Abstract
This chapter examines the dialectical progression of fashion history in modern times. Its objective is to search for the logical necessity of the dialectical process in fashion history, by observing morphological changes in dress fashions. In order to carry out this task, this chapter probes some important topics such as the origin of fashion and its etymology and the disparity between the prefashion system and the fashion system, and looks into the two most critical threefold dialectical movements in fashion history. Hegel and Marx provide the theoretical hinge on which this investigation stands. Toward the end of the quest for a necessity that fashion history reveals, however, one should find that grasping the dialectical development of fashion history, and indeed history at large, requires an understanding of the progression in the realm of human consciousness, ideas, or ideologies, although the two different systems of Hegel and Marx are operative in the development of fashion history during modern times.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Refer to Chap. 6. “Formal Changes in Fashion and Hegelian Dialectic.”
- 2.
See Chap. 6., note 4.
- 3.
For more discussion of Adorno’s suggestion, refer to Chap. 6. “Formal Changes in Fashion and Hegelian Dialectic.”
- 4.
Paradoxically, historically, only absolute idealism gives free rein to the method that the introduction to the Phenomenology of Spirit calls, “simply looking at” [reines Zusehen]. Hegel is able to think from the thing itself out, to surrender passively, as it were, to its authentic substance, only because by virtue of the system the matter at hand is referred to its identity with absolute subject. Things themselves speak in a philosophy that focuses its energies on providing that it is itself one with them.
- 5.
See the following remark made by Marx and Engels, for example:
The phantoms formed in the human brain are also, necessarily, sublimates of their material life-process, which is empirically verifiable and bound to material premises. Morality, religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness, thus no longer retain the semblance of independence. They have no history, no development; but men, developing their material production and their material intercourse, alter, along with this their real existence, their thinking and the products of their thinking. Life is not determined by consciousness, but consciousness by life. (Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, The German Ideology, ed. and intro. C. J. Arthur [New York: International Publishers, 1970], p. 47).
- 6.
Since it is logic above all and not science generally whose relation to truth is the issue here, it must be further conceded that logic as the formal science cannot also contain, nor should contain, the kind of reality which is the content of the other parts of philosophy, of the sciences of nature and of spirit…. As contrasted with them, the logic is of course the formal science, yet the science of the absolute form which is implicit totality and contains the pure idea of truth itself. This absolute form has in it a content or reality of its own; the concept, since it is not a trivial, empty identity, obtains its differentiated determinations in the moment of negativity or of absolute determining; and the content is only these determinations of the absolute form and nothing else—a content posited by the form itself and therefore adequate to it.
- 7.
“[E]verybody has to get dressed in the morning and go about the day’s business. What everybody wears to do this has taken different forms in the West for about seven hundred years and that is what fashion is,…” Anne Hollander, Sex and Suits: The Evolution of Modern Dress, 2nd ed. (London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016), p. 6; cited in Sanda Miller, Peter McNeil, Fashion Journalism: History, Theory, and Practice (London & New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2018), p. 101.
- 8.
See note 27 for some observations made by different fashion historians regarding the topic of the genesis of fashion and their reasoning behind their dating.
- 9.
See Chap. 5, “Fashion Systems in Prehistory and the Americas,” esp., p. 72 in Welters and Lillethun, Fashion History: A Global View (2018).
- 10.
See the following remarks by Welters and Lillethun:
“It is more truthful to understand that the desire to embellish the human body—the fashion impulse—is the dominant reason for dress and that humans seek novelty or change; thus, fashion is endemic to human nature and is the term that we prefer over dress, clothing, costume, toilette, and apparel” (Ibid., p. 29).
“As sites of novelty, new materials and processes play important roles in fashion systems; desire for novelty, the so-called fashion impulse, serves as an impetus to fashion” (Ibid., p. 98).
- 11.
According to Barnard, such a statement as “constant and incessant change is what fashion is” is uncontroversial (Barnard, Fashion Theory : An Introduction, 37).
- 12.
