Why is scientific computing not particularly fashionable?

Clothes make the man. Pedagogical aspects of clothing as a non-verbal message

Table of Contents


I. Mode - the system
1. The attempt at definition
2. The dimensions of fashion

II. The clothing phenomenon
1. The protection theory
2. The shame theory
3. The jewelry theory
4. The sociological point of view
5. The psychological point of view
6. The psychoanalytic view

III. The importance of clothing for the formation of children's identities
1. Change of curriculum vitae
2. Childhood Research
3. Imitation
4. Fashion as a means of self-presentation
5. The influence of peer groups on clothing behavior
6. Buying behavior

IV. Clothing as non-verbal communication
1. Nonverbal communication
2. Vestimental Codes

V. Pedagogy
1. School
2. The experience of oneself
3. The halo effect and vestimental misunderstandings
4. Brand awareness
5. Generation problems
6. Dress codes, school clothes, school uniforms

VI. survey




“In addition to the face and hands - which indeed have the strongest social expressiveness of all body parts and to which we have always paid particular attention - what we actually see and what we react to is not the body but the clothes of our fellow human beings . When we meet them, we form our first impression of them based on their clothing. "[1]

Fashion is an ubiquitous, everyday and diverse phenomenon. The clothing behavior of us humans is determined in a complex way - many different reasons and causes influence the reach in the wardrobe. Who thinks about who 'makes' the fashion or why I dress like this today and what I want to do with it? Our thoughts tend to be about aspects like: How do other people think of my clothes? I wear what I like and others should perceive me as I feel with my clothes. The communication aspect of clothing plays a decisive role in this. At first, when communicating, one thinks of language rather than clothing, but our clothing quickly turns out to be the most important non-verbal means of communication. Non-verbal communication uses a language of symbols or symbols to convey messages. These are encoded, decoded and interpreted. On the basis of our external appearance, our counterpart - even before we can say anything - creates an image of us and puts us in a drawer. But does the clothing also say what we want to achieve with it? The only thing that is certain is that no one can escape the communicative power of fashion / clothing. It fulfills a wide variety of functions in our society. The functional aspects of clothing, the primarily protective and decorative functions, are opposed to fashion aspects. They move people's preference to the


Change, in the constantly new, comes to the fore. But clothing is much more than that: clothing is used for self-expression, self-assertion, and as a means of delimiting and demarcating from social groups. Clothing is not only a superficial and decorative element of human life, but an important means of expression and regulator within a society. Fashion does not exist independently of political and social developments, the driving force for the ephemeral is known to be fashion, which is based on the zeitgeist. Fashion developments are also subject to their own laws, such as the joy of patterns, shapes, colors and fabrics, but they are nonetheless dependent on social, economic and political influences.[2] All of these factors - and we cannot speak of completeness here - influence each other and determine our clothing behavior.

The present work deals in particular with the non-verbal communication power of clothing and examines it particularly with regard to pedagogical and educational aspects. Accordingly, the clothing behavior of elementary school children is to be analyzed in particular. After trying to define fashion or clothing, some important factors that make up clothing, such as sociological, psychological and psychoanalytic, are presented. The focus should always be on the elementary school child, combined with the consideration of the curriculum vitae and identity formation. What are the motivations for choosing clothes that drive children when choosing their clothes or are they allowed / able to choose their own clothes or are they determined by others? To what extent do they allow themselves to be influenced by socialization agencies such as parents, teachers, classmates or by brands? To what extent can primary school children interpret the clothing behavior of adults and their peers and how consciously do they communicate with clothing themselves? This work should clarify this - also with the help of the survey results in the appendix. One can say: clothes make the man - little clothes make little people !?

I. Mode - one system

Fashion represents a completely separate system. Luhmann regards fashion as a self-referential system with four different aspects that strongly influence one another and are reciprocally dependent on one another: design, manufacture, distribution[3] and consumption[4],[5], because “without a designer, no opinion can be formed. No goods without producers. No image without marketing. No opinion-forming without the media. No distribution without buyers. "[6] A constant change and change in fashion is the result, because anyone who wants to can participate in the subject of fashion, because fashion is democratic.

