by Heather Vaughan 

Recent films such as Pleasantville and Far From Heaven show the housewife of the 1950s in the uniform of her profession: a shirtwaist dress.  The shirtwaist itself encompasses the 1950s ideal of conformity and domesticity and a variety of media reinforced these notions over time.  In the 1950s, magazines, television, books, and films all had varying degrees of influence over women’s fashion choices.  Magazines, however, had a more significant role at the inception of the 1950s shirtwaist style just after World War II.  David Halberstam explains that “women turned to magazines to learn how to adapt to their new roles in the land of plenty." [1]  Good Housekeeping was a practical lifestyle magazine that influenced the fashion decisions of women, and provides information on how the 1950s shirtwaist was sold to them.  Tracing the path of the shirtwaist—from its established pre-war form, to its 1947 revision by Haute Couture designer Christian Dior, to its gradual appearance in this new form in Good Housekeeping—shows how it began its development as an icon.  Exploring how it was represented in other media in later years will show how it solidified as an icon.

Shirtwaist dresses were not new in the 1950s.  They had been worn as early as the 1900s and were based on the design of a man’s shirt.  Patterns for Blouses and Dresses, published in 1917 describes the basic “mannish-shirtwaist” as a “garment so designed as to follow practically the same lines as those of a man’s negligee shirt." [2] In their pattern book of dresses from 1916, The Woman’s Institute of Domestic Arts and Sciences notes that a shirtwaist dress is “a simple, practical dress” and that “even for the classroom or for business, because of its trim simplicity and graceful dignity, it has its advantages.”[3]  

Just prior to the “New Look,” the 1940s “wartime shirtwaister” was prevalent.  Author Angela Partington explains that this version was based on the utility look and focused the silhouette on “square shoulders and short, straight skirts,”[4] which is the reverse of the soft, rounded look of the “New Look.”  This utility style shirtwaist was popular and appeared in advertisements in Good Housekeeping, Seventeen, and Mademoiselle in early 1947.  Many of them appeared as golf wear or other sporting related clothing because of their comfort and practicality.  They were often sold specifically to younger women in an effort to help them feel more adult.  An ad on the inside cover of Girls and Teens Merchandiser from January of 1947 showed a “Teen-Set.”  “It’s one young customer and then the next . . . every teen-ager going crazy over Teen-Set.  For Spring selling we recommend this gay version of the shirtwaist: partly push-up sleeves, shoe-string ties at the neck and cuffs, a sophisticated black stripe cotton.”[5] Partington goes on to say that the utility look remained popular via the shirtwaist, but acknowledges the change in form.  “The wartime shirtwaister . . . flourished in the form of 1950s dresses which became almost symbolic of the housewife, and were invariably used to dress her in advertisements for household goods"[6]

Christain Dior’s influence on the 1950s style shirtwaist began with his “New Look” collection in the spring of 1947 and almost single-handedly defined the post-war silhouette.  Although other designers such as Claire McCardell were working with similar skirt shapes at the time, the fashion media credited Dior with the inception of the “New Look.”  While Dior did influence ready-to-wear styles, it is incorrect to say that his version merely “trickled down.”  Grant D. McCracken explains the specifics of the trickle down theory in his essay “The Trickle-Down Theory Rehabilitated.”

“The trickle-down theory, first stated by Simmel (1904), was an ingenious account of fashion change.  The theory holds that two conflicting principles act as a kind of engine or motive force for innovation.  Subordinate social groups, following the principle of imitation, seek to establish new status claims by adopting the clothing of super ordinate groups.  Super ordinate social groups, following the principle of differentiation, respond by adopting new fashion."[7] 

If anything, an opposite scenario caused the shirtwaists popularity.  This change disseminated in a circular and almost cyclical way.  Dior took the already well-established form of the shirtwaist and created a new, haute couture version.[8] While this is not necessarily an early incarnation of the now common trend of turning street fashion into couture, it does suggest Dior’s “. . . willingness to work with an established form but to complicate its construction and render it idiosyncratic.”  The new style then slowly began to influence all price points and classes to create the new form, while obliterating the old one.