For the discussion of the relationship between time-consciousness and modernity see Jürgen Habermas, “Modernity versus Postmodernity,” New German Critique 22 (Winter 1981): 3–14; Jürgen Habermas, Chapter 1. Modernity’s Consciousness of Time and Its Need for Self-Reassurance, The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, trans. F. G. Lawrence (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007), 1–22.
- 13.
For further discussion on the connection between the self’s endless quest for itself and the flow of time, see Chap. 2, “What Immanuel Kant Would Say about Fashion: The Metaphysics of the Pursuit of the Self by Way of Fashion.”
- 14.
Walter Benjamin, The Arcades Project. ed. R. Tiedemann, trans. H. Eiland and K. McLaughlin, (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999), 867, <Q°,21>.
For a detailed discussion on the link between fashion and Benjamin’s concept of dialectical image, see Chap. 4. “In Search of Unintentional Truth .”
- 15.
- 16.
For example, see Ted Polhemus and Lynn Procter, Fashion and Anti-Fashion: Anthropology of Clothing and Adornment (London: Thames & Hudson, 1978), 9; Malcolm Barnard, Fashion as Communication, 2nd ed. (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), 8; Yuniya Kawamura, Fashion-ology: An Introduction to Fashion Studies, 2nd ed. (Oxford and New York: Berg, 2018), 2.
- 17.
Polhemus and Procter, Fashion and Anti-Fashion, p. 9; as cited in Barnard, Fashion as Communication, 9.
- 18.
For example, concerning the sublime, one of the most grandiose concepts in political philosophy, Jean-Luc Nancy says the following:
The sublime is in fashion…. In this sense, the sublime forms a fashion that has persisted uninterruptedly into our own time from the beginnings of modernity, a fashion at once continuous and discontinuous, monotonous and spasmodic. The “sublime” has not always taken this name, but it has always been present. It has always been a fashion because it has always concerned a break within or from aesthetics (whether “aesthetics” designates taste or theory). (Jean-Luc Nancy, “The Sublime Offering,” Of the Sublime: Presence in Question, ed. Jean-Francois Courtine et al., trans. Jeffrey Librett, [Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1993(1988)], 25)
- 19.
Also refer to Michael Allen Gillespie, The Theological Origins of Modernity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008), 2. According to Gillespie, all later forms derive from the late Latin derivative modernus. The term modern and its derivatives come from the Latin modus, which means “‘measure,’ and, as a measure of time, ‘just now.’”
- 20.
See Renato Poggioli, Teoria dell’arte d’avanguardia (English: The Theory of the Avant-Garde), trans. Gerald Fitzgerald (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1968), 216.
- 21.
It should be noted that modernus was coined from modo, as hodiernus was from hodie (today), and its etymological root is not modus but modo according to A Dictionary of English Etymology (London: Hensleigh Wedgwood, 1773).
- 22.
Ernst Robert Curtius categorically says mode has nothing to do with modern, in European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages , trans. Willard Trask (Princeton: Princeton University Press, [1948]1953), 254.
- 23.
Hunt’s quantitative investigation covers France, England, Italian cities including Venice and Florence, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, Scotland, and North America during the time that spans from the twelfth century through to the eighteenth century. (Hunt 1996, 29).
- 24.
See Yves Charbit, The Classical Foundations of Population Thought, 160.
- 25.
This interpretation of various seventeenth-century thinkers, so-called possessive individualism, is made by C. B. MacPherson. See C. B. MacPherson, The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962).
- 26.
See Giorgio Riello and Peter McNeil, “The Fashion Revolution: The ‘Long’ Eighteenth Century,” in The Fashion History Reader: Global Perspectives, Giorgio Riello and Peter McNeil, eds., (New York: London, Routledge, 2010), 174.
- 27.
Cf. On the grounds of object-based observations, many authors argue that sometime in the fourteenth century fashion emerged.
