We ventured three or four weeks ago to assert the need of a revolution in men’s dress in tis part of the world, and our suggestion was that the Southern climate called for a costume something like a suit of pajamas. This to be worn not only in the privacy of the home but on the streets and in places of business and pleasure. Now we read, in a dispatch from London, the declaration by Dr. Leonard Hill, a member of the British Institute of Medical Research, that tight collars are harmful to health.
This is only a little step in the direction of dress reform; but every little helps, and we are grateful to the eminent doctor for starting a war on the tight collar. Ourself, we abandoned stiff collars long ago and intend never to wear them again except when our presence at an evening wedding or some other formal gathering compels us to submit to this atrocity.
Dr. Hill says that women, wearing low-necked blouses, short skirts, and thin stockings, are clad more healthfully than men. And in this case health and comfort go together. As far as summertime clothing is concerned, it must be apparent to anybody who has given the subject a moment’s thought that fashion has been less kind to man than to woman.
In our recent lamentation about masculine attire in summer we made the point that the male inhabitants of this semi-tropical region, the southeastern corner of the United States, were following, but for slight modifications, a style set in northern Europe scores of years ago, and that between winter and summer garments there was not nearly so much difference as the difference in temperature demanded.
The great obstacle in the way of the highly-to-be desired change in style is, of course, the enslaving effect of custom and convention. Nobody wants to make himself conspicuous, no matter how firm his conviction that the established way is the way of folly. Consider our own situation, for example. We think well of pajamas as a street costume in summer; but are we going to walk uptown thus clad and walk into the drugstore and order drinks? Not on your life. Quite aside from the danger that Mayor Roberson might order Town Manager Knox to order Chief Featherston to order Policeman Williams to arrest us, we have no wish to face the interrogations and the ribaldry of the populace.
The other day we received a message from Raleigh that our plea for dress reform had gained favor in high quarters. Bejamin R. Lacy, treasurer of the State of North Carolina, declared—and we have this on what the political correspondents call “unimpeachable authority”—that, if we would come to the capital and make ready to issue from the Sir Walter hotel in pajamas, he would join us at the door, similarly attired, and we would, the two of us, walk up Fayetteville street to Capitol Square.
Who knows but that such a demonstration might set the ball rolling? We are tempted to accept the proposal. Yet, even with the thought of it, we begin to feel the courage oozing forth. Mr. Lacy, being a man of influence, would hardly be molested. But how about us, a stranger and obscure? The police would probably run us in, and before we knew what was happening we might be enjoying the hospitality of George Ross Pou in his official capacity.
No, there ought to be more than two demonstrators, if the public is to be first impressed and then converted. I recall that 25 and ore years ago some of the most fastidious dressers in the University came from Raleigh. Perhaps some of these might be prevailed upon to join in the parade. If we could persuade John and Graham Andrews, and Albert Cos, and Aldert Root, and Hubert Haywood, ad Hall Worth, and Henry Turner—I mention just a few who come to mind—if we could persuade these and others of good repute in the community to join in the enterprise, we might carry through the revolution.
From the editorial page of The Chapel Hill Weekly, Friday, July 31, 1925, Louis Graves, Editor
newspapers.digitalnc.org/lccn/sn92073229/1925-07-31/ed-1/seq-2/
No comments:
Post a Comment