At each class level, different parts of the style were modified to fit within that class’s needs and boundaries.  Partington, notes that “. . . cheaper or mass-produced copies of designer fashion tend to dilute or otherwise ‘tone down’ its more extreme aspects."[9] She goes on to say that, “this notion of popular fashion, as a weaker version of couture or designer originals, appears to rest on an assumption that working-class consumers of fashion goods are less innovatory or adventurous in their preferences and choices than the consumers of designer clothing."[10] By 1953, the shirtwaist had come full circle and been firmly reestablished in its new form.  In August of 1953, Vogue reported that “the new shirtwaist” was the thing to wear if you were a “Young Nillionaire,"[11] indicating that by this point it was already passé to the rich and fashionable elite.  Magazines aimed at different audiences would also report and show the trend, but differently.  “The magazines for homemakers tended to offer practical suggestions for budget-conscious women who shopped at J. C. Penney instead of Bergdorf Goodman. . . ."[12]

While a basic shirtwaist dress from any time has the elements of a man’s tailored shirt, with a turned down collar, a button-down front, and any variation of skirt shape, and sleeve and hem length; Dior’s version focused on a “nipped in” waist and full skirt.  Richard Martin notes that “beginning with his 1947 New Look collection, Dior always included at least one shirtwaist style dress."[13]The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute has three of these dresses by Dior: Cherie (1947), an unnamed red silk dress (1948), and Pactole (1949).  The most important of these is “Cherie,” a dinner dress of silk taffeta with “sloper shoulder, raised bust line, narrowed waist, monumental volume of skirt falling away from a padded hipline to below the calf."[14] The deep pleating is even around the hips, with a small portion at the center front of the skirt left un-pleated.   The unnamed red silk twill dress from 1948 has sharp pleats at center front with smooth un-pleated sides featuring two hip pockets.  It also has a black leather belt and long sleeves.   “Pactole,” is a shirtwaist transformed into a cocktail dress by the use of gold silk satin.[15] It has no breaks in the pleating as with the other two dresses and features a tiny waist, a notched collar, breast pockets, and a front closure with hidden buttons. 

The essential elements of Dior’s “New Look” shirtwaist include the full skirt of “Cherie” with its voluminous use of fabric and pleating at the waist.  The pleats also help to create the padded and exaggerated hips of the “New Look."[16] Rounded shoulders too, were an important element of the look and shoulder pads were often used for this effect. Though not featured in “Cherie,” Dior often created a tiny waist through boning within the bodice of the garment, which reshapes the body. 

Dior’s shirtwaist dresses appeared in fashion publications such as Women’s Wear Daily, Vogue, Harpers Bazaar, beginning in 1947 and continuing throughout the fifties.  In April 1947, Harpers Bazaar, described Dior’s “New Look” in detail:

“The Silhouette is the essence of femininity.  Bodices and jackets are fitted tightly to the body and buttoned from neck to wasp waist . . . Skirts are tremendously full, and from ten to twelve inches from the ground.  Yards and yards of material swing and swirl because pleats are hand –pressed and flare to the hem.  Pleats are stitched down about twelve inches from the waist.  They may be narrow, and graduated to one and a half inches, or two-inch wide box pleats.  Inside the pleated skirts are padded, stiffened yet perfectly comfortable, and wonderful for women with small waists, large hips.  In the house of Dior, French draping met its death—it was vanquished by pleats and under-padding."[17]

The silhouette was shown in fashion magazines much more quickly than in lower and middle class lifestyle magazines such as McCalls and Ladies Home Journal.  Edited by Nancy White, Good Housekeeping focused on practicality in clothing.

