Out-of-style : an illustrated guide to vintage fashions [2nd edition, Dover edition.] 9780486819884, 0486819884

Citation preview

Testimonials from the Experts • “I have bought numerous History of Costume books, but none of them tell me what I need to know, in a manner I can easily access, absorb and utilize. Your book, Out-of-Style, is so easy to understand, I want to be the first to endorse it.”  ­— the late Caroline Rober  Past President of Southern California Association of Professional Genealogists

• “You have done a masterful job of defining your subject and your expertise in this field is unique. . . . Your book promises to be a wonderful help to genealogist researchers everywhere. With great admiration for you.”  —Loretto ( Lou ) Szucs, Author V.P. Community Relations, Executive Editor, Ancestry.com

• “A great reference book. I can’t wait to put it to use!” 

—Maureen Taylor, The Photo Detective

• “Having struggled many times to figure out when a photo was taken, I know how much this book is needed. Betty’s expertise will be helpful to all of us who depend on historical accuracy.”  —Juliana Smith, Ancestry.com Editor, Weekly Discovery

• “Teachers of Theatre will find this book to be a useful tool. This text helps technical theatre students create correctly styled costumes and helps performers create characters influenced by time appropriate attire.”  —Bart McHenry, Dean of Fine Arts and Media Technology,  Saddleback College, Mission Viejo, California

• “FASCINATING! I couldn’t put it down. The author shows how social development influenced how we dress. I would certainly include this book in my theatre classes for —Allen M. Zeltzer its value to future costumers, directors and actors.”  Professor of Theatre, Emeritus, Cal-State University at Fullerton

• “Many costume designers send sketches into the workroom with beautiful, but vague, artistic flourishes, leaving the actual interpretation to pattern makers. Betty’s sketches are beautiful, but easy to translate, because she knows where all the seams go.” — ­­ Marlene Madrid  Retired Supervisor of the Disneyland Costume Workroom

• “Drawing upon her years of costume design experience and love of social history, Betty gives the lay person or the professional designer an invaluable research tool. She does this simply and without the complexity one must wade through in other history of costume books. Her creativity and sense of humour jumps from every page. This is one of the most valued ‘go to’ books in my library with talking points new, even to me.” —Alyja Kalinich   Disneyland Costume Designer

Written & Illustrated by

BETTY KREISEL SHUBERT

DOVER PUBLICATIONS, INC. Mineola, New York

To my wonderful husband, Lyndon Shubert, my “Enabler,” who graciously enabled me to concentrate on this book . . . instead of on him. And to my daughter, Kathryn Gale Kreisel, and my son, Ken Kreisel, for their love, support and pride in this endeavor.

Copyright Copyright © 2013, 2018 by Betty Kreisel Shubert All rights reserved.

Bibliographical Note   This Dover edition, first published in 2018, is an updated and revised republication of the work originally published by Flashback Publishing, Mission Viejo, California, in 2013.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Shubert, Betty Kreisel, author. Title: Out-of-style : an illustrated guide to vintage fashions / Betty Kreisel Shubert. Description: Revised [edition]. | Mineola, New York : Dover Publications, 2018. | “This Dover edition, first published in 2018, is an updated and revised republication of the work originally published by Flashback Publishing, Mission Viejo, California, in 2013.” | Includes bibliographical references. Identifiers: LCCN 2017044746| ISBN 9780486819884 (paperback) | ISBN 0486819884 Subjects: LCSH: Clothing and dress—History—19th century—Pictorial works. | Clothing and dress—History—20th century—Pictorial works. | Fashion—History—19th century—Pictorial works. | Fashion—History—20th century—Pictorial works. | BISAC: ANTIQUES & COLLECTIBLES / Textiles & Costume. | DESIGN / History & Criticism. | CRAFTS & HOBBIES / Fashion. Classification: LCC GT513 .S58 2018 | DDC 391.009—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017044746 Manufactured in China by RR Donnelley 81988401 2018 www.doverpublications.com

Betty’s Theory of Evolution New fashions are created by the logical accident of experimentation . . . gradually evolving into numerous mutations that may take decades to play out. . . . If everyone likes the new look, then that is IN and everything else is OUT!

T

Acknowledgments

he first drafts of this book were encouraged by a Cheerleading Squad whose ongoing enthusiasm carried me through four years of concentrated effort to final completion!

Head cheerleader was my fashionista friend, Sally Feathers (a former real cheerleader), whose sunshine and devotion has continued to warm my pen and my heart. Because I was computer illiterate when I began . . . and never learned to type (this entire book was written in longhand), my dear friend Marlene Madrid, retired supervisor of the Disneyland costume workroom, offered to type my entire book, refusing any payment except my unending gratitude for helping me get started. I have everlasting gratitude to the late Caroline Rober, professional genealogist, who saw my first drafts of Out-of-Style and validated that I was indeed providing genealogists with an important new tool to help them climb their family trees. Thank you, Caroline, for your initial guidance. Next, I met the delightful Lou Szucs, famous genealogist, author and Executive Editor of Ancestry.com, who immediately recognized how useful my information would be to genealogists to enable them to time-date their old family photographs. Lou’s educated encouragement and subsequent friendship has been of ongoing support to me. Thank you to Ellen Reid, my helpful Book Shepherd, who guided me to Ghislain Viau, of Creative Publishing Book Design, whose good taste, creativity, patience and empathy quickly captured my vision and transformed it into the reality you see here. Thank you to Vanessa Putt, Jennifer Becker, Terri Geus, Ellen Kraft, and the rest of the Creative Team at Dover Publications for giving a renewed look at my Life’s Work by updating this newly envisioned Second Edition. Special thanks to my brilliant son, Ken Kreisel (who invented the worldfamous, self-powered subwoofer and other audio inventions while still in his twenties). Ken and my grandson, Nick Kreisel, have tutored me daily on the use of my willful and temperamental computer. THANK YOU and CHEERS! to all my cheerleaders! vii

Contents PAGE

Author’s Note: How This Book Was Born xv Introduction1

PART ONE—THE 19TH CENTURY 1830–1900 CHAPTER 1  EVOLUTION IN A THIMBLE

ILLUSTRATION: Overview of the Primary Silhouettes of Each Decade from 1830 to 1900s How Fashions Go Forward and Sometimes Back Again 

