The Women Who Once Made America Stylish - The Lost Art of Dress

Anyone looking for an explicit how-to-dress-well for our moment in history will be disappointed. The Lost Art of Dress is more of a cultural history -- that said, though, it contains fascinating history and an explanation of applying the principles of art to fashion. Further, the author doesn't just mindlessly slam today's "different" look, she explains WHY these are poor designs that don't really help women look their best, and she explains what does make a good design. You can then easily apply these principles the next time you go shopping.

One early reviewer accused the author of "slut-shaming" today's young women. Um, no -- that reviewer, I suspect, is one of those who take any sort of criticism most personally, and seek to discredit the critic with the extreme label of "hater." What the author does is explain WHY revealing, sexualized dress is not appropriate for all occasions, how less is often more, and how a woman's age and changing figure dictate how much or how little she shows on those occasions when a sexy look is called for. It's nothing those of us over the age of 40 haven't heard before. However, with a generation or so of women being raised to think the fashions of "Sex and the City" and "The Kardashians" are normal, many have become confused. In short, the author delivers a helpful antidote to day's excesses.

This book is on my list of the most uninformative, dullest-reading books I've encountered in my lifetime as an avid reader of all genre of books. One would assume that a book on fashion would at least include some poignant, memorable photographs of fashions past and present. That is not the case with this book. Certainly, there are some pen and ink illustrations, but only five or so actual photos: two from a Vogue Pattern Book and one from a Butterwick Pattern Catalogue. For the most part this 347 page book was as interesting as a technical manual for differences between a PC and a laptop. Ho, hum!!!!!

Considering that my favorite mode of dress in winter is a sweatshirt and sweatpants and that I don't even wear a dress to work, one might think this book would be the last thing I would buy, but I was fascinated by the topic.

Home Economics came of age just before World War I, after years of restrictive fashion for women was giving way to clothing that helped her move naturally and participate in sports. It was a little-respected science at the time, but its proponents did not let it stop them. When Great War-era women asked for advice on fashion, domestic science produced the Dress Doctors: women who looked at the whole picture of a woman's build, mathematical ratios, color coordination, and fabric types and made recommendations so accurate that at one time American women were considered the best-dressed women in the world. The Dress Doctors followed one from childhood to girlhood to womanhood, recommending the ideal of proportion of eight "heads," and within that framework produced options every woman could use. These ideas were spread not only in domestic science courses in school, but by the 4H and settlement houses, and during the lean years of the Depression and the rationed years of World War II, the Dress Doctors came up with economical alternatives.

The author's narrative was so lively and the subject so interesting that I didn't even mind that it was about hated sewing. By the time they got to the baggy, childish dresses of the 1960s, I was in complete agreement and wish we'd learned about this in school in the 1970s, especially the budgeting concepts that young women learned alongside cooking and sewing lessons! Sewing fans, women's studies majors, history buffs, and someone just interested in a neat history will all enjoy this one.

This is an outstanding work. I have thoroughly enjoyed every page. I am confounded by the reviewers who seem to be so upset by this book. It's not a dress guide to tell you what to wear. Yes, the author's own voice comes through delightfully clear. There were times when I laughed out loud at her humor. Some reviewers seem to have misunderstood the book's message.

If you are interested in gaining some insight into why grown women do not have much to choose from for nice, well-tailored clothes, or if you are interested in how mainstream dress has become virtually "anything goes," this book will give you some great insight. The writing is engaging and enjoyable.

A fascinating cultural history that explains why my mother and many of her peers (who were young women in the 40s) always looked put together while ignoring most of the latest trends. I used to think it was just that fashions were more narrowly defined back then, presenting fewer options and less confusion, but Professor Pski reveals how there was clear instruction, guidance, and more of a principle-based DIY wardrobe-building culture (and better options than now for outsourcing some or all parts of a sewing project if one couldn't sew a stitch). I do recall my mother, an artist with refined tastes who loved harmony and beautiful things, saying how much she enjoyed her Home Ec classes. And her mother was an expert seamstress, which didn't hurt. Some readers complained the book is too academic. I found this to be one of the most readable academic books I've ever encountered--looked-forward-to bedtime reading for me even though my favorite bedtime reading is usually a good Stephen King novel. (But I admit that my judgment is shaped by the fact I read academic books pretty regularly.) I applaud Professor Pski for finding a way to marry her hobby and her profession to produce an intelligent, inspiring history.

