Open Access Kent State (OAKS)

f the o s n o i Fash ’70s d n a s 1960e r u t l u c r e t n u o C e/ Cultur F s and ’70 s 0 6 9 1 of the ashions Kent State University Museum September 20, 2019 – September 6, 2020This catalogue has been published in conjunction with the exhibition Culture/Counterculture: Fashions of the 1960s and ‘70s held at the Kent State University Museum from September 20, 2019 to September 6, 2020. This exhibition has received support from the Ohio Arts Council through a Sustainability Grant. Copyright © 2019 Kent State University Museum ISBN 0-9968318-8-8 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without the permission in writing from the Kent State University Museum. Kent State University, Kent State and KSU are registered trademarks and may not be used without permission. Published by the Kent State University Museums t n e t n o C f o e l b a T 4 Acknowledgments by Sarah J. Rogers 7 39 Culture/ Counterculture: Fashions of the 1960s and ’70s Clothes with Fun and Flair: French Fashions of the 1960s by Sara Hume by Colleen Hill 51 Youthquake Menswear by Daniel Delis Hill 61 Checklists t n e m g d Acknowle In poignant moments, collective and personal memory fuse as we respond to astonishing, often tragic events. What we remember feeling and seeing, even where we were standing or sitting, when we learned the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded or saw the Twin Towers on fire is reinforced and magnified by news reports, our circles of friends, and the cacophony of divergent responses. All these inputs become one memory: deeply personal, cultural, communal. The Kent State shootings of May 4, 1970, continue to hold just such personal and collective power. Depending on one’s age, political views, and perceptions of the aftermath, its complex meanings vary. Our memories evolve with time, and so does our understanding of what it all means and how we might apply its lessons to our actions today. The Kent State University Museum is deeply honored to participate in the 50th Commemoration of May 4 and to be part of the campus-wide, yearlong schedule of activities organized to generate meaningful conversation and reflection. The museum’s major contribution is this exhibition, Culture/CounterCulture: Fashions of the 1960s and ’70s, conceived and curated by Museum Curator Sara Hume. Drawing primarily from the museum’s outstanding collection, she explores the cultural canyon between youth culture and the Establishment in the 1960s and ’70s. The divides were easily read through what we wore: activists used their appearance as billboards for their beliefs, just as parents donned conventional dresses and suits inspired by couture. While what we wear has always tracked social, historic, technological trends; in the 1960s increasing power was given to the meaning of how we dressed. By the mid-1970s, the establishment (including Parisian 4couture houses) had co-opted hippie wear and miniskirts not as the language of activism, but out of a desire to be youthful, relevant, and, yes, “hip.” This commemoration and its spirit of reflection and inclusion has been led by the remarkable visions of KSU’s immediate past president, Beverly Warren and former provost, now president, Todd Diacon. They inspired all of us to be creative and bring forth truly meaningful projects. Dean John Crawford-Spinelli, who has enthusiastically supported the exhibition from the beginning, was instrumental in the generous grant the Museum received from the provost’s fund to help fund this publication. We appreciate the support of Rod Flauhaus, the 50th Commemoration project manager, who also understood the relevance of the exhibition. While most of the exhibited objects are from the museum’s collection, we are also grateful to our lenders: the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame; The Ohio History Connection, and Kent State University Libraries, Special Collections and Archives. We also thank the individuals who graciously agreed to lend their personal vintage items: Sheryl Birkner, Peter Gent, Daniel Mainzer, Diane Rarick, Cindy Sheehan, and Fred Smith. Sara Hume is to be congratulated for her insight and care in eschewing the stereotypical views of this period and teasing out the complex, nuanced differences and similarities. We appreciate the contributions of Phaedra Scherl and Carolanne Tkach, both student assistants who worked closely with Sara on the many details of the exhibition. Every Wednesday morning for the past year, our dedicated sewing volunteers—Susan Griffin, Leesa Hileman, Marilyn Lown and Millie Chrin—gathered to repair and prepare garments for the exhibition. Thanks also go to the KSU Museum staff: Joanne Fenn, collections manager; Jim Williams, exhibition designer, for his creative installation design; Todd Clark, security manager; Bianka Sinkfield, administrative assistant; Ruth Krause, store manager; Docents Jean Giulitto, Laurie Howell and Susan Laubach, as well as our colleagues Effie Tsengas, communications and marketing director, and Brittani Peterson, marketing associate. Special thanks to the designer of the catalogue, Cecilia Sveda of Minx Design, and editor Erin Holman. Finally, please join us in remembering students Allison Krause, Jeffrey Miller, Sandra Scheuer, and William Schroeder and honoring all Kent State University students, alumni, faculty, staff, and administration, as well as the citizens of the city of Kent. We will not forget May 4, 1970. Sarah J. Rogers Director 5e r u t l u c r e t n u o C e/ Cultur F s and ’70 s 0 6 9 1 of the ashions Sara Hume Curator Kent State University Museumdustry n i n o i h s the fa th. u o y y b nnized , S E I T X I S E H T N I yra t e b o t f el icated d b a d a h teachers n e t r a g r e shion kind a e f h , t e f i d a s c a e It was In this d . … y d o b t studen r down e e h lt t fi f o o t r d o e v s in fa ty. It cea i v a r g f o law omen e w h t e d h t e d d r n a disreg uturiers a o c t u a h e asses. It – from th m p e o h t t e o t h t – from dressed y e h t m d up o le h b w b u e t b s a It t . s d lutocrat p e of educate h t o t e populac culture, e r h e t d i m s t o u r f o und and ascended o r g r e d n u ent. the m h m s o li r f b , a s t r s e E g fashion e h t from teena o t d e t ople er admit v eautiful Pe e B n e s h r T e r, e n d g Ben – Marilyn from desi ts allowed i Protestors, linking arms, preparing to be arrested. This position served notice of the willingness to be arrested through non-violence. Copyright: Kent State Universityars ago, e y 0 5 t s Almo the shootings of Kent State University students by the Ohio National Guard brought to a head the cultural divides that had split the nation. Much of the tension centered around the generation gap between the baby boomers who were filling college campuses and their parents who had served in World War II. The divisions went beyond the generational, however. There was a contrast between supporters of the Establishment and those who opposed it—the culture and the counterculture. These cleavages in society saw their expression in the fashions of the time. Clothing served as a powerful signifier of people’s identity and indicated their sense of group belonging as well as personal values. Students move away from the commons as the Guard fire tear gas, May 4, 1970. Copyright: Kent State University 10 It is difficult to define clearly who was part of the Establishment as opposed to the counterculture. Mainstream culture in the 1960s and ‘70s cannot be divorced from the contributions of groups that could be seen as marginalized or disadvantaged. African Americans, those of Jewish descent, and others who today we would identify as LGBTQ all played critical roles in the world of fashion. Although these groups are associated with the political activism of the period, they were not necessarily part of the counterculture. Members of these groups did, however, gain prominence in radio, television, film, theater, even politics and the society pages. Television in particular was central to the development of mainstream culture in the 1960s; by 1960 nearly 90 percent of American homes had a television set. Not only was the TV nearly ubiquitous, but other forms of media became less popular—film attendance declined as did the number of hours people listened to the radio.1 In the popular imagination, one of the icons of 1960s mainstream fashion is First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy. The epitome of privilege, she was born into affluence and grew up in polite society. Known for her education in literature and the arts, Kennedy also maintained a love of fashion, particularly French couture. Her advantages extended beyond the material, as she was endowed with natural grace and beauty. During her years in the White House, she worked closely with designer Oleg Cassini to craft her signature look. She favored tailored suits with knee-length skirts and three-quarter-length sleeves in solid colors. She also wore straight, sleeveless, A-line dresses. With their simple lines and solid colors, her clothes were both flattering and photogenic. As her husband was likewise attractive, television naturally complemented the couple. The president and First Lady both used the medium to their advantage. While John F. Kennedy memorably excelled in a televised debate during his campaign, Jacqueline Kennedy took to the television for a tour of the White House that was broadcast on CBS (fig. 1). Figure 1. Jacqueline Kennedy, December 5, 1961. Photography by Robert Knudsen, White House, in the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, Boston. 11The Kennedys, among the youngest families to have resided in the White House, reflected the fresh optimism of the early 1960s. While they were young, they were of an earlier generation than the baby boomers—now known as the Greatest Generation. President Kennedy had served with distinction in World War II, and he inspired members of the next generation, who heeded his call to ask what they could do for their country. The infatuation with the presidency and politics fostered during the Camelot years, however, did not long survive after the president’s assassination. Vietnam, first, then Watergate shattered such optimism. In the years following her first husband’s death, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis kept largely out of the public spotlight. However, she did continue to dress with her characteristic grace and elegance. For instance, in 1967, on a visit to Cambodia, she wore a dress identical to the evening dress of mint-green silk edged with dense beading by Valentino that is in the Kent State University Museum collection. This gown represents both the simple lines and the exceptional quality of the clothes favored by the former First Lady (fig. 2). 12 Figure 2. Green silk charmeuse evening dress edged with beading by Valentino, 1967, Silverman/ Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.593 ab. In the 1960s, the haute couture industry continued to exert strong influence over how a large segment of the population dressed. Despite the growing prominence of youth culture, important and successful designers such as Chanel and Balenciaga created innovative designs for an older clientele. Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel (1883–1971) had begun her career as a milliner before expanding to sportswear in the early 1910s and then finally opening a full couture shop in Paris right at the end of World War I.2 While her early career had been marked by her innovative use of jersey in casual sportswear, Chanel’s mature designs were noted for their tweed (fig. 3). In the years following the reopening of her house after World War II, her name gradually regained its status as a sought-after luxury brand. The quilted linings and metal chains weighting down the jackets’ hems ensured the neat appearance of the bulky fabrics. Cristóbal Balenciaga (1895–1972) was also renowned for his ability to control fabric in his distinctive designs. His house rose to prominence in the years following World War II. In contrast to the contemporary designs of Christian Dior (1905–1957), which emphasized and exaggerated the natural form of the woman’s body, Balenciaga defied a woman’s shape as he created new silhouettes. In the 1960s, he continued to maintain an appeal to older women, to whom his forgiving designs were flattering. Figure 3. Pink tweed suit with matching blouse by Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel, 1960s, Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.425 a-c. 13Figure 4. Grey and white tweed dress by Shannon Rodgers for Jerry Silverman, ca. 1965, Silverman/ Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.663. 