6 9

CHAPTER 2  WHY HOOP SKIRTS WERE BORN

ILLUSTRATION: The Shapes of Hoop Skirts How They Grew and Why They Died

16 17

CHAPTER 3 THE NINE SEQUENTIAL PHASES OF THE RISE AND FALL AND RISE (AGAIN!) OF THE BUSTLE

ILLUSTRATION: What Was Hiding Under Her Bustle? Style Clues of the Nine Phases from 1860 to 1892 ILLUSTRATION: The Nine Phases of the Bustle (Followed by Its Final Demise)

20 21 22

CHAPTER 4  THE OUT-OF-STYLE FASHION SHOW

ILLUSTRATION: Invitation to an Out-of-Style Fashion Show From Stylish to Obsolete in a Few Short Years

34 35

CHAPTER 5  WHEN PROPORTIONS CHANGE

ILLUSTRATION: Proportions Change at Their Most Extreme to a Completely Opposite Look 40 Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beholder 41 ILLUSTRATION: Ever-Changing Erogenous Zones 42 The Pressure to Conform (Even If It Kills You!) 43 ILLUSTRATION: Foot Fetishes and Fashion Victims 46 The Pressure to Conform (Even If It Gives You Bunions!)  47 Arrested Development: Women Who Wait Too Long to Change 49

CHAPTER 6 HOW UNDERGARMENTS AFFECTED THE POSTURE AND SHAPE OF WOMEN’S BODIES CORSETS ILLUSTRATION: How the Changing Shape of Corsets Changed the Shape of Women and Their Clothes All About Corsets—How Fitting! Tight Lacing Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beholder A Good Body Never Goes Out of Style BRASSIERES From Upholstered Bodies to “Look Ma! . . . No Bra!” News Flash! 600-Year-Old Bra Found in Medieval Castle STOCKINGS From Thick Stockings to Sheer Pantyhose in a Few Hundred Years

50 51 52 55 55 56 61 62

CHAPTER 7  SPECIAL OCCASION CLOTHES REFORM DRESS ILLUSTRATION: The Milestones of Reform Dress The Milestones of Reform Dress and the Birth of the Bloomer Girl WEDDINGS ILLUSTRATION: Wedding Veils and Hairstyles Vintage Wedding Gowns and Veils MATERNITY CLOTHES ILLUSTRATION: The Comfort of Mother Hubbard Dresses While “Heavy with Child”  The Evolution of Maternity Clothing MOURNING DRESS ILLUSTRATION: First Phase Mourning Dress Worn for a Year and a Day How to Recognize Mourning Clothes in a Vintage Photograph The Four Stages of Mourning in the 19th Century Mourning in the 20th Century Mourning Dress Is Dead! The Colors of Mourning Life (and Weddings) Must Go On  Mourning Jewelry BATHING SUITS ILLUSTRATION: From Baggy Bloomers to Sexy Bikinis The Evolution of Bathing Suits

64 65 68 69 72 73 74 75 76 78 79 80 81 82 84 85

CHAPTER 8  MODERN IMPROVEMENTS PHOTOGRAPHY ILLUSTRATION: Early Photography How Early Photography Froze Moments in Time So That We Can Look at the Past SEWING MACHINES The First Sewing Machines WASHING MACHINES AND DRYERS ILLUSTRATION: Before Washing Machines and Dryers Wash Day Over a Washtub  HAIRSTYLES ILLUSTRATION: The Permanent Wave Machine Women’s Hairstyle Notes: 19th to 20th Century 

88 89 92 94 95 96 97

CHAPTER 9  HOW TO TRACE YOUR ANCESTORS . . . LITERALLY!

ILLUSTRATION: Tracing Your Ancestors from Photographs Style Clues That Result from Tracings

98 99

CHAPTER 10  OVERVIEW OF WOMEN’S CLOTHES IN THE 19TH CENTURY

Style Clues for the Fashion Detective

STYLE CLUES DECADE BY DECADE 1840–1900s Illustrations and Descriptive Text 1840–1850s 1850–1860s 1860–1870s 1870–1880s 1880–1890s 1890–1900s

101

111 120 130 140 150 158

CHAPTER 11  OVERVIEW OF MEN’S CLOTHES IN THE 19TH CENTURY Style Clues for the Fashion Detective

169

STYLE CLUES DECADE BY DECADE 1840–1900s Illustrations and Descriptive Text 1840–1850s 1850–1860s 1860–1870s 1870–1880s 1880–1890s 1890–1900s

174 176 178 180 182 184

CHAPTER 12  CHILDREN’S CLOTHES IN THE 19TH CENTURY

ILLUSTRATION: From Pantaloons to Pants When Little Boys Wore Dresses and Little Girls Wore Pantaloons ILLUSTRATION: Little Lord Fauntleroy and His Sister Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 19th Century

186 187 188 189

CHAPTER 13  BOYS’ CLOTHES IN THE 19TH CENTURY STYLE CLUES DECADE BY DECADE 1840–1900s Illustrations and Descriptive Text 1840–1850s 1850–1860s 1860–1870s 1870–1880s 1880–1890s 1890–1900s

192 194 196 198 200 202

CHAPTER 14  GIRLS’ CLOTHES IN THE 19TH CENTURY STYLE CLUES DECADE BY DECADE 1840–1900s Illustrations and Descriptive Text 1840–1850s 1850–1860s 1860–1870s 1870–1880s 1880–1890s 1890–1900s

204 206 208 210 212 214

PART TWO—THE 20TH CENTURY 1900–2000 CHAPTER 15  OVERVIEW OF WOMEN’S CLOTHES IN THE 20TH CENTURY ILLUSTRATION: The Bottom Line About Hemlines and the March to Modernity in 100 years The Evolution of Hemlines Over 100 Years  The March to Modernity

218 221 222

CHAPTER 16  THE FIRST TWO DECADES 1900–1920s

ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Dress Variations 1900–1914 Turn-of-the-Century Silhouettes ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Dress Variations 1912–1919 Designer Paul Poiret and the Demise of the Hourglass Figure How Tailor-Made Suits and Sears, Roebuck Catalogs Helped Unify America Shirtwaist Blouses and Showbiz Gossip The Color Alice Blue and the Birth of Teddy Bears ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Hats 1900–1914 The Changing Shapes of Millinery 1900–1920s ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Hats 1906–1920s