This book is extremely important in ways that are not obvious to the casual reader. While the title would give you the impression that it laments the obvious casual attitude Americans have adopted toward dressing to lead their daily lives, it really addresses the bigger points. Not a quick, casual read, this carefully researched work deserves to be savored and studied, highlighter in hand, if you are a thinker/researcher who cares to explore the subject seriously. Does it matter that Home Economics is no longer a serious course of study in many schools? If we take running our households seriously, it does. Does it matter that we no longer value harmony in texture, purpose, durability when assembling an outfit? If practicality and economics are to be considered, it sure does.

A favorite quote, "True, today's fashion magazines throw all kinds of textures together, but they do that to make readers stop and stare. (People stop and stare at traffic accidents, too.)... As a Dress Doctor explained in 1923, "such a combination outrages our common sense as well as our sensibilities."

The author's wit and engaging writing style will keep you reading. This book is well worth the time and mental investment.

I very much enjoyed reading this book, but at various parts the author, seemingly at random, would launch into startlingly negative commentary about modern times. I picked up the book to learn about the past, not to hear some snobbish woman berate modern women for not wearing gloves; it's neither helpful, nor informative. Without all the venom, this book would be marvelous.

This is a piece de resistance of fashion history. Ever wonder why today's garments are cheaply made (intended to wear out quickly) and have little tailoring or shaping (unless they are made of Spandex)? Ever look back at photos of ladies from times past and sigh over how "together" they look, how classy, how dignified? This book explains it all with humor and detail. Whether or not you adore historical fashion, this book is a fabulous read that is hard to put down. I devoured it and found myself nodding heartily through its descriptions of the lost art of home economics and exquisite dress. Lots of beautiful color and black and white illustrations demonstrate exactly what Przbyszewski describes from her research. I've also collected vintage patterns, photographs, and sewing manuals from my teens and taught myself sewing and tailoring techniques through them. She nails what is so fantastic about all of these forgotten resources. A real treasury of long lost fashion sense!

Very enjoyable read. The history of changes in American women's fashion, and why, was both thorough and fascinating. I wondered why my mother's yearbook was filled with 18-year-olds who looked like adults and showed janitorial staff photographed in suits and ties, while I navigate around people in exercise clothes and pajamas at the grocery store and jeans at weddings; however, the reasons behind the changes had not been as clear to me.

But one caveat: the author is a history professor; she does not work for a fashion magazine. If you are wanting lists of must-haves and how-to's, this is very likely not for you. If (like me) you are not a scholar, but you are interested in understanding the history behind the many dramatic changes in daily wear over the 20th Century, this is exactly the book for you. And you may see your own closet with a new perspective that will last longer than any fashion magazine's advice.

Great historical review of the changes in women's dress code. Not a story, just a very lengthy and detailed report. I skimmed over half of it because i have never been that interested in keeping up with styles. It is such a rip off! However, I try to dress "modern". Finding decent dresses today is very difficult that was what I was most interested in. What happened to dresses? Sloppy dressing is very much "in" today to my chagrin

Here is a well-researched book about the history of home economics, sewing, and the (almost) lost art of managing one’s home and life. The book is well-written with some illustrations.

Though I only read a sample of this book, I placed it on my wish list so I can read the entire book later.

I so appreciated reading the history of dressing well and am excited to put the ideas of good dressing into practice. The advice in this book will help keep any one that cares about looking decent away from bad dressing!! Excellent advice in these pages!

So boring. So very, very boring.....

This book should have been great. I don't know a woman, especially a working woman, who doesn't grapple with "what to wear" on a daily basis. Most of us end up spending way too much money, on way too many clothes, which really don't fit us very well or suit us very much. I really looked forward to reading a book that traced out how we got to this place, and to taking a few lessons from it that I could apply to my life.

"The Lost Art of Dress" isn't that book. It is so dull that I am actually finding it difficult to critique. In fact, I am bored just writing about how boring the book was.

Save your time and money - avoid this book.

Loved this book! Loved the information, loved the tone. I have the hardback, 2014. Just a few typos: p. 129 She ties the felt in place and SETS it under...; p 167 I would save up...until I could SPLURGE [which looks a lot like plunge]; p. 178 her life was not marked BY many such events.

