"Super-wides" and Society: Low-riding pants at the turn of the 21st century.

by Sceapfhaidh ni Dhomhniall

Taken from the Proceedings of the CXII Interplanetary Costume Collegium, 2543 A.D.

The phenomenon of the Super-wide jean, though an obscure footnote in costume history, has been one which excites much heated debate among current 20th century costume historians.

This is for good reason; Seldom, since the foot-high chopines of Renaissance Italy and the mutilatory fashions of the early 22nd, has such an unwieldy, uncomfortable and seemingly restrictive item of dress been so popular.

These items of apparel consisted of two pant legs, uniformly of a dark blue cotton twill fabric termed "denim". A recent discovery of an item in a white cotton-lycra blend, however (Martin & Thorell, 2534) has thrown this long-held truism into question; perhaps, it's been suggested, visual images of blue denim were preferred over those of other fabrics and colors. This alternate color may have represented a sub-trend in the fashion of Superwides, or been restrained to a particular economic bracket or geographic area. In all other ways, their basic construction approximated that of the more common and recognizable 20th century Levi (Doris, 2433). Due to the fabric content of this style and its association with informal wear, there are virtually no extant examples of this style. Only two, which are addressed below, have been found to date.

Fabric aside, the most notable characteristic of Superwides was their size and position upon the body. The waistband was several inches larger than the waist measurement of the wearer, thereby causing the Superwides to slip down to hip level or below. The pant legs, floor-length to begin with, became several inches longer than the legs of the wearer, echoing the trailing, hand-covering sleeves of ancient China and the yard-long trains of the middle ages. Interestingly enough, this Super-wide fashion co-incided with the short-lived resurgence of platform shoes…surely no co-incidence, as several people have tried and failed to walk normally in superwides when wearing only foot-pads.

Michael George presented the apocryphal supposition, based on garments exhumed from the San Francisco Quake of 2001, that the size of Superwides reflected a short-lived growth-spurt in the populations of Industrialized nations traced to the use of hormones, steroids and other chemicals used in eating livestock. It was not until the ground-breaking Sears/JCPenney Catalog Discovery of 2487, with which we're all well-acquainted, that this myth was finally laid to rest. (Sorenszci, 2488) There is no doubt that these items were meant to be too big. But why?

Let us consider the cultural milieu during which these items developed. The turn of the 21st century was both a time of unparalleled economic prosperity and a time of great uncertainty. The Y2K Phenomenon and its effect on the dress of the time period is addressed in A. Alexander's seminal work by the same. She theorizes that the excess amount of fabric used in Superwides symbolized the wealth of the wearer, a phenomenon which can be seen throughout history; witness the yard-high wigs of the 22nd century and the houppelandes of the 15th. It was, at the same time, one extreme of that eternal long-short, loose-tight cycle of fashion; this cycle sped up and grew more extreme during the 20th and 21st centuries, not slowing until the 22nd century's unparalleled excess in all items fashionable finally brought people to their senses. (Boydell, 2445). At the same time, the uncertainty engendered by the turn of the second millenium was reflected in this form of attire; it hangs, seemingly kept up by nothing more than the will of the user, threatening to fall at any moment. It might be considered a denim Sword of Damocles.

Given the size of these garments, the main question people have nowadays—of particular import to re-enactors of the Industrial Age—is "how did they keep them up?" Several theories have been proposed. Some believe that the items were fastened to the wearer's undergarments with snaps, hooks and eyes or lacing. The Ardolfi school maintains that Superwides had pseudo-undergarments sewn to the top. Most reenactors currently use suspenders to keep their pants from falling to their ankles, or hand-stitch their Superwides to their undergarments, though some re-enactors have resorted to spirit glue and double-sided tape to achieve the look that they're aiming for.

The most recent theory, put forth at the previous year's conference on Io, was that these pants were in fact, not worn below the hips at all. Jacie Shelli examined the recently exhumed Philadelphia Superwides, which were in all respects similar to those depicted in pictures— but had an extra foot of fabric, closely hugging the torso up to the waist. Worn under the fashionably long and loose shirts of the time, these would be indistinguishable from pants. She points out that the condemnation of the fashion as "showing people's underpants", "ugly" and "low-class" invariably came from the older and more conservative section of the populace, thereby making statements taken from newspaper editorials and letters suspect and unreliable.

And what of pictures showing puffy underwear beneath the Superwides? Easily achieved, Jacie pointed out, by a layer of cotton fabric tucked into the artificially lowered waistband and then into the actual one up above. Her reproduction garment was convincing in all aspects, and she has gained several proponents for the "False Superwide" school of thought.

As we go forward in the study of the past, let us all keep the Superwide in mind. Despite the ample pictorial and material evidence from the time, some things we will never know without talking to the people of the era. Though several theories may surround an item, let no-one say their theory is the correct one; it will, in the end, always have to be adjusted to fit newly-found evidence.


Other works by the author