14 While Paris remained a center for high-end, custom-made clothing, designers in America also served an Establishment clientele. One American label that tapped into a significant market of women with its wearable, simple yet sophisticated clothing was Jerry Silverman, Inc. The label was launched in 1959 by Jerry Silverman (1910–1984) and his designer and partner Shannon Rodgers (1911– 1996), the founding benefactors of the Kent State University Museum, which now maintains an important collection of their designs. Silverman described his clothing as the “meat and potatoes of the dress industry, not the frosting,” and his pieces were offered for sale across the country in boutiques and department stores.3 The label was notable for its quality ready-towear clothing in interesting fabrics and colors. The tweed dress included in the exhibit showcases both its simplicity of line and its attention to material and texture (fig. 4). First Ladies Patricia Nixon, Lady Bird Johnson and Rosalyn Carter all wore Jerry Silverman dresses. Early in his career, Rodgers worked as a costume designer in Hollywood and cultivated connections with celebrities. He designed dresses for a number of celebrities, including Dinah Shore and Miss Americas Bess Myerson and Phyllis George. The connections Silverman and Rodgers maintained with notable figures ensured that an important collection of clothing with celebrity associations became part of the KSU Museum collection. For example, Dinah Shore (1916–1994) wore pieces designed by Rodgers, but she was also a generous donor to the museum, and its permanent collection includes a number of additional pieces from her wardrobe, among them this blue wool evening dress by Norman Norell (1900–1972) (fig. 5). Norell, like Shannon Rodgers, began his career working in theater and film as a costumer, but in the late 1920s he transitioned into working on Seventh Avenue for Hattie Carnegie (1886–1956). After twelve years with Carnegie, where he reimagined couture designs adapted from Paris into ready-to-wear garments for the American market, he moved to work with the manufacturing firm Anthony Traina. Following Traina’s retirement in 1960, Norell launched his own label. TheFigure 5. Blue wool evening dress with embroidered border by Norman Norell that belonged to Dinah Shore, ca. 1965, Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.480 a-c. 15name “Norell” remained synonymous with craftsmanship and fine workmanship even though the clothes were not couture. Dinah Shore’s blue wool dress exemplifies the high quality and understated elegance of Norell’s work. Dinah Shore first gained fame as a popular singer and radio star during the 1940s. Her career followed the rise of television as she became the host of her own show in the 1950s. By the 1960s, she was an established celebrity known for her wholesomeness and warmth. She continued to host her own talk shows through the 1970s. Kitty Carlisle Hart (1910–2007) was another celebrity and socialite of the 1960s whose wardrobe is included in the KSU Museum collection. Like Shore, Carlisle was Jewish and became well known as a television personality familiar to Americans in the 1960s and ’70s, having made a name for herself as a film actress and opera singer starting in the 1930s. From 1956 to 1978 she was a regular panelist on the television game show To Tell the Truth. Her elegance and stylish dress on the show made her a household name. During the 1980s, 16 Figure 6. Black velvet and pink satin evening dress by Donald Brooks that belonged to Kitty Carlisle Hart, ca. 1968, Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.1282.Carlisle donated some of her gowns to the KSU Museum. Carlisle is represented in this exhibition by a pink satin and black velvet gown by Donald Brooks (1928– 2005) (fig. 6). Brooks, also like Shannon Rodgers, enjoyed a career as both costume and fashion designer. While heading his own label from 1965 to 1973, he also designed costumes for Broadway plays, television, and film. Despite his theatrical experience, his fashions were designed to let the wearer shine so they did not overwhelm her. In his obituary in Women’s Wear Daily, the buyer Jeane Eddy was quoted as describing his designs: “Donald’s feeling about clothes is that the woman should be most prominent. He was what I called the middle of my yardstick. There was someone at the bottom with dumb dresses and there was Rudi Gernreich at the top with his over-thetop designs that were very avant garde. Donald was always in the middle. He was a designer for all seasons.”4 Bess Myerson (1924–2014) first found national fame when she was elected Miss America in 1945. She was the first (and so far, only) Jewish woman to receive that title, which she won in the weeks immediately after World War II—right on the heels of Americans’ triumph over the anti-Semitic forces of Nazism—suggesting an acceptance of Jews into the mainstream of American culture. Following her reign, Myerson served as a spokesperson and made television appearances on game shows before transitioning to a career in politics. She is represented in this exhibition by a Shannon Rodgers dress of sheer white chiffon trimmed at the cuffs with white fox fur (fig. 7). The elegant dress plays with a tension between modesty and sexiness. It includes a plunging neckline and an open back, yet the skin is discreetly concealed with a layer of sheer chiffon. Figure 7. White silk chiffon evening dress trimmed with fur by Shannon Rodgers that belonged to Bess Myerson, 1960s, Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.640. 17 The selection of fashion designers and celebrities included in this exhibition attests to the prevalence of Jews in popular culture. The fashion industry in New York has employed a significant number of Jews as well as members of other immigrant communities. Eastern European immigrants, who fled the nineteenth-century pogroms in their native lands, put their tailoring and dressmaking skills to work in the city’s growing fashion industry.5 While they certainly faced anti-Semitism in the United States through the early twentieth century, by World War II Jews were increasingly integrated into society. Although they were now solidly members of the Establishment, many chose new names to disguise their Jewishness: Norman Levinson became Norman Norell, Hattie Kanengeiser became Hattie Carnegie, Fannye Shore became Dinah Shore, Donald Blumberg became Donald Brooks, and Catherine Conn became Kitty Carlisle. Bess Myerson resisted pressure from Miss America organizers to use the more anglicized “Beth Merrick.”6 The discretion with which they maintained their Jewishness granted these entertainers and designers full access 18 Figure 8. Black net evening dress with silver sequins by Norman Norell for Bonwit Teller worn by Diahann Carroll, 1960s, Gift of Mrs. Amy Greene-Andrews, KSUM 2002.44.1a.to the advantages that privilege afforded. Jews also made a significant contribution to the civil rights movement during the 1950s and 1960s. Driven by their own status on the margins of society, Jews made up at least 30 percent of the white Freedom Riders registering blacks to vote and picketing segregated establishments.7 In the 1960s African Americans continued to face discrimination and even segregation. However, during this time some African Americans achieved the highest levels of celebrity. The career of Diahann Carroll (1935– ) reflected the emergence in the 1950s of mainstream films that featured black casts, including Carmen Jones and Porgy and Bess. In 1962 Carroll became the first African American woman to win a Tony Award for her role in No Strings. Through the 1960s she appeared on a string of television variety shows before landing the title role in the 1968 series Julia, which made her the first African American actress to star in her own television series in a role other than as a domestic worker. While she broke barriers by her very presence on television, the content of the program was not provocative. Because the show was created at a time when racial tensions in the nation were coming to a head following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., its producers and writers struggled to avoid racist stereotypes. They faced the challenge of representing black culture for white America. In general, they presented a comfortable, middle-class woman who reflected few if any aspects of black culture besides her skin color. Carroll said in a 1968 TV Guide interview: “At the moment we’re presenting the white Negro. And he has very little Negroness.”8 Carroll is represented in this exhibition by a dress of black tulle adorned with silver sequins that Norman Norell designed for her in the 1960s (fig. 8). This dress is stunning but squarely conventional in its design and appeal. Like her television character, it was appealing in part by being nonthreatening, by conforming to mainstream aesthetics. One of the most celebrated African American stars to emerge in the 1960s was Diana Ross (1944– ). She was one of the most successful stars of Motown Records. Under the direction of Berry Gordy Jr. the public image including the dress of Motown stars was carefully controlled. Ross’s group, the Supremes, was the first major success under the Motown label, and it established a polished, sophisticated look for African American performers. Other than Diahann Carroll and Lena Horne, African American women had few examples of glamorous celebrities as inspirations.9 Motown was an important player in the progress African Americans made in shaping popular culture. As a black-owned business, it provided an opportunity for black stars and executives to profit. The story of American popular music through the 1950s was dominated by white stars such as Elvis Presley and Buddy Holly, who reinterpreted the blues and other musical styles developed in the African American community. By the 1960s, groups such as the Supremes and the Miracles gained a mainstream audience in both the United States and Europe. British pop groups who would come to dominate the airwaves through the 1960s were also heavily influenced by the blues and R&B, including the music produced by Motown. During the 1960s, television played a large role in 19popularizing musical groups. Programs like American Bandstand and The Ed Sullivan Show brought entertainers into American living rooms and contributed to a culture of celebrity. Similar shows in Great Britain, including Ready, Set, Go and Top of the Pops, popularized American music across the pond. In 1970, Diana Ross left the Supremes to launch her own solo career, and in 1971, she had her own television special, Diana! in which she wore the taupe sequined dress included in this exhibition. The dress is a testament to Ross’s attention to cultivating her glamorous persona. In the early years of her career, she had made her own dresses, but by the 1970s she had designers such as Bob Mackie help her establish her look. As much as Diana Ross was the essence of glamor and sophistication, Jimi Hendrix (1942–1970) epitomized wild experimentation. In contrast to the generally conservative style of many of the African American stars through the 1960s, Hendrix was extravagant and deliberately thumbed his nose at the constraints of polite society. He began his career, wearing suits and standing in the background, in backup 20 bands for rhythm & blues acts including Little Richard, Wilson Pickett, Sam Cooke, and Ike and Tina Turner. After signing with