Born in Brooklyn on July 25, 1916, [18] Nancy White was the associate director at Good Housekeeping when Harpers Bazaar first reported on Dior’s “New Look.”  Eight months later, in December of 1947,[19] White replaced Martha Stout as fashion director at Good Housekeeping.  In total, White spent sixteen years at the magazine.[20] According to her obituary of 2002, she then “. . . joined Harper’s as an assistant editor in 1957, and was appointed editor at the beginning of 1958.  She was chosen by the previous editor, Carmel Snow, who happened to be her aunt.  [Diana] Vreeland had been another candidate for the top job; she promptly quit.”[21] Nancy White remained at Harper’s until 1971 and died at the age of 85.[22]

As fashion director at Good Housekeeping, White followed the Paris trends from a distance, picking up pieces of Dior’s “New Look” months or even years after they had initially shown on runways and fashion magazines.  Reporting fashion in a lifestyle and homemakers publication limited the space she had to report the fashion news.  Good Housekeeping was known for its practicality in all aspects, and this applied to fashion as well.  “Although the clothes you see on Good Housekeeping’s pages are the kind that set you dreaming, the dreams are the kind that can come true.  For with all their flattering distinction, these clothes are sold in many stores and at prices retailers call ‘popular’—virtues not always found in clothes you see featured as fashion news.”[23] Affordability and practicality were such driving forces, that Good Housekeeping tested the clothing at a Textile Laboratory at the Good Housekeeping Institute to ensure that clothing they endorsed met the strictest standards of durability and affordability.  Special labels and seals were even created for approved garments, and appeared in clothing ad pages in a variety of magazines.[24]

Good Housekeeping reported the trends, but tended to focus on easier-to-wear versions, and honestly reported problems.[25] For example, in February of 1948, when describing the then popular waistline Nancy White wrote, “Probably you were not born with it, but you may achieve it comfortably through a girdle fitted with a high waistband, or a long bra, or even a waist cincher. . .  On the next pages – foundation accessories, which are literally the basis of fashion this spring. . .  You will find them sturdy and easier to wear than ever before.”[26] White emphasized comfort, sturdiness, and ease in the magazine.  These qualities were of the utmost importance to her readers.  Though it is important to remember that “Whatever [a] magazine’s audience, the underlying message was similar to those regarding housekeeping, marriage, and parenting: looking good was a duty, requiring hard work and commitment.”[27]

All of the elements of Dior’s “New Look” shirtwaist may be found in Good Housekeeping between 1947 and 1950.  The silhouette and posture, pleating, full hips, pinched in waist, and rounded shoulders of the “New Look” are clearly present.  There was also a specific effort made to sell the look to younger women and teens.  The versatility of the shirtwaist form lent itself well to coverage in Good Housekeeping as it could be altered and used for sportswear, dinner dresses, evening ensembles, party dresses, or housedresses.

“New Look,” posture appeared first in Good Housekeeping with hips thrust forward and rear-ends tucked under.  In April 1947, an article by Ruth Murrin called “2 outstanding figure faults,” provided solutions for a “jutting rear.”  The article warned, “This fault spoils your posture, makes your hip section look bigger than it is and causes a deep curve in back.  To correct it, learn to turn your pelvis down under you.  When you stand and walk, consciously tuck your buttocks under as if you were flinching from a spank.”[28] This recommendation showed the beginnings of postures commonly seen in high fashion magazines of the time, whose models were often shown with their hips thrust forward. In March 1948 illustrated models began to appear in Good Housekeeping with their hips tilted forward making a stronger connection to the models in fashion magazines.

Femininity was a large part of Dior’s “New Look,” and it would resonate throughout the 1950s.[29] Good Housekeeping takes note of the change from the Utility look in June of 1947, by saying that the mode had “a new length, new fullness, new roundness, [and a] new softness.”[30] In July of the same year, the uncomfortable details were spelled out, “We’re going to be ladies again.  We’re going to be feminine, with greater accent on tiny waist, fuller hips, higher heels, hats that are very much hat. . ..” [31] A growing necessity for figure shaping showed in November.  In a back section of the magazine, a piece called “The Shape” noted  “Like an old fashioned corselet, a nylon-marquisette and nylon-and-cotton mesh-elastic bra rounds your hipline.”[32]  By March of 1948 more forceful images and an editorial showed the growing importance of shaping the body “to quite the tiniest and most important waistline in three decades . . . the New Shape is a feminine shape, departing from a pointedly small waist to hips that curve, a bust that’s full…” 