The most widely accepted hypothesis dates fashion’s emergence to the appearance of a new men’s clothing styles in the mid-fourteenth century Burgundy…, it said that modern male dress first appears in France around 1350 with the revolution produced by the appearance of the short surcoat on young men, in radical opposition to the long robe, which continued to be worn by older and more venerable men. (Sarah-Grace Heller, Fashion in Medieval France [Cambridge, UK: D. S. Brewer, 2007], 48).
From what is taken by most scholars to be the beginnings of an institutionalized fashion cycle in the West, namely, fourteenth-century Burgundian court life, up to the present, fashion has repeatedly, if not exclusively, drawn upon certain recurrent instabilities in the social identities of Western men and women. (Fred Davis, Fashion, Culture, and Identity [Chicago, University Press, 1992], 17).
An intensified aristocratic interest in fashionable clothing seems first to have become noticeable at the Burgundian court in the fourteenth century,…. (Elizabeth Wilson, Adorned in Dreams: Fashion and Modernity , rev. ed. [London: Tauris, 2003], 20).
The Court of Burgundy was especially notable for luxurious dress during the 14th and 15th centuries…. Tortora, Phyllis G. and Sara B. Marcketti Survey of Historic Costume [London and New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, (1989/2015)], 148.
Scholars generally recognize the fourteenth century as a time when workers in costume crafts, merchants, and eager customers, both an aristocracy and a wealthy bourgeoisie, clearly portrayed the kinds of social behavior associated with fashion, behavior from which the highly complex fashion system of the twentieth century and twenty-first centuries has evolved (Roach-Higgins 1995: 395–96). (Kawamura , Fashion-ology, 49).
It was in the second half of the fourteenth century that clothes both for men and for women took on new forms, and something emerges which we can already call ‘fashion.’ (James Laver, Costume and Fashion: A Concise History [New York: Oxford University Press, 1983], 62).
Also see Susan Crane, The Performance of Self: Ritual, Clothing, and Identity During the Hundred Years War, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 3 and 13.
- 28.
Georg Simmel writes:
Fashion is the imitation of a given example and satisfies the demand for social adaptation; it leads the individual upon the road which all travel, it furnishes a general condition, which resolves the conduct of every individual into a mere example. At the same time it satisfies in no less degree the need of differentiation, the tendency towards dissimilarity, the desire for change and contrast,…. Thus fashion represents nothing more than one of the many forms of life by the aid of which we seek to combine in uniform spheres of activity the tendency towards social equalization with the desire for individual differentiation and change. (Simmel, “Fashion” [1957], p. 543)
- 29.
See Crane, The Performance of Self, 13; Jay Calderin, Form, Fit and Fashion: All the Details Fashion Designers Need to Know but Can Never Find, (Beverly, Massachusetts: Rockport Publishers Inc. 2009), 28; Elisabeth Crowfoot, Frances Pritchard, and Kay Staniland, Textiles and Clothing, 1150–1450 (Woodbridge, UK: Boydell Press, 1992), 7; Welters, “Introduction,” p. 3; Christopher Breward, The Culture of Fashion (Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1995), 13 and 29; James Laver, A Concise History of Costume (London: Thames and Hudson, and New York: Abrams, 1969), 62; Wilson, Adorned in Dreams, p. 18; Fernand Braudel, The Structures of Everyday Life: The Limits of the Possible, Volume I of Civilization and Capitalism, fifteenth–eighteenth Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), 317.
- 30.
Alan Hunt, Governance of the Consuming Passions: A History of Sumptuary Law (1996), 45.
The reason that some caution is needed about linking the advent of sumptuary legislation with the rise of fashion is that in both England and in the Italian cities of Florence and Venice sumptuary laws were already well established by the early decades of the fourteenth century and predated the eruption of the increasingly self-conscious fashion in the Burgundian court.
- 31.
Christopher Breward states:
As well as defining gender roles and status within family based communities, the pervasiveness of fashion as a new concept from the 1350s had a more direct impact on the emergence of the individual—a sense of self-knowledge and an understanding of man’s place in the wider structures of the world. Within medieval society the body was prioritized as the dwelling-place of soul, inner character was displayed throughout outward signs and clothing could not avoid implication in such a problematic moral arena. Individuality and the communications of the soul were manifested through various strategies. (Breward , The Culture of Fashion [1995], 35)
- 32.
