FASHION / The fickle skirt: Up we go again
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE CLOTHES you see here should not be taken on board by anyone too old to be smitten with Take That. But the truth for us all in 1994 is plain to see. Just as you'd said hello to the new long skirt, it's time to say goodbye. Just as you had learnt to walk properly in those long skinny sheaths, they're about to look as dated as a pair of flappy flares. Choice is all very well, but as soon as you have chosen, fashion spins its wheel once more and snaps: 'Wrong] Too late]' The old long skirt is - sorry - on its way out.
This is going to be the year of 'short' (again), with the itsy bitsy little skirts we observed from the side of the catwalk released into the shops. Some of them are already out there, teamed with silver strappy sandals and knee-high socks in a look that can only spell 'tart' to those old enough to remember dancing round your clutch bags last time around. In a reversal of George Bernard Shaw's dictum, fashion is not wasted on the young; these days it's only those young enough to have no fashion memory at all who can enjoy it.
To me, Argyll socks and court shoes, bobby socks and sheer black tights scream 'No]'. But I have now lived through 10 years of matt black Lycra tights, and I've got used to them. To me, pastel skirts and tiny tops recall teenage disco dance routines in front of Pan's People on the telly. I just couldn't bear to Tardis-dress back there again. But then I'm not supposed to - at least, not yet.
Short is shocking. It has been every time it has reappeared as a fashion trend, which, despite the opinion of sociologists, psychologists, market analysts et al, has
nothing, in my opinion, to do with the rise and fall of the economy, and almost everything to do with boredom and a desire for the next new thing. Now, early in the year, shorty- short (and we're even talking really short slips that would have been sold as tops last year) raises an eyebrow. We'll get used to it.
After all, we took to it in the mid-Eighties - we took to knee grazers, then thigh grazers and then what the fashion trade charmingly used to refer to as 'pussy pelmets'. Most women ended up with their skirts hovering somewhere
between knee and hip with an expanse of forgiving matt
tights in between. This is how most women, not young
enough, brave enough or daft enough for knee socks or bobby socks, will take to it again.
This is the moment for those unlikely participants in
the short/long skirt debate which raged at the beginning
of last year, when even the Telegraph's proprietor entered
the fray, to rise up and chorus: 'I told you so.' And when
long comes back - and it will - the rest of us will have our
chance to rise again. -
THE YEAR IN SHORT
For spring/summer 1994, skirts went from knicker-skimming - a good 14in above the knee - through micro - about 10in above the knee - to mid-thigh - 6in above the knee and probably where skirt lengths will settle. But some designers still opted for knee-length, calf-length, ankle-length (about 17in below the knee), right down to floor- length (about 20in below the knee). Here is an at-a-glance guide to which designers ended their skirts where.
IN MILAN
Dolce e Gabbana: 10in above knee
Versace: 10in above knee
Alberta Ferretti: mid-thigh, about 6in above knee
Prada: knee-length, but see-through
Genny: 6in above knee
Sportmax: 6in above knee
Hamnett: 10in above knee
Armani: ankle-skimming
Jil Sander: 6in above knee and mid-calf
Ozbek: knicker-skimming - 14in above knee
IN PARIS
Issey Miyake: mid-thigh, about 7in above knee
Galliano: knicker-skimming kilts about 14in above knee, and also floor-length
Lacroix: can't make his mind up
Gaultier: mostly ankle-length
Vivienne Westwood: bum-pelmets or floor-length
Corinne Cobson: knicker skimming or floor-length
Ann Demeulemeester: floor-length
Helmut Lang: mid-thigh (the ugliest length but probably where it will settle)
Martin Margiela: ankle and floor-length
Valentino: thigh grazing - acceptably short
Comme des Garcons: ankle-length
Yohji Yamamoto: micro-short
Lagerfeld: ugly knee-length and micro - about 10in above knee
Chanel: about 10in above knee
Chloe: mid-thigh
Yves Saint Laurent: mid-thigh
Dior: ankle-length
Gigli: ankle-length
Marcel Marongiu: ankle-length
IN LONDON
Flyte Ostell: ankle-length
John Rocha: ankle and mid-thigh
Bella Freud: short - 8in above knee
Betty Jackson: long - mostly ankle- length
Sonja Nuttall: ankle-length
Abe Hamilton: ankle-length
Sonnentag Mulligan: ankle-length
IN NEW YORK
Donna Karan: about 10in above knee
Calvin Klein: micro and ankle-length
Liza Bruce: about 10in above knee
Ralph Lauren: micro and ankle-length
Isaac Mizrahi: tiny-mini-micro
Anna Sui: micro-length
LIST COMPILED BY TAMSIN BLANCHARD
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments