CLOTHES RATIONING DURING WORLD WAR II AND ITS IMPACT ON FASHION

: the article deals with rationing clothes during World War II. The hypothesis of the study: rationing is introduced to save resources and curb inflation and becomes a decisive factor in shaping fashion along with the shortage of goods. The subject of the study is fashion during World War II. The purpose of the study is to identify and compare the features of the rationing of clothing in different countries during the war. The objectives of the study are to consider how the normalized distribution influences the features of wartime fashion, which has been studied mainly in the example of the Soviet Union, Germany, Great Britain, the United States of America, and France. The authors utilize the socio-psychological approach that considers the features of human behavior concerning apparel in specific historical conditions.


Introduction
Fashion and style in design during World War II began to arouse particular interest in the early 21 st century and became relevant retro fashion due to the nostalgic moods prompted by the economic crisis and other negative phenomena that concerned people in the 2010s. The world is changing rapidly, the COVID-19 epidemic has become a catalyst for many trends, in particular, the "fourth industrial revolution". Proponents of the green economy concept predict the need for new rationing, while the desire to reduce consumption will be disguised as concern for the environment and human health. In this context, the experience of rationing during World War II is instructive. This study contains a comparative analysis of the rationing systems during World War II in different countries and the impact of these measures on fashion, as well as some other factors.
The study hypothesizes that rationing was introduced in all combatants to save resources and curb inflation, but each country had specific features associated with the implementation of these measures. Nevertheless, the wartime fashion in all countries, even regardless of the economic system, was generally uniform, but, naturally, with specific features that seemed to be superimposed on the general pattern. The subject of the research is the fashion of World War II in a historical context, determined by the systems of clothing rationing. The purpose of the study is to identify the features of clothing rationing in different countries during the war. The objectives are to consider how rationing impacted the characteristics of military fashion. Wartime fashion has been studied mainly on the example of the USSR, Germany, Great Britain, the USA, and France.

Materials and Methods
Fashion during World War II has been the subject of many studies, both devoted to the fashion of the 20 th century, and the fashion of individual countries during the war.
Wartime fashion has been featured in the extensive works on 20 th -century fashion -John Peacock (1993), Nigel Cawtorne (1996), Charlotte Seeling (2000), Valerie D. Mendes, and Amy de la Haye (2005) considered both the stylistic features of the fashion of this period and the impact of clothing rationing systems on fashion. In the 2000s, researchers became more interested in certain aspects of wartime fashion, rationing, and thrifty consumption. Geraldine Biddle-Perry chose the British fashion of the "austerity" era as the subject of research -the post-war period when wartime restrictions were not only preserved but tightened even further (BIDDLE-PERRY, 2016). David Gilbert (2017) analyzed the relationship between fashion and the state of the economy, in particular, wartime fashion. Rebecca Arnold researched the forms of fashion presentation in Britain during World War II and researched the development of American fashion during the war (ARNOLD, 2018;2009). Julia Drost (1998) and Dominique Veillon (2002) wrote about French fashion during the occupation. The relationship between fashion, totalitarianism, and the Nazi ideology was studied by Gloria Sultano (1995), Irene Guenther (2004), Eugen Weber (2003, and Andrey Vasilchenko (2009).
Tatiana Strijenova (1991) was a pioneer in the study of Soviet fashion. Numerous researchers have shown interest in studying the specific features of Soviet fashion in the context of Soviet ideology and the features of a planned socialist economy (BARTLETT, 2011;MOINE, FITZPATRICK, 1999). Natalia Lebina (2015) explored various aspects of the daily life of Soviet people within the framework of the concept of the "norm" vs "anomaly". However, in these works, the period of the Great Patriotic War is hardly considered, the focus being on pre-war and post-war fashion. The topic of wartime fashion was briefly touched upon in the collection "Soviet Style" (ERMILOVA, 2012).