See Crane, The Performance of Self, 13; Jay Calderin, Form, Fit and Fashion, 28; Elisabeth Crowfoot et al., Textiles and Clothing, 7; Linda Welters, “Introduction,” 3; Christopher Breward, The Culture of Fashion, 13 and 29; Laver, A Concise History of Costume, 62; Wilson, Adorned in Dreams, 18; and Braudel, The Structures of Everyday Life, 317.
- 33.
Refer to note 32.
- 34.
The words in parentheses are my own addition.
- 35.
Refer to Fernand Braudel’s comment:
…whereas the traditional costume had been much the same all over the continent, the spread of the shorter costume was irregular, subject to resistance and variation, so that eventually national styles of dressing were evolved, all influencing each other to a greater or lesser extent―the French, Burgundian, Italian or English costume, etc. (The Structures of Everyday Life, 317.)
- 36.
Cf. Douglas Russell says, “During the Elizabethan-Jacobean Period the modes in male and female dress were loosely characterized as the Spanish style because in color and somewhat less line and silhouette, their major inspiration came from the fashions of the formal Spanish court.” Russell, Costume History and Style, 218.
- 37.
Ronald M. Berger, The Most Necessary Luxuries . The Mercers’ Company of Coventry, 1550–1680 (University Park, PA: 1993), 23.
Men adorned their doublets and cloaks with lace, ribbons, buttons, and gold and silver thread…. Starch, which Puritans called “the devil’s liquor,” was used to fashion exotic cambric and lawn ruffs…. Complaints of wasteful spending on clothes increased dramatically after the mid-sixteenth century.
- 38.
As Ronnie Mirkin points out,
It is evident that Elizabethan and Jacobean costume was built so as to enforce the body to act according to correct rules of conduct. Right behaviour would strike the spectator with awe; wrong deportment would have a comical or grotesque effect. The most important items of clothing to determine the correct position of the body were the rigid whaleboned doublet and the stayed corset—stiff instruments for encasing the torso of both men and women and setting it upright. (Ronnie Mirkin, “Performing Selfhood: The Costumed Body as a Site of Mediation Between Life, Art and Theatre in the English Renaissance,” Body Dressing, ed. J. Entwistle, E. Wilson [Oxford & New York: Berg, 2001], 155.
- 39.
Douglas Russell describes this change in dress as following:
Compare, for example, the qualities of dress in the Evening Ball for the Wedding of the Duc de joyeuse, dated about 1581, with those in the famous The Garden of Love by Rubens, dated about 1632. It is as if the ruffs had suddenly melted into soft lace collars and the boning, padding, and forcing of the body had relaxed into an easy expansion of the clothing away from the contours of the body. The tortured, excessively decorated fabric surfaces have been replaced by an interest in the natural character of the fabric itself. Like architecture, sculpture, and painting in the Baroque era, the costumes moved, expanded, and spread out into space to create a sense of size and grandeur. (Russell, Costume History and Style, 237)
- 40.
Also see Douglas Gorsline, What People Wore: 1800 Illustrations from Ancient Times to the Early Twentieth Century (New York: Dover Publications, 1994), 66.
- 41.
Refer to James Harvey Robinson, An Introduction to the History of Western Europe (Boston: Ginn and Co., 1903), 465.
- 42.
For the origin of the nickname see Georgiana Hill, A History of English Dress from the Saxon Period to the Present Day, Volume 1 (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1893), 281.
- 43.
Also see Gorsline, What People Wore, 66.
- 44.
Douglas Russell notes that the dress shape became much bulkier and heavier toward the end of the seventeenth century. This coincides with the theoretical development of diving-right monarchy.
The costume fashions after about 1685 in all the countries of Europe were much heavier than those in the 1660s and 1670s and often remind one of a great upholstered chair. (Russell, Costume History and Style, 260)
Also see Toby Reiner, Divine Right of Kings in Encyclopedia of Political Theory, ed. Mark Bevir (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2010), 399–340.
