactly right. In the mid 1970s on a little Ivy league campus, my Sebagos from Barries in New Haven were sniffed at. The Prep school look was very much alive and well. I think the 1980s saw the innovation of athletic shoes as standard campus wear.


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

The "preppy" look was already the accepted dress wear when I hit Williams College in 1975. I actually thought that was how everyone in New England dressed. But all the elements were already in full force that you see in the OPH. Ironically, I don't remember people using the term "preppy" back then other than referring to someone who went to the traditional boarding prep schools in New England, which together with other prestigious private day schools like St. Alban's was still a pretty significant portion of the Williams student body.

The big change I would say from the 1970s to 1980s was Ralph Lauren moving in, especially in terms of displacing Lacoste. In the Seventies, the alligator was everywhere, even down to socks (Lacoste marketed the socks with the alligator on only one sock--if you were really in, you had to buy two pairs, wear only the ones with alligators on them and get rid of the other two). Yes, I know it was a crododile, but everyone called them alligators.

Anyway, in the early eighties Lauren totally displaced Lacoste, especially in terms of polo shirts. And while a lot of the Lacoste polo shirts were in your basic red, white and blue, RL went in for all sorts of different colors, both bright and pastel, which were a big hit. I remember the RL stores here essentially displaying all their shirts in a chromatic order, from black on one end to white on the other, and probably 30 or more shades in between.

I never quite understood what happened to Lacoste, but it seemed they were driven into virtual style extinction quite quickly in the early Eighties.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Beresford said:


> The big change I would say from the 1970s to 1980s was Ralph Lauren moving in, especially in terms of displacing Lacoste. In the Seventies, the alligator was everywhere, even down to socks (Lacoste marketed the socks with the alligator on only one sock--if you were really in, you had to buy two pairs, wear only the ones with alligators on them and get rid of the other two). Yes, I know it was a crododile, but everyone called them alligators..


In the early 80's they must have changed that because the socks had two alligators on them. At that time, I was growing up pretty poor. But, my mother wanted my brother and I to go to the best schools. It just happened that at the time the best schools were the ones the rich kids went to. My mother was a nurse and didn't make much money back then. My parents had divorced in 1977 and my father was in the military. So, there wasn't much money. Especially not for things like Lacoste clothes. I think around the time Polo was beginning to really hurt Lacoste, JCPenney started carrying Lacoste. They had the socks and both the socks had the alligator. My mother was trying to help my brother and me fit in with the rich kids. So, when the socks were on sale for $2 a pair, she would buy several pairs. She would take the alligator off and sew it onto our Sears or JcPenney shirts or shorts. I know it seems shallow, but when you are the new lower class kids at the rich school, it sure helped we could sort of fit in.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Pale Male said:


> Finewhale Levi's Cords in mousey browns and grays.


I loved mine.


----------



## Fading Fast (Aug 22, 2012)

Nobleprofessor said:


> In the early 80's they must have changed that because the socks had two alligators on them. At that time, I was growing up pretty poor. But, my mother wanted my brother and I to go to the best schools. It just happened that at the time the best schools were the ones the rich kids went to. My mother was a nurse and didn't make much money back then. My parents had divorced in 1977 and my father was in the military. So, there wasn't much money. Especially not for things like Lacoste clothes. I think around the time Polo was beginning to really hurt Lacoste, JCPenney started carrying Lacoste. They had the socks and both the socks had the alligator. My mother was trying to help my brother and me fit in with the rich kids. So, when the socks were on sale for $2 a pair, she would buy several pairs. She would take the alligator off and sew it onto our Sears or JcPenney shirts or shorts. I know it seems shallow, but when you are the new lower class kids at the rich school, it sure helped we could sort of fit in.


I get that there are all sorts of "high-minded and intellectual" arguments that you should have just worn what you could afford and been accepted for that or, if not, not cared since "those kids weren't people you'd want as friends anyway" - that's a fine stance for adults to make for themselves, but kids have to live life without the context and experience an adult has.

To me, your Mom was smarter and kinder than those who make the "high-minded" argument; she wanted her kids to have a good education and also get along with the other kids. Sounds like a pretty great Mom to me.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Fading Fast said:


> I get that there are all sorts of "high-minded and intellectual" arguments that you should have just worn what you could afford and been accepted for that or, if not, not cared since "those kids weren't people you'd want as friends anyway" - that's a fine stance for adults to make for themselves, but kids have to live life without the context and experience an adult has.
> 
> To me, your Mom was smarter and kinder than those who make the "high-minded" argument; she wanted her kids to have a good education and also get along with the other kids. Sounds like a pretty great Mom to me.


She he was and is. Of course, you never really understand how much your parents do for you until you grow up a little.

Now, I understand how much she sacrificed for me.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

Nobleprofessor said:


> In the early 80's they must have changed that because the socks had two alligators on them. At that time, I was growing up pretty poor. But, my mother wanted my brother and I to go to the best schools. It just happened that at the time the best schools were the ones the rich kids went to. My mother was a nurse and didn't make much money back then. My parents had divorced in 1977 and my father was in the military. So, there wasn't much money. Especially not for things like Lacoste clothes. I think around the time Polo was beginning to really hurt Lacoste, JCPenney started carrying Lacoste. They had the socks and both the socks had the alligator. My mother was trying to help my brother and me fit in with the rich kids. So, when the socks were on sale for $2 a pair, she would buy several pairs. She would take the alligator off and sew it onto our Sears or JcPenney shirts or shorts. I know it seems shallow, but when you are the new lower class kids at the rich school, it sure helped we could sort of fit in.


That's a very moving story. Kudos to your mother. I'm glad that though my kids go to a school populated mostly by rich kids, the uniform has something of a leveling effect--and we always manage to find stuff at the 2nd hand co-op.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

wwilson said:


> Not really trying to necro an old thread, just saw it down below as a "similar thread" and found it interesting enough to revive again. Has me wondering what's in store for the upcoming semester...


Necromancy from the forum necropolis. Really? A 5 year old thread? And your comment doesn't add any new information. The fact that you find it interesting is not a good enough reason IMO to resurrect a 5 year old thread & it is against the forum rules, which I'm sure you've read


----------



## ArtVandalay (Apr 29, 2010)

Awesome story, thanks for sharing.



Nobleprofessor said:


> In the early 80's they must have changed that because the socks had two alligators on them. At that time, I was growing up pretty poor. But, my mother wanted my brother and I to go to the best schools. It just happened that at the time the best schools were the ones the rich kids went to. My mother was a nurse and didn't make much money back then. My parents had divorced in 1977 and my father was in the military. So, there wasn't much money. Especially not for things like Lacoste clothes. I think around the time Polo was beginning to really hurt Lacoste, JCPenney started carrying Lacoste. They had the socks and both the socks had the alligator. My mother was trying to help my brother and me fit in with the rich kids. So, when the socks were on sale for $2 a pair, she would buy several pairs. She would take the alligator off and sew it onto our Sears or JcPenney shirts or shorts. I know it seems shallow, but when you are the new lower class kids at the rich school, it sure helped we could sort of fit in.


----------



## wwilson (Jul 13, 2012)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Necromancy from the forum necropolis. Really? A 5 year old thread? And your comment doesn't add any new information. The fact that you find it interesting is not a good enough reason IMO to resurrect a 5 year old thread & it is against the forum rules, which I'm sure you've read


Please forgive my ignorance and know that I shall never do it again. Thank you so much for your expected forgiveness and mercy.


----------