The most thorough investigation of the everyday life of Soviet people during the Great Patriotic War was carried out by the team of authors E.F. Krinko, I.G. Tazhidinova, T.P. Khlynina (2011; based on numerous different sources. A whole chapter is devoted to wartime fashion in the work by Sergey Zhuravlev and Jukka Gronov (2013), which examines the development of the Soviet fashion industry. Several works consider the features of the card-based system that operated during the war (LYAPUNOVA, 2017; MARKOVA, 2019).
Fashion from World War II is of interest not only to scientists but also to reenactors and collectors. In many countries, various events dedicated to this topic are regularly held -exhibitions, fashion shows for retro clothing and accessories, or their reconstructed counterparts. For example, the exhibition "Fashion on both sides of the front, 1939-1945: fashion press of World War II" from the collection of fashion historian Megan Virtanen was held in 2013 in St. Petersburg at the Center for Arts and Music of the V.V. Mayakovsky Central City Public Library.
In this study, the concept of "dress" is understood as "a system of nonverbal communication that enhances human beings' interaction as they move in space and time" (EICHER, 2000), and at the same time, as a part of a person's daily life, which forms behavioral stereotypes. The socio-psychological approach examines the features of human behavior in relation to clothing in specific historical conditions.
The time frame of the study is as follows: the "shortage period" in the United States ends with the end of the war, and the works on war-related fashion in Great Britain and Germany focus on the initial post-war years (the end of the 1940s) that were even more difficult in terms of supply than the war years (in Germany since 1944). In the Soviet tradition, the dividing line between wartime and post-war fashion was usually drawn in 1945. Analysis and comparison of consumer practices were carried out based on the studies of everyday life and wartime fashion, as well as the memories of war survivors.
Wartime fashion was perceived as a means of maintaining the high morale of the nation, as a form of resistance to war. Despite the inhuman living conditions of the civilian population in some countries, fashion did not die, not only survived, but also developed in wartime, since scarcity always stimulates creativity, ingenuity, which distinguished the consumption practices in the USSR throughout its existence, and in Western countries have intensified during rationing (GILBERT, 2017). The rationing of clothing is a common feature of the wartime economy of all combatant countries, which had a great impact on the daily life of people. Rationing is an administrative measure for regulating commodity circulation to limit consumer demand, combat speculation and inflation, which is typical for the military economy. The originality of this study lies in the fact that, in contrast to the food supply, no comparative analysis of the features of clothing rationing and wartime fashion in different countries has yet been carried out.

Results
The main factor that, as noted by all researchers of wartime fashion, had a decisive influence on the formation of wartime fashion and was common to almost all combatants was commodity shortages and measures for the rationed distribution of food and clothing among the civilian population. The negative experience of World War I was considered when national systems for the distribution of resources had not been introduced and there was a food crisis, only certain categories of food were distributed in cities, coal, but not clothes. The rationing of clothing as part of rationing measures was supposed to contribute to the achievement of several important goals -provide the population with a guaranteed minimum of goods, prevent inflation, save resources to concentrate all production opportunities for military purposes. As a rule, certain types of food (varying in different countries), hygiene products, fabrics (primarily silk, from which parachutes were made), clothing, shoe leather, gasoline, and car tires (in the USA) were subject to rationing.
The rationing system was not only designed to meet the minimum clothing needs of the civilian population but was also supposed to help save materials and minimize production costs. In the UK, for example, these measures, known as "austerity", allowed one to save an estimated five million square meters of cotton annually. The resources saved were to be spent on military needs, in particular, on sewing military uniforms and uniforms for female support units. Since the beginning of the United States' entry into the war, the US War Industry Committee set the task of reducing the consumption of fabrics for clothing by 15%.
Cards, coupons, or stamps were not a substitute for money but only allowed one to buy goods according to the norms determined by special decrees in each country. The norms specified the amount of produce allocated per person per day or week, month, hygiene products (soap, powder) per month, and clothes per year. Unlike food ration cards which strictly rationed the amount of meat, fat, sugar, canned food, bread, etc., assigned to one person, coupons for clothes made it possible to choose what to spend them on.
