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!
  • “Look, on the one hand, I understand him,” says Rivka Ben-Pazi, a niece of Elchanan Hameiri, the boy that Henk Zanoli saved. “He had a family tragedy.” But on the other hand, she said, “I think he was wrong.” What do you think?
  • How about a side of Hitler with your spaghetti?
  • Why "Be fruitful and multiply" isn't as simple as it seems:
  • William Schabas may be the least of Israel's problems.
  • You've heard of the #IceBucketChallenge, but Forward publisher Sam Norich has something better: a #SoupBucketChallenge (complete with matzo balls!) Jon Stewart, Sarah Silverman & David Remnick, you have 24 hours!
  • Did Hamas just take credit for kidnapping the three Israeli teens?
  • "We know what it means to be in the headlines. We know what it feels like when the world sits idly by and watches the news from the luxury of their living room couches. We know the pain of silence. We know the agony of inaction."
  • When YA romance becomes "Hasidsploitation":
  • "I am wrapping up the summer with a beach vacation with my non-Jewish in-laws. They’re good people and real leftists who try to live the values they preach. This was a quality I admired, until the latest war in Gaza. Now they are adamant that American Jews need to take more responsibility for the deaths in Gaza. They are educated people who understand the political complexity, but I don’t think they get the emotional complexity of being an American Jew who is capable of criticizing Israel but still feels a deep connection to it. How can I get this across to them?"
  • “'I made a new friend,' my son told his grandfather later that day. 'I don’t know her name, but she was very nice. We met on the bus.' Welcome to Israel."
  • A Jewish female sword swallower. It's as cool as it sounds (and looks)!
  • Why did David Menachem Gordon join the IDF? In his own words: "The Israel Defense Forces is an army that fights for her nation’s survival and the absence of its warriors equals destruction from numerous regional foes. America is not quite under the threat of total annihilation… Simply put, I felt I was needed more in Israel than in the United States."
  • Leonard Fein's most enduring legacy may be his rejection of dualism: the idea that Jews must choose between assertiveness and compassion, between tribalism and universalism. Steven M. Cohen remembers a great Jewish progressive:
  • BREAKING: Missing lone soldier David Menachem Gordon has been found dead in central Israel. The Ohio native was 21 years old.
  • “They think they can slap on an Amish hat and a long black robe, and they’ve created a Hasid." What do you think of Hollywood's portrayal of Hasidic Jews?
  • 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.