- 45.
However, toward the close of the rein of Louis XIV, interest in the aesthetics of dress and private life, not from the court but from elite individuals, increased, resulting in the different fashion cultures of la cour and la ville. See Jennifer Michelle Jones, Sexing La Mode : Gender, Fashion and Commercial Culture in Old Regime France, (Oxford: Berg, 2004), 41.
- 46.
For example, Fukuyama writes:
And yet this realm of consciousness in the long run necessarily becomes manifest in the material world, indeed, creates the material world in its own image. Consciousness is cause and not effect, and can develop autonomously from the material world: hence the real subtext underlying the apparent jumble of current events is the history of ideology. (Fukuyama, “The End of History,” 6)
- 47.
Alice Mackrell, “The Dress of the Parisian Élégantes with Special Reference to Le Journal des dames et des modes from June 1797 until December 1799,” MA thesis, Courtauld Institute, 1977, 45; cited in Alice Mackrell, Art and Fashion: The Impact of Art on Fashion and Fashion on Art (London: Chrysalis Books Group, 2005), 40.
- 48.
Even the cotton fabric used for the dress gave off some sort of sensation having political resonance synesthetically ingrained in the mind as Walter Benjamin’s quotation from Edouard Foucaud elucidated:
“Cotton fabrics replace brocades and satins,… and before long, thanks to … the revolutionary spirit, the dress of the lower classes becomes more seemly and agreeable to the eye. Edouard Foucaud, Paris inventeur: Physiologie de l’industrie française (Paris, 1844), p. 64 (referring to the Revolution of 1789) [B 6a,3]” (Benjamin, The Arcades Project, 75).
- 49.
See Phyllis G. Tortora and Sara B. Marcketti, Survey of Historic Costume (London and New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, 1989/2015), 329.
- 50.
Also see Russell’s account in Costume History and Style (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1983):
Female gowns, even in the very last days of the Empire, had added many ruffles and much lacy trim, and by 1820 the high waistline began to drop from just below the bust to just above the waist, the corset now returned; sleeves began to expand in size; skirts began to flare out in many folds over layered petticoats to the ankle; and appliqué, ruching, embroidery, and lace ruffles began to trim all edges of the gown … (334)
Later in the 1820s the sleeves gradually took the focus of attention as they continued to grow in size until they had to be stiffened with special linings. Some were still puffed at the top and then pleated into a slim sleeve below, but the majority were of the tapering, leg-o-mutton variety…. Skirts became even wider at the bottom during the 1820s, with more ornamentation and definition toward the bottom of the skirt such as tucks, pleats, ruffles, appliqué, or loops of silk or fur. (341)
- 51.
According to Robert Crego in Sports and Games of the 18th and 19th Centuries (Westport, CN: Greenwood Press, 2003, 67), the first rudimentary bicycle, “little more than a saddle atop a bar connecting two wheels,” was introduced by Baron von Drais to the public in 1816. However, not until the mass production of the modern “safety” bicycle in 1890s did a large number of women begin to ride. See the following remark by Zack Furness:
Elite women in Europe and the United States were the first to utilize cycling technologies, though most were excluded from riding the high-wheeler, or “ordinary,” bicycle (the one with the big front wheel) as well as most models manufactured prior to the modern “safety” bicycle, which is essentially the bicycle as we know it today. “Ordinaries” were incredibly difficult to operate and both clothing and behavioral restrictions made it nearly impossible for women to ride them…. Women could thus operate tricycles without dramatically challenging the dominant social norms of the period. Following the mass production of the safety bicycle in the 1890s, many women took up cycling and found in it a renewed sense of freedom and mobility. (Zack Furness, One Less Car: Bicycling and the Politics of Automobility [Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010], 19)
- 52.
