The sight of suits, dresses, and hats was once far more common. Formal attire sanctified the streets, being a common display of professionalism. First went hats, because cars no longer made their use efficient. Then, with hippie movements in the 60s, pressure began to push against societal formalities. By the 90s, the suit began to be phased out in lieu of the “business casual” trend, pioneered by tech companies such as Google. This began with “Casual Friday,” which eventually devolved into “casual everyday.” Once COVID-19 rolled through in 2020, formal attire was already a shell of its former self. Yet, COVID made sure to batter these last remnants with the rise of remote work. Although suits still exist for courts, funerals, weddings, and some high-end jobs, was their expulsion from normal life too careless? Or was it a natural evolution of little consequence?
Opinions on this change vary. Though some miss the departure from formality and long for the days when sleepwear was not worn at schools and stores, many embrace the convenience and comfort of modern expectations. But alas, easiness is not necessarily indicative of goodness. Was there virtue in the old, formal ways?
Modern formal attire, manifesting primarily in suits and dresses, can place its origin back to 17th-century Europe. As with many phenomena, the suit was an aspect of the aristocratic court that trickled down to common folk. Charles II of England decreed that those in the English court must abide by specifications of dress that most resembled the modern suit, albeit with some antique differences, such as wigs and a lack of a tie. And although decreed, the attire that became the modern suit was an evolution of the courts over hundreds of years, influenced often by the military and nobility. This evolution continued until the 19th century, when the modern suit was nearly identical to its modern image, spurred by a desire for more simplicity and comfort in the design.
The suit, therefore, became an aristocratic symbol—a sign of value and respect placed on any task which might warrant it. Wearing a suit to work, for example, signifies that work is sacred, serious, and deserving of a noble respect. The suit is seldom worn throughout the day, only during the task that is exalted, creating a pronounced delineation between the formal and informal. Moreover, it is a reinforcement of the work-life dichotomy. Such a dichotomization helps to reinforce the mentality that work is a place of dedication and productivity, not idleness. The slothen, relaxed nature of home life is emphasized as separate from the nature of work. In 2023, Temple University found that, across 808 tracked days in the workplace, those who were dressed for the occasion exhibited higher performance and higher surveyed self-esteem.
Outside of indicating one’s respect for the job itself, suits equalize among the sexes and therefore enforce an outward conformity. The more norms at the workplace are outwardly conformed to, the more likely one is to conform to others. Conformity allows for a certain stressful pressure, one that is often lacking in environments that feel too home-adjacent and comfortable. This pressure, wielding one’s search for validation, is an effective means of motivating workers to do tasks in a more timely and competent manner than they would do on their own accord.
Asserting that the return of formal attire would be positive is not to say it should be uniform across all types of jobs and settings. Some workplaces benefit from other formal uniforms that allow for less stiffness and more comfort, and some would find formal attire counterintuitive. A manual laborer might risk damaging their attire too often to ever justify its usage, while needing to maximize mobility for productivity. Outside of cases such as these, however, formal attire has seen an unnecessary and arguably damaging decline. Workplaces expect formality less and less, especially with the rise of remote options, and formality fails to be exuded even to a minimal degree in non-professional tasks. Shoppers and students fail to demonstrate respect for their fellow countrymen and institutions, often wearing in public what they woke up in. Even in churches, where attire is generally more conservative, it still lags behind the extreme formality of the past, wherein churchgoers would don suits, dresses, and even veils. Such a downward trend indicates a deeper philosophical shift away from aristocratic aspiration and seriousness, and towards a contentment with the low and casual. For the sake of bringing excellence, however small, to those around you, wear formal attire where it is sensible to do so. Not just for you—though that may also be positive—but for the reinforcement of good workers around the nation.
De Facto Times 