Paul Fussells Uniforms: Why We Are What We Wear Provokes Ageless Debates

0
130

By Joe Talkington,
owner of Star Uniforms

Several years ago, author and historian Paul Fussell spent time in the hospital and wondered where all the nurses had gone. Apparently, he could not identify them because they were not wearing the traditional white uniforms and white hats.

We in the uniform industry, of course, know exactly what he likely experienced. Medical practitioners today enjoy a wide selection of colors and patterns to wear on the job. Hospitals choose from a variety of comfort styles, performance fabrics and unique designs.

In response to not being able to identify the nurses, Fussell writes This novel phenomenon struck me as misguided when, as a bed patient, I wanted to see a nurse now and then and the only caregivers I could raise looked like charladies.

This experience prompted Fussell to muse on the wearing of uniforms in general. As a historian by nature, his research on the topic became so broad that it led him to see the wearing of ANY clothing as a uniform question.

Everyone must wear a uniform, but everyone must deny wearing one, lest ones invaluable personality and unique identity be compromised, writes Fussell. But, Fussell discovers something along the way. While he expected people to dislike dressing like everyone else, he found they actually loved doing so. He surmises that the uniform, no matter how lowly, assures its audience that the wearer has a job. (And in this economic environment, this may be especially true.)

Fussell is a former U.S. Army Officer and, as a result, the book places a heavy emphasis on military uniforms. He describes how Generals Eisenhower, MacArthur and Patton used personal touches to modify their uniforms. Each of the generals uniforms represented their unique personality and identityfrom Eisenhowers now namesake jacket to Pattons shiny helmet liner.

Patton, in particular, believed a smart-looking uniform commanded respect. Fussell quotes Patton as saying, Officers must assert themselves by example and by voice. They must be pre-eminent in courage, deportment and dress. Remarkably, Patton even admits in his diary that he was not always as brave as he seemed and that he relied on his uniform to keep his courage up.

Another general that Fussell discusses is MacArthur, who offered a simple khaki shirt and trousers alternative to the uniform of the day. The uniform choice was arguably in response to the heat and humidity of the Pacific war locations of World War II. But it is interesting to note MacArthurs wearers comfort experience affected even the most regulated of uniform programs.

As a uniform provider, I had expected these types of observations to lead to an in-depth discussion of todays uniform environment and was disappointed the book did not go further. For example, little emphasis is given to the business casual explosion, featuring the armies of American workers reporting for duty wearing logod shirts.

Fussell does provide an anecdotal comment on the subject. The well-advertised dress-down or casual Friday had, of course, managed to impose its own uniform conventions: no worker would venture to appear in anything like colored tights or, in torrid weather, swim suits, or in really sexy micro-miniskirts…But women have a longer list of casual donts than men have: no shorts, no low-cut tank tops, no Capri pants, no spandex fabrics (too skin-tight). No sneakers or thongs, and some offices frown on open-toed sandals. No gym clothes or picnic outfits.

Another case in point is that female uniforms are minimally discussed. Except for a small three-page chapter on nurses and another on brides (yes, Fussell muses on this fashion item from a uniform perspective), there is little attention paid to the category that prompted his research on uniforms in the first placewomen in uniform.

The truth is that the book lacks a great deal of organization. There is no index, footnotes, direction or pictures. The presentation is rather just a smorgasbord.

Half the book is devoted to military uniforms. The other sections include comments about chefs, doormen, flight attendants, athletes, firefighters and others.

The New York Times review of the book started by saying this is not a book about uniforms, its the notes for a book about uniformsthe contents of a file folder of clippings and jotted thoughts on the subject.

Yet, even with these shortcomings, there are entertaining tidbits, humorous insights and genuinely useful observations.

For instance, there is ammunition for those uniform dealers out there experiencing a stubborn customerstories to offer when discussing change. While the dress of certain groups has remained consistent for centuries, most have made attempts to change with the times. As an example, some of the Catholic nuns have dropped the practice of wearing habits, while others refuse to change.

Ironically, why the Catholic Church has been progressively dressing-down for decades, the Hare Krishnas continue dressing up. The founder of the Hare Krishna movement was asked why they dress differently, and the Swami responded, Its because we are different. But there is no argument the group has successfully used apparel as a uniform style to convey their message and identify memebership.

What does any of this mean to the uniform industry? Why discuss all this?

In the past, the super-objective, the most important intent of the uniform, was to reflect dignity and the importance of the work being performed. Today, a great deal of the elegance is gone. The trend is to emulate casual clothing, a fashion style that places comfort at the top of the list of goals.

The reality is that Fussells hospital nurse experience is an example of the greater conflicts of interest that uniform customers must deal with. In todays world, management has a difficult time trying to balance a uniform design that favors employee contentment and comfort against the potential for customer confusion related to misidentification of employees.

Manufacturers are striving to help certain industry categories meet the struggle for appropriate dress standards while still providing comfort and the opportunity for an employees personal touches to reflect their personality. As an example, those persons in the medical professions who are required to wear a particular color of uniform can be offered unique garments by having an additional embroidery of the same color.

The color of the uniform may be the same but the style selected may include snaps, buttons, pleats or sewn-in creases. The pockets can be concealed or exposed, and a special pocket for the cell phone may be included.

Other issues this discussion raises relate to uniforms in todays culture favoring masculine verses feminine styles. The uniform styles in todays workplace may also be affected by a tightness or looseness of the garment, not to mention considerations for the amount of skin exposed by the designs. The navel displayed with low-riding pants presents a challenge to todays supervisors.

The rebellion and defiance of dress codes is quite prevalent in our society. One such example has been the role of the blue jean. It has been suggested that the blue jean was a rebellion against control, yet due to wide acceptance, it has become a uniform which writer Alison Lurie observed makes 90 percent of college students identical below the waist.

Fussell offers industry members a big picture view of how uniforms fit into a historical psychology. There is perspective to be gained by an outsiders look into the general societal views of apparel in the workplace. While the details may not be what a uniform industry member would have chosen to focus on, there is plenty of entertainment in Fussells observations. For example, he writes that while U.S. mail carriers lined up in their blue paramilitary attire look like the troops of a well-disciplined army, FedEx personnel in their purple and green shirts bring to mind a chorus line in a Broadway musical.

The uniform retailer today is striving to obtain accessories that will assist the customer in reflecting their unique personality. This is a difficult task with the wide range of ages, cultures and work restrictions.

Clothes still help to define the person though. Luckily, more companies and agencies appreciate that apparel also helps define the organization. Uniform store personnel have an opportunity to assist the customer in presenting the most positive appearance possible.

It is why we are what we wear. It is why we try to make a uniform everything it can be.

Above story first appeared in MADE TO MEASURE Magazine, Fall & Winter 2003 issue. All rights reserved. Photos appear by special permission.
Halper Publishing Company
633 Skokie Blvd, #490
Northbrook, IL 60062
(847) 780-2900
Fax (224) 406-8850
[email protected]