Clothing cards were not introduced only in a small number of combatant or occupied countries -for example, in Hungary, where the rich fashionable women from Berlin went to update their wardrobe, as Missie Vassiltchikov (1994) wrote in her diary. The norms varied from country to country, but, as a rule, met the very basic needs for clothing.
Although, there was a common problem in many countries with the production of footwear for civilians, which was difficult to buy even with coupons -in the USSR (LEBINA, 2015), Germany, Great Britain because leather and rubber were mainly used for military purposes (KRINKO ET AL., 2011;ZHURAVLEV, GRONOV, 2013;VASILCHENKO, 2009;CAWTORNE, 1996).
In Germany, the rationing system was introduced even before the start of the war -from 25 Aug. 1939, and problems with the supply of food and clothing to the population began long before the war, after the Nazi Party came to power, because the raw materials (cotton, wool, rubber) for the production of clothing had to be bought with currency, and all resources were required for military needs. On 12 Nov. 1939, clothing cards were introduced, but this did not mean that even the minimum needs could be satisfied. For example, in the fall, only postmen, newspapermen, and cleaners had the right to buy new rubber galoshes and boots. If in the USSR, the USA, and Great Britain, adults received the same number of clothing coupons per year (there were special rules everywhere for children, and in the USSR, residents of the Far North received a double rate of coupons), then in Germany the rates differed for men and women, for boys and girls in accordance with the gender policy of the Nazis. Moreover, the number of new clothing items that could be purchased per year was limited -for example, only five pairs of socks or stockings. In general, an adult was entitled to 100 coupons per year on a special "wardrobe card" (Reichskleiderkarte), and a women's winter coat cost 70, a man's suit or coat was 60 coupons, pajamas -30, a nightgown -25, socks were five, trousers were eight, skirts were four (not made of wool), dresses were seven (not woolen), stockings cost four, a pair of shoes cost five. There were special cards for shoe repair. Moreover, prices were not fixed, and the authorities tried to control consumption, simultaneously "squeezing" the black market. Even in 1943, which was the most prosperous in terms of supplying the German population due to the pillaging of the occupied countries and the infusion of millions of workers' hands of prisoners of war and Ostarbeiters into the economy, the norms for "wardrobe cards" did not increase, and in 1944 the production of clothes was generally stopped. The entire industry of the Third Reich was switched to the needs of the army, even small sewing workshops and ateliers were engaged only in repairing the old uniforms (ZALESSKII, 2016). This deplorable clothing situation was compounded by the loss of property by the civilian population due to carpet bombing of large German cities by the Allies and the evacuation from East Prussia at the end of the war and continued after the war.
In France, clothing coupons were introduced in the summer of 1940 after the capitulation by the occupation authorities to save resources for their subsequent export to Germany. Therefore, the behavior of the French, especially the French women, was fundamentally different from the behavior of consumers in other countries where being thrifty was regarded as patriotic behavior. Bright, extravagant, and wasteful fashion (in terms of fabric consumption, incredible hats, and makeup) became a kind of resistance to the occupation, there was no point in saving resources because "the Germans would get everything anyway" (Figure 1). This feature is noted by all researchers of French fashion during the occupation period (DROST, 1998;VEILLON, 2002;WEBER, 2003). French women sewed dresses from forbidden silk, Lyons weavers secretly produced silk fabrics with the national tricolor banned after the surrender. This explains the difficulties that French fashion experienced at the end and immediately after the war -the French cuts, which the French hoped to export to the USA and Great Britain, did not comply with the decrees on the austerity of wartime fabrics.  Bevin, the Utility plan was introduced, which regulated the production and distribution of clothing for civilians. Initially, unused margarine coupons could be spent on clothing purchases. Then special coupons for clothing were issued -each adult was entitled to 66 per year. In 1942, the number was reduced to 48 coupons, in 1943 -to 36, and in 1945 -to 24. To buy a man's suit with a lining, one had to hand over 26 coupons, a coat or a woman's suit cost 18, men's trousers -11, dresses -11, jumpers were five, a pair of stockings cost two, and even two handkerchiefs cost one coupon. For a pair of men's shoes, nine coupons had to be paid, for women's shoes -five coupons, but they were rarely sold due to a lack of leather and even faux leather. If an employee was given a uniform at work, part of the coupons had to be handed over (nurses had to give 10, the police -six). Secondhand clothes and fur coats could be purchased without coupons.
