/fa/ - Fashion

Unironically yes. Thanks to prosperity and disposable income. Playful colors and patterns, proportionally pleasing silhouettes. It was a perfect balance between the austerity of the 40's and the kitsch of the 60's. Never has clothing style been so objectively attractive. 1950's America is probably the last true golden age of aesthetics. The 80's had some decent stuff too. I'm hoping now that our culture is so self aware we can return to this style but I doubt the degens and Walmart dwellers will ever go for it.

'60s was way better. Early to mid' 60s upper class wear is the defenition of timeless

>>14989093

>>14989093
>>14989098
Go back to the TIP containment thread.
50s middle class>>>>>>>>>>>>>>60s upper class

>>14989093
>>14989098
MFA core

>>14989093
The peak of the 60s was just riding the wave of peak 50s

>>14990091
>le epic suits
>>14990101
Okay gypsy

>>14990153
Ok redditor. Don't you have some HECKIN EPIC Take Ivy TIMELESS preppy inspo albums to browse?

>>14988946
Yes, they were.

>>14990287
uwu

>>14988946
not really. women in particular looked super unattractive. the femininity of the early 1900s completely disappeared at this stage

>>14991021
>That one picture is how ALL women looked back then

>>14991079
i wasn't even referring to the OP picture

>>14991096
A: The 20s women are stylized illustrations of ideals, not necessarily realistic
B: The 50s women look fine

>>14991160
what the fuck are you talking about lol the 20s ones are straight out of a fashion magazine from the 20s. same as the 50s image. they are not "illustrations of ideals". if that were the case then so is the 50s image and the rest of the 50s images in the thread. i guess we have different definitions of fine; i don't think stiff silhouettes, thick cardboard looking materials and a horrible throwback to late 18th century panniers look good.

>>14991178
The 20s are literal illustrations, not photographs

>>14991348
nigga does the clothing from the 50s magazine look like a photograph to you? what is wrong with your eyes?

>>14991433
The 50s ones are far more realistic, the 20s ones more stylized.

>>14991096
>Heavily stylized cartoons of 'Junior misses' - preteen girls.
>Photographs of adult women.

Classic 4channel.

Bear in mind that up until the 60s most of what you see as "representative" of whatever decade's fashion is illustrations (ads). Most suits in the 50s were too baggy and illfitting. It's like the low rise suits of today, they only look good when specifically modeled for an ad

>>14992680
Baggy suits are based though

>>14992935
only if you're from scranton

>>14988946
Greasers and bowling fits are yes

>>14994073
>Greasers
Cringe

>>14992960
No, they're always based.

>>14989026
modcloth dot com core

literally one step above 'rockabilly' or women who claim to do 'burlesque' which is barely above 'steampunk'

>>14991096
20s fashion was kino. the androgyny and thinness of heroin chic but without the trashiness

there's been nothing like it since

>>14995109
So it's based as fuck?

>>14988946
god i would love to see their feet

>>14995197

>>14995569
nice meme lol!

>>14995578
Go back to r*ddit

>>14995569
I like feets :)

>>14995197
you are so fucking retarded anon

>>14989093
>>14989098

The late 1950s was very similar to these photographs, as well, except slimmer fits like in these pictures were still less common in 1957, and took a while to gain traction as part of widespread fashion. Also, during the middle of the 1960s, hair had started to become generally a little less pompadour-esque, more of a relaxed and fluffy quality, and often a little longer than previously, although not extreme for most American and Westerner young men until either very late during that decade, or during the 1970s, when haircuts had fundamentally gotten noticeably longer in general.

>>14996096
Cringe

>>14988946
I don't like those short hairstyles on women

>>14997649
Have sex