British manager Chas Chandler in 1966, Hendrix moved to London, where his career took off. He developed a highly individual style, in part from his exposure to London’s fashion scene, that favored bright colors, a combination of bold patterns, and luxurious textures. His flashy stage presence was a combination of statement clothing choices and such antics as burning his guitar. Despite his roots in the US blues and soul music scene, Hendrix’s mature music was part of the predominately white psychedelic rock scene of the late 1960s. The fashion he gravitated to, including the purple velvet jacket displayed in the exhibition also pushed established gender boundaries. The luxurious material and its bold color were and still are largely viewed as feminine. Hendrix was a pivotal figure in the development of countercultural style for his provocative exploration of the boundaries of race, gender, and personal style. Hendrix’s bold personal style was groundbreaking in the 1960s. But by the 1970s, many of the dramatic stylechoices that had been on the fringe in the 1960s became increasingly mainstream. The dresses included in the exhibition that were worn by Lena Horne (1917–2010) demonstrate the increasing acceptance of bohemian style. A generation older than Diahann Carroll, Horne had a career that spanned more than seventy years and truly reflects the increasing opportunity for African American women. She acted in Hollywood films during the 1940s, but her parts were restricted to minor roles because scenes she was in would have to be cut for cities that did not allow scenes with black performers to be shown. Through the 1960s, Horne performed primarily as a singer in nightclubs while also making many appearances on TV variety shows, including The Ed Sullivan Show and The Judy Garland Show. In the 1970s, she became familiar to Figure 9. Red jersey dress with long trumpet sleeves by Giorgio di Sant’ Angelo worn by Lena Horne, 1970s, Gift of Lena Horne, KSUM 1992.14.16. a new generation of viewers through appearances on Sesame Street and The Muppet Show. Like Diahann Carroll and Diana Ross, Horne cultivated an elegant and sophisticated style. By the 1970s, she had adapted her classical look to the increasingly bohemian contemporary fashions (fig. 9). Giorgio di Sant’ Angelo (1933-1989), a designer who rose to prominence in the late 1960s, designed many of her clothes. Sant’ Angelo made his name with designs that took inspiration from Native American and gypsy styles and included leather, fringe, feathers and beads. He moved on to make extensive use of stretchy, drapey materials such as the synthetic jersey shown in Lena Horne’s dresses included in this exhibition. Along with Jews and African Americans, gays were central to the development of fashion in the 1960s and ’70s. Although homosexuality remained largely unacknowledged, a significant number of prominent fashion designers were gay. While gay rights became a subject of political struggle in the late 1960s and the 1970s, particularly following 1969’s Stonewall riots, the public was not necessarily aware of the sexuality of celebrated fashion designers. In the catalogue accompanying her groundbreaking exhibition A Queer History of Fashion, Valerie Steele addresses the question of whether it is even appropriate to discuss the sexual identity of designers. She concludes that “it is entirely legitimate to discuss the sexuality of the deceased, since there is nothing shameful about variant sexuality.” Furthermore, “it is, in fact, entirely legitimate to ask why homosexuals have played such an important role in fashion.”10 Many of the designers discussed in this essay who were closely linked to designing for the Establishment of the 1960s were gay. Steele identifies two of the great icons of postwar Paris fashion, Balenciaga and Dior as having been gay. Both were discreet in their personal lives, but each shared his life with a male partner. Norman Norell was another designer of the same generation who was likewise discrete in his sexual identity. While known among his circle as gay, he would never admit it.11 Jerry Silverman and Shannon Rodgers were partners in their personal as well as 21professional lives. They owned and lived in adjacent penthouse apartments on Park Avenue in New York City and shared a country house upstate. Like many of these other designers, their relationship was certainly known among their friends but not by the public. Rodgers, the creative force in the partnership while Silverman was the businessman, loved dramatic displays and decorating but created a firmly mainstream aesthetic for the brand. However, many members of the younger generation who came to direct fashion in the 1960s and ’70s were more open. Yves Saint Laurent (1936–2008) took over Dior’s house after the master’s death in 1957. He would assert to a French film maker in 2002, “My sexuality has been very important to my creativity.”12 He was particularly interested in the lines between men’s and women’s fashion. Taking inspiration from Marlene Dietrich’s wearing of men’s formal wear, Saint Laurent famously reinterpreted the man’s tuxedo as a woman’s tailored suit. This exhibition includes a suit with a safari jacket, a design Saint Laurent first presented in 1967 (fig. 10). The look 22 approximated the styles worn both by the Afrika Korps (the German troops stationed in Africa during World War II) and white colonists’ dress more generally. Saint Laurent, born and raised in Algeria by French parents, frequently took inspiration from points of contact between Europe and other cultures. As a young designer in the 1960s, he looked to the styles among the youth for inspiration, and many of his designs reflected innovation that pushed against Establishment constraints. While his couture designs were definitely part of mainstream fashion, he introduced a boutique—his Rive Gauche line—that offered fashions at a lower price point, allowing his work to reach a larger, albeit still select, audience. Another designer who explored the boundaries of gender constructs was Rudi Gernreich (1922–1985). Born in Austria, Figure 10. Safari-inspired suit by Yves Saint Laurent, 1968, Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.2111 ab.1992.14.16.Gernreich was Jewish and fled to the United States with his mother in 1938, when Germany annexed the country. As early as the 1950s, he became active in the burgeoning gay rights movement through his work with the Mattachine Society, one of the earliest LGBTQ rights organizations in the United States. Motivated by his dissatisfaction with society’s attitudes toward sexuality and the body, Gernreich imagined a future where gender played a negligible role in informing how people dressed. In a January 1970 issue of Life magazine, Gernreich predicted that in the 1970s clothing wouldn’t be identified as either male or female: “Women will wear pants and men will wear skirts interchangeably.”13 While he consistently showed outfits for women with pants starting in the mid1960s, he took his idea for unisex to the Figure 11. Patchwork caftan with mirrorwork and multicolored embroidery, ca. 1975, Gift of Coral Browne Price, KSUM 1985.27.1. extreme in the 1970s when he showed identical outfits for men and women, including caftans. This exhibition includes a caftan that bears the Rudi Gernreich label, although it appears to have been made in India with traditional techniques such as patchwork and mirror-work. Gernreich was photographed wearing a similar caftan (fig. 11). While Gernreich’s designs were more revolutionary than mainstream fashion, regular Americans’ wardrobes did change in a number of ways that echoed his ideas. Women increasingly wore pants, including pantsuits for work. Men wore their hair long and embraced a more colorful palette. In his contribution to this catalogue, Daniel Hill explores what is often referred to as the Peacock Revolution in menswear. The easing of distinction between masculine and feminine dress was accompanied by an increase in casual styles. College campuses largely became incubators for these clothes—particularly jeans. Both young men and women wore jeans and T-shirts on campus for an expanding array of social occasions. While many college campuses in the 231960s still insisted young men wear jackets and ties for dinner, this formality disappeared by the 1970s. At the same time, young women abandoned accessories such as hats and gloves. College campuses were also the site of growing political activism during the 1960s. The civil rights movement, which took off in the 1950s, laid the groundwork for a culture of protest. By the 1960s groups such as the Black Panthers and the Black United Students had gained an important foothold on campuses. Specific clothing items became closely associated with particular groups; the black beret, for instance, came to symbolize the Black Panthers. The Black United Students held a number of rallies at the Kent State campus and participated in broader campus protests. The image to the right (fig. 12) shows members participating in the Moratorium to end the War in Vietnam, which took place across the United States in October 1969. The organization’s president, Erwind Blount, stands in the center with a microphone. He is flanked by two young men who each wear dark berets. This photograph brings together 24 symbolism that developed out of the fight for rights and respect for African Americans as well as the protest against the war in Vietnam. College students were central to the resistance because they were the generation being sent to fight and die in the conflict. Enrolling in higher education was one means of receiving a Figure 12. President of Black United Students (BUS), Erwind Blount, speaks to crowd during National Moratorium on Vietnam War, 1969, Photograph by Lafayette Tolliver. Kent State University Libraries, Special Collections and Archives.Figure 13. Students protesting the draft marched by the Military Science building (the old Hub), 1969, Kent State University Libraries, Special Collections and Archives. Figure 14. Poster for the Student Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam, 1969, Kent State University Libraries, Special Collections and Archives, L2019.50.5. student deferment and avoiding the draft; another was joining the National Guard. Although images of student protests (fig. 13) from the 1960s reveal that students’ dress was generally relatively conservative, their elders often characterized these young protestors as rebellious, even iconoclastic. Tensions emerged not simply between the youth and their parents but between youth and the government. At its extreme, the protests were expressed as a disrespect for the young men who served. At the same time, many protest signs (fig. 14) clearly express support for GIs. On the whole, the objection to the war was a call to protect and save the lives of young men who had to fight. However, a soldier’s uniform did not confer on the wearer the respect and gratitude that is now shown to active duty soldiers and veterans. This exhibition includes both the uniform worn by Dennis Fullerton when he served in Vietnam in 1968 and a black cotton jacket he wore after he returned to the United States. The jacket bears the embroidered message “When I die I’ll go to heaven because I’ve spent my time in Hell/Chu-Lai.” Shirts and jackets with this 25message became a form of expression for returning Vietnam veterans to both identify themselves and express the horror their service entailed. The tensions between young people and the Establishment came to a head at Kent State. When President Richard M. Nixon announced on April 30, 1970, that he was expanding military activities into Cambodia, protests erupted across the United States. Demonstrations in Kent became unruly. In hopes of maintaining order, the town’s mayor, Leroy Satrom, called the governor of Ohio, James Rhodes, to request that the Ohio National Guard be sent in. Across the Kent campus and through the town, the young men of the National Guard, many of whom were no older than the students, sought to maintain order. Student