The first elemental portions of Dior’s shirtwaist to appear in Good Housekeeping are pleating and full skirts.  While Dior used pleats to achieve his very full skirts, dresses in Good Housekeeping appear to gain fullness by various means including pleating, petticoats, flounces, or crinolines.  Initially, pleating alone was used.  Pleating extra yardage was popular in its own right in the years following the war simply because the fabric rationing regulations had been discarded.  While Harpers Bazaar began showing pleats by February of 1947,[33] Good Housekeeping did not note the change until March of the same year.[34] R&K dresses featured in both advertisements and editorials in Good Housekeeping showed shirtwaist dresses with all over tuck pleats and full skirts.”[35]

Eventually, the interest with pleats waned, but the full skirt remained important.  In March of 1948, fully pleated skirts changed to show pleating only at the sides of the dress, similar to those shown by Dior a year earlier.  Eventually though, the interest in pleats disappeared altogether.  Achieving skirt fullness came primarily from petticoats and flounces, crinolines and other such undergarments in conjunction with small pleats or tucks on the dress.  In April 1948, Good Housekeeping featured a section on trousseau petticoats.  The descriptions of these petticoats emphasize the shape and sound a woman should have and make.  One is described as “An organdy beauty with a deep flounce made to float out your skirts,” emphasizing shape.  Describing the sounds one makes, it is a “petticoat that whispers” when you walk and another is described as a “crunchy white cotton hope-chest treasure."[36]   In her 1959 book addressing fashion for wives, designer Anne Fogarty emphasizes that it is importation to “be sure you wear the proper fullness under each dress.”[37]

            Pleating in the dresses also initially added to the appearance of fuller hips, another of Dior’s dictates.  Pleating at the sides of the dress aided in this look especially well.  Suits in Good Housekeeping especially employed the look of the padded hip,[38] but the shirtwaist seems to have been left untouched by this extreme of couture.  The closest comparable is in an April of 1948 Kay Whitney ad which showed a shirtwaist dress with ruffles at the hips and called a “tiered pocket dress.”[39]  Though the magazine never really emphasized hip padding, Nancy White noted the passing of the trend with an editorial in the September 1948 issue titled, “How will you look this winter.”  She said, “You will discard the . . .Padded Hips as unsound elements in last year’s radical changes…” [40]  Good Housekeeping often highlighted the less extreme and focused on more middle-of-the road fashion trends.

The waistline was probably the most difficult to achieve of the “New Look” elements.  Often described as “pinched” or “nipped” in, several articles in Good Housekeeping between 1947 and 1950 focus on the need for a small waist, and emphasize tightly fitted tops.[41] Undergarments played a significant role in achieving this look and had names like the “Waspie” . [42] As previously mentioned, Nancy White focused on its importance in the now established “New Look” in a piece on long-line bras in February of 1948.  When describing these garments she emphasizes comfort, sturdiness and wearability, despite the obvious discomfort associated with them. [43] Selling this demanding style to her readers who were focused on comfort and practicality must have been challenging, but the popularity of the look necessitated it.  Sketches of women in the magazine with the “New Look” waist often appear to have caved in waists, or look as though they have been punched in the stomach.   Nancy White even refers to the style as a “Gasp Waist.”[44]

Rounded shoulders are another trend first influenced by Dior’s “New Look"[45] which had significant and clear play in Good Housekeeping’s images and editorials.  In January 1947, Good Housekeeping was still focused on the 1940s utility look, which included a sharp, masculine shoulder.  In May of 1948, while many other of the “New Look” elements had been incorporated, shoulders still appeared sharp.   By September of 1948, however, the rounded shoulder was an acceptable trend, “You will rejoice in the clever tailoring that has finally made a success of the Rounded Shoulder.  You will take this shoulder whenever you can find it…"[46]The trend remained prominent for a considerable length of time as well.  An editorial in January of 1950 editorial featured “Greek day costumes” noted of a shirtwaist dress that “you must have it on before you really appreciate how well the shoulders fit.”[47]

