The transition to the Middle Ages, or the Medieval era, occurred when information—including fashion changes—became better spread by trade and travel. Royal courts exchanged information (and spies) on what rivals were doing and wearing. Monarchs and court favorites were studied for their fashion innovations, in a manner quite similar to the recent media scrutiny of Hilary Clinton’s South Sea pearls during her confirmation hearing. The upper classes dressed to impress and their inferiors scrambled to imitate them when they could. Class status was preserved when better dress could be denied to those of lower class status, giving rise to sumptuary laws for clothing and textiles that only begged to be broken.  The nobility considered themselves the arbiters of fashion, while increasingly finding themselves threatened by the growing merchant and middle classes. Almost as soon as nobles ventured out of their castles in the latest fashions, wealthy merchants’ sons were spurred to copy their dress. Imitators included those in the affluent middle class whose goal was upward social mobility. Even transvestism now had a place in creating mobility between the sexes. Isn’t it fascinating to realize that these patterns of social mimicry became prevalent in the Medieval era, long before the time of Jay Gatsby? p.s. Although I may be wrapped up in the past right now, I’m still mindful of what day today is. January 20, 2009. Inauguration Day. Have you been following the spate of stories and articles in the media about how the fashion industry is looking to Michelle Obama for salvation? C’mon, get a grip! Instead of looking to one woman, however wonderful and stylish she may be, why doesn’t the fashion business look to what really is the problem? Wretched designs, that’s what! Lose those baby dolls and shrunken scale jackets. We’ll all spend money again if there’s actually something to buy out there!