A month ago I finally watched Frost/Nixon (2008), Ron Howard’s docudrama of the 1977 interviews between Australian TV figure David Frost and former U.S. President Richard Nixon. Being a history major (and a current history grad student) I was allured by the film’s historical subject matter. But being a pop culture buff/film fan, I was impressed by Howard’s use of segues, costuming, lighting and general atmosphere. By the end, I realized that it had become my favorite Ron Howard film.*
Before I returned it to Blockbuster, I reviewed an earlier scene that had especially captured my attention. After Frost and his producer have departed from their initial meeting with Nixon at the latter’s California retreat, Nixon (Anthony Minghella) turns to his chief of staff Jack Brennan (Kevin Bacon, who seems to have found a niche playing blunt, square-jawed ex-military men) and comments on Frost’s choice of footwear:
Nixon: Say, did you notice his shoes?
Brennan: No, sir.
Nixon: Italian. No laces. What do you think? My people tried to get me to wear a pair like that.
Brennan: I think a man’s shoes should have laces, sir.
Nixon: You do?
Brennan: Yeah. Personally, I find those Italian shoes very…effeminate.
Nixon: That’s quite right.
In the DVD commentary, Howard’s clothing designer noted that a conscious choice was made to portray Frost and his team (mostly left-leaning newspaper men) in “casual” dress—sport coats, jackets, blazers, shirts and pants of various colors, and hardly any neck ties—while Nixon’s advisers dressed traditionally in blue/black suits, ties and vests, and polished shoes. Frost’s laceless Italian loafers were merely one part of that visual dichotomy.
In thinking about Frost’s shoes—and Brennan’s contemptuous assessment of their wearer’s orientation—I wondered: have we truly entered the Age of Frost? Is casual the new traditional? And what does mean for the thirty-somethings of today, most of whom arrived in the world about the time that Nixon and Frost were sitting down to talk?
Think about the workplace. At one point in the not-too-distant past (the late 80’s/early 90’s?), “business casual”—polo/button-down shirts and slacks, sans tie—was acceptable for Fridays. The other four days of the workweek required the full business dress of black/brown/grey pants, white/blue dress shirts, and tie. Now, “business
casual” is the traditional apparel of Monday through Thursday; Friday is the day for jeans, casual shirts, and tennis shoes. For thirty-somethings, this is so “normal”, so deeply ingrained in our business culture, that we find it difficult to envision anything different.
In the world of shoes, the difference is even more dramatic. In the early- to mid-20th century, men wore their tennis shoes to participate in sporting events; every other occasion demanded formal footwear. Even in the liberated, “swinging Sixties”, most people were inclined to wear Beatle boots, which still suggested a degree of semi-professionalism. Boots might not make a man look like a business professional, but they might make him look like a cowboy; either way, you couldn’t mistake him as being “effeminate”. And boot buckles were, in their own way, acceptable substitutes or laces.
Now, anything (seemingly) goes. Hush puppies and loafers, which once bedevilled Jack Brennan, have given way to crocs, Merrill slip-ons, and other shoes that glory in their conspicuous lack of leather, laces, or any other pretension to professionalism and conservatism. These are the shoes that thirty-somethings wear to practically every social or business function. Indeed, if one were to show up in polished dress shoes, people would take notice.
Of course, while this is true for the world of commerce, entertainment and leisure, it is still not a universal standard. Ironically, the two colliding worlds of Frost/Nixon—television and politics—still cling to the old ways. Television figures are invariably “dressed to the nines”, if not in suits, then in tasteful, conservative slacks, shirts and ties. And politicians dare not appear before the camera, or even their own casually-dressed public, in anything less than sartorial splendor. Nevertheless, in looking at advertisements, TV shows, and movies, one could argue that the casual image has won the day.
So what does this mean for thirty-somethings?
Well, if the laceless loafers of Frost represent the new standard, the question is: what will the future standard be?
Recent studies suggest that “casual Fridays” might not be such a good idea, citing reduced productivity, tardiness and dilly-dallying on phones and the Internet as direct results of a “casual” mindset. Yet this is the world we live in. Hardly any modern boss would seriously consider doing away with “casual Fridays” (even though, on occasion, they might be junked for in-office visitors or potential clients), and the suggestion that men start investing in good suits and polished wingtips could be seen as a clueless pretension to luxury, at a time when most paychecks need to be spent on something more substantive.
Still…in the back of our minds, we cannot escape two haunting sayings, spoken by our parents’ generation (the first to “break away” from the traditionalism of their elders):
- “Dress for the job you want.” Comforting though jeans, tee-shirts, and laceless shoes may be, don’t we all secretly suspect that our more slovenly-dressed peers really don’t have their **** together? Are they to be taken as seriously as those of us who daily put on the traditional garb of the working world? As much as we glory in our rejection of outdated modes of fashion, don’t we still afford them some worth?
- “Dress your age.” This, I believe, will never go out of style. Isn’t there something faintly disturbing about old people who dress like the very young? An anonymous author once noted, “Old age has respectability, until it pretends to youth.” As thirty-somethings accept that they have left the world of childhood and young adulthood behind, the need to be “age appropriate” will certainly dominate more of their thinking.
But, if “business casual” is traditional, then…how far below this will be the standard of our children? Or their children? Will sneakers be standard-issue dress for business interviews in the 21st century? Will latter-day Jack Brennans bemoan the disappearance of crocs and Merrills for newer footwear (God knows what these would look like)? Or will the decline in traditional dress be halted at the present fault lines?
(As an aside: will the Watergate Apartments still stand in that future time? And, aside from fans of Futurama, will anyone know who Nixon was?)
*The defeated incumbent was 1995’s Apollo 13, another historical drama.