Flared Trousers (1930's/40's)?

[Cobden]

Towards the End of the Second World War, there was a slight fashion in the British army to put small triangular serge insert into the seam at the bottom of the battledress trousers when walking out, giving them a nautical flaring - I'd imagine there must have been some civilian fashion that this must have emulated

 

[resortes805]

Hey Nick...I saw in the past thread that you have TWO pairs of flaired trousers...you wanna sell or trade one pair? Email me or call me if you're looking for something imparticular.

They're mine... all mine!!!!!

 

[herringbonekid]

...I'd imagine there must have been some civilian fashion that this must have emulated

i don't think so... sounds like a military detail to me. i've never seen a pair of 30s-40s British flared trousers, and i haven't heard of any from other vintage wearers (Ben Stephens... are you reading ? have you ever seen any ?)

resortes805, i'd love to see a pic of some U.S. civilian trousers with a visible flared cuff if you have time to post one !

 

[Cobden]

It was very much an unofficial thing (i.e. if the RSM caught you, you'd be at the receiving end of a vigorous verbal battery!). It might have been emulating sailors, or just trying to recreate the wide legged look as much as was physically possible

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Herring, Ben tells the same story as Cobden - unofficial inserts for "walking out". I too would love to see resortes's troos.

i don't think so... sounds like a military detail to me. i've never seen a pair of 30s-40s British flared trousers, and i haven't heard of any from other vintage wearers (Ben Stephens... are you reading ? have you ever seen any ?)

resortes805, i'd love to see a pic of some U.S. civilian trousers with a visible flared cuff if you have time to post one !

 

[herringbonekid]

Herring, Ben tells the same story as Cobden - unofficial inserts for "walking out".

oh, i don't doubt it... but i was wondering whether Ben had ever seen any 'flared' British 30s-40s civilian trousers. as i said, the widest i've ever seen are 12" and are part of a 30s suit i have. wouldn't ever alter them !

the widest American pair i have (from a suit dated 1936) are 11.5"

 

[DCMark]

oh, i don't doubt it... but i was wondering whether Ben had ever seen any 'flared' British 30s-40s civilian trousers. as i said, the widest i've ever seen are 12" and are part of a 30s suit i have. wouldn't ever alter them !

the widest American pair i have (from a suit dated 1936) are 11.5"

That beats this pair - they're only 11". I can see why someone might think they are flared from just looking at them though.

 

[DCMark]

BTW - I was thinking of selling it but have decided to keep it in the (hopefully not vain) hope that I can redistribute some of my girth from my belly to my chest!

 

[resortes805]

The bell is subtle, but it's there.

 

[J.J. Gittes]

Those are beautiful, what I'd do for those! I have a pair of trousers from a suit around 1936-7 with very full cut trousers, pretty wide at the bottom. Ill have to snag a pic sometime.

 

[herringbonekid]

thanks for the photo resortes805. you're right they are flared. perhaps the most subtle flare ever, but a flare nonetheless !

 

[Mysterious Mose]

This was posted before:

 

[DCMark]

Just noticing the size listed as "6 to 16" - are these women's pants? If not, what size system is this?

 

[Dinerman]

Just noticing the size listed as "6 to 16" - are these women's pants? If not, what size system is this?

Childrens?

 

[DCMark]

Well, I think this ad is prior to the enactment of child labor laws, so maybe you're right. But seriously, I think that's it. So, anything similar for adult men? (Sailors excluded.)

 

[resortes805]

Childrens?

Yup!

Y'know, for kids!

 

[Mysterious Mose]

For teenagers? Stella Blum, Everyday fashions of the thirties as pictured in Sears Catalogs, page 67.

 

[herringbonekid]

For teenagers? Stella Blum, Everyday fashions of the thirties as pictured in Sears Catalogs, page 67.

exactly the sort of illustration you can't trust. see page 56 in the same book... those trousers look FLARED without question, but wait... read the dimensions in the small print... 22" bottoms ! that's 11" front to back. the standard WIDE leg of the 30s.

 

[Yeps]

exactly the sort of illustration you can't trust. see page 56 in the same book... those trousers look FLARED without question, but wait... read the dimensions in the small print... 22" bottoms ! that's 11" front to back. the standard WIDE leg of the 30s.

Just because it has the standard wide bottom does not mean that it does not taper in at the knee, thereby creating a bell below. Mind you, I don't have the book, so I can't debate that specific illustration, although the "Wide Flaring Bottom" with the "sailor style wide flaring bottoms" is pretty indisputable proof, I think.

 

[herringbonekid]

..."Wide Flaring Bottom" with the "sailor style wide flaring bottoms" is pretty indisputable proof, I think.

no disagreement there. however 'sailor style' or 'flared' are not used as descriptions in the sears trousers mentioned by Mose above. we only have the illustrations to go on, and the measurements (22"). if you can find me a pair of 22" trousers with taper at the knee that produces a significant flare i'll believe it.

i'm positive that the 'flared' looking suit/sports trouser illustrations in Sears would in real life look no more flared than the trousers resortes posted (i.e. only just ) or in fact dead straight.