Figure 1.-- Some of the reasons the short pants proved popular are obvious and relate to their practicality. Other reasons are not so obvious or perhaps not very important. Short pants were widely adopted for boys' wear in Europe, but so much in America. We are not entirely sure why this difference developed. Herecwe have an older German boy, we believe in the 1930s.

Short pants were widely adopted for boys' wear in Europe. The question arises as to why short pants emerged as a popular boys fashion in the 20th century and why some boys came to like them. Some of the reasons the style proved popular are obvious and relate to their practicality. Other reasons are not so obvious or perhaps not very important. Some of these factors relate to the boys' attitudes and some to the parents and concerning boys' clothes--this usually meant mother. The reader should note that HBC is listing here the factors which may have given rise to this new style for boys. The importance or even the overall impact of each of these factors is debateable. On factvsome of these factors are mutually exclusive, meaning that short pants like any fashion exist in a very complicated social structure and it is often difficult to definitively assess just what caused a certain style to become popular and subsequently decline in poopularity. HBC would be interested in other factors that HBC readers may know as well as your insights as to just how important these factors were.

Changing Conventions

The fashion hiostory of the 20th century is a general trend from fussy, formal fashions to the comfortable, casual styles of today. Short pants have been part of that fashion movement. As formal styles declined in popularity, clothes like short pants that were simple and comfortable to wear increased in popularity.

Practicality

Shorts were and continue to be practical clothes for boys. They are easily washed and depending on the material do not require ironing. They can not be ruined by a slip or fall wher boys night tear knees out of long pants. Boys pants do not change much stylistically, thus the principal reason that pants are replaced is that a boy ters them are outgrows them. While long pants are commonly torn at the knee, shorts pants are much less subject to being torn. Thus they generally last until a boy outgrows them. A HBC reader adds, "Another reason for parebts to purchase short pants for boys is that growing boys (and girls, for that matter) tend to grow 'up' much faster than they grow 'out'. Having raised several boys, I can vouch for the fact that their pants lengths changed much faster than the waist sizes and most trousers were discarded either because of irreparable tears or because they had become unfashionable "high-waters." A boy's parents would not need to buy him new shorts as often as they would long pants. The same is probably true with girls and skirts or dresses -- only fashion keeps a growing girl from wearing the same skirt or dress for a relatively long time. This may be why during the depression young girls often wore quite short skirts and dresses. It may not have been strictly a matter of short skirts and dresses being the fashion, but possibly more a practical matter."

Ease of Dressing

Short pants were easier to manage than knickers. There were no buttons or buckle closures. When someone was older they could manage buttons and stockings etc better and they wore knickers. The practical use of shorts may have been more because they may have been more manageable for younger children than knickers.

Age Conventions

By the end of the 19th century, a widely established clothing convention was that boys should wear some style of shortened trousers. This meant primarily kneepants or knickers. Thus the convention of short pants for boys was a simple continuation of this late 19th century convention. Thus shorts were popular with parents who wanted to dress their children in what they considered suitable clothes

Comfort

Shorts are compfortable garments, less constricting than long pants. For this reason, they are also ideal for sports and a range iof outdoor activitioes. They are especially comfortable for summer wear. It must be said that while shorts might be comfortable for summer wear that they were originally conceived of boys clothes to be worn all year round. A comfortable summer garment might be less comfortable in the winter. As a result, shorts were often wiorn with kneesocks or even long stockings. In some countries shirts were made with different material, a heavy weight material for winter and a lighter weight for summer.

Adoption by Youth Organizations

The popularity of shorts came after theu were adopted by youth groups like the Boy Scouts and Wandervogeal as casual practical clothes for outdoor wear. The choice followed the adoption of shorts as British Army wear in tropical postings. The colonial uniform for British and French troops included short trousers in Africa. British soldiers in South Africa wore shorts during the Bohr War. Basen Powell was of course involved in the battle of Mafeking. Baden Powell was surely influenced by military battledress when he desisned the Boy Scout uniform. The style was given great empetus once established as a part of the Boy Scout uniform. Even earlier short pants had been adopted by the important Wandervogel movement in Germany. American Scouts, however, chose to mostly wear knickers.

Masculine Image

Many saw short pants as a garment with a more verile, masucline image. Women and girls did not in the early 20th century wear short pants. (Girls gym uniforms, for example. well into the 1930s commonly consisted of bloomers rather than shorts.) The British soldier in tropical postings wore shorts. (Note that the American army did not adopt shorts--perhaps a factor in the resistance among older American boys to wearing shorts. The adoption of shorts by youth groups like Wandervogel and the Boy Scouts also helped to give them as veril, modern image. Note that this factor was contrary to other factors such as the view of some parents that short pants were a suitable style for a child.

Women's Fashions

Another factor mush have been rising hemlines for women. It was only natural that as women begun to wear dresses that revealed their legs that they would view short pants as suitable for their children.

Cost

Short trousers were less costly than long ones, requiring less material. Furthermore you need not buy a new pair just because your son grew a few centimeters. Cost was a particular factor during crises like wars. Itay in World War II, for example, required boys to wear short pants rather than longs to reduce shortages.

Health

Articles were published in the early 20th century, recommending short oants for health reasons, citing circulation or the affect of sunshine. HBC will try to obtain some of these articles. We do not believe, however, that they had a major impact on the popularity of shorts. One factor that may have been important is that boys with tanned legs looked healthy much as colege kids like to get a tan on spring break. Recent reserch has in fact confirmed some health benefits of wearing short pants.

Social Class

A French Canadian reader writes, "My opinion is that long pants were associated to working class at the end of the 19th century. As Thorston Veblen said, High Class always seeks to be different from Low Class. Because more and more kids had to be at school at the beginning of the 20th century, knee-pants and short pants became a kind of uniform telling the future will be weahthier. I just give an opinion. I am sure many theoricians has certainly worked on some hypothesis related to this phenomena." We do not think that this is the reason that boys began wearing short pants. The practical factors mat initially been very important. We note for example that in Europe boys of all social class began wearing them. Our reader is correct, however, that social class was a factor. We note that often boys from more affluent families were likely to wear short psnts to an older age. Also we note that when working-class boys finished school, normally at about 12-14 years of age, they normally began wearing long pants. More affluent boys might wear shorts a few years longer. Social class was also a factor in America. Boys from affluent families in America were more likely to wear short pnts than working-class boys. Our reader writes, "When I speak about working class, I include laborers who were the main social class in numbers for a long time in the Western countries. Only later did the Middle Class expand. Outside cities in America and Canada, we can see (even when boys are going at school for 2-3 years ) that they always wore long pant or bib-front overalls. For me, short pants is a symbol of instruction and boys from midddle-class or even low status had to wear them as a mark of distinction from those who "reject" instruction for a fast access to work and... money." Of course many children had no real choice, but because of economic need, had to work.

Reader Comments

HBC readers have commented on this page. An English reader tells us about his experiences in the 1960s. This was a period in which English boys were just beginning to wear long pants more commonly. He and his brother, however mostly wore shorts.

Created: 2:23 PM 11/18/2005
Last updated: 6:16 PM 6/24/2006