226 227 228 229 230 231 231 234 235 237

CHAPTER 17  AMERICA ON THE ROAD

ILLUSTRATION: Automobile Touring Clothes 1900–1920s Automobile Touring Clothes How WWI Jodhpurs and Riding Britches Replaced Dusters and Tied-Down Hats

240 241 244

CHAPTER 18  FASHION CHANGES 1920–1960s THE ROARING TWENTIES ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Dress Variations 1920–1930 Who Put the Roar in the Roaring Twenties? ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Hats and Hairstyles 1920–1930 THE GREAT DEPRESSION AND THE GOLDEN AGE OF RADIO Everything Changed in the 1930s ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Dress Variations 1930–1940 ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Hats 1930–1945 FASHIONS OF THE FORTIES AND HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Hats 1940–1950s ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Hairstyles 1940–1950s ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Fashion Variations 1940–1950s Fashions of the Forties and Hollywood Boulevard The History of Hollywood Boulevard “Frantic Forties Party” Invitation Herald-Examiner newspaper clipping, “As Time Goes By” ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Fashion Variations 1950–1960s The “New Look” for Women in the 1950s ILLUSTRATION: Women’s Hairstyles 1950–1960s The New Look for Movies The New Look for Las Vegas The Phenomenon of the Fifties Felt Skirt  ILLUSTRATION: Fashion Photography, Spring 1934 The Changing Styles of Fashion Photography The Origin of Fashion Shows Chanel’s Influence on Clothes Designed for the Movies Authenticity of Period Costumes Designed for the Movies

246 247 249 251 252 254 258 259 260 261 263 264 266 268 269 272 273 274 276 278 279 280 281 282

CHAPTER 19  THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CLOTHES The Blue Velveteen Suit The Eccentric Dresser What Is Good Taste?  The Twenty-Five-Year-Old Dress

285 286 286 287

CHAPTER 20  OVERVIEW OF MEN’S CLOTHES IN THE 20TH CENTURY

Style Clues for the Fashion Detective 

289

STYLE CLUES DECADE BY DECADE 1900–1960s Illustrations and Descriptive Text 290 Men’s Clothes Zippers and the Prince of Wales  292 294 The “New Look” for Men—Early 1950s 1900–1910298 1910–1920s299 1920–1930s300 1930–1940s301 1940–1950s302 1950–1960s303 CHAPTER 21  OVERVIEW OF CHILDREN’S CLOTHES IN THE 20TH CENTURY Typical Examples of What Children Wore 1900–1960s Long Denims and Short Shorts 1950–1960s Illustrations and Descriptive Text Boys’ Clothes 1900–1910 Girls’ Clothes 1900–1910 Boys’ Clothes 1910–1920 Girls’ Clothes 1910–1920 Boys’ Clothes 1920–1930 Girls’ Clothes 1920–1930 Boys’ Clothes 1930–1940 Girls’ Clothes 1930–1940 Boys’ Clothes 1940–1950 Girls’ Clothes 1940–1950 Boys’ Clothes 1950–1960 Girls’ Clothes 1950–1960

305 306 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319

About The Author 321 Bibliography329 Index339

Please see Index for a complete list of pages containing the author’s fashion illustrations.

Author’s Note How This Book Was Born

O

ne day I found myself walking to our clubhouse with a woman who was on her way to a genealogy club meeting. She was carrying old family photographs that she could not date.

“Show them to me,” I said. “I can tell by the clothes about when the pictures were taken.” This simple statement brought an invitation for me to be guest speaker at the next genealogy club meeting and changed my career focus from Costume Designer to Fashion Historian, Author-Illustrator and Columnist for Ancestry Magazine. I arrived at the genealogy club meeting armed with sketches especially created to illustrate my talking points. There was so much interest in my subject that, for months afterward, people came to me to decipher their treasured, vintage photographs. Always interested in writing, I decided to write a much-needed book, especially for genealogists. . . . But, a funny thing happened as I developed the proposed book: It became apparent that, in addition to genealogists, I would be writing a new kind of history of costume book, of value also to schools, libraries, theater companies and anyone interested in fashion. I realized that my knowledge of clothing construction and ability to articulate and illustrate changes in fashion would help make other history of costume books, already in libraries, more easily understood. However, after I finished writing Part One, the 19th Century, and began writing of the 20th century, an interesting expansion of purpose occurred: Having xv

Author’s Note begun my long career when I sold my first design to a manufacturer in 1938 at age thirteen, I have been an active observer and working professional for several decades from the 20th century to the 21st century. When I began writing of the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s, memories, personal experiences and educated observations began to find themselves on these pages. All by itself, my book evolved into a Personal Journal, documenting the evolution of fashion as I witnessed it and the social history that influenced fashion changes in those long-gone years. It was then that I realized that since we are now well into the 21st century, my information as a contemporary observer is of particular value to people for whom the 20th century is as vague and distant as the 19th century had always been to me. I hope to close that gap for posterity.

xvi

Out-of-Style

Introduction

M

y goal in writing this book is to simplify and modernize the complex but fascinating subject of evolving fashion and to put the information in logical perspective for genealogists, schools, libraries, theatre companies, costume design students and anyone interested in fashion. Unless one is going to design the costumes for a period film or needs to pass a college exam on the subject, most people do not need to know “everything” written in sometimes verbose history of costume books. Therefore, since “a picture is worth a thousand words,” I have tried to make each decade easily identifiable by illustrating and articulating the definitive differences in styles worn by men, women, and children in the 19th and 20th centuries. These illustrations are shown alongside simplified descriptive text that points out distinguishing Style Clues for the Fashion Detective. In addition, because not everyone wore identical clothes, I have included the variations of styles that were worn simultaneously in each decade. These show the reader how to recognize telltale style clues that time-date an era. Through the years I have observed, and confirmed through research for this book, that there are often contradictions between various history of costume books for time-dating clothes. This is probably because they are reviewing different museum collections in different parts of the world or studying differing authors. Sometimes there is a picture of a garment with the obvious style details of a particular time, to which the author has curiously assigned a questionable date. Because different books show different categories of clothes, readers are sometimes left to compare apples to oranges. In view of all this, I, therefore, felt validated in my assessment of the problem when I read that Ernestine Carter, the venerable former Fashion Editor of British 1

