To clarify my original question: I'm wondering what the significance is of the relationship between clothes and class. Is it that clothes make class distinctions visible, and therefore more rigid? Is it that it speaks to a desire to reinforce class distinctions even as we pretend we have moved past them?

My problem with the answers I came up with was: if we assume that class is defined mostly by job, and we don't start "dressing the part" (because we don't know how to) until we already have the part, then clothes are not a bar, or a guaranteed entry, to any particular class. So it would seem that clothes bear very little on our ability to move within the social strata. But I may be making too much of that. What do other people think about this?

-- ClaireOSullivan - 12 May 2008

For whatever this is worth, I think Eben’s comments on a day close to the end of the semester were the starting point of all of this. Recall when he shared with us that, for example, custom-tailored suits that have real button holes on the cuff of the sleeves are distinguished from off-the-rack ones that don’t have real button holes. You know that this raised the anxiety level in the room, especially among those male students who never knew this, and therefore wondered what else they didn’t know. Then his comment on Mina’s paper about the collar and tie being the tell-all to interviewers – but then not sharing what IS the correct collar/tie choice – raised blood pressure levels among these self-doubting men in our class all over again. (I just hope he continues to act like he doesn’t know quite as much about women’s clothing, so that we women don’t start having reason to let our minds run with fear, too.) Although many will take issue with this, I think men are more prone to wanting to comply with whatever it takes to get to the top – many of them want families and figure that it may be the case that they will be the primary breadwinners, if not the sole breadwinners (I know, I know, I’m older, so while this viewpoint seems less relevant today than a generation ago, I believe that old impulses die hard, especially when, after all, the men in our class are influenced by their fathers). I’m generalizing here, but I believe many of the men in our class want to get it right so that they minimize the issues that may cause them to sacrifice something that they consider valuable. Desperate, maybe, but just remember, women oftentimes take alternative career paths, and this is socially acceptable, especially if there are children involved, so it makes sense that we hear a lot more anxiety coming from some of the men in our class than the women, and perhaps for good reason.

-- BarbPitman - 11 May 2008

I hope you guys don’t mind, but I would like to redirect the conversation a little bit. Maybe we could get back to Eben’s response to Mina’s paper. I am sure men are judged by their clothing as well, but women experience a different kind of judgment. Whether or not the person who made the boot comment meant to be sexist, the fact that comment had such an effect on Mina is meaningful. I really do not think men think about their image the way women do. To be taken seriously women have to tone down the cute and the sex.

Also, I would like to answer Claire’s original question (“where and when does the relationship between clothes and class become important?”) with another question: When didn’t this relationship exist? I gladly concede that my reaction is probably a product of my personal experience, but I cannot remember a time when class and clothing were not related. Would you mind clarifying the question? Are we being law specific? Are you wondering lawyers must figure out how to dress like a lawyer?

-- ThaliaJulme - 11 May 2008

I mean, I just see all these things (suits instead of jeans, brand choice, shirt colour) as arbitrary concessions to the society we have to live and work in. I definitely agree that showing you know the difference between a suit and jeans is different from showing that you know the difference between an ivory and a white shirt. But it seems to me like a difference of degree rather than type.

-- ClaireOSullivan - 11 May 2008

The reasons i asked about the appropriate attire are

1) Eben made it clear he knew the answer but chose not to share it. This is annoying and since i wanted the information I chose to try to press him on it.

2) I am willing to suffer the minor indignities of dressing the part if it will help me get the job I want. Its just a cost benefit thing. A good possible counter argument to this (which I use to justify the failings of my closet) is that I wouldn't want to work for people who would care about something so trivial. I just see the clothes as a means to an ends though. Whether we're lawyers or not you will have to suffer minor indignities in order to please your superiors. This good will will most likely you give us the opportunity to do bigger and better things. Besides, it just gives me one less thing to think about when i'm getting prepared for an interview.

-- JulianBaez - 11 May 2008