A Book in Review – Uniforms: Why We are What We Wear

Uniforms: Why We are What We Wear By; Paul Fussell
Non-Fiction: Fashion- History 204 pages copyright 2002
This book is an interesting peek into uniforms; their history, meaning and culture. Most uniform types get a few pages about them. Military uniforms as the most emotionally charged and influenceal uniforms are discussed threw out the book. It has lots of like bits of fun information like: up until the 1940’s German executioners did their job in a white tux, and UPS workers are not allowed to take their uniforms home in part to stop them from being sold as they are considered fashionable. It also includes info on uniforms that we do not normally think of as such; blue jeans on teens, the polo of casual Friday’s, wedding gowns, etc. For all its great information and reasont publication the author’s mindset and dwelling on the past and not current uniforms in places is irksome. For starters the author is one the fought in WWII “greatest generation” men who thinks “the kids these days. . .” about things. For example, he talks about Americans dislike of uniforms compared to Europe and Japan’s love of them in the negative. He complains about groups in America like nuns and nurses abandoning their uniforms so that they look like every one else with out stating key facts. For example, most nuns that work outside a convent do not wear the “penguin suits” like some orders wear in Europe. However, often times they never wore that uniform and many nuns wear a less formal “uniform” that still clearly defines them as a nun. Nurses may not dress like Florence Nightingale or Nurse Ratchet, but in most hospital today and often in private practices nurse do wear a uniform of scrubs, something that he failed to talk about at all. Also he had a whole chapter on “Weirdoes” or “Sickos” which he defines as people who wear uniforms (especially military) ones that don’t need to. In this he talks about neo-Nazis, fetish wear, wearing camo or shirts that say things like you are police when you aren’t and war re-enactors. He then goes on to say that these people are disturbed. Especially, the war re-enactors, which in his mind are all deranged individuals that having missed a real war think it is all fun and games and should be locked away in the loony bin. (Even though, this is the exact type of book that would be read by people into re-enacting the past, if he didn’t bad mouth them so.) This is followed by a chapter on Hemingway about how he was not some crazy sicko like people who teach about history by showing it as it happened. Never mind that he was actually crazy and so into pretending that he fought in wars that he didn’t that he changed his war correspondence uniform to look more military and formed his own army unit. Overall, this made me like the book less, but not enough to not want to finish it.