End of Loehmann's Is End of an Era

Shopping Ain't What It Used To Be

Going, Going: With its crowded dressing room and dreary physical plant, Loehmann’s places its emphasis on goods rather than amenities.
Flickr
Going, Going: With its crowded dressing room and dreary physical plant, Loehmann’s places its emphasis on goods rather than amenities.

By Jenna Weissman Joselit

Published January 10, 2014, issue of January 17, 2014.
  • Print
  • Share Share

The news that Loehmann’s, the grandmother of discount clothing emporia, is closing its doors caught me by surprise and saddened me, too. It shouldn’t have. After all, apart from the occasional purchase of a pair of socks, I hadn’t shopped there in years, nor did any of my fashion-minded confrères. A casualty of online shopping, Loehmann’s also faced increasing competition from other discounters whose merchandise seemed more appealing, more up-to-date. At least that’s the explanation put forward by those in the retail clothing business.

I suspect things are a bit more complicated than that. Like its fabled “Back Room,” there’s a backstory to Loehmann’s fall from grace, one that has as much to do with culture as with economics.

From its inception in the 1920s and well into its heyday in postwar America, Loehmann’s was decidedly not for the faint of heart or those in need of hand holding. Department stores and boutiques might pride themselves on service, on attentiveness to the customer. At Loehmann’s, it was every woman for herself. What’s more, department stores and boutiques had atmosphere; Loehmann’s had stuff.

The store’s dreary physical plant underscored the primacy it placed on goods rather than amenities. Much has been made over the years of its crowded communal dressing room where privacy was unknown and unwarranted intimacies were exchanged at the drop of a hat. I vividly recall entering its precincts, my arms filled with potential purchases (oh, rapture!), and being equally mindful of a gnawing sense of dread at the prospect of exposure. The no-frills layout of the store was worth noting, too. To describe it as minimal would be an understatement: the selling floor was a veritable sea of skirts and sweaters, rack upon metal rack of merchandise. Harsh, unforgiving lighting compounded the overall effect of being in a space akin to that of a warehouse.

The original Loehmann’s on Brooklyn’s Bedford Avenue presented a different face to its customers. Though a cash and carry business right from the get go, it surrounded consumers with a vision of opulence rivaled only by that of the local movie palace. In an interior inhabited by marble lions and gilded dragons, glistening chandeliers and mighty torchieres, the very first Loehmann’s transformed shopping from a chore into an indulgence.

Nothing could have been further from my experience. By the time I became a loyal Loehmann’s customer, in the 1970s and ’80s, a visit to one of its suburban branches had more in common with a science experiment than with the free exercise of the imagination. Anything but relaxed, shopping at Loehmann’s called for a set of hard-nosed skills: an eagle eye, the better to identify the bedraggled dress in the corner as a Bill Blass confection; linguistic ability, the better to interpret the garment’s label which had been mutilated beyond recognition; and speed, the better to make a beeline for the desired object before anyone else. Raw and unmediated, the experience of shopping at Loehmann’s was entirely bound up with the thrill of the hunt; the pleasure was all in the pursuit.

To maximize opportunity, two sets of hands – usually those of a mother and her daughter – were required. The relay race that lay at the heart of Loehmann’s tested the bonds of that relationship; if you were lucky, it stretched them, too. I remember how my mother would fiercely patrol the aisles, looking for just the right ensemble for my first day in high school or the perfect dress for a friend’s Sweet 16 party. Most of the time I would dutifully tag along, a mobile receptacle for growing heaps of things on hangars. But now and then, I’d take off on my own, eager to spread my sartorial wings, only to return triumphantly, expectantly, with a blouse that matched or an accessory that complemented. (In my family, we were very big on ‘complementing.’)

Not every mother-daughter shopping expedition ended well; some resulted in more than their fair share of pouts and disappointments — in the clothing on display and in one another. But as I now look back, our seasonal outings to Loehmann’s taught me a lot about style and taste, agency and independence — and, at the risk of sounding sappy, about maternal pride as well.

But enough of that. The point of this excursion down memory lane is to situate the closing of Loehmann’s within a larger cultural context: the changing nature of shopping. For one thing, contemporary consumers no longer have to leave home to purchase an article of clothing; these days, the merchandise comes directly to them. For another, if would-be shoppers are going to make the effort to venture forth, the experience has to offer something extra. Bare bones shopping no longer compels, nor does bargain hunting. To appeal, shopping has to be more than a sport or an exercise in saving money. It has to enlarge our sense of self and of life’s possibilities. As for it being an exercise in bonding, well, I don’t think mother-daughter outings to the store still pack quite the same punch. Newer activities (a day at the spa?) have taken their place. Besides, sartorial authority is no longer a contemporary mother’s prerogative; the younger members of the female population are more apt to take their fashion clues from blogs and other web-based sources than from mom.

Under the circumstances, Loehmann’s was destined to wither on the vine. Still, it had a good run of 90-plus years, filling our closets with America’s bounty.


The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.





Find us on Facebook!
  • Undeterred by the conflict, 24 Jews participated in the first ever Jewish National Fund— JDate singles trip to Israel. Translation: Jews age 30 to 45 travelled to Israel to get it on in the sun, with a side of hummus.
  • "It pains and shocks me to say this, but here goes: My father was right all along. He always told me, as I spouted liberal talking points at the Shabbos table and challenged his hawkish views on Israel and the Palestinians to his unending chagrin, that I would one day change my tune." Have you had a similar experience?
  • "'What’s this, mommy?' she asked, while pulling at the purple sleeve to unwrap this mysterious little gift mom keeps hidden in the inside pocket of her bag. Oh boy, how do I answer?"
  • "I fear that we are witnessing the end of politics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I see no possibility for resolution right now. I look into the future and see only a void." What do you think?
  • Not a gazillionaire? Take the "poor door."
  • "We will do what we must to protect our people. We have that right. We are not less deserving of life and quiet than anyone else. No more apologies."
  • "Woody Allen should have quit while he was ahead." Ezra Glinter's review of "Magic in the Moonlight": http://jd.fo/f4Q1Q
  • Jon Stewart responds to his critics: “Look, obviously there are many strong opinions on this. But just merely mentioning Israel or questioning in any way the effectiveness or humanity of Israel’s policies is not the same thing as being pro-Hamas.”
  • "My bat mitzvah party took place in our living room. There were only a few Jewish kids there, and only one from my Sunday school class. She sat in the corner, wearing the right clothes, asking her mom when they could go." The latest in our Promised Lands series — what state should we visit next?
  • Former Israeli National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror: “A cease-fire will mean that anytime Hamas wants to fight it can. Occupation of Gaza will bring longer-term quiet, but the price will be very high.” What do you think?
  • Should couples sign a pre-pregnancy contract, outlining how caring for the infant will be equally divided between the two parties involved? Just think of it as a ketubah for expectant parents:
  • Many #Israelis can't make it to bomb shelters in time. One of them is Amos Oz.
  • According to Israeli professor Mordechai Kedar, “the only thing that can deter terrorists, like those who kidnapped the children and killed them, is the knowledge that their sister or their mother will be raped."
  • Why does ultra-Orthodox group Agudath Israel of America receive its largest donation from the majority owners of Walmart? Find out here: http://jd.fo/q4XfI
  • Woody Allen on the situation in #Gaza: It's “a terrible, tragic thing. Innocent lives are lost left and right, and it’s a horrible situation that eventually has to right itself.”
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.