While Good Housekeeping was aimed primarily at housewives and homemakers, it had an established section that covered teen fashion.  The “New Look” style was heavily marketed to younger women, possibly because they were more interested in new trends than their mothers, or adapted more easily to change.[48] In addition, mothers of teens were often the ones paying for these clothes and needed the reassurance that their daughters would be up date in their fashion choices.  Thus, a small section covering Teen Fashion was useful to Good Housekeeping’s readers.  An August 1947 fashion editorial, shows a series of teen fashions, several of which are shirtwaists, with copy that notes “Skirts have a swing session. . .skirts are full and free again, the way we like them best."[49]  Later, in May of 1948, a piece titled “To the Knowing Teen” focused on hem lengths and shoe requirements brought on by the “New Look,” “What about a teen and the New Look?  Well, fashions have changed for her too, of course, but she’s got to do some adjusting to them.  For instance, if she takes a long, full-folded skirt, she’s got to wear the higher heels those skirts were designed for.  Moccasins and the sweeping hemline clash like mad."[50]A later piece in the “Teens of Our Times” section by Helene Wright cautions that if she wants “a new-look waistline” a teen should “watch those rich deserts”[51] In August of 1948, teens and television were linked and both were said to be “out of the fad stage, into a future that’s geared to do the young world proud.”  The article goes on to describe that teens like full skirts, practicality, informality, femininity, and not “corn.”[52] Significant coverage of “new look” in other fashion magazines aimed at younger women may have prompted Good Housekeeping to cover it.[53]

By the 1950s, the new shirtwaist dress was represented at each price point and inundated Good Housekeeping as well as fashion magazines.  No longer news, the utility shirtwaist had been replaced by the more feminine “New Look” shirtwaist and was a staple in the American woman’s wardrobe.  It was present in all manner of advertising, and was cheaply available in chain stores, such as Valincot.  An ad for the “splatter-dot house dress” for $2.98 at a local store shows an iconic looking shirtwaist style house dress.[54]  Even Good Housekeeping’s fiction illustrations (seemingly the slowest to pick up on a fashion trend) began to show “New Look” dresses complete with full skirts and rounded shoulders.[55]   By May of 1950, cartoons of women in the home were shown wearing this now commonplace style shirtwaist.[56] The traditional form had been permanently altered to fit the new mode.  Speaking to the pervasiveness of the look, an April 1957 issue of Life Magazine showed a photo of Elizabeth Eckford trying to break the race barrier at a high school in Little Rock, Arkansas.  Every woman in the photo wears this style of shirtwaist dress.[57]

            That is not to say that the shirtwaist dress remained static after this point.  Minor changes consistently kept this dress popular.  The most significant change after 1950 was the use of patterned fabrics and floral prints.  Dior showed a floral shirtwaist in his Spring 1951 collection,  and consequently Vogue and Harpers Bazaar both focused on floral patterns in this and later years.[58]  “The shirtwaist in flower, its natural up-to-the-minute aptness made suddenly more so by one of this spring’s miraculous botanical prints—sharp acid greens and yellow and the tart vermilion pinks that blaze this time of year in a hundred country gardens.”[59] These trends slowly followed in Good Housekeeping.  The focus on the textile kept the shirtwaist new and fresh, while retaining its usefulness and wearability.  Other media too, helped keep the shirtwaist popular.

Reinforcement of the icon, after these initial introductions was left primarily to other, and increasingly more popular media, such as television, although books played a role in this as well.  While early on, magazines such as Good Housekeeping and Coronet told women how to embody the ideal, television showed them.[60]  In the mid to late 1950s television began to reinforce the shirtwaist as mother’s uniform on family comedy TV shows like The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best, Make Room for Daddy, and later, The Donna Reed Show.  These shows reinforced the idea that a responsible or “good"[61] woman is well put together at all times.  With the advent and prevalence of television, women were shown doing housework in the most perfect of ensembles, including Dior inspired shirtwaists, with high heels, and pearls.  However, early television shows, such as The Honeymooners were slightly more realistic and less idealistic than later shows such as Leave it to Beaver, I Love Lucy, and The Donna Reed Show.  In addition, the later 1950s saw a dramatic shift in terms of influence and television began to outweigh all other types of media.  “. . . By the mid-fifties it was clear that television could attract larger audiences than any of the older media, even with the cut-rate subscriptions increasingly offered by magazines.”[62]