1. The attempt at definition

Everyone defines fashion differently. Often only partial aspects are presented, a complete and holistic definition hardly seems to be possible. The complexity of fashion does not allow a uniform statement. The ZEITmagazin[7] fashion even calls it a mysterious being, mysterious, enigmatic and dark. Loschek provides a - in my opinion - general and comprehensive definition. After Ingrid Loschek[8] fashion comes from the Latin modus and means right measure, manner (of life). The wife of King Henry IV, Maria de ‘Medici, brought the term to France for the first time in 1600, after she described her style of dress as 'al modo Italiano' (Italian style). From there the term spread to Germany and became

1628/30 with the linguistic form 'à la mode' (French after fashion)[9] common. As early as the 18th century, a distinction was made between old-fashioned and new-fashioned. Elke Drengwitz etymologically distinguishes fashion even further into 'mode' (masc.), Which corresponds to mode (Latin) (see above) and 'mode' (fem.), Which to this day represents the meaning of contemporary, changing clothing includes.[10] 'A fashion' is called a factual 'individual fashion', which appears briefly in society and then disappears again. 'The fashion', on the other hand, describes the change in fashions. This is seen more as a general term that describes many 'individual fashions' and thus reflects the long-lasting process of fashion. The basic motive of the fashionable behavior is satiety, curiosity and a certain play instinct to try new things and to experiment. Fashion emerges when there are social changes. Fashion does not play a major role in traditional cultures, which change very slowly. Especially today, fashion is a topic that affects all of us - or rather - no one can escape it. The many different and different clothing fashions are certainly also due to different countries and different traditions.[11] However, in no country can people refuse fashion, because "in refusal they remain committed to it."[12] In common parlance, the terms fashion and clothing are often used synonymously, whereby it must be noted that in the textile and clothing science terminology the term clothing is a generic term for the terms uniform, traditional costumes and fashion. As Chapter II shows, people do not only participate in fashion, but rather actively contribute to the fact that clothing becomes fashion through their self-portrayal through the medium of clothing.[13]

2. The dimensions of fashion

Three dimensions in particular characterize the term fashion: the time, social and material dimensions.[14] With its definition of fashion, the foreign word dude only takes up the temporal aspect: “1.) Customs, custom; The taste of the day and the time; in [the] - come; in [the] - to be. 2.) the latest, contemporary in clothing, hairstyle, etc. "[15] The time dimension includes fashion with its relative short life due to its changeability, i.e. the rapid change of fashion / trends, but also the aspect of time with regard to the constant change in taste. Fashion can only play a decisive role in the present, as it only really exists in the present, a longer period of time seems utopian. In addition, fashion can only become fashion through the aspect of time (short duration), replaced by a new one. René König[16] equates fashion with innovation. However, different periods of time are given for innovations. As already mentioned, some are very short, others are continuous. It therefore seems necessary to make a distinction, also with regard to the language, of the innovations, as was already outlined in Chapter I. 1. by “a mode” or “individual mode” and “the mode”. Werner Sombart[17] tries to break through the non-definition of the time span by claiming that as soon as the change in fashion takes place during the lifetime of only one generation, one can speak of a "temporal fixation"[18] speak. Which time span is taken up with the time dimension of fashion, however, actually remains impossible to determine precisely. The social dimension describes that fashion only becomes fashion through society and the community. Even a fashion designer cannot say ad hoc that he has created a fashion with his designs, the fashion designer can only introduce it and wait to see whether it is picked up and worn by a large number of people.

As a result, fashion always appears collectively, i.e. fashion always has to be in public in a certain way[19]in order to be able to achieve collectivity at all. Only then can there be a "collective imitation of a fashion expression"[20] come. This is where the socio-psychological aspect of clothing behavior comes into play, which is discussed in more detail in Chapters II. 1. and 2.. Fashion is often equated with clothing everywhere, including Ingrid Loschek. But fashion encompasses a lot more in the material dimension. Simple sayings take up the term fashion in completely different subject areas, such as modern books, modern countries, modern sport and modern ideals of beauty[21]. Fashion should therefore not be used as a synonym for clothing. In summary, fashion can only exist in the here and now (present), occur collectively and should be viewed as a single fact. In the following chapter, the term clothing with its various aspects is to be placed above the term fashion, as required by the textile and clothing scientific terminology (see Chapter I. 1.).

