By Annabella Lawlor for University of Fashion
Paris in the late 1940s saw immense changes to its city, both socially and visually. Women traded in their work boots for heels, once again hearing the clack of each step against the cobblestone streets. During World War II, luxuries were not afforded under the
restrictions of wartime rations, monumentally affecting the production of non-utility clothing for fear of wasting resources.
As women entered the workforce during the war, slim shapes and sharp lines characterized global feminine styles for fear of excess waste in garment production. Assuming occupations of those called to war, women also visually emulated the (then) masculine nature of labor by donning utility suits and trousers.
But after the war’s end, the desire to grasp some semblance of normality plagued the world, and men returned to work. In post-war France, revived fashion houses scrambled to produce visions of extravagance and uniqueness: a look that would define a generation and social period—one of recovery, celebration and restoration.
In 1947, French designer Christian Dior debuted a characteristic look, an exaggerated revival of pre-war silhouettes. Coined the “New Look” by fashion writers, the design’s slim waist accentuated the extravagant billowing pleats of its skirt. The rigid shoulders of wartime suits were softened into curving lines, while sharpness instead shaped the waist into petite restriction. The style thus became a physical embodiment of the burgeoning post-war fashion markets and global economies. In its curvaceous allure, the “New Look” not only cemented Paris as an unwavering influence on global fashion but also represented a revival of the couture industry as a whole.
However, a dress that was made to exemplify a period of independence was soon mobilized into symbols of social confinement. As the American ready-to-wear industry continued to develop in the 1950s, Dior’s “New Look” became synonymous with the vision of
suburban motherhood and wifehood. The “house dress,” a shirtwaist dress often cinched at the waist and full in the skirt, was seen
as suitable for all duties of the suburban household: cooking, cleaning and silence. In her 1959 book, “Wife Dressing: The Fine Art of Being a Well-Dressed Wife,” fashion designer Anne Fogarty described the simple austerity of the shirtwaist dress as ideal for one’s role in the home.
In this light, the “New Look” is a balance of constraint and freedom, as the waist cinches the liberating movement of its twirling pleats. With every flounce of its skirt, the garment models the cultural ideals of femininity as a normalcy in Western society. For the housewife, it accentuates the curves of her form into almost cartoonish shapes. The “New Look” isn’t a dress. It’s a body in motion, constructed by a male designer and dictated into idealized, silhouetted perfection.
The “New Look” is undeniably beautiful; it revolutionized and revived the economy of global haute couture. Two things can be true at once. This hyperfeminine style overshadowed the freedoms granted to women during World War II. Used against the image of equality and progression in the 1950s, the “New Look”—while chic—was detrimental to the garmenting of women in post-war societies, confining them to visions of purity and softness.
It’s hard to ignore how this exaggerated silhouette has been weaponized throughout history. In recent years, the style has seen a rise in popularity with fluctuating trends, often in tandem with the rise of political conservatism in the United States. The “tradwife”
aesthetic—one that preaches modest dress, hours working in the kitchen on homemade meals and images of rural sanctuary in a child-filled home—riddled the internet in the months leading up to the 2024 presidential election. Characteristic of the popularized style, the “milkmaid dress” is constructed by floral prints, a soft bunching of fabric at the bust and an A-line skirt: a silhouette descending from Dior’s 1947 design. In 2025, media has been encouraging women to fulfill their duties in the home in support of
their working husbands. With many faces of the “tradwife” movement dressed in Dior’s characteristic design, the “New Look’s” soft
femininity has likely been deemed ubiquitously suitable as its defining, idealized attire.
That is not to say that expressing one’s femininity through fashion always equates to social restriction. However, when viewing shifting data in both the garment industry and political system, these hyperfeminine clothing styles do not diverge from accompanying conservative values. Fashion has always been impacted by the social beliefs of a period.
