Figure 1.--James Roosevelt like some wealthy boys in the early 1920s adopted the short pants that became popular following World War I, especially in Europe. Note the buttons at the knee, reflecting the convention that dress shorts or knee pants should have the buttons originally designed for breeches. James' buttons were purely ornamental. |
Wars and other priods of upheaval are often a catalyst for profound social change, which in turn is a catalyst for dramatic change in fashion. Major changes in fashions appear to appear to often follow wars or other social uphevals. Some of these changes are obvious. I haven't fully thought this out yet, but we have been collecting information on major conflicts which we believe is the fiorst step in assessing this question. We have begun to formulate some preliminary ideas, but this still a very nuch open question to us. Hopefully HBC readers will have some ideas here. Of course fashion changes or just a part of the wider cultural changes resulting from wars. There are other related topics. Chikldren are often involved in the wars and always affected by them.
We have developed some thoughts about the fashion impacts of specific wars. We wonder, however, if there are any fashions impacts of war in general. A reader writes, "It is interesting to note that in period of war boys are wearing military uniforms like their father and in period of peace they are wearing more fancy "feminized" clothings." This is probably an over simplified formulation, but certainly the first part of this formulation is accurate. Almost always during wars, boys want to wear military garments. War is a very exciting event and often attracts the interest of boys. Not only do boys war uniform garments they can get ahold of, but the uniforms often inspire boys' fashions, both actual items and detailing. Of course this did not always come in time of war. The sailor suit, for example, became a popular boys' fashion during an era of relative peace in Europe. As to more fancy styles in times of peace, here we think the overall pattern is much more varied. Many different styles developed during peaceful era. It is, however, probably correct that because of the economic demands of modern war that styles plainer and more utilitarian. We note for example that pleats and knickers were casualties of World War II.
HBC has collected information on the following wars and crises. In most cases we have just collected basic information on the conflict and our understanding of fashion impacts are still limited. We have primarily focused on 19th and 20th century conflicts. This is the historical period in wich specialized clothing existed for boys. Some of these conflicts had major impacts on fashion. Some of these conflicts had less impact on fashion, but are important to fully understand the swwp of history and the other conflicts we are assesing. We hope to eventually, however, expand our coverage to earlier conflicts as well.
There are many historic example of pacifist thought, although rare in the full sweep of human history. Modern examples of pacifism appeared in European churches like the Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, and others. These groups were important, especially the Quakers who did not separate themselves from the wider society like the Mennites. The Quakers were especially important in the anti-slavery movement. Their impact on war and militarism was, however limited. Potentially more important was the world Socialist movement that developed in Europe during the second half of the 19th century. Socialism developed as a strongly anti-militarist, anti-war movement. Socialists saw war and colonialism as natural outgrowth of capitalism that would be swept away in a new socialist future. War was another way in which captalist class divided and exploited the working class. The militarism of 19th century Europe was one of the driving forces of the emigrant outflow during the late 19th-century. Socialist leaders pointed out that most of the dieing and suffering was experienced by the workers who formed the bulk of the waring armies while capitaliss made great fortunes selling arms. The Socialist movement was still in its infancy when the Franco-Prussian War broke out (1870). The movement by the early 20th century had become an important political force throughout Europe, especially Western Europe. As military rvalries developed among the great powers, Socialist leaders were hopeful that worker solidarity could prevent a major war in Europe. The failure of the movement to do so has always been considered one of the great failures of the world socialist movement. In the wake of the World War I disaster, anti-militarism grew un both Europe in America. This sentiment was one of the major reasons that Britain and France did not effectively contront the NAZIs and America remained staunchly isolationist until Pear Harbor. After the World War II, the Soviets used pacifist sentiment in Western Europe to weaken European resistance to Soviet military expansion.
There have been countless attempts, even in our modern age, to conquer nations or groups of nations. Some have involved minor territorial aims while others have sought to titally subject other nations. Most have ended with minor peace treaties between the major combatant countries. Some have evolved into major conflagrations causing untold death and distruction. The most devestating modern wars have been the 30 Years War which devestated Germany, the Napoleonic Wars, World War, and World War II. After each of these major wars, international conferences attempted to reconstruct Europe and in the case of the Worlds Wars, much of the rest of the world as well: Westphakia (1648), Vienna (1815), Paris (1919), and San Francisco (1945). The results even of the Peace of Westphalia persist in our modern world. Some of these treaties proved more controversial than the wars themselves, especially as the wars receeded in people memories. The Congress of Vienna became a symbol of the repression of the Ancien Regime. Hitler railed against the Versailles Peace Treaty, not the War. The American right after World War II attacked the Yalta Agreements and the Uninted Nations created in San Francisco.