II. The clothing phenomenon

Fashionable clothing, i.e. fashion, must be distinguished from clothing that does not refer to fashion, but has different meanings or fulfills specific functions (e.g. protective clothing, sportswear) or cultural clothing that is strongly standardized (e.g. military clothing, traditional costumes or priestly robes). Clothing and personality are often closely related. Clothing attitudes are linked to "gender role stereotypes and personality variables."[22] Consequently, certain attributes are ascribed to the wearer only through a certain color, shape or pattern of an item of clothing. Elke Drengwitz also formulated this for women and their personality traits.[23] We are fully aware of some attributes and literally use these particular items of clothing in a tactical and strategic way to trigger a certain message from ourselves. Real self-assessment, ideal self-definition and wishful thinking merge with one another. Again there are some people who want to 'step out of line' in order to fight against the imagined attributes. Furthermore, clothing can make a person completely different - irrespective of the aspect of the attribution of personality traits. Clothing can cover, correct and stage various parts of the body, but it can also hide and 'adapt' flaws. Most of this is done to look good, to impress others, and to communicate non-verbally (see Chapter IV.). Why now do people dress at all? The answer to this question can be found in the first place, such as protection, shame and jewelry, but it is

It also includes sociological, psychological and psychoanalytic factors, which are discussed in the following chapter.

1. The protection theory

In our part of the world, people cannot do without clothing. In the protection theory, also known as 'The Protection Theory', clothing is consequently a substitute for physical defects in relation to other living beings.[24] First of all, aspects of protection against cold, heat, dust, moisture, wind and against injuries from e.g. insects or thorns are obvious. The clothing behavior began "from the moment when humans discovered the function of clothing as protection against the injustices of nature."[25] However, these aspects, which are most common in our society, should not be overestimated. Also in certain professional groups[26] hard-wearing and resistant protective clothing is required. Especially nowadays - so wing[27] - In terms of hygiene, too much rather than too little clothing is worn. Clothing can also offer physical protection in extreme situations, but also psychological protection[28]. "From the point of view of physical protection, clothing - in addition to food, accommodation, etc. - can be counted among the basic human needs."[29]

2. The shame theory

Similarly, in the shame theory, also known as 'Modesty Theory', nudity represents a physical deficiency, whereby one's own nakedness with shame[30] reacts and the

Desire for covering is evoked. In the Bible, Genesis 3: 7, it says: "Their eyes were opened and they saw that they were naked, and they plaited fig leaves together and made aprons."[31] The position against nudity is against one's own inclination or the inclination of others, against the suppression of a wish or satisfaction, disgust or disapproval and can be directed towards different parts of the body. In contrast to showing one's physical stimuli openly, there is now a tendency to shamefully cover them up. According to Hermann Wirtz, it is even the case that "particularly prudish people [want] to avoid any hint of sensuality as much as possible."[32] Every person, every society and every culture knows the feeling of shame and therefore never walks around completely naked - everyone according to their own standards for what is decent, moral or shameful. "Without body painting, matching hairstyles, loin cord, tribal tattoos, jewelry or just covering certain parts of the body, the rural dwellers living in tropical regions felt as shamelessly naked as we without the appropriate suit in the office."[33]

3. The jewelry theory

Decorating ('The Decoration Theory') and decorating the body is the most basic motif of clothing and the main aesthetic drive of man. Wing classifies adornment into seduction, trophies and intimidation, rank, professional, regional and national badges, and display of wealth[34]. Here, too, there is a feeling of deficiency, furthermore a feeling of inferiority, which we try to prevent by decorating and enriching ourselves. Jewelry also includes paintings, decorative scars, tattoos and much more.According to Franz Kiener, it must be assumed that jewelry is accessible. That means a certain feeling for

Jewelry requires a certain sense of beauty.[35] The urge to decorate in the sense of embellishment goes in some social groups "beyond clothing behavior to physical interventions."[36] This view not only includes piercings and tattoos, but also any other aesthetic-medical interventions.