Television characters affected how women felt about themselves and their capabilities (both in terms of motherhood as well as in terms of appearance[63]) and in 1959, Donna Reed was given an award for her character on The Donna Reed Show from the founders of Mothers Day (The American Mother’s Committee), reinforcing the notion that mothers should strive for perfection.[64] William Roberts, who created the characters for The Donna Reed Show described her character as “wife, mother, companion, booster, nurse, housekeeper, cook, laundress, gardener, bookkeeper, clubwoman, choir singer, PTA officer, Scout leader, and at the same time effervescent, immaculate, and pretty.”[65]  Moreover, her character and unrealistic perfection helped to solidify the shirtwaist dress as an icon of female perfection.

Popular fiction such as The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit (1955) reflected the frustration connected with the mass conformity of the 1950s, and described the male “uniform” of the time.  In the film version, the main characters wife Betsy, wears a uniform of her own: a shirtwaist dress with a full skirt.[66] Women who did not wear the uniform as such were often seen as rebels.  In 1956, both the author and publisher of Peyton Place (1956) broke the rules by wearing pants.  Publisher Kitty Mesner wore slacks regularly, and author Grace Metalious was known to wear a man’s checked shirt, and a pair of jeans.[67] Eight million copies of her books sold in paperback and it was banned in Canada but “her appearance was as much of a scandal as the book was.”[68]

Younger women in high school and college received a portion of their fashion information in their Home Economics classes and from textbooks.  One such textbook, Clothing for Moderns, has two editions.  One was published in 1949 and the other in 1957.  The differences between these editions further illustrate the change in the shirtwaist dress between these years.  It lists the shirtwaist as number four on the list of the seven basic garments every woman needs.  “Casual shirtwaist or coat dresses-for school, work, dates, travel."[69]

 Another, similar book Management for Better Living points out the ideal silhouette and posture,[70]  and reinforces the idea that women must be perfectly put together at all times by showing an image from the Whirlpool corporation of a woman doing her laundry in a shirtwaist dress complete with heels, makeup, and pearls.[71]

            As early as 1967, the dress had reached the status of icon, and clearly represented the ideal woman of the 1950s.  Fashion Designer Rudi Gernreich referenced the older style in his 1967 collection, in opposition to his innovative and new styles. 

“[Rudi] Gernreich, the showman, surprised the audience at his October [1967] collection by showing a model wearing a belted shirtwaist dress that covered her knees.  As if that weren’t shock enough, she wore a padded bra, nylon stockings, and spike-heeled pumps with bag and gloves to match.  Just as bewildered reporters and buyers started to gasp in amazement, out came Moffitt in a thigh-high mini of the same print as the shirtwaist dress and little-heeled shoes.  The point, said Gernreich, was that there were no rights or wrongs in fashion—that the spirit of that moment was in how clothes were put together."[72]

Another and perhaps more obvious point is that by 1967, the shirtwaist dress had already become a cultural icon of times past.

Now, whenever a play, movie, or TV series wants to reference an ideal woman in the 1950s fashion, the costume designer must at least consider the “New Look” shirtwaist.  So too, designers looking for feminine or highly contrived silhouettes must consider Dior’s contribution and the 1950s look.  Dior and the fashion press may not have solidified this look in the average American household, but others—Nancy White included—helped to solidify the 1950s shirtwaist dress as an American cultural icon.

Copyright July 2005  

Endnotes

Bibliography

Books

Ash, Juliet and Elizabeth Wilson.  (Eds.)  Chic Thrills: A Fashion Reader.  Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.

Bacon-Smith, Camille.  Enterprising women: television fandom and the creation of popular myth.  Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992.

Baker, Patricia.  Fashions of a Decade: The 1950s.  Facts on File.  New York 1991.

Breines, Wini.  Young, white, and miserable: growing up female in the fifties.  Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001.

Brown, Mary Ellen (Ed).  Television and women's culture: the politics of the popular.  London; Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990.

Buxbaum, Gerda (Ed).  Icons of fashion: the 20th century.  Munich; New York: Prestel, 1999.

Cawthorne, Nigel.  Key moments in fashion: from haute couture to streetwear: key collections, major figures and crucial moments that changed the course of fashion history from 1890 to the 1990s.  London: Hamlyn, 1998.