This book is Really Interesting on many fronts. It's educational and meaningful. I enjoyed learning about the "Dress Doctors". I Appreciate the fact that the author calls out the pressure on women to look sexy all the time, where shoes that hurt their feet, and the look of tv personalities, who too often default to the ever present (and boring, and tight and restrictive) sheath dress. I enjoyed Much in this book, but I also feel, as my title says, Conflicted about it. The style that the author (and the Dress Doctors") put forth is the kind that says NO to bright colors in anything but the most restrained use in how one dresses. Moreover, the colors that Are approved strike me as rather dull and faded out, at least as a main palette. In fact, even though this book puts forth many rules of good taste, much of it Does seem rather subjective to me. As I see it, the style is also Extremely WASPy, in all that is both Wonderful and Annoying about that type of look. I'm Not talking Preppy, but rather, a way of looking that is demure, restrained, very often undeniably beautiful, Unquestionably of good taste, but also Constraining (on many levels), too often Predictable and even rather Deadening. I saw the author being interviewed on 2 shows. In the first interview I saw, she wore a very interesting blouse of black with accents of red. I'm thinking she had cherries as a print on the collar and also a row of six red buttons on both cuffs. Very Lovely, very Elegant and kind of funky, as the blouse is retro looking, in a classy and understated way (and if that's Your style, as well as hers, Rock It! I say). I Loved what she wore for That interview. The Other interview, she's clad all in gray. Eesh! Not real fun to look at all that gray. If my depression had a "look" it would be something like that suit she had on. I mean, for the Love of Variety, Please put on an interesting pin (or Brooch, if we want to get snooty, and I think, given the tone of this book, we Do) or some scarf or Something. She actually violated one of her own rules, to use Some degree of vivid accent to liven up a look. I don't know what her point was, if there Was one, to be in all gray, with nary a softening influence to be found in that drear look. Of course, it's Easy to criticize, as I am doing! Yet, it's also Understandable, given that this author is presenting herself as The authority in Good Taste. If Good Taste means looking like a Quaker, then one is in luck, I guess, but her Cherries blouse was really Superb, because it was kind of quirky as well as classy. The author is a professional woman, a scholar, a college professor. She's obviously Extremely Talented and has expertise in teaching, sewing and hat making. Writing, too. However, I could personally find little to relate to Myself. If you are fashionably trim and live by the credo that taking off one thing before you leave your home is the Ideal way to go, you are in luck, the author has Much to say to YOU. If you are a bohemian free spirit who Adores scads of bright color, lots of prints (bring 'em On!) and finds thrift store shopping a Wonder because you never know What you might find, (including things with Sequins!) then this book might come across as unduly finger wagging. You might feel shamed, rather ignorant and also a bit of a slattern for wanting to call attention to yourself w/all your flashy gewgaws, flamboyant patterns and otherwise clownish sense of fun in your fashion. I LOVE the Excitement of neon, for instance. (Why should Crossing guards & Hunters have all the Fun)??? I am Not a woman of Style, I am one of Expression, and Expression can be problematical but, hopefully, it should Never be dull, staid or overly concerned with what Others think of as "good taste" (On the other hand, it's Great to Know what the rules are and Appreciate them for what they offer before one goes breaking them). This book is often amusing. The Japanese designer the author faults for the lumpy dresses & such - I had to agree w/her on this. It's Never good to don an item of clothing that makes you look like the Chemo & Radiation is just Not working, but I Also thought: this crazy clothing Would look good on theatrical dancers, and sure enough, I found such images and it Does look good on Them). At any rate, If You are Also the kind of woman a Dress Doctor would have taken one look at and said, sweetly: "what an array of contrasting colors, my dear. Do sit down now", you might find this book is a downer, a true wet blanket to your impulsive need to be flashy, and no doubt the author would only see this dampening effect as a Good thing, but I do not, necessarily; I think it's way too boring to mandate that everyone look more or less like each other. I also think this book is not very welcoming to the cultural influences of other countries and peoples. For those who admire cultures where bright color is the norm and decorative elements are very much: The More the Merrier, this book will make you feel like an unschooled peasant, even though using bright color, lots of patterns and decorative elements Does take skill, (or Madness, if you Will) as well as moxy and even courage. I can't help but think, admirable as they were, the Dress Doctors were also a bunch of women who just Might have benefited from dusting off some of their rather rigid notions of what "style" is, at least so as to be a Bit more inclusive of Individuality. But then: they Wouldn't be the Dress Doctors, they'd be the Dress Wizards or the Demented Dress Designers or some such thing! So, for an Interesting read, this book is Excellent, but if you take it too much to heart it just might break your heart (or, your ego, at the very Least). The author's snappy tone throughout the book is often amusing and can be a bit like fresh, cold water thrown in one's face: refreshing in certain ways, especially on a hot Summer's day, but...a bit more tolerance for those who want to look Unique would have been nice, too. I must add: it might not seem so, but I Do recommend this book!