In children, these three functions can be read off quite easily.The mother is usually responsible for the protective function - especially with small children - who ensures that her child is dressed appropriately and practically. The pubic function is not very pronounced in small children, they also like to run around as a nudity in summer. With increasing age, however, shame spreads and girls ask for swimsuits or bikinis before breasts can even be recognized - certainly following their instinct to imitate (see Chapter III. 3.). The jewelry function is most pronounced: which child is not happy about the contents of a dressing-up box? How often is mom's lipstick used to beautify herself? And how much do little girls like to slip into their mother's high heels? However, it can be said that these three basic motifs for clothing, in addition to their functions, can be attributed to another achievement, namely the expressive function, because shame and jewelry behavior as a vestimental (clothing-related) function reveals something about the person of the wearer, symbolically expresses his inner being out. Thus, even these functions of clothing enable non-verbal communication, since they make messages about their wearer.

4. The sociological point of view

In the first instance, clothing is a symbol from a sociological point of view, i.e. people use their clothing to demonstrate their social milieu and their associated value orientation. A division into different groupings takes place. Eva-Maria Ziege shows the importance of fashion, which not only serves as the clearest form of distinction, but also of communication and thus also one

Approach of two individuals. Fashion turns out to be an "indispensable subject of classical sociology."[37] In doing so, Ziege sets two priorities for her explanations, namely fashion as a distinguishing feature between center and periphery, i.e. also the public and private sphere, and fashion as a system of signs for communication. Different sociologists hold different aspects responsible for the change in fashion, e.g. the actions of consumers or the competitive thinking on the capitalist market. Above all, the market-building power of luxury is making dress codes disappear, but differences still exist. The differences between women's and men's clothing remain clear, at some times clear and unambiguous, at others milder and more blurred. Today it is noticeable that women are increasingly using men's clothing, but the other way around it is downright rejected. There are of course exceptions. From a sociological point of view, studies show that through imitation fashion loses its distinctive character and is thus devalued.[38] Shapes in fashion change according to a regular pattern and quite slowly. As a result, fashion is "an ordered phenomenon and this order of fashion is self-supporting"[39]. Their development can continue discontinuously, but can also be endogenous - with the exception of seasonal (microdiachrony) variations. In addition to practical tasks in clothing and fashion, it also fulfills essential psychological and social functions, which the market for the textile and clothing industry also reflects on an economic level. In summary, fashion change is a complex socio-psychological reaction to social change, which is based on a zeitgeist model that combines social-psychological with sociological and semiotic aspects - as Ziege represents. With this, Ziege concludes Blumer's view[40] indicates that fashion is selected collectively from a wide range of possibilities (see also Chapter I. 2.).

In my opinion, the model is from summer[41] more plausible, since it restricts the collective choice to individual social groups. In doing so, he precisely assigns different social milieus - based on the milieu concept of the Heidelberg Sinus Institute from 1986 - life goals and styles, from which the worn clothing style results[42]. For the clothing behavior of children from a sociological point of view, the consideration of the curriculum vitae, which is described in Chapter III. 1. Done, of vital importance.

5. The psychological point of view

Fashion is somehow everyone's business, because everyone dresses somehow and maybe even according to a model. Our personality is expressed through our clothes and fashion. We always try to find a compromise between the tendency towards the general and similar (collective) and towards the particular and unique (individual). The original example of the fact that fashion has power is the novella “Clothes make people” by Gottfried Keller from 1874[43]. Already here the topic of deception through external appearances and status symbols up to the obscuring of being through a beautiful appearance is taken up[44]. After Georg Simmel[45] fashion is a product of class divorce. Fashion and clothing contain not only social functions, but also psychological ones. So fashion represents as

Follow-up to the same and conclusion to others is of great relevance. But fashion psychology is not only mentioned in these areas. The basic psychological function of clothing is the demonstration of objectification and the expression of one's own identity.[46] Clothing has a special psychological meaning - as idioms like 'clothing as the second skin' show. According to Hoffmann, there are two forms of use of clothing, insertive and expressive use. Both forms use the language of clothing (see Chapter IV.). In this way, calming and associative styles of clothing fit into society and save the wearer from misunderstanding the group, while expressive clothing serves to distinguish[47] (see also III. 6.). Chapters III. 2. and III. 4th dedicated.