Introduction Harper’s Bazaar, museum authority and author of The Changing World of Fashion, also encountered the same lack of agreement between historians when she researched for her book . . . finally accepting a consensus of dates . . . as I have. While researching for my book, I have had as many as eighteen reference books on my worktable open at the same time, to the same decade. As I referred to them, one by one, I felt like a wine connoisseur tasting from each glass as I tried to distill the composite essence that produces the distinguishing look of an era. Often garments will be described in words only, with no accompanying pictures. The reader is left to “imagine” the clothes as described. The authors often use archaic or technical names for articles of clothing, names that are foreign to the average person or they do not use modern dressmaking terms. As an experienced costume designer, uniquely able to “see” yet unborn garments “in my head,” I can only conclude that if “I” cannot fully imagine the verbally described clothes, how can the average reader or student of fashion know what the author is talking about? Then, there are the books that describe garments that are several pages fore or aft . . . requiring the reader to flip back and forth, trying to match the information to the proper picture. That is why I always puts descriptive text adjacent to its relevant illustration. In addition, some 20th century periodicals have chosen to showcase clothes that I know were never generally worn. For example, zoot suits of the 1940s were only worn by a small group of Latinos in the barrios of East Los Angeles, or by a few jazz musicians who wanted to be “different.” If one did not know better, after seeing their inclusion in retrospectives, one would believe that this localized style was a popular fashion of the 1940s. Another example: Although Rudi Gernreich’s topless swimsuit of the 1960s was highly publicized, it was never actually worn. Yet, it always appears in retrospectives of swimsuit styles. Its only value to the history of fashion is that it reflected the immodesty and sexual freedom of the pervasive “Hippie Culture” of the 1960s. Thus, it was an example of contemporary mores, not an example of what was actually worn. If you will excuse the expression . . . the topless swimsuit was . . . a “bust.” I have often been dismayed to find runway aberrations shown side by side with authentic examples of 20th century fashion. It seems dishonest on the part of fashion editors to present these “oddities” to trusting posterity as the 2

Out-of-Style prevailing taste of an era, when they were only worn by a few exhibitionists or paid models. When I see inaccurately presented examples of clothes from my own lifetime (which future generations of students will trust to be authentic), it makes me wonder about some of the clothes, not of my time, that are shown in history of fashion books. Maybe, I wonder, “Have they included some ‘oddities’ that were not genuine examples of their era?” Here is more to wonder about: Artists’ renditions of clothes and proportions in fashion plates and periodicals are, by nature, “fanciful,” taking artistic license to exaggerate. They often show dresses that were for balls and special occasions, not clothes that actually functioned in people’s lives. In addition, portrait painters chose clothes that were flattering or romantic, not necessarily choosing the latest contemporary styles. Often, they painted people to show them more important, wealthy, or powerful than they actually were. Therefore, because of all the above vagaries, in addition to studying history of costume books, I have chosen to concentrate on the study of authentically self-dated photographs of real people wearing real clothes in their own element and time frame. The results are not “designs”; they are the “composite look” of each era. To best show the numerous variations of women’s clothes of the 19th century required four pages of illustrations for each decade, plus descriptive text. Men’s and children’s clothes had fewer variations thereby requiring only one page of drawings plus text for each decade. Dedicated readers may notice that in several places in this book, the same information is repeated. This is deliberate because I believe some people will use this as a reference book for specific areas of research. I have, therefore, repeated important points where they are relevant or need restatement. I hereby offer you, my readers, all that I have learned and observed . . . and absorbed by osmosis . . . during a long and varied career in costume design. I hope you find my unique perspective illuminating, entertaining and of value to your individual pursuit of knowledge.

3

Part One

The 19th Century 1830-1900

Chapter

1

Evolution in a Thimble

Overview of the Primary Silhouettes

1830 NOTE: See Chapter 10 for style variations worn simultaneously in each decade. Hairstyles, hats and Style Clues for the Fashion Detective are included there. NOTE: Overlapping time spans indicate new styles were born while older styles were still in fashion.

1840 1869 to 1875

1850 1860

6

Out-of-Style

of Each Decade from 1830 to 1900s

1884 to 1889

1890 to 1898

1883 to 1886

1874 to 1882

1895–1903

Goodbye, Victorian Lady . . . Hello, Gibson Girl! 7

Out-of-Style

Chapter

1

Evolution in a Thimble How Fashions Go Forward and Sometimes Back Again

W

hat if you were still wearing the same clothes you were wearing twenty-five years ago (assuming you have not changed sizes and are not counting your beloved old, but threadbare, “at ease” clothes)? That would reveal either you were Out-of-Style, or the world around you had stopped: exemplified by contemporary people who are still wearing the clothes of biblical times. In order to appreciate how, why and especially when clothes changed in the distant past of our ancestors, one needs to realize how one’s own wardrobe has evolved almost imperceptibly over the years. One needs to understand modern evolution and the psychology of clothes in order to relate to the past. This first chapter is a selective overview of how some fashions evolved from the 19th century into the present. You will then appreciate that Hoop Skirts did not suddenly “APPEAR”. . . they EVOLVED. In fact, they evolved with complete “logic” as the slightly full skirt of the 1830s begat the Birdcage Hoop Skirt, which begat the Triangular Hoop Skirt, which begat the Bustle, which begat the Gibson Girl . . . and so on. You will then realize the short-skirted, flat-chested “Boyish Look” of the 1920s was not born overnight, as was “The New Look of 1947,” which, by contrast, exploded full blown on the International Scene. Certain decades in the 20th century produced more dramatic changes than others due to social upheavals—as in the 1960s and 1970s—which simultaneously spawned widely different fashion sensibilities. It used to be said that 9