protest leaders called for a rally on the Commons at noon on Monday, May 4, and despite university officials’ efforts to prevent such Protestor speaking to the crowd during the 1972 commemoration. Copyright: Kent State Universityan assembly, students began gathering in the late morning. Tensions came to a head as efforts to disband the students peacefully failed, and some students yelled and threw rocks. Ultimately some of the Guardsmen fired their rifles into the crowd, killing four and injuring nine more. People across the country were shocked by the violence, which pitted the state against young protestors. Following the events at Kent State, the tensions between culture and counterculture persisted. However, the high fashion of the succeeding years reflected increasing influence of counterculture and street style. Rudi Gernreich made explicit references to the events of May 4 in a collection he presented in October 1970. In this show, known as his back to school collection, the military-influenced styles went down the runway on models holding real guns (fig. 15). One of the models who took part in the show, Leon Bing, reflected later: “It was a fearful failure and pretty much put a shadow over his career because people couldn’t get over it.”14 While designers such as Gernreich saw fashion as a vehicle to make commentary on political events, the Figure 15. Tan knit sweater and shorts by Rudi Gernreich, 1970, Gift of Marion C. Risman, The Rudi Gernreich Collection, KSUM 1993.74.6 ab. events at Kent State were so raw, so recent, and so traumatic that people were not ready accept their interpretation in design. Gernreich’s efforts to employ fashion as social commentary reflected a change in the role of fashion designers. His runway shows became a form of performance as much as a commercial activity intended purely to sell designs. This shift in the agenda of fashion shows occurred at the same time as designers were losing their place as deciders of fashion. In the world’s fashion centers emerged small boutiques that presented inexpensive, innovative clothes for trendy young people; Biba in London and Paraphernalia in New York were two of the most notable of these. Trends like the miniskirt reflect the power of these youthful consumers. While many writers have tried to assign credit for the invention of the miniskirt to such designers as Mary Quant, the style was less the result of individual inspiration as a gradual result of rising hemlines.15 Fashion was shifting from a top-down system shaped by Parisian haute couture to a bottom-up one fed by a variety of emerging style influencers. Major designers such as André 27Courrèges, Pierre Cardin, and Yves Saint Laurent did recognize the importance of the youth market as they interpreted innovative styles in their high-end designs. Colleen Hill’s essay in this catalogue traces the growing influence of ready-to-wear on fashion, particularly in France. One of the new trends in fashion that cut across every price point was the adoption of an array of experimental materials. As the world entered the space age, futuristic aesthetics influenced fashion design, particularly in the form of new synthetic materials. Many different plastics were introduced to the world by the 1950s, and in the 1960s these were liberally used as sequins and other attachments on evening dresses, as shown on this pink and white dress by Givenchy (fig. 16). They also made their way onto accessories such as handbags and sunglasses. The Courrèges sunglasses based on Inuit eyewear designed to protect against glare off of snow and ice epitomize this modern aesthetic while demonstrating a broadening range of design influences. The emergence of inexpensive fashions meant that many outfits could be worn only 28 Figure 16. Evening dress with pink and white plastic strips and beads by Givenchy, ca. 1965, Silverman/ Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.505 ab. a few times before being discarded. This ephemeral nature of fashion was pushed to an extreme in the brief paper dress trend. Starting in 1966, companies such as Waste Basket Boutique produced dresses out of a specially produced flame-resistant paper, similar to the material used today for gowns worn in doctor’s offices. These dresses were generally cut in simple A-line shapes, exaggerating the simple silhouette fashionable at the time. While paperdresses were just a fad, new synthetic materials became a significant segment of the clothing by the 1970s. For example, because polyester was wrinkle-resistant, machine washable, and inexpensive, it found widespread popularity. The move away from copying elite styles reached its logical extension with hand-crafted, DIY designs. The rejection of mainstream consumerism and materialism reached its most extreme with hippies. Participation in the counterculture was widely associated with such clothing items as jeans that have been patched or recrafted into skirts and tie-dyed T-shirts. These forms of upcycling and reuse reflected a burgeoning concern for the environment as much as an aesthetic decision. Many of the pieces included in the exhibition were much loved items that are still in the collections of their original owners and have been lent for this exhibition. Sheryl Birkner, a freshman at Kent State in the spring of 1970, witnessed the May 4 shootings. The clothing she wore shaped the memories she has of her years in college. She still has (and wears) a dress that she bought in 1970 which is made out of four Indian wool scarves. (fig. 17). Cindy Sheehan has lent an outfit of denim culottes and matching vest, which she acquired on vacation in Southern California. As she describes it: “I visited family in SoCal each summer and enjoyed having access to new fashions before they hit the Midwest. I remember wearing this outfit in high school.” She also purchased the puka-shell and shark-tooth necklaces in Southern California as well, as they reflect a beach vibe. Diane Rarick still owns several garments that her mother, Arletta Brown made for her in the early 1970s. The wool tunic with its woven design and the poncho both draw from elements of South and Central American design. The embroidered work shirt personalizes a utilitarian garment with fanciful floral designs. For all of these women, clothing remains a link to the past. The items have strong personal attachments with the people who made them and the occasions when they were worn. While the popularity of handcrafted styles obviously rose up organically, without the direction of fashion designers, a number of designers and artists co-opted Figure 17. Dress made of wool scarves, 1970, on loan from Sheryl Birkner, L2019.42.1. 29the trend. By the 1970s, Roy Halston Frowick (1932–1990), better known as Halston, was an influential designer. Though most famous for designs featuring clean, minimalist lines, by 1970 Halston had introduced a number of tie-dyed designs into his collection. He worked with Will and Eileen Richardson, whose firm, Up Tied, become known in New York as the best at tie-dyeing.16 The tie-dyed ensemble included in this exhibition may well have been part of this collaboration (fig. 18). Tie-dye, widely used to color T-shirts and other garments during the 1960s and ’70s, is a form of resist dyeing that has a long tradition in many cultures. Halston’s tie-dye ensemble combines the skillful execution of this highly esteemed artistic tradition with the brightly colored vocabulary of the popular style. Like tie-dye, patched and refashioned denim was a popular staple of many young people’s wardrobes in the early 1970s. Denim had once been a signifier of the working class, but beginning in the 1950s blue jeans became a symbol of youthful rebellion among high schoolers. Through the 1960s, denim 30 Figure 18. Tie-dyed ensemble with matching scarves by Halston, 1970s, Gift of Marti Stevens, KSUM 1988.11.32 a-d.became increasingly ubiquitous, leading style leaders to develop new variations on the basic jeans. Used, worn denim became sought after, as did all manner of manipulations to the basic jeans. The pieces donated to the KSU Museum by Susan Allen-Umerley are representative of this fashion (fig. 19-20). Allen-Umerley was an undergraduate at Kent State in the 1970s, and as her jeans wore out she reinforced them with patches and scraps of fabric—including some leather she purchased in the Haight-Ashbury neighborhood of San Francisco. She also converted a pair of denim jeans into a skirt (fig. 20). In 1973, the New York Times alerted readers to the popularity of aged denim in an article titled “If Jeans Seem on Their Last Legs, It’s Only the Beginning—As Skirts,” Just as in the case of tie-dye, a tension developed between the aesthetics Figure 19 Detail of patched denim jeans, 1970-74, Gift of Typical Student Fashions of 1970-1974, KSUM 2018.9.1. 31of DIY and high-priced, boutique designs. According to the Times, a new Levi’s denim skirt cost about $8 in 1973. Bloomingdale’s sold skirts of recycled denim for $20, while the New York City boutique Serendipity 3 sold custom-made skirts with appliqués and embroidery for $300.17 Serendipity 3 was and still is a restaurant that also sells an array of funky and one-of-a-kind goods. In the 1960s and ’70s the store became known for its denim clothes and accessories in particular. The KSU Museum boasts an extensive collection of its denim fashions and accessories, donated directly by the business when the museum was founded. Among the many Serendipity 3 pieces in the collection are several that make references to Asian design motifs (fig. 21). The exhibition includes a denim maxi skirt hand-painted with a female figure that draws heavily from Indian aesthetics. Men also looked to India for inspiration as they adopted a style of suit jacket named after Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India. The opening up of fashion choices to include design ideas from other cultures allowed Americans to break away from 32 Figure 20 (top). Pair of jeans reworked into skirt and cotton shirt, 1970-74, Gift of Typical Student Fashions of 1970-1974, KSUM 2018.9.2-3. Figure 21 (right). Maxi skirt of painted denim from 1971 and denim bikini top from 1974 by Serendipity 3, Gift of Serendipity 3, KSUM 1983.2.65 and 63 a.the limitations of western dress. This was particularly the case for men, who had long been confined to the strict uniformity of the suit. While the Nehru jacket allowed for restyling the conventional suit coat, some men were even more adventurous. African American men began to adopt elements of traditional African dress as a means of honoring their heritage; notable among these is the dashiki. The word dashiki comes from the Yoruba or Hausa word danshiki and refers to a style of tunic worn by men in West Africa, specifically Nigeria. Credit for popularizing the dashiki among Americans is given to Jason Benning, who helped found the New Breed cooperative in New York City’s Harlem, which opened a store in 1967.18 The tunic included in this exhibition is actually from Northern Ghana, where Kent State University professor Fred Smith purchased it (fig. 22). This style of garment was not technically a dashiki, which was developed by cultures farther south in Ghana and in neighboring Nigeria. Ultimately dashiki became a general term for the styles of shirt that became popular both across West Africa and throughout the African diaspora. High fashion also exploited the popularity of global inspiration not just in actual clothing design but also in the settings for photo shoots. Cuban writer Edmundo Desnoes criticized the trend in an essay titled “Suzy Parker and the Third World”: “The disdain and ridicule Figure 22. Embroidered smock from Northern Ghana, 1960s, on loan from Fred T. Smith, L2019.45.1. 