This is a very frustrating book. Professor Pski (as she named herself on her website) has done a amazing job researching the entire life cycle of the Home Economics movement in the USA, and she has told this story drenched in her own 21st century opinions. It is more of a diatribe than a history, and even though I agree with her points, I find her methods reprehensible. The "Dress Doctors" is the author's term, used to reduce individual efforts to a made-up brand name, and is endlessly repeated like a tuneless drum. Great history buried alive. Shame! Shame on you!

Dear Miss Przybyszewski:

I received an advance review copy of your book through NetGalley.com and now that I have read it I would like to ask you what is it that you want to this book to do? I ask because, for the life of me, I don't understand. You provide truly excellent biographies and summaries of style tips from top American Home Economists of the past two centuries, and then you stop at about 1950. You fail to tell us how to use these tips to be elegant and fashionable today, when wearing an ankle-length women's suit, no matter how well fitted, will only garner censure from our colleagues and bosses. The book feels like an expansion of the lit review chapter of a PhD thesis, not a purpose-written book, and the lack of a useful discussion of fashion and style for the woman of 2014 is baffling.

I find your asides to the readers to be snide, out of place, and rather offensive. It is not helpful or courteous to say that elegant women should not be seen in swim suits, or that encouraging self-esteem in teenagers is wrongheaded. A woman, especially a business woman, who tries to make do with only one outfit (or even five), as you challenge us to do, would be an object of contempt. And what is it about open-toed shoes that makes you hate them so much? I am willing to bet a package of sewing needles that few women today feel deprived of the option to wear a cape over their dresses.

I really do not know who would find this book useful, despite the excellent history it provides.

Most sincerely yours,

Miss Anonymouse

Oh, dear. This is a terrible book on a fascinating subject--so terrible that I'm about to vent my outrage at its publication. Do not waste your money unless you wish to design and sew your own 1930s look-alikes and happen to be 6 feet tall, willowy, and oblivious to contemporary taste and public opinion.

Dr. Przybyszewski (preh-beh-SHEV-ski to us, though you have to Google it to find out) utterly and painfully revives the erstwhile "home economics" teachers of my 1950s youth--middle class, middle aged, middle west (sorry well-dressed Nebraskans, of whom I'm sure there are many). Forced into junior-high classes that taught me by ghastly example how not to dress or eat (a perfectly square top with a large tic-tac-toe design that tore the first time I wore it and left me with a lifelong revulsion for both sewing and pink, and a barely imaginable "cocktail" dish of canned mini-franks, grape jelly, and a head of garlic--I'm not making this up; Google reveals many equally awful recipes remain in circulation). But back to the book...

"The Lost Art of Dress" reads like an unpublished 60s Ph.D. thesis that's been lightly, very lightly, updated for 2014 publication. The writing is deadly, the advice is bad, and the history is non-linear. If pp. 1-207 represent this history, it starts in the late 19th c. and stops c. 1980. Well, maybe that's when the last "dress doctor," those ladies whose history this purports to be, retired. We can only be grateful that their art of dress has been lost. We're told little about their lives.

I love the history of clothing, and believe the clothes of the 20s through 50s are some of the most beautiful and flattering ever designed. Examples are inadequately illustrated here. They include only black-and-white, primarily line drawings. They prove Dr. P's observation that style designs most often use unrealistic, unnaturally long and lean body images. Photos or film stills from these eras might have been too expensive (permission fees), but far more informative.

Color would have been even better, but likely prohibitive. A 1936 table of approved color combinations for costumes is given, but only a few of its terms, presumably as arcane as those of our own fashion industry, are defined. Terrapin, Oakwood, Peasant blue, Pablo, Crane.... We might take a guess, but a color chart would have been invaluable. That lacking, we learn only that a small body of women, trying desperately to carve out an area of special, mysterious expertise in an era of hard slog for female academics, invented definite, rigid notions of what works with what.

Dr. P longingly describes the circumscribed rules of dress for middle- and upper-class women, grudgingly noting that many solutions were published for poor farm women via extension programs, even in the great Depression. She briefly nods to the socio-political realities of non-Caucasian women, but describes them with startling insensitivity. She really misses ubiquitous gloves and hats, and thinks we're the poorer for their loss. Unfortunately she apparently also believes a "housecoat" of quilted green velvet would be just the thing for whipping up a quick family breakfast. Maybe the sarcasm was too subtle for me.

What I really want to know (beyond how this got published) is how the heck to tie that wonderful scarf on the cover.