In “Pockets: Articles of Interest #3,” Trufelman explores the history and gendered dynamics of pockets in clothing, discussing the evolution of the pocket, particularly in womenswear, over the past few centuries, as well as its implications for those “who can walk through the world comfortably and securely,” and those who cannot.
Meanwhile, in “Suits: Articles of Interest #10,” she focuses on the history of menswear and its seemingly limited capacity for self-expression, particularly on how fear of suspicion and social ostracization has played a role in subduing menswear.
Ultimately, both of these texts explore the same fundamental idea: how gendered clothing serves to reinforce gender norms, and vice versa. While critical analysis of gendered clothing using a feminist approach is the most evidently productive, I think there’s something to be gained upon deeper inspection with an economic focus.
I have long held that, while the absence of pocket’s in women’s clothing is, to a significant extent, rather telling of the omnipresence of gender norms, it is also economic in nature. I believe the omission of useful pockets in womenswear is simply a ploy to sell more purses and handbags. Bear with me; this does sound somewhat conspiratorial in nature. But it’s not exactly the first time industries have invested a significant amount of time and capital in convincing audiences for the need of unnecessary goods in the name of successfully conforming to the expectations placed upon one’s gender.
Case in point: according to the Smithsonian, “in the early twentieth century, manufacturers of safety razors, seeking to expand their market, promoted the idea that body hair on women is inherently masculine and indelicate, as well as unhygienic” (“Hair Removal”, par. 5).
In “Pockets,” Trufelman discusses the development of the reticule in the early 19th century, a small, ornately decorated handbag meant to replace the traditional pockets worn under the more voluminous skirts typical of fashion prior to the turn of the century. While intricate, these reticules were almost entirely fashion and no function. The image above is of such a reticule, originating from Britain during the first quarter of the 19th century. Its lantern-like form is rather striking to the eye, however it is entirely transparent and full of small holes; this means that all of a woman’s possessions would be clearly visible to passers-by, and, furthermore, susceptible to falling through the cracks and being lost. As such, it is a rather inconvenient method of carrying one’s belongings.
I don’t believe this is meant to be a handbag for daily use. Rather, based on its particularly unique decoration and shape, I think it’s meant to complement an outfit, and act as a part of a whole ensemble, rather than stand alone. In creating such unique designs, retailers are thus able to sell a greater variety of products, attempting to convince consumers that, in order to fit into fashionable society, one must have a wide selection of purses for various different occasions.
Works Cited
“Hair Removal.” Smithsonian, si.edu/spotlight/health-hygiene-and-beauty/hair-removal#. Accessed 10 February 2023.
Swift, Taylor. “The Man.” Spotify. https://open.spotify.com/track/3RauEVgRgj1IuWdJ9fDs70?si=d0715045c3d7471d.
Trufelman, Avery. “Pockets: Articles of Interest #3.” Articles of Interest, 2 October 2018, 99percentinvisible.org/episode/pockets-articles-of-interest-episode-3/.
Trufelman, Avery. “Suits: Articles of Interest #10.” Articles of Interest, 26 May 2020, 99percentinvisible.org/episode/suits-articles-of-interest-10/.