NYU Press is soliciting contributions for a proposed interdisciplinary,
multi-national anthology of original essays about children and war, from
the early 19th century up to the present. Contributions are encouraged
from all disciplines, including history, psychology, sociology, military
studies, anthropology, and political science, as well as from children's
activists and policy makers. Essays may address, among other topics:
children's participation in warfare, both on the battlefield and on the
home front; the effects of war on children's institutions and family
life; and the representation of armed conflict in children's play and
literature. "War" will be defined broadly, including, for instance, the
Cold War, terrorist operations, and "low level" conflicts. Each essay
should be between 6,000-8000 words. The deadline is March 31, 2000. Interested scholars should send their one-page proposals, along with brief c.v.'s, directly to the editor of
the proposed anthology, James Marten, at History Department, Marquette
University, P. O. Box 1881, Milwaukee, WI 53208-1881. They may also be e-mailed to him at martenj@execpc.com
Many countries developed slang terms for soldiers and people from other countries. Often these terms were derogatory. The most famous is probably, the French word for the Germans--"le boche". An assessmet of the drogatory French word for the Germans, "le boche", is an interesting study of French-German relations during the 19th and 20th century. The word, once so common, is no longer heard in France. As far as we can determine, the Germans had no comparative derogatory term for the French--although their allies the English did. Some of these terms were more positive, especially the term widely used for the Americans--"Yanks".
Uniformed youth groups began forming in the late 19th century, but became more extensive after the Scouts were founded in
1906. Thus many groups were organized throughout Europe when World War I (1914-18) broke. These groups were mobilized to support the War effort in many ways. This changed substantially in World War II. The Hitler Youth not only had a major role on the home font, but actually had a combat role. The NAZIs in most occupied countries banned Scoting, although they operated clandestinely. The NAZIs and in some countries supported alternive right-wing groups, but none played the
significant role played by the Hitler Youth. Group in America and Britain played the same home front roles that they did in
World War I. In addition to youth group activities in the two major 20th century wars, youth groups in individual countries have played important roles in various regional conflicts.
Children and other civilians have alwaysbeen affected by war. In ancient times armies often lived off the land. They would often pilage farms and towns to obtain provisions. Cities that were conquered would be looted and in many cases the men, women, and children sold into slavery. This is what happened to Carthage and may other city of the ancient world. European knights in the middle ages adopted a code of chilvary. This was rarely extended to the peasantry. In our moder age a code of behavior was adopted for conducting war, but was not often followed. The French Revolution changed European wars. Rather professional armies fighting wars, the French mobilized large citizen armies. Children were often drawn up in these armies. This concept resulted in larger and larger armies, eventually culminating in the two world wars. The Europeans adopted a code that civilians should be respected and protected by combatants. It became obvious in World War I, however, that civilians on the home front played a major role in the outcome of a war. Children were graetly affected, especially those living in or near the far-flung battlefields. The number of casualties also mean that millions of children grew up without fathers and or in poverty. It was this perhaps inevitable that civilians would be directly targeted in the next War. World War II indeed brought more horrors to children than any other modern war. Children were affected not only by the staggerings dimensions of the War, but by the tactics and strategies adopted by the combatatants. The Germans and Japanese used terror bombing of civilian populations as an offensive tactic in the early phases of the War. The Americans and British eventually adopted the same tactic as part of their strategic doctrine. Children as part of the civilain population were this affected. The Germans did even more than bomb civilains. First they targeted handicaped children for sterilization or death. Once the War began they targeted non Aryan populations for death or slavery in a new Europe. Children here were a special target as they had no value as workers and thus Jewish children were among the first to be killed. Some wre even used in diobolical medical experiments. Thousands of other non-Jewish children were kidnapped and assessed racially by SS and other doctors. Most that failed the racial testing or were uncooperative eventually died in concentration camps. Those that passed were brought to the Reich for Germiniztion by SS and other approved families.
The question of good and evil and war and peace is a central question of human relations. Some have concluded that war is the ultimate evil and nothing justifies the resort to force. HThe ultimate expression of this belief is pascifism. Pacifists often speak from a plane of moral superority. They have difficulty addressing the question of morality when they allow evil to be done such as the failure to intervene in the face of terrible atrocity such as the genocide in Rawanda. The question arises if those who stand by and watch evil acts with out intervening have no moral responsibility in allowin evil to happen. Many Americans reached the conclusion that war was the ultimate evil after World War I. American isolationism was a major force in the 1930s and complicated President Rooselvelt's efforts to aid the Western democracies when confronted by Hitler. American isolatkionism had deep roots and there were pacifist elements. Yet even ardent isolationists for the mpost part believed in national defense if attacked. Ironically the isolationism which almost resulted in Europe's conquest by NAZIism has today been adopted by many young Europeans who today view war as the greatest evil. (There are substantial differences among Europeans here. These believes are most ardently heald by the younger generation and in those countries not subjected to Soviet installed police states after the War.) Another philosophical issue debated by those who accept the necesity of war is how much evil is morally permissable in the persuit of war. The Allied World war II stratehic bombing campaign has been question on moral grounds. (During and immediately fter the War, few questions were asked because of the enormity of the German and Japanese attrocities.) The issue of civilian casualties has become major issue. It has become such an issue that countries like Serbia (1998?), Adghanistran/Taliban (2001), and Iraq (2002) will place military assetts near schools, religious sites, and other locations where civilian casulaties might result.
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to Main essay page]
[Return to Main military style page]
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Clothing styles]
[Countries]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Satellite sites]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]