Heavy physical workers (which was long pursued by the trade unions), diplomats, artists, and young mothers, and with the end of the war also demobilized female military personnel received additional coupons. It was forbidden to make vents on the sleeves, use more than three buttons for fastening, make pockets with flaps, sew three-piece suits, trousers with cuffs, which were fashionable before the war. Moreover, in Britain, it was forbidden to embroider clothes and underwear.
An interesting, even unique, feature of the British "Utility" plan -the patterns of clothing items that were sold on coupons at fixed pre-war prices were developed by famous British designers: the royal tailor Norman Hartnell, Edward Molyneux, Digby Morton, Hardy Amies (during the time free from the leadership of the Belgium department in Special Operations Executive), who were members of the Incorporated Society of London Fashion Designers (Figure 2). At the same time, not only the features of the models were regulated so as not to waste extra fabric, but also the quality of the clothes. As a result, the average Briton during the war wore more fashionable clothes (almost of the level of modern ready-to-wear, because the clothes were developed by famous designers who dressed high society) and of better quality than before the war.
Likewise, food rationing has improved the health of the British; thanks to which, during the war years, infant mortality decreased and life expectancy increased, except for deaths from military operations. Clothing rationing in Great Britain was canceled only in 1949.  In the USSR, the card-based system existed even before the war ( Nov. 1942, "On streamlining the card system for bread, some food, and industrial goods" from 1 Jan. 1943, common forms of cards were introduced for the entire country. If food norms depended not only on the category of cards but also on local resources, then the norms for providing industrial goods were the same for all regions of the USSR (the norm was double in the regions of the Far North). Workers and engineers and technicians were given 125 coupons a year, employees -100 coupons, dependents (that is, those who did not work -the retired, people with disabilities, children, and students) -80 coupons.
To buy a coat, one had to hand over 80 coupons in the store, a silk or woolen dress cost 60, a cotton dress was 40 coupons, a pair of adult shoes was 50, a bar of laundry soap was two coupons. In the USSR, cards were canceled in December 1947. There was a shortage of fabrics and clothing for the civilian population everywhere, although in almost all countries there were shops selling clothes without cards or coupons (in the USSR -"commercial stores"), the prices there were "sky-high", inaccessible to most people. The shortage of clothing was caused not only by the rationing system which significantly restricted the consumption by the civilian population but also by the loss of property during bombings or evacuations -especially in the USSR, in Great Britain during the "blitz" era, in Germany (especially in the last months of the war). The "peaks" of the deficit did not coincide in different countries. In the USSR, from the point of view of providing the population with the necessary things, the first two years of the war were the most difficult. In the United States, cards were introduced later and canceled earlier than in other countries. In Britain and Germany, the last two years of the war and especially the post-war period were the most difficult. During the war and in the first postwar years, clothes had a value incomprehensible to a modern person -this was, as in the old days, movable property of the family that could be exchanged for food or necessities, sold, and often stolen.
The scarcity of clothes that could be purchased with coupons forced people to save fabric and other materials by all means, sew clothes themselves, alter old clothes, use unusual materials to make clothes, shoes, accessories, and jewelry. Military uniforms were often altered -for example, the famous Italian designer G. Armani recalled that during the war Giorgio and his brother and sister wore clothes that his mother had altered from military uniforms (MOLHO, 2008).
The lack of stockings led to the proliferation of women's trousers -not only as part of military uniforms or sports and workwear but as casual and even evening wear.
"Fashion designer Elizabeth Hawes in 1939, desperate that women did not want to notice the functional comfort of trousers that was obvious to her, wrote in her book 'Men Can Take It': "I can say outright that women should wear trousers to work but my words won't change anything. If Greta Garbo, or Chanel, or God had said that, it would not have changed anything either. Women are not ready to wear trousers to work. When they are ready, they will wear them. It took a world war for women to get out of their corsets. It will probably take another one to get them into trousers" (ARNOLD, 2016, p. 122).