33of capitalist countries toward the Third World reached its peak in photographs that appeared in Harper’s Bazaar using the African continent to launch the latest exotic furs, hats and stockings. . . . There is elegance and exoticism in all these photographs, true, but there is also cruelty. The cruelty that uses men as decorative elements.”19 The 1960s were turbulent around the world, as former colonies broke from their imperial powers and achieved independence. Fashion reflected both the continued dominance of former colonial powers and the new valorization of previously subordinated cultures. While many fashion trends drew inspiration from foreign cultures, a number of designers developed purely original patterns and motifs. Emilio Pucci was one of the most significant designers who became known for his abstract and Figure 23. Printed blouse and wrap skirt by Emilio Pucci, ca. 1973, Gift of Charles Sawyer, KSUM 2001.50.1 ab. 34Figure 24. Cotton dress and crocheted shawl with printed underwater scene by Tina Leser, ca. 1968, Gift of Mrs. Charles Rumsey in memory of Tina Leser, KSUM 1995.19.3 a-c. brilliantly colored patterns. Pucci had his roots in producing sportswear, and his clothing had a casual ease (fig. 23). He also produced an array of accessories and even housewares, ranging from the handbag included in the exhibition to scarves, jewelry, glasses, and even airline uniforms.20 Missoni was another Italian brand known for its bright patterns. Although the label was founded 1950s, it first found success in the 1960s and became widely influential starting the in early 1970s. Missoni specialized in innovative knitwear. The example included in this exhibition is representative of the label’s signature brightly colored designs in which the knit is skillfully placed on the diagonal. The multicolored buttons and bright green belt buckle add to the whimsy and humor of the piece. Another fun piece in the exhibition is a blue cotton dress by Tina Leser (1910– 1986), decorated with an undersea design of fish and coral (fig. 24). The dress, with its pattern so large that a single repeat fills it completely, is paired with a crocheted shawl adorned with appliqués of fish cut out of the same print. Although the cut of 35this rather formal dress is conventional, its originality comes from the inventive print. Leser was known for her pioneering sportswear. She began her career as a fashion designer in Honolulu, where she focused on resort wear, including playsuits and coverups. This blue undersea dress retains the seaside theme even though Leser created it after moving her operations to New York. The spirit of fun in the works by designers such as Pucci, Missoni, and Tina Leser underscore the period’s lighthearted side. The fashion model Peggy Moffit summed up the spirit of the times: “If you are serious about fashion, you don’t take it seriously. . . . I don’t think fashion is a joke, but real fashion must have wit.” Although the 1960s and ’70s were a time of turbulence and protest, they were also full of youthful enthusiasm and innovation. T-shirts with political messages also date to the 1960s. In the 1950s, the T-shirt emerged as a garment in its own right rather than just underwear, and it quickly became a site for communicating messages. Whether advertising products or politics or broadcasting school affiliations, plain cotton T-shirts became 36 blank canvases. As protest movements grew in the 1960s and into the ’70s, the shirts’ messages were often political. The powerful legacy of this turbulent era can be seen in the design of T-shirts made to commemorate May 4, 1970. During the 1990s and continuing through 2000s, anniversaries of the event were marked with T-shirts, many of which are included in the exhibition. These attest to the continuing power of clothing to convey a powerful message and issue a direct call to remember and learn from the past. The 1960s marked a sharp rupture in style and the overall organization of the fashion industry. By the 1970s, couture fashion lost its place as the determinant of how Americans dressed. The growing influence of the baby boom generation can be seen in greater political consciousness but also in the shift in fashions that catered to young people. In many ways, college campuses led the push to more casual clothing, including the move toward women wearing pants and the ubiquity of blue jeans. By the late 1970s many of the innovations introduced by the counterculture found widespread acceptance by the Establishment and became mainstream. In fact, many styles we still wear today have their roots in the 1960s counterculture.About the Author Notes Sara Hume is Associate Professor and Curator of Kent State University Museum. Her research in the history of dress has focused on the intersections between fashionable and traditional dress as well as the global reach of the fashion industry. She also studies the relationship between evolving fashionable aesthetics and the underlying forces of economic and political change. She earned her PhD in Modern European History from the University of Chicago. She is currently completing a book which examines the development and preservation of regional or folk dress practices in Alsace in the face of pressure both from political conflict and mainstream fashion. She holds a BA in Art from Yale University and an MA in Museum Studies: Costume and Textiles from the Fashion Institute of Technology. 1. Robert J. Thompson and Steve Allen, “Television in the United States,” in Encyclopedia Britannica, last updated July 1, 2019, https://www.britannica.com/art/television-in-the-United-States. 2. Jessa Krick, “Gabrielle ‘Coco’ Chanel (1883–1971) and the House of Chanel,” Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, October 2004,https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/chnl/hd_chnl. htm. 3. Esther B. Fein, “Jerry Silverman, 74, Is Dead; Founder of a Fashion House,” New York Times, October 28, 1984. 9. Ruth La Ferla, “Dare to Be Supreme,” New York Times, December 17, 2006. 10. Valerie Steele, “A Queer History of Fashion: From the Closet to the Catwalk” in A Queer History of Fashion: From the Closet to the Catwalk, ed. Valerie Steele (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013) 8–9. 11. Steele, Queer History of Fashion, 37–38. 12. Steele, Queer History of Fashion, 56. 13. “Fashion for the ‘70s: Rudi Gernreich makes some modest proposals,” Life, January 9, 1970. 4. WWD Staff, “Fashion Designer Donald Brooks Dies at 77,” WWD, August 2, 2005, https://wwd.com/fashionnews/fashion-features/fashion-designer-donald-br…. 14. Booth Moore, “Rudi Gernreich ‘Fearless Fashion’ Exhibition Opens in L.A.,” Women’s Wear Daily, May 9, 2019, https://wwd.com/eye/lifestyle/rudi-gernreichfearless-fashion-exhibition…. 5. For further reading about Jewish immigrants in the fashion industry see Nancy L. Green, Ready-to-Wear and Ready-to-Work: A Century of Industry and Immigrants in Paris and New York (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1997); Malcolm Gladwell, Outliers: The Story of Success (Boston: Little, Brown, 2008). 15. Colleen Hill, Paris Refashioned, 1957–1968 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017), 77. 6. Emily Shire, “Why Was Bess Myerson the First and Last Jewish Miss America?” Daily Beast, January 7, 2015, https://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/07/why-was-bess-myerson-the-firstand-last-jewish-miss-america. 7. Howard Sachar, “Jews in the Civil Rights Movement,” My Jewish Learning, accessed May 20, 2019, https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jews-in-the-civilrights-movement/. 8. Aniko Bodroghkozy, “‘Is This What You Mean by Color TV?’ Race, Gender, and Contested Meanings in Julia,” in Critiquing the Sitcom: A Reader, ed. Joanne Morreale (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2003), 138. 16. “The Psychedelic Tie-Dye Look,” Time, January 26, 1970. 17. Angela Taylor, “If Jeans Seem on Their Last Legs, It’s Only the Beginning—As Skirts,” New York Times, September 1, 1973. 18. Ann Geracimos, “About Dashikis and the New Breed Cat,” New York Times, April 20, 1969. 19. Quoted in Marylin Bender, The Beautiful People (New York: Coward-McCann, 1967), 22. 20. Bernadine Morris, “Emilio Pucci, Designer of Bright Prints, Dies at 78,” New York Times, December 1, 1992. 37w s e h t o Cl r i a l F d n a n u F ith French F 1960s e h t f o ashions Colleen Hill Curator of Costume and Accessories The Museum at FIT, New Yorkead. d s i E t COUTUR a socialis H A U T E esign for the street . . . 1 d . o s t s t a n I wa and m r g e h t r o nf a, who o g i a i h c s n a le f a f B kind o odel for m r e m r o f —a er— design e Khanh ll n e o i u h n s a a f m r m a E dy-to-we a e r g n i z hen she la w lb , i 4 a r 6 t 9 a 1 became ment in e t a t s t n e i c igning pres s t e e d y n ld u o g b e nh had b made this a h K . ld o s both ix years a -s w y t t n a e h t w t g g clothin was only n i k a m , r e ars earli e y e e r h t s in Pari sible. s e c c a d n oking a for ward-lo Figure 1. Women shopping in the Biba boutique on Kensington Church Street, London, 1965 Photograph ©Pictorial Press Ltd/Alamy Stock Photo? n matter o i n i p o ’s id Khanh d h c u m But how Anyone with an interest in dress history may consider “Swinging London” the epicenter of 1960s fashion, and for good reason. British designers such as Mary Quant and Barbara Hulanicki, the founder of the legendary Biba boutique, created vibrant, youthful, and affordable clothes that have come to define the look of the decade (fig. 1 previous page). The excitement of London’s fresh influence on fashion, however, did not entirely overshadow the significance of Paris, long established as the fashion capital of the world. That French fashion had lost its relevance is a persistent yet easily disproven myth. Even a cursory glance at leading fashion publications from this era demonstrates that magazines such as Vogue and Queen continued to feature French couture while simultaneously expanding their coverage of ready-to-wear. Faux tortoiseshell sunglasses by Emmanuelle Khanh, probably 1970s, Gift of Mrs. William McCormick Blair, Jr., KSUM 2001.43.17 a. 42 Although ready-to-wear clothing was not unheard of in France prior to the 1960s, it had suffered from a poor reputation. Initially known as confection, these machine-made, mass-produced garments were of dubious quality and design and were generally disregarded by fashionable women. While many French women could not afford couture, they often frequented the workrooms of “little dressmakers” who provided custom-made clothing at affordable prices. It is important to note that the wardrobes of most women during this time period—and French women, in particular—comprised fewer garments that were better made. As the fashion arbiter Geneviève Antoine Dariaux noted in her 1964 style guide Elegance, the Parisian woman “considers it a compliment (as is it meant to be) when her best friend says ‘I’m so glad you decided to wear your red dress—I’ve always loved it!’”2 Cheap, ready-made clothes were simply not a viable or necessary option for many French women. During the 1950s, prêt-à-porter replaced the term confection. A literal translation of the existing English phrase ready-to- wear, this new term was a clear nod to the fashion industry in the United States, known for its manufacture of stylish, massproduced garments. Yet, ready-made clothing in France needed more than a new name: it needed a new identity. Emmanuelle Khanh took on the challenge, establishing herself as a leader among a small but lively group of designers known as stylistes. Their strictly ready-to-wear creations were experimental in ways that couture could not afford to be. A couture garment was characterized by its lavish materials and extensive handwork, meaning that the production of even a sample was expensive. Furthermore, a couturier’s survival depended on his or her clientele, who could easily be alienated by ideas that were too avant-garde. The significantly lower cost of clothing by Khanh and other stylistes allowed for a free-spirited approach to design that appealed to their peers. By 1964, onethird of the population in France was under the age of twenty.3 This influential consumer group was determined to look and behave differently than its parents did.4 For young women, that 43included purchasing fashionable clothes from shops rather than engaging in the time-consuming, outdated