Chapter

1

Evolution in a Thimble it took several years for a new fashion to trickle down from the top of the Social Ladder to become available and worn by the masses. Because of the now instantaneous, electronic transmission of ideas this is no longer true. Whether slowly, as in the past, or rapidly, as in the present, fashions evolved inexorably forward (sometimes backward), influenced by function, mores, politics, wars, films, economics, climate, locale, celebrities, women’s evolvement, the whim of fashion designers and the contagion of new ideas. Because, in the modern world, the same influences are “in the air” and being felt simultaneously around the globe, fashion show runways often show remarkably similar clothes. This happens when an inspiring new idea is introduced: Each auditing designer becomes a runner in a creative relay race, grabbing onto the newest trend and running with it until other designers take it all the way to the finish line. Having exhausted all possible variations, the now over-exposed fashion is declared “DEAD.” I once had a discussion with someone who claimed that designers deliberately make entire wardrobes immediately obsolete in order to stimulate sales. I disagreed. That is not how serious creative designers think: What happens instead is that for some time they have been eking out every variation and nuance of a particular proportion and silhouette. Suddenly BORED, they experiment with the exact opposite of what has been done before or they have an irresistible “idea” they feel compelled to develop. If others like the look and want to emulate it, that look is IN and everything else is OUT. The exception is the occasional quirky designer who, wanting publicity and ATTENTION, sends deliberately outrageous unwearable clothes down a fashion show runway. They are photographed by the gullible Fashion Press, validated by jaded Fashion Editors who do not “EDIT,” and purchased by pathetic Fashion Victims. The clothes then die a quick death to be resuscitated only for Halloween parties. The best example of a sudden and dramatic style change (that occurred for logical reasons) was the revolutionary “New Look of 1947” by French designer Christian Dior. It sent shock waves around the world and made entire wardrobes of the early-to-mid-1940s immediately obsolete. World War II was over and suddenly the knee-length, broad-shouldered, narrow silhouette (mandated to conserve fabrics during the war) became full-skirted as the length dropped dramatically to below mid-calf. The previously comfortable natural waist became tight and cinched. The broad shoulders narrowed

10

Out-of-Style as shoulder pads were discarded. To achieve this new silhouette, dressmaking techniques reverted to the firm, inner construction of bygone eras to recreate the new (again) hourglass figure. The tight fit of the New Look was achieved with bust and waist darts which accentuated curves (that is why women loved it). American women quickly accepted this new silhouette when they saw how full skirts emphasized their cinched (and newly discovered) small waists. Because the peacetime world was also ready for a change, everyone was soon happily wearing “The New Look” . . . which lasted until the 1960s. Several short-lived variations of the 1950s were the “Trapeze,” the “Bubble,” and the “Sack.” The Sack was a throwback to the loose-fitting Chemise of the 1920s. Because these styles were not universally flattering, they were short-lived. However, the boxy chemise, with some refinements, evolved into the popular “Jackie Kennedy Look” of the early 1960s. Jackie’s slim boyish figure looked best in gently-fitted, leggy sheaths and gowns; that influenced yet another dramatic change in silhouette and new (again) short skirt length. The “Jackie Look” of the 1960s was one of grace, polish, sophistication and civilized decorum. But another social influence was simultaneously emerging: Hippies and Flower Children, who were languishing on the streets and protesting on university campuses. They brought a counterculture of uncut (even unwashed) hair, deliberately sloppy, mismatched clothes and the adoration of all things poor, ethnic, drugged and antiestablishment. This spawned the popularity of ethnicinspired clothes from Third World countries. There was, however, a difference: The Hippies on the streets emulated poor peasants. But, by the 1970s adoration of the dominant youth-culture caused the Beautiful People at the top to also want to look “young and with it.” So, they adopted their own ethnic versions: They dressed like Russian Cossacks, European Festival Dancers, and Arabian Harem Girls in rich fabrics with lavish braid and trims. They were the “Rich Hippies.” This was the first time that top American and European fashion leaders had been influenced by people at the bottom of the social ladder. In fact, for the first time since the French Revolution (when it was fatal to look rich) fashion arose from the street to influence the Beautiful People at the top. Several other looks evolved in the tumultuous, but colorful times of the 1960s and 1970s—each look inspired by what was going on in the world. The adoration of The Youth Cult produced the “Baby Doll.” Exploration in outer space 11

Chapter

1

Evolution in a Thimble produced “The Moon Maiden.” The Beatles, in their narrow little-boy suits and sheepdog haircuts, paved the way for their female English counterparts, the Mods (Moderns), whose very short “Mini” skirts and youthful styles soon forced mature women to choose to wear pants rather than mini skirts. (That is, unless they had great legs.) Other eras did not spawn so many diverse influences that simultaneously produced such varied looks. Because Period clothes required complicated construction and sewing techniques, they took a long time to make, at first by hand, or later, on hand-cranked or treadle-pedaled sewing machines with all finishing done by hand. Since trendy styles don’t last long and are poor wardrobe investments, not many “novelty” clothes were accepted into the mainstream of fashion in the old days. Then, as in the present, most people owned clothes for different purposes, but their wardrobes were more limited in quantity. For example, they needed work clothes, aprons, housedresses (a category that no longer exists because modern women wear sportswear and jeans at home and have automatic washer-dryers), nice clothes to wear while visiting and shopping, sturdy travel clothes because traveling was rugged and, of course, special occasion or Sunday clothes. When you look at old family pictures, if it is a formal portrait, they are probably wearing their “Sunday Best,” with props probably provided by the photographers. If the picture was taken during some activity, such as a picnic, in front of a business establishment, or a souvenir picture on a trip, they are probably wearing garments suitable to the occasion as we do now. Because everyday clothes were worn until they were worn out (or obviously out of style), any reusable fabric was cut down for children’s clothes and aprons. Only “Special” clothes were preserved for posterity and museums. Hence, “self-dated,” contemporary photographs of “real people” and their clothes are the most accurate examples of an era. That is why, in addition to researching numerous history of costume books and periodicals, I have studied hundreds of authentically dated vintage photographs of real people. The purpose of this book is not to show specific “designs,” but to distill and to document the easily recognizable style details common to each decade. When you see Styles Clues for the Fashion Detective (Chapter 10), you will note some overlapping of style details as decades begin and end. You will see that