Unfortunately, this prediction came true the same year.
During the war, the consumption of not only clothing but also cosmetics was strictly rationed. Apart from Germany, the production of makeup and perfumery, despite the difficulties with raw materials, did not stop during the war because it was considered important for maintaining a fighting spirit. Even in the USSR, lipstick, and perfumes were produced -for example, the State Perfume and Cosmetic Factory No. 4 (since 1953 -the Northern Lights factory) in besieged Leningrad not only produced military products (mine cases, medicines) but also perfumes, which, due to the lack of bottles, were poured into pharmacy bottles. In the UK, cosmetics production was cut by three-quarters but was deemed necessary. Lipstick quality was poor, with limited shade choices, but posters and magazine covers advertised a feminine, well-groomed woman in the rear (including the Royal Navy and Air Force Auxiliary). In the United States, the War Production Board concluded that the continued production of lipstick, blush, powder, and bath balm was essential to maintain the morale of the nation (CAWTORNE, 1996, p. 53). In France, cosmetics and perfumes were produced in large quantities and of a varied range -it was not a problem to purchase perfume, lipstick, or bright nail polish.
A completely different attitude to cosmetics was in Germany. Even before the war, the Nazis promoted the image of a "real German woman" and a "real German girl" who does not smoke, does not use makeup, wears a "Tracht" (dress in the style of a traditional Bavarian dress "Dirndl") and long skirts, braids her hair or pulls together in a modest bun. The image of the Hollywood "vamp woman", which was popular in Weimar Germany, was particularly attacked by Nazi propaganda. In return, the image of "natural German female beauty" was advertised. True, these requirements did not apply to German actresses and movie stars. In early 1941, the Imperial Hairdressing Association adopted a directive limiting the length of a woman's hair to 10 cm. Thus, hairstyles with longer hair were not done in hairdressing salons and hairdressers could even shorten hair that was too long unless it was pulled into a modest bun or braided. The use of makeup was regarded as "antisocial behavior", for this one could be forcibly sent to work at a military plant -Missie Vassiltchikov (1994)  The publication of fashion magazines was treated the same as the manufacturing of cosmetics -even in the USSR, such magazines were published during the war (with a short break). In France, fashion magazines came out with only hand-drawn illustrations, but in the UK the magazines featured photographs (magazine quality is also a means of increasing morale), and in the USA -color photographs, which required higher quality paper. In all countries, brochures with examples of converting old clothes into fashionable cuts were popular.

Discussion
During the war, the state in all countries actively intervened in the design, production, and consumption of clothing. The norms that determined the number of clothes allocated to one person per year did not vary significantly in different countriesthe differences were, rather, in the possibility of acquiring things with these coupons and the quality of clothes. As noted above, wartime fashion researchers in the United States and Great Britain have come to an unexpected conclusion that the quality of mass clothing during the war, thanks to government regulation and the participation of designers in the development of clothing sold with coupons, increased significantly (ARNOLD, 2009;CAWTORNE, 1996). In the USSR, the situation was exactly the opposite -the fabrics were of poor quality, there were not enough specialists (ZHURAVLEV, GRONOV, 2013).
Although there was a planned socialist economy in the USSR and a capitalist economy in other countries (state-monopoly capitalism in Germany), a rationing system was introduced everywhere for the rationed distribution of resources for the civilian population. This led to the widespread practice of making clothes, shoes, accessories, etc.
Things made of strategic materials -silk and wool -were in short supply everywhere.