6. The psychoanalytic view

When it comes to clothing, sociological and psychological factors are not isolated from one another, but must be related to one another, as they are interlinked. People must have different clothing experiences (sociological) and have different sensations when wearing clothing (psychological). John wing[48] developed nine 'types of clothing' for this purpose. With the different types, everyone has a different interest in clothing and thus a different attitude. The basic requirement is that the person is interested in clothing at all. This in turn assumes that the wearer perceives pleasant sensations with clothing, for example when his body comes into contact with special substances or admiration is expressed about his clothing. "1. The 'Rebellious type' is the simplest type because he gets little positive satisfaction from clothing. Clothing constricts him and hinders him. He wears only thin and light clothing, if at all.

2. The 'Resigned type' has tendencies similar to the rebellious type, only he has surrendered to the habits and conventions of wearing clothes. He reluctantly puts on what everyone puts on. Due to an unconscious inhibition, however, he has no idea of ​​the ideal clothing for him. 3. The 'Non-emotional type' has no feeling for his clothes. He is indifferent to it and accordingly he has no sense of propriety or the need for protection through clothing. Everything else is more important to this guy, but not the clothes. 4. The 'Prudish guy' has a tendency to dress well. All exhibitionistic tendencies are clearly defeated with him. The revelation of one's own naked body is experienced as embarrassing and repulsive. 5. The 'Dutiful type' prefers clothing that is stiff and tight or has a strict line. Clothing has become a symbol of work and duty. He makes a sharp distinction between 'work clothes' and 'casual clothes', in which he feels 'somehow different' and then adopts a less rigid and strict approach to life. 6. The 'Protected type' gets a conscious satisfaction from his clothing. He prefers warm clothing that will protect him. The fashionable is only of secondary importance to him. 7. The 'Supported type' feels comfortably strengthened and supported by the clothing, especially by tight and stiff clothing. There are narcissistic and auto-erotic elements in this type. It is therefore possible that he is in a decisive battle between loose and sparse clothing on the one hand and stiff, supportive clothing on the other. 8. The 'Sublimated type' is the ideal wearer of clothing after Flügel. For him, narcissistic self-feelings merge with the satisfaction drawn from clothing to form a harmonious unit. A disadvantage of this type is that their interest in clothing can arise from a strong narcissism, which then leads to an exaggerated interest in clothing display. 9. The 'Self-satisfied guy' is a person who has no suggestions on how to improve clothes. He knows what he wants and, in his opinion, wears the best possible clothes. He usually despises people with less taste. A representative of this type also has the exaggerated positive self-esteem on that

Transfer clothing behavior. "[49] Flugel's results, to bring personality types in connection with a clothing experience typical for them and to analyze them with the help of the psychoanalytic model of thought[50], are the most accurate results so far[51]. It becomes clear how different people see the meaning of clothing and reflect it on the basis of their body[52]. It seems essential to investigate the development process or the underlying trigger mechanisms of clothing behavior and to present its basic psychological functions. The main focus should be placed on childhood (primary school age). Which influencing factors is the elementary school child already exposed to? To what extent does clothing contribute to children's identity?


[1] Wing, John Carl: Psychology of Clothes, 1986. In: Ebner, Claudia C .: Clothes changed. Fashion in the cycle of culture. Bielefeld 2007, p. 16.

[2] see: Herzog, Marianne: Textile lessons with multiple perspectives. Ideas, suggestions and materials for primary school. Seelze 2003. p. 50.

[3] Ahlheim, Karl-Heinz (among others): Duden - Foreign Dictionary, Volume 5. 2nd, improved and increased edition. Mannheim 1966, p. 451. Distribution: obsolete. for: distribution, distribution, dissolution. P. 167. Here, more in the use of buying.

[4] Duden - foreign dictionary: Consumption: 1.) Consumption of economic goods that serve to satisfy needs. […] Consumptive: intended for consumption. P. 378. Rather intended here in terms of the use of stretchers.

[5] see: Kneer, Georg and Nassehi, Armin: Niklas Luhmanns theory of social systems - an introduction. Munich 1993, p. 147.