practice of frequenting dressmakers. The fashion press regularly mentioned Khanh’s name alongside those of several other young French designers, including Christiane Bailly, Daniel Hechter, Michèle Rosier, and Sonia Rykiel. Writing about the changes to the French fashion industry, the fashion journalist Hebe Dorsey noted that the stylistes were “a bit like The Beatles, with a great appeal to the masses from whence they came. They are free, unafraid—and will do vulgar things with fun and flair.” An especially audacious dress design by Khanh, dating to 1966, exemplifies this statement. It was made from wide stripes of colorful vinyl that could be stripped away, one by one, to shorten the skirt’s length (fig. 2). Although the stylistes were immensely important in France and abroad, their names are not always well known today, particularly among Americans. This is due in part to the fact that they regularly, though not always, worked under labels other than their own. Khanh, for example, designed for the French labels I.D., Pierre D’Alby, and Cacharel, as well as the New York boutique Paraphernalia. She also shared a label with Christiane Bailly, which they called Emma-Christie. Hechter negotiated licensing contracts with labels around the world, including the United States and Japan, and reported sales of $25 million by 1972.6 Michèle Rosier worked for Chloé and also established her own label, Vêtements de Vacances (V de V), which specialized in chic sporting attire (fig. 3). Sonia Rykiel began her career by designing for a Left Bank boutique called Laura, which was owned by her husband’s family. After divorcing Sam Rykiel in 1968, she began selling clothes under her own name. Figure 2. Dress by Emmanuelle Khanh made from removable strips of vinyl, 1966 Photograph ©Keystone Pictures USA/Alamy 44 Leading fashion magazines had little choice but to keep up. As the New York Times journalist Marylin Bender noted in her revealing 1967 book, The Beautiful People: “when the news of fashion is being made by and for the age group that subscribes to Mademoiselle, Glamour, Seventeen and Elle, their French equivalent that forcefully promoted the manufacture of ready-to-wear and gloated over the decline of haute couture, where do Vogue, the bible of American elegance, and its rival, Harper’s Bazaar, go? They raid the territory of their younger sisters. That’s where the action is.”8 Sandra Horvitz, a young editor at Mademoiselle during the 1960s, recalled the tremendous impact that Elle had on other fashion magazines, including her own New York–based publication.9 Under the direction of Hélène Gordon-Lazareff (who also happened to be Michèle Rosier’s mother), Elle did not entirely eschew couture, but it was more focused on the innovative ready-to-wear offerings of the stylistes. Figure 3. Ski and après-ski ensembles designed by Michèle Rosier, 1966 Photograph ©Keystone Pictures USA/Alamy 45Horvitz recalled that as the 1960s progressed, Elle’s influence resulted in the growing popularity of ready-to-wear fashion shows in Paris. As a regular attendee, Horvitz would select styles to be featured in Mademoiselle—and she also chose designs for her personal wardrobe (fig. 4). The increasing influence of the stylistes—and by extension the assertion of ready-to-wear as a consumerist force— was evident by the mid-1960s. It was impossible for couturiers not to take note of these changes, and several adapted accordingly. Pierre Cardin, who had worked for Christian Dior before opening his own couture house in 1950, was known as one of the “least stuffy” of the couturiers.10 He had even shown an early interest in ready-to-wear, when he planned a line of prêt-à-porter to be sold in Paris’s Printemps department store in 1959. This endeavor led to his expulsion from the Chambre syndicale—the governing body of the French couture industry—who cited his violation of a rule dictating that any ready-to-wear designs by a couturier could only be sold in his or her own boutique.11 Although Cardin continued to 46 produce couture, he maintained a keen understanding of the future of fashion. In a 1964 interview for the New York Times Magazine, he expressed his belief that couturiers should introduce a limited number of changes to fashion each season, as the industry had become too democratic for the dictatorial voice of the couturier.12 The most acclaimed launch of a couturier’s ready-to-wear line occurred in 1966, when Yves Saint Laurent, who also trained with Dior, opened his Rive Gauche boutique. Literally meaning “Left Bank,” Rive Gauche referred to the boutique’s location in an area with a reputation for being the “bohemian” part of Paris. Because Saint Laurent was one of the most famous couturiers of the 1960s, his Rive Gauche designs enjoyed an immediate Figure 4. Dress by Emmanuelle Khanh for I.D., 1966. The Museum at FIT, 77.57.2. Gift of Sandy Horvitz. Photograph © The Museum at FITcachet. And because the designs introduced in his couture collections were similar to those sold at the store, more women could afford the distinctive Saint Laurent look. That did not mean that Rive Gauche offerings were considered a bargain. As Marylin Bender observed, Saint Laurent’s ready-to-wear fashions were still costly, describing a particular garment—a shiny, yellow vinyl raincoat with crocheted sleeves—to exemplify her point.13 Costing $90 in 1966, or more than $700 in 2019, this distinctive jacket was hardly an impulse purchase for the average woman (fig. 5). Figure 5. Raincoat by Saint Laurent Rive Gauche, fall 1966. The Museum at FIT, 77.21.4. Gift of Ethel Scull. Photograph © The Museum at FIT 47 Alongside Cardin and Saint Laurent, André Courrèges was considered one of the most innovative couturiers working in Paris during the 1960s. A protégé of Cristóbal Balenciaga, he developed a sleek, minimalist aesthetic that was the result of his mastery of cut. Yet his streamlined silhouettes were especially vulnerable to poor ready-made copies (fig. 6). Rather than see women dressed in such low-quality imitations, the couturier decided to offer more accessible versions of his designs. In 1966, he presented a runway show with a variety of options: couture (designated as “Prototypes”); ready-to wear (cleverly called “Couture Future”); and an even less expensive ready-towear line similar in concept to today’s “diffusion” lines (he called it “Hyperbole”). To showcase couture designs alongside ready-to-wear creations was a bold and unprecedented move.14 The couturiers’ firm stamp of approval on prêt-à-porter was critical to its widespread acceptance and growth in France. It should not be forgotten, though, that couturiers often followed the daring experimentations of the stylistes. As a whole, the changes that took place in the fashion industry during 1960s, in France and abroad, provided the framework for the ways fashion is produced and consumed today. As one of the most dynamic periods in fashion history— aesthetically and commercially—it is little wonder that the 1960s continue to fascinate dress enthusiasts of all kinds, including designers, historians, and museum visitors. Figure 6. A young woman in Munich wears a “Courrèges-look” wool dress and boots (left), 1966. Photograph © Keystone Press/Alamy Stock Photo 48About the Author Notes Colleen Hill is the curator of costume and accessories at The Museum at the Fashion Institute of Technology (MFIT). Since joining the museum in 2006, she has curated or co-curated more than a dozen exhibitions, including Fashion Unraveled (2018), Paris Refashioned, 1957-1968 (2017), Fairy Tale Fashion (2016), Exposed: A History of Lingerie (2014), and Eco-Fashion: Going Green (2010). She holds an MA in Fashion and Textile Studies: History, Theory, Museum Practice from FIT, and is currently pursuing a PhD at London College of Fashion. She has published six books on fashion and contributed essays to numerous other publications. 1. James W. Brady, “The Alley Khanh of Fashion,” Women’s Wear Daily, February 17, 1964, 8. 2. Geneviève Antoine Dariaux, Elegance: A Complete Guide for Every Woman Who Wants to Be Well and Properly Dressed on All Occasions (New York: Doubleday, 1964), 203. 3. Chris Tinker, “Rock ’n’ Roll Stardom: Johnny Hallyday,” in Stardom in Postwar France, ed. John Gaffney and Diana Holmes (New York: Berghahn Books, 2007), 75. 4. John Gaffney and Diana Holmes, “Stardom in Theory and Context,” in Gaffney and Holmes, Stardom in Postwar France, 17. 5. Hebe Dorsey, “Conclusion: Prêt-à-Porter v. Couture,” in Couture: An Illustrated History of the Great Paris Designers and Their Creations, ed. Ruth Lyman (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1972), 243. 11. Claire Wilcox, “The Legacy of Couture,” in The Golden Age of Couture: Paris and London 1947–57, ed. Claire Wilcox (London: V&A Publishing, 2007), 81. Couture boutiques were generally located on the ground floor of couture houses and featured items such as scarves, perfume, and a limited range of simple garments. 12. Interview with Pierre Cardin, New York Times Magazine, July 19, 1964. 13. Bender, Beautiful People, 222. 14. Didier Grumbach, “Haute Couture and Ready-toWear: A Recent History,” in Fashion Show: Paris Style, ed. Pamela A. Parmal and Didier Grumbach (Boston: MFA Publications, 2006), 93. 6. Dorsey, “Conclusion,” 250. 7. Olivier Saillard, Sonia Rykiel (New York: Rizzoli, 2009), 11. 8. Marylin Bender, The Beautiful People (New York: Coward McCann, 1967), 25. 9. Sandra Horvitz, interview with the author, February 23, 2016. 10. Bender, Beautiful People, 224. 49r a e w s n e M e k a qu Youth Daniel Delis Hill Fashion Historian, Author, and Illustratorbaby I I r a W Wo r l d t s o p t s r the fi y midb d n a , l schoo h g i h tion d a e l r u e t p n o e p . s e U.S h t boomer f o f l a than h e r o m , e five. y t decad n e w t ge of a e ogue h V t a r s e a d ” n , e u was hquak IN 1960, “yout a g n i o g r e re unlike e d n w u , s h a g u w o America ouths, th y e s e h T . in 1965 d e r la c e d people. g editor n u o y f o erations n e g s u o i v most pre Crowd of people, some with fists raised. 1970. Kent State University Libraries. Special Collections and Archives.American s he 1960 t f o s r e t youngs rejected the materialism, social conformity, and complacency of their elders. Instead, many chose to rebel against the “Establishment”—schools, government, the military, religion—and bring about sweeping social change through activism and protest. At college, they demanded that students have rights of free speech and that school bans on political activity on campus be rescinded. In the civil rights movement, they registered voters and protested the delays in implementing court-mandated desegregation in the South. In the Second-wave feminist movement, they marched for women’s pay equality and reproductive self-determination. And they joined with American Indians to bring attention to the government’s broken treaties and neglect. Most galvanizing for all American young people at the time, though, was the Vietnam War (1965-75). No sooner had the first U.S. combat troops been sent to South Vietnam in 1965 than campuses nationwide erupted with antiwar demonstrations. Nightly TV news reports brought the war in Asia and the antiwar protests at home into millions of living rooms each night. The events of May 4 continued to draw protest activities, including Vietnam Vets Against the War (organization VVAW). Copyright: Kent State University 54 Shocked citizens across America watched the reports of the tens of thousands of antiwar protesters who marched on the Pentagon in 1967. And horrified parents were stunned by the televised scenes of violence against protesters during the 1968 police riot in Chicago, and most especially, the killing of unarmed students by national guardsmen in Ohio and Mississippi in 1970. The great majority of American youths, though, found ways other than activism and protests to rebel against sociopolitical conventions. For young men, the most direct and personal way to rebel was to choose a nonconformist, nontraditional look and dress. Particularly alarming to