Whenever we have friends over for dinner we take care to plan for the people attending. We check to see what foods they don't like, lest we make eggplant parmesan and there are never-eggplanters in the group. We ask about food allergies, so a menu of jambalaya with shrimp doesn't lead to an evening of watching a guest break out in hives. And because we want all to be as comfortable in our house as we are, we let them know the dress code is always, always, always very casual.
Then again, it's hard to find a venue or setting these days where that doesn't apply. Sure, if it's listed as a black-tie gala or you are a bridesmaid or groomsman at a wedding there is a specific outfit by definition. But beyond that almost anything goes, anywhere, anytime. You might choose to put on a suit and tie or wear a dress, but that's your call. Know that at the next pew or seat or table there is just as likely to be a person in shorts and sandals.
It all started when sportswear was introduced to the American wardrobe in 1930's. Originally describing more informal and interchangeable tops and bottoms, it came to mean anything not associated with evening wear. The trend accelerated with the unisexing of clothing as women took to pants (shocking!). It continued as '60s casual counterculture style pushed into the mainstream, then doubled back on itself as the office loosened up with business casual in the '90s. Come the pandemic and all formality fell by the wayside, as remote work led to work from home led to sweatpants as high fashion.
The movement has permeated every walk of life, from work to play, from church to school, from theatre to travel. It was less than 18 months ago that no-less-an-institution than the US Senate wrestled this topic, on account of the senator from Pennsylvania. John Fetterman's brand is as a working man, and as part of that persona he prefers to do his legislating in a sweatshirt and gym shorts. While there was an unwritten rule on the senate floor that "business dress" was required, it had already been relaxed in 2019 when then-Senate Rules Committee chair Amy Klobuchar pushed for a change so women could wear sleeveless dresses. Since then there has been a gentle-person's agreement to keep it snappy looking, to the point that all senators, including Fetterman, voted from the door of the cloakroom leading to the floor if they were in tee shirts, polos and yes, hoodies.
But in 2023 Senator Fetterman's turn came up as presiding officer of the chamber, and he took his place at the rostrum in his usual ensemble. All hell broke loose: after all, this was important stuff, no simple debt ceiling debate or gun rights discussion. This was about pants. And so Senators Romney and Manchin worked across the aisle to introduce Senate Resolution 376, the SHORTS Act (SHow Our Respect To the Senate), requiring business attire by specifying "a coat, tie, and slacks or other long pants" for men. And no, you didn't miss it: it doesn't say anything about women. It passed unanimously, with Romney predictably touting it as an accomplishment: "It's another example of Republicans and Democrats being able to work together and to solve — in this case — what may not be a real big problem, but it's an important thing and makes a difference to a lot of people."
Since then we've had precious little discourse on formality, until this past week with the venue being a chess tournament. The world's number one chess player Magnus Carlsen was told he could not continue playing while wearing jeans. Officials at the World Rapid and Blitz Chess Championships in New York said they had a dress code, that jeans were banned, and took a firm stand. Firm, that is, until Carlsen said he would withdraw from play and head to the beach rather than change. Hang on, said the officials. When we said "banned" we actually meant that while "it is still required to follow the official dress-code, elegant minor deviations (that may, in particular, include appropriate jeans matching the jacket) are allowed." As one observer noted online, "So jeans matching the jacket, or what's typically known as a jean jacket are good?!" I believe that is, how shall we put it, checkmate?
Let's face it; whatever you wear people will judge you. It's just a matter of how comfortable you are being judged. Harry Winston said it best: people will stare, so make it worth their while. And while it's true that others may judge you based on your sartorial choices, the more important point is how it makes you feel about yourself. Or as Bette Midler put it, "I firmly believe that with the right footwear one can rule the world."
-END-
Marc Wollin of Bedford has never been noted as a fashion icon. His column appears weekly via email and online on Blogspot and Substack as well as Facebook, LinkedIn and X.