Cawthorne, Nigel. The new look: the Dior revolution.  London: Hamlyn, 1996.

Clancy, Deirdre.  Costume since 1945: couture, street style, and anti-fashion.  New York: Drama Publishers, 1996.

De La Haye, Amy (Ed) the Cutting edge: 50 years of British fashion, 1947-1997.  1st American ed. Woodstock, N.Y.: Overlook Press, 1997.

De Marly, Diana. Christian Dior.  New York: Holmes & Meier, 1990.

Dior, Christian.  Talking about fashion.  New York, Putnam, 1954.

Edgerton, Gary R. and Peter C. Rollins (eds.) Television histories: shaping collective memory in the media age.  Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2001.

Erwin, Mabel Deane.  Clothing for moderns.  New York, Macmillan Co., 1957.

Erwin, Mabel Deane.  Clothing for moderns.  New York, Macmillan Co., 1949.

Esslin, Martin.  The age of television.  San Francisco: Freeman, 1982.

Fane, Mrs. Xenia Flyer.  Television image of the father: a comparison of the father image held by home economics teachers with the image perceived by high school students on commercial television.  Thesis (Ph. D.)  --New York University, School of Education, 1965.  

Fogarty, Anne.  Wife Dressing: The Fine art of being a well dressed wife (with provocative notes for the patient husband who pays the bills).  Julian Messner, Inc. New York.  1959.

Fultz, Jay.  In search of Donna Reed.  Iowa City, Iowa: University of Iowa Press, 1998.

Giroud, Francoise. Dior. New York, Rizzoli, 1987.

Haralovich, Mary Beth and Lauren Rabinowitz (Eds.).  Durham Television, history, and American culture: feminist critical essays.  Duke University Press, 1999.

Hollander, Anne.  Sex and Suits: the Evolution of Modern Dress.  Kodansha America, Inc. New York.  1994.

Horn, Marilyn J.  The Second Skin: An Interdisciplinary Study of Clothing.  Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.  1968.

Howell, Georgina. In Vogue: 75 years of style.  London: Condé Nast Books, 1991.

Humphreys, Nancy K. American women's magazines: an annotated historical guide.  New York: Garland, 1989.

Hylton, Stuart.  From rationing to rock: the 1950s revisited.  Thrupp, Stroud, Gloucestershire : Sutton Pub., 1998.

Keenan, Brigid.  Dior in Vogue.  New York, Harmony Books, 1981.

Keller, Katie.  Mothers and work in popular American magazines.  Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1994.

Kottak, Conrad Phillip.  Prime-time society: an anthropological analysis of television and culture.  Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub.  Co., 1990.

Lasswell, Mark.  TV guide: fifty years of television.1st Ed.  New York: Crown, 2002.

Lhamon, W. T. Deliberate speed: the origins of a cultural style in the American 1950s.  Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1990.

Mankiewicz, Frank and Joel Swerdlow.  Remote control: television and the manipulation of American life.  New York: Times Books, 1978.

Marling, Karal Ann. As seen on TV: the visual culture of everyday life in the 1950s.  Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1994.

Martin, Richard and Harold Koda.  Christian Dior.  New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1996.

Meehan, Diana M.  Ladies of the evening: women characters of prime-time television.  Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1983.

Mendes, Valerie and Amy de la Haye.  20th century fashion.  London: Thames & Hudson, 1999.

Metalious, Grace.  Peyton Place.  Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1999 [re-release of 1956 edition].

Meyerowitz, Joanne (Ed).  Not June Cleaver: women and gender in postwar America, 1945-1960.  Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1994.

Milbank, Caroline Rennolds. Couture, the great designers.  New York: Stewart, Tabori & Chang: Distributed by Workman Pub., 1985.

Moffitt, Peggy, William Claxton, and Marylou Luther.  The Rudi Gernreich Book.  New York, Rizzoli, 1999.