Van Cleave writes:
“Eventually, however, the public ridicule attracted by the reform costume proved too much for women’s rights advocates, who felt that the attention paid to their appearance detracted from their ideas on other issues.... By the following year (1855), most women’s rights leaders had given up dress reform, choosing to focus instead on issues such as suffrage, marriage reform, and education.” (Kendra Van Cleave, “Moral and Dress Reform Movement, 1800–1869.” Encyclopedia of American Social Movements, Vol 1. (ed.) Immanuel Ness. [Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2003], 270).
- 53.
See the following comment by Benjamin:
Who still knows, nowadays, where it was that in the last decade of the previous century women would offer to men their most seductive aspect, the most intimate promise of their figure? In the asphalted indoor arenas where people learned to ride bicycles. The woman as cyclist competes with the cabaret singer for the place of honor on posters, and gives to fashion its most daring line. [B1,8]
- 54.
New York World interview, February 2, 1896. Scribner’s Magazine (1896) in the same year also wrote:
It [the bicycle] has given all women practical liberty to wear trousers if they want to, and indeed, to get themselves into any sort of decent raiment which they find convenient for whatever enterprise they have in hand…. Three years ago, no modest American woman would hardly have ventured on the street in New York with a skirt that stopped above her ankles, and leggings that reached obviously to her knees. To-day she can do it without exciting attention. (Scribner’s Magazine 19, (1896): 783). The words in square brackets are my own addition.
References
Adorno, Theodor W. 1993. Aspects of Hegel’s Philosophy. In Hegel: Three Studies, trans. Shierry Weber Nicholsen. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Anthony, Michael J., and Warren S. Benson. 2003. Exploring the History and Philosophy of Christian Education: Principles for the 21st Century. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications.
Ashelford, Jane. 1996. The Art of Dress: Clothes and Society 1500–1914. London: National Trust Enterprises.
Banner, Lois W. 1994. Dress. In Encyclopedia of Social History, ed. Peter N. Stearns. New York: Garland Publishing.
Barnard, Malcolm. 2002. Fashion as Communication. London/New York: Routledge.
———. 2014. Fashion Theory: An Introduction. New York: Routledge.
Baudelaire, Charles. 1981. The Painter of Modern Life. In Selected Writings on Art and Artist, trans P. E. Charvet. Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Benjamin W. 1999. The Arcades Project, ed. Rolf Tiedemann and trans. Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Berg, Maxine. 2004. In Pursuit of Luxury: Global History and British Consumer Goods in the Eighteenth Century. Past and Present 182 (1): 85–142.
Bossan, Marie-Josèphe. 2004. The Art of the Shoe. New York: Parkstone.
Boucher, Francois. 1966. 20,000 Years of Fashion: The History of Costume and Adornment. New York: Abrams. Originally, Histoire du costume en Occident, de l'antiquite a nos jours. Paris: Flammarion.
Bradley, Carolyn G. 1954. Western World Costume: An Outline History. New York: Meredith.
Breward, Christopher. 1995. The Culture of Fashion: A New History of Fashionable Dress. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Byrde, Penelope. 1979. The Male Image: Men’s Fashion in Britain, 1300–1970. London: B. T. Batsford.
Cǎlinescu, Matei. 1987. Five Faces of Modernity: Modernism, Avant-garde, Decadence, Kitsch, Postmodernism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Caporaso, James A., and David P. Levine. 1992. Theories of Political Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cavallaro, Dani, and Alexandra Warwick. 1998. Fashioning the Frame: Boundaries, Dress and Body. Oxford: Berg.
Challamel, Augustin.1882. The History of Fashion in France, or, the Dress of Women from the Gallo-Roman Period to the Present Time, trans. Mrs. Cashel Hoey and John Lillie. London: Sampson, Low, Marston, Searle, & Rivington.
Charbit, Yves. 2010. The Classical Foundations of Population Thought: From Plato to Quesnay. New York: Springer.
Chazin-Bennahum, Judith. 2005. The Lure of Perfection: Fashion and Ballet, 1780–1830. New York: Routledge.
Craik, Jennifer (2009). Fashion: The Key Concepts. Oxford: Berg.