However, there were significant differences in the quantity and quality of things that    Researchers of Soviet fashion note another feature -the war led to the migration of large groups of civilians (refugees, evacuees) to the eastern regions of the countrythe Volga region, the Urals, Siberia, the Far East, and Central Asia. This contributed to the spread of urban fashion from the European part of Russia to rural areas, small provincial towns (ZHURAVLEV, GRONOV, 2013). At the end of the war, Western fashion "moved" to the east, when the Soviet army entered the territory of Germany, Austria, and the countries of Eastern Europe. Soldiers were able to send home "trophy" items that changed perceptions of consumption standards. Trophy films already had a huge influence on post-war Soviet fashion -especially the German musical film "The Woman of My Dreams" with Marika Rökk, and the legendary film "Sun Valley Serenade" with Sonja Henie and the Glenn Miller Orchestra. Clothing from charitable parcels from the USA in 1944-46 had less influence on the acquaintance of Soviet people with Western fashion than trophy items because there were much fewer of those. Thanks to these parcels, Soviet people saw clothes with a zipper (they were not produced in the USSR before the war, and the jackets of Soviet pilots were fastened with buttons). The author's uncle, who was a small child at the time, received an American jacket made of corduroy with a zipper. This was how the first jeans appeared in the USSR -they were called "damned leather" trousers.
During the war, designers were faced with new, unprecedented tasks, especially in the United States and Great Britain -not only to develop clothing patterns that comply with decrees on rationing and saving fabrics but also to rely on national motifs. Due to the occupation of France, American fashion was for the first time "freed from the dictates" of the fashion of the Old World. For the first time, fashionable styles were created based on American motifs -country, sports minimalism (ARNOLD, 2009;CAWTORNE 1996). In Britain, tweed suits became a symbol of national fashion. Before the war, they were appropriate only outside the city or on the sports field, during and after the war, such suits became ordinary everyday clothes, quite suitable for ladies. Perhaps this metamorphosis happened not only because the tweed suit is a very practical item, but also according to the "Utility" plan, London designers developed models of coarse wool suits that were sold for coupons -and since this plan covered 85% of all clothing produced, tweed suits became the mainstream fashion.
In the USSR, similar tasks were set before Soviet fashion designers only after the war -to improve the quality and artistic level of Soviet clothing. For this purpose, model houses were created, which were supposed to develop samples of patterns for sale to garment factories for replication (ZHURAVLEV, GRONOV, 2013;BARTLETT, 2011)). Already in 1945, the designers of the Moscow House of Fashion Design created about a thousand samples of clothes that were to be introduced into production.
Another aspect of wartime fashion, which, as a rule, is mentioned in passing was that the harsh living conditions and the lack of familiar things have led to the abandonment of the previous norms and formal fashion rules associated with wearing clothes. For example, before the war, the women in the city had to wear stockings even in hot summers just like men had to wear socks. Shoes worn on bare feet have always indicated poverty. In the Soviet Union and in the 1920s and 1930s, one used to do this because of a shortage of shoes, especially young people, as they abandoned many accessories because of the struggle against bourgeois fashion -hats, ties, gloves, jewelry, etc. (LEBINA, 2015). The ban on the production of silk stockings led to the fact that the official fashion allowed to wear shoes without stockings in the warm season. In the 1930s, with sports models of women's clothing, it was possible to wear shoes with socks -during the war, this also became a widespread trend. The war also changed the attitude towards women's trousers, which before the war were sports and work clothes, and only Parisian couturiers offered extravagant patterns with evening trousers. During the war, trousers began to be worn as casual clothing (also due to the lack of stockings) (figure 8).  The turban became the symbol of wartime fashion and was worn instead of a hat, which before the war was also an obligatory clothing element of a decently dressed woman. The turban protected from cold and dust, hid the lack of a hairstyle, was easy to manufacture. However, not in the USSR. There, turbans are a sign of antagonists in Soviet films. In real life, women wore the most traditional headdress in Russia -a headscarf.
The author's grandmother, who graduated from university, worked as a doctor before the war and used to wear only hats, also began to wear a headscarf during the war. It also became possible to go out without a headdress at all.
