Men's Clothing Forums banner

1970's Preppie vs. 1980's Preppy

1 reading
54K views 50 replies 28 participants last post by  wwilson  
#1 ·
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.
 
#28 · (Edited)
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.
 
#29 ·
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.
 
#30 ·
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.
 
#31 ·
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)
 
#32 ·
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.
 
#33 ·
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.
 
#34 ·
...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
 
#35 ·
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
 
#36 ·
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.
 
#37 ·
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.
 
#39 · (Edited)
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.
 
#41 ·
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.
 
#42 ·
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.
 
#43 ·
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.
 
#44 ·
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.
 
#46 ·
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.
 
#47 ·
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.
 
#48 ·
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.
 
#49 ·
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 ;)
 
#50 ·
Awesome story, thanks for sharing.

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.
 
#51 ·
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.