parents, teachers, and other adult authorities was long hair on men. With the appearance of the Beatles on American TV in 1964, teen boys were inspired to grow their hair long, a break with the gendernorm orthodoxies of masculine identity established during the era of Napoleon. At first, social opprobrium against men’s long hair was broad, but by the late 1960s, the look had evolved from a subversive defiance of masculine norms into a fashion trend featured throughout American popular culture. The Beatles likewise introduced to American youth a new concept in men’s clothing called mod, short for modernist. In England, the center of men’s mod styles was Carnaby Street, a narrow lane in Soho lined with specialty boutiques that offered young men fashions that were fresh, innovative, and decidedly nonconventional. Skinny rib pullovers flattered the slim youthful physique; shirts of the new synthetic fabrics in neon hues and psychedelic patterns were eyecatching; and see-through voile and lace shirts became all the more exhibitionistic when worn unbuttoned down the front. Jackets were tapered to fit snugly at the waist and hips, and variations were designed without traditional collars and lapels. Similarly, trousers and jeans were sexualized with a painted-on fit through the hips and thighs, and low-rise hiphugger waistbands. In 1968, the era’s iconic bellbottom cuff became a phenomenon that lasted through the mid-1970s. Among the favored mod accessories for young men were skinny ties in floral prints, scarves in 55vibrant colors and patterns, and jewelry ranging from chain necklaces and ropes of love beads to multiples of bracelets and rings (fig. 1). For most traditionalists in America, mod styles were viewed as effeminate and antithetical to conventions of American masculine identity. Parents genuinely worried that such clothing might “turn” their sons gay. But since young women liked the modernity of the peacock revolution looks, the youthquake male gladly donned the latest Carnaby Street import or knock-off. The American menswear industry eagerly adapted Carnaby styles for the US market, many of which sold well, notably granny-print calico shirts in the new permanent-press fabrics, hiphugger pants, and tapered suits and sports jackets. However, for many American youthquake men, the once controversial mod fashions became too commercialized and mainstream, thus just another iteration of conformity. Instead, some young men explored a more personalized self-expression in their dress through street styles. The antiestablishment, 56 antiwar counterculture that emerged in the second half of the 1960s provided young men with an abundance of ideas for unconventional, individualist looks. The ultimate nonconformists of the period were the hippies, whose eclectic and nontraditional dress was a multicultural mix of clothing. Vintage styles from thrift shops were layered with military garments from surplus outlets, which were often combined with nonwestern styles that included embroidered East Indian shirts, African kente cloth tunics, Arabian kaftans, and colorful Mexican vests and ponchos, among others. In addition, hippies embellished their well-worn jeans with drawings in permanent marker of flower power motifs, antiwar symbols and slogans, and psychedelic swirls with strips of machine-made embroidery stitched to the cuffs of bell-bottoms or along the fly fronts and pocket edges. Among the preferred street looks of the peace-and-love flower children were handcrafted clothes and accessories. Such styles were often one-of-a-kind that allowed the wearer the truest form of independent, personal style. Many enterprising art Figure 1. “Uncommon shirtery,” asserts a 1969 ad from Carriage Club.students and craftspeople made extra cash by creating wearable handicrafts for “bein” and “sit-in” protests and, especially, for music festivals. Textile artisans skilled with knitting or macramé produced a wide variety of unique garments and accessories such as soft hats, bags, vests, scarves, and belts. Silkscreen printmakers adapted or copied graphics and messages from popular dorm posters and applied them to T-shirts. Still other handicrafters added embroidery or beading to flea-market clothing. The most ubiquitous handmade look of the era, though, was tie-dye. Not only was the process easy, quick, and inexpensive—requiring a twenty-cent box of powdered dye, a few rubber bands, and some hot water—but also each resulting pattern was unique. Still, even with the uniqueness that each flower child might achieve with his handcrafted clothing, ultimately the nonconventional look was tribal. The young people who wore flowers in their hair, painted their faces, and layered tiedyed, multicultural, and vintage clothing were mostly from white, middle-class families. Their street looks were a unified Figure 2. The look of the hippie was at once individualistic and, at the same time, tribal. William Barry ad, 1969. expression of rebellion against conformist parents and the Establishment much more than a statement of protest against social injustices or the Vietnam War (fig. 2). Yet, other tribal street looks were worn specifically to make protest statements. The more assertive antiwar young men selected protest clothing to declare unequivocally their stand against the draft, the military, and the war. In addition to long hair and perhaps strands of love beads, one of the most effective forms of antiwar protest dress was modified military garments, particularly those in the distinctive army olive green color, which were cheap and easily available through army-navy surplus outlets. Activists tribalized these symbols of the military establishment with antiwar messages and graphics written in permanent marker, silkscreened, or painted on them, especially the circular peace sign. Military garb was further tribalized with the addition of laminated buttons proclaiming antiwar messages, often worn in multiples clustered on lapels and sleeves. Probably the most incendiary antiwar protest look, though, were patchworks made of pieces cut from 57US flags that were stitched to the seats of jeans or backs of jackets. Wearers of the patches ran the risk of confrontations and even violence on the street from supporters of the war. In African-American communities, the emergence of a new masculine identity was equally dramatic. Among young, urban black men and women, the civil rights movement had inspired an ethnic consciousness and the desire to reconnect with their African heritage. Many wanted their dress not only to symbolize this legacy but also to present a tangible protest against racism and exploitation. From the late 1960s through the early 1970s, the full, rounded Afro hairstyle became the most visible representation of black pride and unity. In addition, as a further statement of their African heritage, many black men adopted the dashiki—a collarless tunic, usually made with fabrics that replicated African kente cloth. Similarly, boutiques in African-American neighborhoods provided ready-to-wear shirt styles in prints and patterns that represented the colors of Kwanzaa or imitated resistdyed cloth from West and Central Africa. 58 As young people explored street style looks that expressed their sociopolitical activism, newfound cultural identities, and rebellion against convention, the American ready-to-wear industry was provided a continual source of new ideas for the youth market. The flower children inspired flower-power prints and patterns for every conceivable form of men’s, women’s, and children’s clothing, ranging from shirts, jeans, and outerwear to intimate apparel and accessories. Similarly, everything from T-shirts to evening gowns was tiedyed. From the multicultural dress of the hippies came mass-market adaptations of American Indian dress, including beaded headbands and belts; buckskin moccasins and boots; and fringed leather vests, jackets, and totes. Likewise, hippies inspired the Nehru jacket, based on the East Indian sherwani—a men’s long jacket with a circular stand-up collar made famous by Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. The Arabian kaftan, also a favorite of hippies, became commercially marketed as loungewear for the sophisticated urbanite. In the early 1970s, wide elephant bells became atrend, derived from the street style of ripping open the side seams of standard bell-bottoms and stitching in contrasting gussets for an even wider, homemade look. In body-conscious vest suits, sleeves and collars were removed from suit jackets, and youthful waists and hips were belted. From handmade protest clothing came an endless variety of novelty T-shirts with whimsical rather than radical messages. These and other street styles of the 1960s have been continually revisited by the fashion industry since the looks were first innovated and donned by the youthquake generation more than fifty years ago (fig. 3). About the Author Bibliography Daniel Delis Hill has worked as a retail fashion illustrator, catalogue art director, and creative director of fashion photography. He also taught in the fashion departments of Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, and the University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio. Other books by Daniel Delis Hill include Fashion from Victoria to the New Millennium and Necessaries: Two Hundred Years of Fashion Accessories. Bennett-England, Rodney. Dress Optional: The Revolution in Menswear. Chester Springs, PA: Dufour, 1968. Costantino, Maria. Men’s Fashion in the Twentieth Century: From Frock Coats to Intelligent Fibers. London: B.T. Batsford, 1997. Hill, Daniel Delis. American Menswear from the Civil War to the Twenty-First Century. Lubbock: Texas Tech University Press, 2011. Hill, Daniel Delis. Peacock Revolution: American Masculine Identity and Dress in the Sixties and Seventies. London: Bloomsbury, 2018. Lester, Richard. Boutique: A History, King’s Road to Carnaby Street. Woodbridge, UK: ACC Editions, 2010. Marwick, Arthur. The Sixties: Cultural Revolution in Britain, France, Italy, and the United States, c.1958–c.1974. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Ross, Geoffrey Aquilina. The Day of the Peacock: Style for Men 1963–1973. London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 2014. Whitney, David, ed. Youthquake. New York: Cowles, 1968. Figure 3. Body-conscious suits of the youthquake era included the vest suit and belted safari styles in the new double knit fabrics. Europecraft ad, 1970. 