12

Out-of-Style some carryovers from a previous decade are still worn at the beginning of an era, and new trends begin their early evolution at the end of a decade only to expand in influence and exaggeration later. In the distant past, it took a long time for new clothing styles to cross oceans and prairies. The most influential method for transmitting the latest style was to copy the hand-colored fashion plates in Godey’s Lady’s Book and other periodicals, which was probably the origin of the compliment, “You look like a Fashion Plate!” Or, they copied miniature Fashion Dolls, dressed in the latest designs, which had been reproduced in actual fabrics, and shipped by boat to America from Paris (a ten-day trip). (Fashion Dolls were utilized again after the end of World War II when the French Fashion Industry needed to refocus attention on Paris as The Fashion Capital of the World.) By the late 1860s, wealthy Americans visiting Paris brought back trunks full of gowns. Expensive designer originals were sometimes purchased directly by manufacturers and retail stores. Some stores sold the originals to their customers or had their own workrooms copy the sample clothes stitch by stitch. Paper patterns became more available after 1859—as did sewing machines. This made it possible to duplicate complicated construction and sewing techniques. In the 1930s, a faster method of transmitting style ideas was utilized by American dress manufacturers: They subscribed to a monthly service which provided mimeographed sketches of fashions just shown on the runways of Paris and New York. The designs were then quickly copied, produced and shipped for sale to retail stores—almost before the expensive, custom-made originals had been sewn and delivered to Couture customers. Here is how multiple copies were made on mimeograph machines before fax and copy machines existed: A semitransparent film was laid over a sketch of a design to be copied. With a sharp tool, the drawing was traced by hand to cut a stencil. The stencil was then inked and rolled on a mimeograph machine, producing one copy each time it was inked and rolled. Copied designs were (and still are) known as “Knock-offs”—not so good for Creators—but they helped build the American Ready-to-Wear and Fashion Shoe Industries. The ability to quickly adapt fashions from Paris, New York and subsequently Hollywood, made it possible for all classes of the general public to be well-dressed. However, by the early 21st century these major American manufacturing industries have been decimated by outsourcing to third world countries. 13

Chapter

1

Evolution in a Thimble By looking back over your own lifetime at your own photo albums and family videos, you can see how greatly your appearance and that of your family and friends has changed over the years. You probably even laugh at the outfits and hairstyles that previous style sensibilities dictated. Often, fashions repeat with some variations or modifications: The reruns are identifiable from their predecessors usually by the changed hairstyles of a particular era. For instance, in the late 1930s and early 1940s, film star, Joan Crawford, and American designer, Adrian, popularized the broad-shouldered look, achieved with Adrian Shoulder Pads. These were saddle-shaped (thick at the shoulder and thin near the neck). Shoulder pads became obsolete in 1947 but returned in the 1980s when actress Joan Collins and designer Nolan Miller brought them back in the TV series Dynasty. Soon everyone was inserting shoulder pads into every garment they owned, even sweatshirts and tees. (The 1980s shoulder pads were fatter, wider, and rounder than the 1940s pad, extending well into the sleeve itself.) This lasted until the late 1980s and early 1990s when, in an effort to update our clothes, we removed the pads, resulting in sagging shoulders and sleeves that were too wide and too deep, forcing us to finally abandon the clothes we had so frugally tried to salvage. Also, back for reruns were the Capri pants of the 1950s and the flareleg pants of the 1960s and 70s, which returned to fashion again in the new 21st century. Since the fashion pendulum swings back and forth, temporarily borrowing ideas from the past, then again rejecting them, the clothes that used to look “Snappy”. . .“Swell”. . .“Hip”. . .“Outta Sight”. . . “Groovy”. . .“Awesome” “Cool”. . .“Hot”. . . soon become démodé. See! Even words become DATED. It used to be said that a silhouette or “look” lasts about ten years after its general acceptance by the masses. Therefore, realize that people in your vintage photographs may have been simple folks not fashion leaders. They may be wearing clothes they have owned for several years. Since fashion periodicals or magazines always show advanced designs (and it takes them months to prepare to publish), comparing those featured styles to photographs you are trying to time-date may not result in accuracy. Be aware that the people in your photographs may have adopted those styles later than the printed date on the cover of the periodical that you may be using for reference. So add one to perhaps three years to the date printed on the referenced periodical.

14

Out-of-Style Because changes in fashion develop as part of a logical, sequential process, one can only tell the difference between two changing “looks” after they have fully evolved. The progressive steps that took the style from THERE to HERE may have taken a full decade. Often, distinguished books on the history of fashion differ in the dates given for certain silhouettes. This is probably because they are studying sample garments from different museum collections around the world or from periodicals of differing origin. For these reasons, and because it is not really possible to know the exact moment in time that a change of fashion took place—except for the extraordinary, sudden emergence of “The New Look” for women in 1947 and the sudden change in men’s clothes in the early 1950s—a certain margin of error must be expected in estimating the exact date of the photographs you are trying to time-date. This is especially true of clothes of the 19th century. But do not despair . . . in Chapter 9, I will show you How to Trace Your Ancestors . . . Literally!, enabling you to sleuth out the nuances of cut, fit, style and proportion that place clothes and, therefore, people within the correct decade of their time in history.

15

Chapter

2

Why Hoop Skirts Were Born

The Shapes of Hoop Skirts NOTE: Combination dates indicate the time span that styles were worn. Overlapping time spans indicate new styles appeared while older styles were still being worn.

The Cone-Shaped Hoop changed the silhouette to Triangular 1866–1873

The cage-crinoline born 1853—died 1866

In 1853, steel-wire hoops were introduced to replace multiple muslin petticoats and uncomfortable horsehair petticoats: The French name for these was “Crinoline.” Even after scratchy horsehair was discontinued, the name “Crinoline” lived on to describe voluminous hooped skirts. By 1856, hoops were in general use except for chores or everyday wear, (and certainly not on the prairies). However, plain everyday dresses were temporarily upgraded to “Best” by adding a hoop as occasion demanded. 16