New York (N.Y.).  -- Mayor's Committee for the Commemoration of the Golden Anniversary of the City of New York.  City of New York Golden Anniversary of Fashion, 1898-1948.  Official jubilee Ed.  [New York, 1948]

Palmer, Alexandra.  Couture & commerce: the transatlantic fashion trade in the 1950s.  Vancouver, BC: Published by UBC Press; [Ontario]: in association with the Royal Ontario Museum, 2001.

Pennell, Ellen La Verne.  Women on TV.  Minneapolis, Burgess Pub.  Co. 1954.

Picken, Mary Brooks.  Dresses, part 2.  Women’s Institute of Domestic Arts and Sciences, Inc. Scranton, Pa. 1916.

Pochna, Marie-France.  Christian Dior: the man who made the world look new; translated from the French by Joanna Savill; foreword by Stanley Marcus.  Edition 1st English-language Ed.  New York: Arcade Pub., 1996.

Pochna, Marie-France.  Christian Dior.  Paris: Flammarion, 1994.

Pochna, Marie-France.  Dior.  New York, N.Y.: Universe/Vendome, 1996.

Press, Andrea Lee.  Women watching television: gender, class, and generation in the American television experience.  Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991.

Primeau, Ronald.  The rhetoric of television.  New York: Longman, 1979.

Probert, Christina.  Lingerie in Vogue since 1910.  Abberville Press Publishers, New York.  1981.

Rethy, Esmeralda de. Christian Dior: the early years, 1947-1957.  New York: Vendome Press, 2001.

Richardson, Louvica Faith How to write for homemakers.  Ames, Iowa State College Press, 1949.

Royce, Brenda Scott.  Donna Reed: a bio-bibliography.  New York: Greenwood Press, 1990.

Schreier, Barbara A. Mystique and identity: women’s fashions of the 1950s.  Norfolk, Va.: Chrysler Museum, 1984.

Selnow, Gary W. and Richard R. Gilbert.  Society's impact on television: how the viewing public shapes television programming.  New York: Praeger, 1993.

Snow, Carmel. The world of Carmel Snow, by Carmel Snow, with Mary Louise Aswell.  Design by Alexey Brodovitch.  New York, McGraw-Hill, 1962.

Solomon, Michael R. (Ed).  The Psychology of fashion.  Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1985.

Spigel, Lynn and Denise Mann (Eds.).  Private screenings: television and the female consumer.  Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1992.

Starr, Mary Catharine.  Management for better living.  Boston, Heath, 1956.

Steele, Valerie.  Fifty years of fashion: new look to now.  New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997.

Terrace, Vincent.  Fifty Years of Television: a guide to series and pilots, 1937-1988.  New York: Cornwall Books, 1991.

Thesander, Marianne.  The Feminine Ideal.  Reaktion books, London 1997.

Thumim, Janet (Ed).  Small screens, big ideas: television in the 1950s.  London; New York: I.B. Tauris Publishers; New York, NY: In the United States of America and in Canada distributed by St. Martin's Press, 2002.

Trahey, Jane (Ed).  Harper's bazaar.  100 years of the American female.  New York, Random House, 1967.

Walker, Nancy A.  Shaping our mothers' world: American women's magazines.  Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2000.

Walker, Nancy A. (Ed).Women's magazines, 1940-1960: gender roles and the popular press.  Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 1998.

Wheen, Francis.  Television: a history.  London: Century Publishing, 1985.

White, Nancy and John Esten.. Style in motion: Munkacsi photographs of the 30s, 40s, and 50s.  New York: C. N. Potter: distributed by Crown Publishers, 1979.

Wilson, Sloan,  The man in the gray flannel suit.  New York, Simon and Schuster, 1955.

Woman’s Institute of Domestic Arts and Sciences.  Patterns for Blouses and Dresses.  International Educational Publishing co. Great Britain, 1917.

Zuckerman, Mary Ellen.  A history of popular women's magazines in the United States, 1792-1995.  Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 1998.

Newspapers

Dallas Morning News

New York Times

Magazines

Good Housekeeping

Harpers Bazaar

Life

Mademoiselle

McCalls

Seventeen

TV Guide

Vogue

Video

David Halberstam's the fifties [video recording] / the History Channel.  New York: History Channel: A&E Home Video: Distributed by New Video Group, 1997.  v. 3.  Let us play house (50 min.)