[6] Franke, Vera and Stetter, Bitten: Fashion Talks - fashion is communication. An introduction to the exhibition. In: Kugler, Liselotte and Isenbort, Gregor (Ed.): Fashion Talks. Museum Foundation Post and Telecommunications, 32 2011, p. 12.

[7] ZEITmagazin: March 19, 1998, 13th issue.

[8] Loschek, Ingrid: Reclams Mode & Costume Lexicon. 3rd, revised and expanded edition. Stuttgart 1994, p. 358.

[9]"À la mode" refers to the contemporary prevailing fashion, which was worn in certain sections of the population for a short time.

[10] Drengwitz, Elke in: Scheiper, Petra: Textile Metamorphoses as an Expression of Social Change. The clothing behavior of young men and women as a phenomenon of shifting the boundary between sex and gender identities. Wiesbaden 2008, p. 53.

[11] Since I am personally closer to western fashion and the literature I have found is largely limited to western society, I will carry out my research accordingly.

[12] Lehnert, Gertrud: Mode. A crash course. Cologne 2008, p. 10.

[13] see: Drengwitz, Elke in: Scheiper, Petra: Textile Metamorphoses as an Expression of Social Change. The clothing behavior of young men and women as a phenomenon of shifting the boundary between sex and gender identities. Wiesbaden 2008, p. 57.

[14] Schnierer, Thomas: Fashion Change and Society. The dynamic of “in” and “out”. Opladen 1995, p. 19 f.

[15] Duden - foreign dictionary: Mannheim 1966, p. 451.

[16] König, René in: Schnierer, Thomas: Modewandel und Gesellschaft. The dynamic of “in” and “out”. Opladen 1995, p. 21.

[17] Sombart, Werner in: ibid, Opplade 1995, p. 22.

[18] Schnierer, Thomas: Opladen 1995, p. 22.

[19] see: Hoffmann, Hans Joachim: The use of clothes. Intended, expected, and hoped for public. In: Journal of Semiotics. Posner, Roland (eds). Vol. 7, Issue 3. Tübingen 1985, p. 189 ff. Here, a distinction is made between three types of public: intended public (clothing to stabilize power relations), expected public (clothing to show conformity) and hoped-for public (clothing as an opportunity to expressive self-expression).

[20] Scheiper, Petra: Wiesbaden 2008, p. 54.

[21] The modern topics of 2012/13 include the book series 'Shades of Gray', island vacations on Ibiza, Zumba as a power and dance sport or a tattoo with the symbol of a feather.

[22] Dollase, Rainer in: Baacke, Dieter u.a .: Youth and fashion. Clothing as a self-presentation. Leverkusen 1988, p. 117.

[23] ibid .: p. 118 .: "'Romantically playful' dress 'sensitive, affectionate girls and women who need to be leaned on', e.g. they wear fluttering dresses, ruffled dresses and softly falling blouses. 'Sporty-factual' dress 'emphatically natural, comradely, lively, happy and reliable girls and women', for example they wear casual trousers, pleated skirts, ribbed sweaters and short jackets. 'Feminine-active' women dress 'feminine-attractive, sensitive and adaptable'; they wear, for example, neat, figure-hugging dresses, blouses / sweaters in combination with a skirt. 'Emancipated-dynamic' dress 'elegant, expressive and self-confident girls and women', e.g. they wear jacket dresses, compllets, elegant afternoon and evening dresses. 'Progressive-extravagant' dress 'idiosyncratic, demonstrative, progressive and emphatically non-conformist girls and women', they wear what they like - the main thing is that it is unusual and very individual. "

[24] Other living beings such as animals have e.g. a shell, fur or a plumage that protects them.

[25] Justo, Graciette Ruf da Cunha Duarte: Clothing as a symbolic self-presentation. Nonverbal messages about the individual. Diploma thesis for the examination for the acquisition of the academic degree. Kassel 2005, p. 2.

[26] Protective clothing in war or equipment in sports and other work.

[27] Flügel, John C. in: Ebner, Claudia C .: Clothes changed. Fashion in the cycle of culture. Bielefeld 2007, p. 17.