Out-of-Style

Chapter

2

Why Hoop Skirts Were Born How They Grew and Why They Died

I

n the 1820s and 1830s, skirts were slightly belled out from the body. By the 1840s, skirts had grown wider and W-I-D-E-R until they were held out by a total of five or six cumbersome, horsehair-stiffened petticoats. These were called crinolines, from the French word for horsehair. Horsehair was a stiff, wiry, and very scratchy material. The top two petticoats were padded, ruffled and pretty. For clarity, in this book I will call crinolines “Hoop Skirts” because this more accurately describes the silhouette. By the late 1840s, some skirts measured four yards in circumference. Because crinolines were uncomfortable and limited the wearer’s movement, by 1853, some women had gratefully adopted the newly introduced spring-steel hoops, which were suspended from tapes at the waist and/or encased into fabric petticoats. It took until 1856 for hoops to be generally accepted. The hoops held the top skirt of the gown away from the body and freed the legs of the wearer, thereby increasing air circulation (and saving a lot of laundry). Only one or two beautiful muslin petticoats were now necessary to cover the hoop. These made a lovely, lacey froth when women walked. Pantaloons were worn for modesty (in case the skirt flipped up). Because skirts were so labor intensive, requiring yards and yards of fabric, two bodices were often made for each skirt—one for day, one for evening. The really exaggerated skirts that are shown in fashion plates were for balls and special occasions. The ultimate in stylishness was to have a crinoline that 17

Chapter

2

Why Hoop Skirts Were Born was so wide one could hardly pass through the door; however, the skirts worn by average women were more conservative, though still quite wide. There were, however, exceptions: Working women seemed to have found a functional, no-nonsense uniformity of clothing. Vintage photographs of plainswomen and pioneers, traveling by covered wagon in the 1850s and on, show a minimum of petticoats, narrow sleeves, no trimming and with (understandably) carelessly styled hair. A photograph of laundresses in 1865 shows no hoops, long full skirts, shirtwaist blouses, sleeves rolled up and hair center-parted, covering the ears. Vintage fashion plates show skirts at floor length; however, in reality, some skirts were two inches off the floor. Because of the wide circumference of the skirts, the illusion was that they were floor length. Cage Crinolines were worn until 1866 when skirts reached their maximum width. They were superseded by the Cone-Hoop which changed the silhouette to triangular. Only two steel hoops were now needed to hold skirts out at the bottom—one below the knees, one at low calf. Vintage pictures often reveal a ridge from hoops poking through the top skirt. The cone-hoop allowed the creation of the gored skirt (pie-shaped pieces) and the Princess line dress which reduced excess gathers across the stomach: This produced a flat-front dress, which was typical of 1860s dresses. Here is an amusing anecdote that took place in 1863, before the birdcage-shaped hoop became passé: As a congratulatory gift to the newly proclaimed Queen of Madagascar, Empress Eugenie of France sent the Queen a gift of two fashionable Parisian dresses, complete with cashmere-covered birdcage hoops. When the French Ambassador paid a formal call upon the new Queen, he was astonished to see her wearing one of the dresses without a hoop to support the voluminous yardage of the skirt, which dragged on the floor all around her. With great difficulty, the Ambassador restrained himself from explosive laughter when he saw the missing hoop had been installed as a proud “Canopy of State” over the Queen’s throne. (Apparently, the cross-pollination of fashion information had not yet reached Madagascar.) About 1867, skirts couldn’t get any wider, so the fullness began to be drawn to the back, where the skirt was longer. This evolved into skirts with trains.

18

Out-of-Style When this extra fullness in back was pulled up, it became the poufy bustle that caused the demise of the hoop, which was then replaced by the crinolette, a combination stiffened petticoat with a built-in WIRE bustle support. Hoops continued to be worn by some fashion diehards until 1873–1874, when Paris declared hoop skirts officially “DEAD.” An important style clue that differentiates the bustles of the 1870s from the bustles of the 1880s is that 1870s underskirts (with or without hoops) were full, while the underskirts of the 1880s were narrower. (See next chapter, The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle.)

19

Chapter

3

The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle

What Was Hiding Under Her Bustle? The crinolette: a combination stiffened petticoat with built-in wire bustle support 1869–1875

Wire supports that provided the “hump” to the rump-hump-bump silhouette 1884–1889

20

Out-of-Style

Chapter

3

The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle (Followed by Its Final Demise) Style Clues of the Nine Phases from 1860 to 1892

I

t is important to understand that bustles did not suddenly appear. They evolved with complete logic and then disappeared for another decade.

In order to differentiate between the two separate eras of bustles, one must recognize the mutations along the way. These reveal the confusingly similar yet DIS-similar looks of those years. The sequential illustrations on pages 22–23 are the result of months of intense study that finally produced the “AHA! Moment” that revealed how to tell this story in a simplified manner. The pages of text following the illustrated chart point out the style clues that date each of the Nine Phases. 21

Chapter

3

The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle

The Nine Phases of the Bustle PHASE #1 1860–1867 Transition Styles: “Elevator” and “Looped” Dresses

PHASE #2 1863–1872 The Classic, Triangular 1860s Dress

PHASE #4 1869–1875 The Poufy Bustle Over a Wide Skirt

PHASE #3 1866–1872 Transition Style: The Tiered Apron Overskirt; Not Yet Draped Up to a Bustle

22

PHASE #5 1874–1882 Bustle Gone; Fancy Narrow Skirt; Focus at Back of Knees

Out-of-Style

(Followed by Its Final Demise)

PHASE #6 1878–1883 The Narrow, Tied-Back Skirt with Fan-Tailed Train

PHASE #7 1883–1886 Return of the Bustle! This Time, Over a Narrow, A-line Skirt

PHASE #8 1885–1889 The Rump-Hump-Bump and the Waterfall Bustle

PHASE #9 1887–1892 No More Bustle! The Long, Plain Asymmetrically Draped Skirt

23

Chapter

3

The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle

Phase One 1860-1867 TRANSITION STYLES—“ELEVATOR” AND “LOOPED” DRESSES NOTE: These were Transition Styles, first created to temporarily raise skirts off the streets or to engage in active sports like croquet or lawn tennis. These were the world’s first, functional sportswear for women. SILHOUETTE: Triangular, worn over the cone-shape hoop of the 1860s. Skirt lengths were somewhat off the floor. SKIRT DETAILS: The Top Skirt was lifted to mid-calf level by a cord, (like a Venetian blind). . . . This was the Elevator Skirt. The Looped Skirt was raised temporarily by hooks and eyes or buttons and loops. These resulting drapedup festoons were later raised to thigh-high level and became the forerunner of the draped-up, poufy, back-bustle of the early 1870s. Newly exposed underskirts were then made in the primary dress fabric, thus becoming an integral component of the complete garment. (In fact, underskirts became the highly decorated main focus of interest in all dresses of the 1870s and 1880s.) BODICE: Styled and fitted in the accepted variations of the 1860s dresses: natural waist, darts, princess seams, or gathered into a waistband. SLEEVES: Still, a slightly dropped shoulder line. Bishop Sleeves (full and gathered into top sleeve and wrist band), or the Banana Sleeves (narrow at top and wrist, fuller at elbow), or Coat Sleeves (shaped to follow the curve of the relaxed arm). Sleeves were wider for summer dresses, narrower for winter. HAIR: Large braids or buns often contained in snoods which were worn from top of crown to nape of neck. (Think Scarlett O’Hara.) HATS: Early 1860s, bonnets which tied under the chin were popular. The spoonshaped bonnet was not worn after 1864 when hats became the norm. These were small and tilted over the forehead on top of hair pulled and piled to the back.

