Hogwarts School Uniform
The other day I read a series of posts on the Hogwarts uniform and how book!uniform differs from movie!uniform, which is more canonical and whether thereās been/there should be some retconning to unify the books, films and illustrations from different sources. Since wizarding fashion is one of my favourite subjects (particularly since the word ācorsetsā was mentioned in HBP), I thought I had to write a post about it. So here it goes.
On tradition and unmuggleness
As much as I like the movie uniforms, the way I see it, theyāre irreconcilable with those described in the books, which, both because theyāre from the book and because thatās how I see them in my head, I consider canonical. Most people point out as proof of this that in a couple of occasions we are told more or less directly that the basic (Iāll talk more about this later) uniform does not bear any house indicator (see the Penelope Clearwater and Crabbe-and-Goyleād Ron-and-Harry Cases, both in CoS). This is true. However, what I see as a bigger issue is the fact that the movie!uniform is basically a muggle school uniform with robes instead of a blazer, which, considering how often we see wizards struggling with muggle clothing, doesnāt really add up. And given that school uniforms tend to be on the conservative side of fashion, it would make much more sense to have the Hogwarts uniform resemble traditional wizarding attire.
On openings and trouserslessness
The movie robes are completely open at the front save for one (PoA-onwards) or two (PS-CoS) little clasps, which would take next to no time to do up and undo, so the movie robes would be put on and off like a bathrobe or a coat. However, most (if not all) of the times we see Harry changing into his school robes heās described as pulling them over his head. To me that implies that the front is not open all the way down, that maybe thereās just a small opening with a few buttons, like a polo shirt. Either that or the robes are open all the way down but fastening and unfastening them is so tedious that students simply never do them up or undo them all the way. In a pre-zipper world, a front opening like that would most probably mean a metric tonne of little buttons, at least (look up some old-timey portraits, particularly of womenās fashion. They took their buttons seriously). No one has time to fiddle with that many buttons, so it would be easier to undo a few of the top ones and pull the robes over your head.
Personally, I think the left-hand version fits the description of āplain black work robesā better. And yes, thereās no indication anywhere in the books that the sleeves are flared or gathered at the top, but they look more wizardy this way, so.Ā
For an even more undeniable piece of evidence that supports the idea of having a closed front, look no further than Snapeās worst memory in OotP. When he gets levicorpused by James, we see his underwear. Heās not wearing trousers. Wh. Why is he not wearing trousers??? Because thereās no risk of accidental exposure of oneās undergarments when there isnāt a massive opening on the front of oneās robes, thatās why. Also, if for some sinister reason he had not been wearing trousers under open-fronted robes, everybody wouldāve been able to see his pants already and it wouldnāt have been āfunnyā when James revealed them.
Moreover, it seems that trousers, even though they are worn in the wizarding world, are neither required nor part of traditional wizarding attire. See the old man at the Quidditch World Cup. Trousers have been adopted to some extent, but they are not considered wizarding clothing per se, but rather a garment borrowed from muggles. So if we go back to the idea that uniforms tend to be conservative, the Hogwarts uniform would have probably been designed to be worn with no clothes underneath other than underwear.
On hats gone with the wind and cloaks
Hats. āOne plain pointed hat (black) for day wear.ā Day wear. In the films (PS, basically), hats seem to only be worn on special occasions. And I can understand that; On set theyāre probably a huge inconvenience as they like to fall off and have to be touched up constantly and may cover something/someone important. Still, canonically, a pointed black hat for day wear is part of the Hogwarts uniform.
Now, do not quote me on this, but I am positive that in one of the books there is a description of a windy day where students grab the brims of their hats so that they donāt get blown off. Thatās the one and only time in the whole series (that I can remember) where the uniform hats are said to be brimmed. It makes sense, though, as traditional witch hats do have a brim. Modest brims seem adequate for uniforms. (I do think it is strange to make students wear hats indoors, but oh well.)
(Edit:Ā ā āMaybe Iāll skive off Divination,ā he said glumly as they stood again in the courtyard after lunch, the wind whipping at the hems of robes and brims of hats.ā - OotP, chapter 17)
Then thereās the winter cloaks. Again, plain and black, this time with silver clasps. No crest, no house colours. And thereās also the protective dragonskin gloves, which seem to be used both as protective gloves for Potions/Care of Magical Creatures/Herbology and as regular winter gloves.
On house pride (or the lack thereof)
So far we have established that the uniform consists basically of plain black garments: a set of black robes (closed front), a black cloak, a black hat. Hence, by default, there is no way to tell what house a student belongs to just by their attire. Or is there? Hereās where the ābasic uniformā I mentioned Ā before comes into play.
It is true that the robes, hats and cloaks are plain black when bought. And yet, there are many points in the story when Harry seems to simply know what house some students belong to, even when he clearly doesnāt know them. We get constant references to āa gorup of first year Ravenclawsā or āa Hufflepuff girlā, and since the story is told from Harryās point of view rather than an omniscient narratorās, there must be a way for Harry to tell apart people from different houses without knowing them personally. So how can we reconcile the ideas that some peopleās house is recognisable at first sight while other peopleās isnāt? Itās quite simple: CUSTOMISATION.
Bagdes, scarves, appliques, ribbons, hat ornaments, buttons, socks, belts, and a long etc, to show your house pride. Just as we can get jumpers and hoodies and caps and whatnot with the name and colours of our uni or specific college, kids in the wizarding world are probably able to buy (and make) house merchandise. These items would be available at Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade, and parents would send them to their children once theyāve been sorted or the kids themselves would be able to get them via owl order.
Some students may only wear a small badge on their chest. Others a scarf+turtleneck undershirt+bandana+animal-shaped hat bauble combo. I love to imagine some kids wearing ridiculously tacky things, like red-and-gold neck ruffles or bee-striped boots. And those kids who are not as inclined to show off their house? They can just wear their basic black uniform. Ā