In general, though not as radically as during World War I, the appearance of women changed during World War II. These changes were especially noticeable for the older generation. In one of her novels, Agatha Christie put criticism of this fashion into the mouth of a character -an old grumpy lady, but if one remembers that there is not a single word of approval of this fashion in the texts of those years, then perhaps this is the opinion of the writer herself: "Look at the way they dress. Trousers! Some poor fools wear shorts -they wouldn't if they knew what they looked like from behind! What do they wear on their heads? Proper hats? No, a twisted-up bit of stuff, and faces covered with paint and powder. Filthy stuff, all over their mouths. Not only red nails -but red toenails! Even in church, no hats. Sometimes not even those silly scarves" (CHRISTIE, 2008, p. 150-151).
The wartime fashion also manifested a completely natural nostalgia for a peaceful life -in the USA and Great Britain, these were Latin American motifs that appeared in the patterns of French and British designers even before the war. There were no such motifs in the USSR or Germany.
In all countries, thrifty consumption was regarded as "consumer patriotism", "patriotic chic". Too wide trousers with cuffs, long double-breasted jackets compared to the official style were regarded as defiantly unpatriotic. Therefore, such suits became a way of demonstrating protest for wartime youth subcultures. In the United States, calls to save fabric served as a pretext for the emergence of the "zooties" youth subculture, whose representatives wore oversized suits (the real reason for the protest was racial problems) ( Figure 5). In France, a subculture of black-market speculators and criminals "zazou" who wore similar suits (only with tight trousers to stand out because most Frenchmen wore wide ones) was a reaction to the Vichy regime's calls for austerity. In Germany and Austria in the second half of the 1930s, a youth subculture "Swing-Jugend" ("Swing-Kids") or "Schlurfe" appeared. At first glance it was apolitical, associated with a passion for American jazz, but the open adherence to American and British fashions during the war looked like a frank demonstration of rejection of the Third Reich. "Swing-Jugend" wore long chequered or tennis-striped double-breasted jackets with huge shoulders, wide trousers with 10-15-centimeter cuffs, boots with thick soles. The authorities fought these subcultures in various ways -to the point of imprisonment in concentration camps for the re-education of "asocial elements" in Germany. In the USSR, a similar subculture will appear only after the war -the famous "hipsters".

Conclusion
In this study: a comparative analysis of the rationing of clothes during World War II in the USSR, Germany, Great Britain, the USA, and France was carried out.
it was shown that the shortage of clothing was caused not only by the rationing system, which significantly restricted the consumption by the civilian population but also by the loss of property during bombing or evacuation. The "peaks" of the commodity deficit did not coincide in different countries.
we showed the common and distinctive features of wartime fashion in different countries, while in numerous studies of fashion during World War II, attention was focused on national characteristics.
the norms that determined the amount of clothing entitled to one person per year did not vary significantly in different countries. The differences can be seen in the ability to purchase things with coupons and the quality of clothing.
the state in all countries controlled not only consumption but also the design and production of clothing, which led in the United States and Great Britain to an increase in the quality of clothing that was sold under the rationing system.
thrifty consumption during the war was regarded as "consumer patriotism", except for France where a deliberately extravagant style was a form of resistance to the occupation regime; fashion was perceived as a means of maintaining high morale of the nation, as a form of resistance to war; during the war, the consumption of not only clothing but also cosmetics was rationed. Apart from Germany, the production of make-up and perfumery, despite the difficulties with raw materials, did not stop, because it was considered necessary to maintain a fighting spirit; in the Soviet Union, strict norms for the distribution of clothes were introduced, but at the same time, during the war, the state intervened in fashion issues to a lesser extent than in other countries, although the appearance of a Soviet person before and after the war was regulated rather strictly; the shortage of goods led to the abandonment of the previous rules and regulations of formal fashion associated with the wearing of clothes; in all countries, thrifty consumption was regarded as "consumer patriotism", which provoked the choice of a deliberately uneconomical style of clothing as a form of protest by participants in youth subcultures.
The originality of this study lies in the fact that, in contrast to the food supply, no comparative analysis of the features of clothing rationing and wartime fashion in different countries has yet been carried out. Further studies of the experience of wartime rationing seem to be very interesting from the perspective of the "green economy" concept.