[28] Psychological protection against ghosts, illnesses or “moral dangers”. This protection includes, for example, the monk's robes as protection against seduction, the business suit especially for women against immoral offers or the amber chain for the maturation of milk teeth.

[29] Wirtz, Hermann-J. (Ed.): Clothes make the man - people make clothes. Cotton, textiles and clothing in the world economy. 1st edition, Düsseldorf 1981, p. 17.

[30] Feeling of shame as a negative inhibition impulse. Stand as the first instance against sexual forms of display.

[31] The Bible with apocrypha to Martin Luther's translation in the revised version from 1984. Stuttgart 1999, p. 5.

[32] Wirtz, Hermann-J .: Düsseldorf 1981, p. 23.

[33] Payer, Margarete and Payer, Alois: Free information for free citizens: Countries and cultures - international communication cultures. In: http://www.payer.de, Chapter 10: Cultural factors - clothing and decency, 3.3 Avoidance of shame as a function of clothing. Stuttgart 2001.

[34] see: Flügel, John C. in: Ebner, Claudia C .: Bielefeld 2007, p. 18 ff.

[35] see: Kiener, Franz: Clothes, Fashion and People. Munich / Basel 1956, p. 50.

[36] Wirtz, Hermann-J .: Düsseldorf 1981, p. 19.

[37] Ziege, Eva-Maria: The art of differentiation. Sociology of fashion. In: Leviathan, March 2011, issue 1, p. 143.

[38] see: ibid. p. 146.

[39] ibid. p. 147.

[40] see: Blumer, Herbert in: Schnierer, Thomas: Modewandel und Gesellschaft. The dynamic of “in” and “out”. Opladen 1995, p. 68 f.

[41] see ibid., pp. 74 ff.

[42] The excerpt shown here relates to the assignment of milieu and style of clothing. In the "conservatively upscale " Milieu is worn e.g. B. a "timeless, dignified style of clothing with the striving for distinction", in the "petty bourgeois " In the milieu one wears "inconspicuous, functional, natural" clothing, in the "promotion-oriented " In the milieu one prefers "correct, exclusive and contemporary" clothing and in the "hedonistic " In the milieu, the clothing style is determined by the will “to want to look different.Clothing styles are provocatively set against mass fashion. ”This is also where the group styles of youthful subcultures are located (see also Chapter III. 6. and IV.).

[43] In the novella "Clothes make the man" it is about the tailor's apprentice Wenzel Strapinski, who is considered a wealthy nobleman in a small town called Goldach due to his outward appearance (clothing) but also his elegant manner. He takes advantage of the situation and enjoys his newly assigned role until his old boss shows up and clears everything up. Even then, Keller knew how to amusingly deal with topics such as class differences, status symbols and externalities in his novella. The author-narrator deliberately plays with the double meaning of the saying “clothes make the man”, the critical one, which says that the world is only too happy to be deceived, and the appreciative one, which says that one owes it to oneself and others, value to put on its appearance.

[44] see: Keller, Gottfried: Clothes make the man. Reclam, Stuttgart 2000.

[45] Simmel, Georg: On the psychology of fashion. Sociological Study. In: Kanner, Heinrich et al. (Ed.): Die Zeit. Viennese weekly for politics, economics, science and art. 5. Volume 1895, No. 54, pp. 22-24.

[46] Sommer, Carlo Michael: The social sense of fashion. Clothing and fashion from a socio-psychological point of view. In: Holenstein, André et al. (Ed.): Second skin. On the cultural history of clothing. 1st edition, Bern 2010, p. 241.

[47] see: Hoffmann, Hans-Joachim: Dress language - a psychology of illusion in clothing, fashion and masquerade. Frankfurt am Main 1985, p. 190 f.

[48] Wing, John Carl: Individual Differences. In: Bleckwenn, Ruth (ed.): Clothing and fashion. Baltmannsweiler 1981, p. 39 f.

[49] ibid., p. 34 ff.

[50] see: Kunst, Gabriele: The importance of clothing for the educational process of young people. Written work to obtain the master’s degree. Göttingen 1991, p. 23.

[51] Preferably by including and taking into account specific issues

End of the reading sample from 85 pages