Cunnington, C. Willett, and Phillis Cunnington. 1992. The History of Underclothes. New York: Dover. Originally published 1951.
Danesi, Marcel. 2004 (1994). Messages, Signs, and Meanings: A Basic Textbook in Semiotics and Communication Theory, 3rd ed. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press.
Didier, Franklin James. 1821. Letters from Paris and Other Cities of France, Holland, & c.: Written During a Tour and Residence in These Countries, in the Years 1816, 17, 18, 19, and 20. Baltimore, MD/New York: James V. Seaman.
Fabretti, Isabella Campagnol. 2008. The Italian Renaissance. In The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Clothing through World History, ed. Jill Condra, vol. 2, 1501–1800. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
French, Katherine. 2013. Genders and Material Culture. In The Oxford Handbook of Women and Gender in Medieval Europe, ed. Judith M. Bennett and Ruth Mazo Karras. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fukuyama, Francis. Summer 1989. The End of History, The National Interest 7.
Gilchrist, Roberta. 2012. Medieval Life: Archaeology and the Life Course. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.
Gillespie, Michael Allen. 2008. The Theological Origins of Modernity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Grieder, Josephine. 1985. Anglomania in France, 1740–1789: Fact, Fiction, and Political Discourse. Geneva: Librairie Droz.
Habermas, Jürgen. 2007. Chapter 1. Modernity’s Consciousness of Time and Its Need for Self-Reassurance. In The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, trans. F. G. Lawrence. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hagen, Rose-Marie, and Rainer Hagen. 2003. What Great Paintings Say. Vol. 1. Köln/London: Taschen.
Hancock, Graham, and Robert Bauval. 2011. The Master Game: Unmasking the Secret Rulers of the World. New York: The Disinformation Company.
Hegel, G. W. F. 1991. The Encyclopaedia Logic: Part 1 of the Encyclopaedia of Philosophical Sciences with the Zusätze, trans. Geraets T, Suchting W, and Harris H. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishers.
———. 2001. The Philosophy of History, with Prefaces by Charles Hegel and the translator, J. Sibree. Kitchener: Batoche Books.
———. 2010. The Science of Logic, ed. and trans. George di Giovanni. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hill, Georgiana. 1893. A History of English Dress from the Saxon Period to the Present Day. Vol. 1. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
Houston, Mary G. 1996. Medieval Costume in England and France: The 13th, 14th, and 15th Centuries. New York: Dover Publications.
Hunt, Alan. 1996. Governance of the Consuming Passions: A History of Sumptuary Law. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Hunt, Lynn, et al. 2012. The Making of the West, Volume B: 1340–1830: Peoples and Cultures. 4th ed. Boston/New York: Bedford/ST. Martin’s.
Israel, Jonathan I. 2001. Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity, 1650–1750. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Kawamura, Yuniya. 2018. Fashion-ology: An Introduction to Fashion Studies. 2nd ed. Oxford/New York: Berg.
Kelly, Francis M., and Randolph Schwabe. 2002 (1925). European Costume and Fashion: 1490–1790. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications. Originally published under the title Historic Costume: A Chronicle of Fashion in Western Europe 1490–1790. New York/London: Charles Scriber’s Sons/ B. T. Batsford.
Kuchta, David. 1996. The Making of the Self-Made Man. In The Sex of Things: Gender and Consumption in Historical Perspective, ed. Victoria de Grazia and Ellen Furlough. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lehman, LaLonnie. 2013. Fashion in the Time of the Great Gatsby. Oxford: Shire Publications.
MacDonald, Michael H. 1996. Europe, a Tantalizing Romance. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
McElligott, Jason. 2007. Royalism, Print and Censorship in Revolutionary England. Woodbridge: Boydell.
McKay, John P., Bennett D. Hill, and John Buckler. 2011. A History of Western Society, Volume 1: From Antiquity to the Enlightenment. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Mieville, China. 2006. Between Equal Rights: A Marxist’s Theory of International Law. Leiden: Brill.