59t s i l k c e ChCelebrities Green silk charmeuse evening dress edged with beading Valentino Italian, 1967 Silk charmeuse, rhinestones, ribbon, pearls, beads Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.593 ab Blue wool evening dress with embroidered border, Belonged to Dinah Shore Norman Norell American, ca. 1965 Wool, embroidery, rhinestones Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.480 a-c White silk chiffon evening dress trimmed with fur, Belonged to Bess Myerson Shannon Rodgers American, 1960s Silk chiffon, fox fur Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.640 Black velvet and pink satin evening dress, Belonged to Kitty Carlisle Hart Donald Brooks American, ca. 1968 Velvet, satin Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.1282 62 Black net evening dress with silver sequins, Belonged to Diahann Carroll Norman Norell for Bonwit Teller American, 1960s Black net, sequins Gift of Mrs. Amy Greene-Andrews, KSUM 2002.44.1a Purple velvet jacket worn by Jimi Hendrix American or European, ca. 1967 Velvet Collection of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, L2019.37.2 Beaded taupe dress worn by Diana Ross Probably American, 1971 Plastic beads and sequins Collection of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, L2019.37.1 Red jersey dress with long trumpet sleeves, Worn by Lena Horne Giorgio di Sant’ Angelo American, 1970s Polyester jersey Gift of Lena Horne, KSUM 1992.14.16 White jersey dress with matching overdress, Worn by Lena Horne Giorgio di Sant’ Angelo American, 1970s Polyester jersey Gift of Lena Horne, KSUM 1992.14.5 ab Couture and Its Influence Cream tweed suit Cristóbal Balenciaga French, 1960s Wool tweed Gift of Mrs. Emmet Whitlock, KSUM 1986.10.1 ab Pink tweed suit with matching blouse Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel French, 1960s Wool tweed, silk blouse and lining Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.425 a-c Two-piece tweed dress Shannon Rodgers for Jerry Silverman American, ca. 1965 Wool tweed Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.662 ab Grey and white tweed dress Shannon Rodgers for Jerry Silverman American, ca. 1965 Wool tweed Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.663 Dress and matching coat of striped wool Mila Schön Italian, ca. 1965 Wool Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.620 abMan’s wool houndstooth coat Pierre Cardin French, ca. 1965 Wool Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.628 ab Divisions over Vietnam Green army fatigues American, 1968 Cotton Loan from the Ohio History Connection, L2019.41.1 Camouflage bucket hat American, 1968 Cotton Loan from the Ohio History Connection, L2019.41.3 Armbands worn by members of the Committee for Nonviolence Marshals American, 1970 Cotton muslin Jerry M. Lewis papers. May 4 collection. Kent State University Libraries Special Collections and Archives, L2019.50.2 ab Armband with text “Remember Kent & Jackson State. Stop the Draft” American, early 1970s Cotton twill Jerry M. Lewis papers. May 4 collection. Kent State University Libraries Special Collections and Archives, L2019.50.3 Black cotton jacket American, 1969 Cotton Loan from the Ohio History Connection, L2019.41.2 Banner “NO WAR – Kent State Students United” American Canvas May 4 banners and posters collection. May 4 collection. Kent State University Libraries Special Collections and Archives, L2019.50.4 Jacket of dress uniform from Ohio Army National Guard American, 1970 Wool May 4 memorabilia and artifacts. May 4 collection. Kent State University Libraries Special Collections and Archives, L2019.50.1 Poster for the Student Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam American, 1969 Paper May 4 banners and posters collection. May 4 collection. Kent State University Libraries Special Collections and Archives, L2019.50.5 Tan knit sweater and shorts Rudi Gernreich for Harmon Knitwear American, Fall 1970 Wool knit, leather, metal rings and clasps Gift of Marion C. Risman, The Rudi Gernreich Collection, KSUM 1993.74.6 ab Experimental Materials Paper dress with original packaging Waste Basket Boutique American, ca. 1966-67 Paper Anonymous gift, KSUM X2017.1.1 Paper dress with original packaging Go!!! Clothes by James Sterling Paper Fashions Ltd American, ca. 1967 Paper Gift of Paige Palmer, KSUM 2001.1.49 a Silver coated paper dress Waste Basket Boutique American, ca. 1967 Metallic coated paper Gift of Paige Palmer, KSUM 2001.1.38 63Clear plastic dress with yellow and orange flowers Paraphernalia American, 1960s Plastic Gift of A. Christina Giannini, KSUM 2017.7.2 Evening dress with pink and white plastic strips and beads Hubert de Givenchy French, ca. 1965 Net, plastic strips, beads Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.505 ab Ivory wool knit dress with clear vinyl insets Rudi Gernreich American, 1968 Wool knit, vinyl Gift of Marion C. Risman, The Rudi Gernreich Collection, KSUM 1993.74.29 a-c Global Influence Crocheted lace dress and matching coat of white raffia Italian, 1968-69 Raffia Gift of Susan L. Otto, KSUM 2017.5.1 White evening dress with circular paillettes Elinor Simmons for Malcolm Starr American, made in Hong Kong, 1965-72 Chiffon, paillettes, beads, metallic thread Gift of Joanne Mumford Walker, KSUM 1993.70.2 Embroidered smock Northern Ghana, 1960s Handwoven cloth, embroidery On loan from Fred T. Smith, L2019.45.1 Orange and gold dress and jacket with floral pattern Adele Simpson American, 1960s Silk and metallic brocade Gift of Adele Simpson, KSUM 1990.112.3 ab Man’s brown suit with Nehru jacket Jacques American, ca. 1965 Wool Gift of Lee Stewart and Sheila Stewart, KSUM 1984.32.7 a-c Denim wrap dress Serendipity 3 American, 1966 Bleached cotton denim Gift of Serendipity 3, KSUM 1983.2.59 Man’s orange shirt Fortnum Mason English, 1967-74 Silk Gift of Leamond Dean in memory of Margery Knight, KSUM 1995.54.40 Maxi skirt of painted denim Serendipity 3 American, 1971 Bleached and painted cotton denim Gift of Serendipity 3, KSUM 1983.2.65 Patterned lamé jacket and pants Bill Blass American, ca. 1970s Lamé Gift of Mrs. J. Rene, KSUM 1989.44.1 ab 64 Orange and gold evening caftan Thea Porter American, late 1960s Chiffon, metallic jacquard woven fabric Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.1244 Denim bikini top Serendipity 3 American, 1974 Bleached cotton denim Gift of Serendipity 3, KSUM 1983.2.63 aBeyond the Gender Binary Black jersey pantsuit Yves Saint Laurent Rive Gauche French, ca. 1967 Jersey Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.714 a-c Man’s black wool vest suit The Higbee Co. American, 1960s Wool twill From the collection of and in memory of James Melvin Someroski, KSUM 1997.6.25 ab Man’s paisley shirt P Celli Italian, 1967-68 Silk jersey Gift of Leamond Dean in memory of Margery Knight, KSUM 1995.54.30 Ivory wool pantsuit Jacques Bellini Italian, 1970s Wool Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.1213 ab Blue blouse Jack Mulqueen Silksational American, 1970s Polyester Fulton-Lucien Collection, KSUM 1992.37.1 Man’s three-piece ivory suit Carlo Ciatti Italian, 1960s-90s Wool Gift of Barry Bradley, KSUM 2009.37.5 a-c Man’s blue shirt House of Dior French, 1960s 80% Dacron, 20% cotton Gift of Joseph S. Simms, KSUM 1985.6.4 Paisley tie American, ca. 1950s-90s Silk Anonymous gift, KSUM X1997.252.1 Safari-inspired suit Yves Saint Laurent French, 1968 Wool gabardine Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.2111 ab Patchwork caftan with mirrorwork and multicolored embroidery Rudi Gernreich American, probably made in India, ca. 1975 Cotton, mirrors, metallic ribbon, metallic thread, cotton and silk thread Gift of Coral Browne Price, KSUM 1985.27.1 DIY Patched jeans American, 1970-74 Cotton denim, leather patches Gift of Typical Student Fashions of 1970-1974, KSUM 2018.9.1 Pair of jeans reworked into skirt American, 1970-74 Cotton denim, cotton patches and inset Gift of Typical Student Fashions of 1970-1974, KSUM 2018.9.2 Cotton shirt Mexican, 1970-74 Cotton Gift of Typical Student Fashions of 1970-1974, KSUM 2018.9.3 Dress made of wool scarves American, 1970 Wool On loan from Sheryl Birkner, L2019.42.1 65Navy wool tunic with woven designs Arletta Brown American, late 1960s Wool On loan from Diane Brown Rarick – Arletta Brown Collection, L2019.43.1 Wool knit sweater Rudi Gernreich for Harmon Knitwear American, 1972 Wool rib knit Gift of Marion C. Risman, The Rudi Gernreich Collection, KSUM 1993.74.51a Wool poncho Arletta Brown American, ca. 1970 Wool, wool yarn On loan from Diane Brown Rarick – Arletta Brown Collection, L2019.43.2 Puka shell necklace American, 1970s Shells On loan from Cindy Arnold, L2019.44.2 Embroidered cotton work shirt Arletta Brown American, 1972-73 Cotton chambray On loan from Diane Brown Rarick – Arletta Brown Collection, L2019.43.3 Denim culottes and matching vest American, 1976 Cotton denim, printed cotton On loan from Cindy Arnold, L2019.44.1 ab 66 Shark tooth necklace American, 1970s Shark teeth, leather, glass beads, wooden beads, metal wire On loan from Cindy Arnold, L2019.44.3 Gardening chaps and matching gloves Leila Larmon for Serendipity 3 American, 1970s Cotton denim, plastic, foam sponges, cotton appliqués, elastic Gift of Serendipity 3, KSUM 1983.2.31 a-c Wool knit jumpsuit Rudi Gernreich for Harmon Knitwear American, ca. 1972 Wool knit Gift of Marion C. Risman, The Rudi Gernreich Collection, KSUM 1993.74.37 T-shirt made with cotton lace doily Serendipity 3 American, 1970 Cotton jersey, cotton lace doily Gift of Serendipity 3, KSUM 1983.2.26 Midi skirt of patchwork denim and mattress ticking Serendipity 3 American, 1976 Cotton denim, mattress ticking Gift of Serendipity 3, KSUM 1983.2.75 Patterns and Textures Sheer white dress with circles embroidered in blue André Courrèges French, late 1960s White organza, wool binding Gift of Aileen Mehle, KSUM 1986.2.12 Hand block-printed silk dress American, 1960s Hand block-printed silk Gift of Dr.& Mrs. (Karen Jenson) Reginald Rutherford III, KSUM 1998.47.6Printed blouse and wrap skirt Emilio Pucci Italian, ca. 1973 Cotton Gift of Charles Sawyer, KSUM 2001.50.1 ab Tie-dyed ensemble with matching scarves Halston American, 1970s Silk chiffon Gift of Marti Stevens, KSUM 1988.11.32 a-d Tie-dyed T-shirt American, ca. 1960s Cotton On loan from Daniel Mainzer, L2019.47.1 Striped knit ensemble Missoni Italian, early 1970s Silk/cotton knit Gift of Mrs. Jerome (Loretta) Borstein, KSUM 1986.31.2 a-c Patterned knit shirt American, 1970s Acetate tricot knit From the collection of and in memory of James Melvin Someroski, KSUM 1997.6.14 Unbleached cotton pants Cotler American, ca. 1970 Cotton From the collection of and in memory of James Melvin Someroski, KSUM 1997.6.4 Cotton dress and crocheted shawl with printed underwater scene Tina Leser American, ca. 1968 Cotton, acrylic yarn Gift of Mrs. Charles Rumsey in memory of Tina Leser, KSUM 1995.19.3 a-c Accessories White plastic sunglasses André Courrèges French, ca. 1965 Plastic Gift of Mrs. John Frankenheimer, KSUM 1987.100.41 a Faux tortoiseshell sunglasses Emmanuelle Khanh French, probably 1970s Plastic Gift of Mrs. William McCormick Blair, Jr., KSUM 2001.43.17 a Black hat with pink brim House of Dior French, 1960s Velvet, synthetic fabric feathers Gift of Matilda Miller, KSUM 1994.23.19 White leather pillbox hat Cristóbal Balenciaga French, ca. 1965 Leather Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.1587 Round hat covered with pink and green feathers Vincent & Harmik American, early 1960s Feathers, net, velvet Gift of Eleanore Midrack Shockey, KSUM 1986.82.28 Light orange corduroy hat with leather bow Cristóbal Balenciaga French, ca. 1965 Corduroy, leather Silverman/Rodgers Collection, KSUM 1983.1.1589 Black and white leather gloves Kislav French, ca. 1960 Leather Gift of Vera Gawansky, KSUM 1985.33.7 ab 67Embroidered black doeskin gloves French, 1945-65 Doeskin, embroidery Gift of Roslyn Scheinman, KSUM 1995.16.3 ab Metal lunchbox-like purse American, 1960s Metal, decoupage, leather handle Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Victor (Lilian) Gross, KSUM 1991.68.9 Cotton twill handbag Emilio Pucci Italian, 1962 Cotton twill, leather strap Fulton/Lucien Collection, Gift of Dr. and Mrs. Robert E. Fulton, KSUM 1986.123.38 Black alligator shoes with stiletto heel Roger Vivier for Dior French, 1963 Alligator leather Gift of Mrs. Surella D. Ames, KSUM 1993.23.1 ab White patent leather handbag with wooden buttons Coppola e Toppo for Valentino Italian, 1960s Patent leather, wood and metal buttons Martha, Inc., KSUM 1991.34.90 White leather handbag covered in plastic disks Italian, 1960s Leather, plastic, metal rings Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Victor (Lillian) Gross, KSUM 1991.68.8 Black crocodile Kelly bag Hermès French, 1960s Crocodile leather, metal Bequest of Joanne Toor Cummings, KSUM 1996.81.313 ab 68 White leather boots André Courrèges French, mid 1960s Leather Gift of Mrs. John Frankenheimer, KSUM 1987.100.3 ab Purple vinyl shoes Capeto’s American, ca. 1975 Vinyl Gift of Bill Reilly, Jr., KSUM 1998.25.6 ab May 4 Commemorative T-Shirts Selection of T-shirts commemorating May 4 American, 1980-2009 Cotton May 4-Related T-Shirts collection. May 4 collection. Kent State University Libraries Special Collections and Archives, L2019.50.6 a-g, .7 a-e Grey suede shoes American, 1968-74 Suede, metal buckle Gift of Eleanore Midrack Shockey, KSUM 1987.16.3 ab Blue and tan leather platform wingtips Dexter American, 1970s Gift of Dick and Isabel Kertscher, KSUM 1986.104.2 ab Detail of patterned knit shirt, 1970s, From the collection of and in memory of James Melvin Someroski, KSUM 1997.6.14kent.edu/museum 515 Hilltop Drive Kent, Ohio 44242-0001 • 330-672-3450