Miller, Sanda, and Peter McNeil. 2018. Fashion Journalism: History, Theory, and Practice. London/New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Nickolai, C.A. 2013. Decently dressed: Women’s fashion and dress reform in the nineteenth century United States. In Historical and archaeological perspectives on gender transformations: From private to public, ed. S.M. Spencer-Wood, 149–172. New York: Springer.
Nicolson, Juliet. 2011. The Great Silence: Britain from the Shadow of the First World War to the Dawn of the Jazz Age. New York: Grove Press.
O’Malley, Thomas. 1986. Religion and the Newspaper Press, 1660–1685. In The Press in English Society from the Seventeenth to Nineteenth Centuries, ed. Michael Harris and Alan Lee. London: Associated University Presses.
Origins: A Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English. 4th edition. 1966. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Payne, Blanche, Geitel Winakor, and Jane Farrell-Beck. 1992. The History of Costume: From Ancient Mesopotamia Through the Twentieth Century. 2nd ed. New York: Harper Collins.
Poitras, A.J. 2007. Capitalist Rising: The Short History of a Long Insurgency. New York: Vantage Press.
Reiner, Toby. 2010. In Divine Right of Kings in Encyclopedia of Political Theory, ed. Mark Bevir. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Reynolds, Graham. 1951. Elizabethan and Jacobean. In Costume of the Western World: Fashion of the Renaissance in England, France, Spain and Holland, ed. James Laver. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Ribeiro, Aileen. 1988. Fashion in the French Revolution. New York: Holmes & Meier.
Rossides, Daniel W. 1998. Social Theory: Its Origins, History, and Contemporary Relevance. Dix Hills, NY: General Hall.
Russell, Douglas. 1983. Costume History and Style. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Scribner’s Magazine. (1896, June). The Point of View. Scribner’s Magazine 19: 783.
Sedgwick, Sally. 2017. Remarks on History, Contingency and Necessity in Hegel’s Logic. In Hegel on Philosophy, History and Modernity, ed. Rachel Zuckert and James Kreines. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simmel, Georg. 1957, May. Fashion. The American Journal of Sociology 62(6):541–558.
Smethurst, Paul. 2015. Bicycle—Towards a Global History. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Steele, Valerie. 1998. Paris Fashion: A Cultural History, 2nd edition, revised and updated. Oxford/New York: Berg.
The Leisure Hour, vol. 42. s.n. 1893.
The Oxford English Dictionary, 1989. 2nd ed., ed. J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner. Oxford/New York: Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press.
Tortora, Phyllis G. and Sara B. Marcketti (1989/2015). Survey of Historic Costume. London and New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Tunis, Edwin. 1999 (1954). Weapons: A Pictorial History. Baltimore/London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Van Cleave, Kendra. 2003. Moral and Dress Reform Movement, 1800-1869. In Encyclopedia of American Social Movements, ed. Immanuel Ness, vol. 1, 268–271. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Warner, Patricia Campbell. 2006. When the Girls Came Out to Play: The Birth of American Sportswear. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary. 1913. Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam Co.
Welters, Linda. 2011a. Europe to 1700, Part I: A Brief History of Fashion. In The Fashion Reader, ed. Linda Welters and Abby Lillethun. Oxford: Berg.
———. 2011b. Introduction, Part I: A Brief History of Fashion. In The Fashion Reader, ed. Linda Welters and Abby Lillethun. Oxford: Berg.
Welters, Linda, and Abby Lillethun. 2018. Fashion History: A Global View. London/New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Wilcox, R. Turner. 1958. The Mode in Costume. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Winks, Robin W. 1993. World Civilization: A Brief History. San Diego, CA: Collegiate Press.
Wrigley, Richard. 2002. The Politics of Appearances: Representations of Dress in Revolutionary France. In Oxford. New York: Berg.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kang, E.J. (2019). Dialectic of Fashion History in Modern Times. In: A Dialectical Journey through Fashion and Philosophy. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0814-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0814-1_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-0813-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-0814-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)