24

Out-of-Style

Phase Two 1863-1872 THE CLASSIC TRIANGULAR 1860s DRESS NOTE: This basic dress style in calico, cotton or wool survived as a work dress in cities and prairies for many years . . . first with, then without, a hoop. In silk, it was a basic “Best” dress. SILHOUETTE: Triangular, worn over the cone-shape hoop and the small, back waist pad (the Dress Improver). Two petticoats were worn over the hoop to keep it from showing through the top skirt. The back waist pad held the gathered fabric up and out for more graceful walking. This evolved into various wire contraptions. (See Illustration on page 20, What Was Hiding Under Her Bustle?) 1867: By 1867, skirts couldn’t grow any wider, so they began to be drawn into the back in a new kind of bustle, showing the shoe in front, slightly longer in back. A STYLE CLUE OF THE 1860s: Skirts were gored, smooth and flat over the stomach. The center gore was cut “A” line, with box pleats on each side leading to gathered widths in back. The skirt was not yet pulled up into a poufy bustle. BODICE: Shoulders slightly dropped. Natural waist placement without front points. Back bodice cut in three pieces, without a center seam. Stretchy, biascut side pieces were shaped to within two inches of the center back, resulting in a glove-like fit over the corset. FRONT BODICE VARIATIONS: Included princess seams, bust darts or fullness gathered into the waistband; Yoke treatments sometimes seen. Front buttoning with large buttons became popular in this decade, while white collars became smaller.

25

Chapter

3

The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle

Phase Three 1866-1872 THE TIERED, FLARED, KNEE-LENGTH “APRON” OVERSKIRT—LATE 1860s NOTE: This was a Transition Style between the Classic 1860s Dress and The Birth of the Bustle. In the mid-to-late 1860s, the silhouette was Triangular, skirts were worn over a cone-shaped hoop (See Chart: Chapter 2, The Shapes of Hoop Skirts). In the late 1860s the hoop was replaced by the Crinolette, a combination stiffened petticoat with built-in wire bustle support. (See Chart: Chapter 3, What Was Hiding Under Her Bustle?) The skirt was still full, flat across the stomach, and longer in back than front (the beginning of the trained skirt). STYLE CLUE: In this phase, there were all kinds of variations of the tiered apron overskirt ranging from one to three tiers, short in front to long in back; long in front to shorter in back; round edges, square edges, ruffled or plain edges. But . . . they were not YET. . . pulled UP into a bustle! SKIRT DETAILS: By the early 1870s this style added sashes and bows in back to cascade down, thus creating its own kind of modest bustle which lasted until 1873. By this time, exuberant, poufy bustles dominated fashion. (They reached their maximum size in 1875.) BODICE: Neatly fitted over tight, curvy corsets similar to the ones worn in the early 1860s which emphasized the bosom. Shoulders still slightly dropped. Natural waist placement. Necklines high or “V” shaped, edged in white; or a neat white collar set high on a neck band. SLEEVES: The Banana Sleeve (narrow at top and wrist, wider at elbow) or the narrower Coat Sleeve (shaped to the curve of the relaxed arm). Cuffs neatly trimmed. Some modestly open, belled sleeves.

26

Out-of-Style

Phase Four 1869-1875 THE BUSTLE AND THE POUFY SKIRT SILHOUETTE: Triangular. Although considered unfashionable by 1871, the triangular, cone-shape hoop was worn by some diehards until 1873. With or without the hoop, underskirts were full. From then on, all focus was on the skirt and the bustle, which varied yearly in size and shape. SKIRT SHAPE: Narrow from front view only; wide as seen sideways from front to back; this was because when the apron/overskirt was drawn against the body it flattened the front, revealing the shocking suggestion of the female form which had been hidden by the wide skirts of previous decades. There was no polite acknowledgment that women had “legs.” (In fact, the word “leg” was taboo; the word “limb” was instead acceptable.) Early 1870s bustles started out modest in size, emanating from side seam to side seam covering the entire back side, reaching their most extreme size in 1875. Even though hoops had been discarded, and replaced by the crinolette, underskirts remained full and flounced at the hem. Specially shaped petticoats tied onto the body from waist to thighs kept skirts close in front and held the exuberant draperies up and out in back. (See Chart: Chapter 3, What Was Hiding Under Her Bustle?) STYLE CLUE: Vintage photos often show women seated. In spite of that, early 1870s dresses can be dated because they had ample skirts which spread widely over knees and laps and exposed full widths of bustles sewn from sideback seam to side-back seam, covering entire backside. Alternately, one can time-date mid-to-late-1870s dresses in women who are sitting down, because their narrower skirts wrap closely about the wearers’ knees showing little or no bustle.

27

Chapter

3

The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle

Phase Five 1874-1882 BUSTLE GONE; FANCY NARROW SKIRT FOCUS ON BACK OF KNEES SILHOUETTE: Narrow from top to bottom. The high back bustle has deflated (for awhile!) Focus has dropped down to low back-hip and back of knees. SKIRT DETAILS: The fashionable straight-line sheath skirt was sometimes modified into an A-line. Often skirts had pleated flounces at the hem. Infinite variations of trim and draperies circled the narrow skirt, around and around, ending in modest details at the low back. (This was the beginning of the slinky, fan-tailed train which was to follow in the next phase, Phase Six.) By the end of the 1870s, all skirts were tied back by inside ties that pulled the skirt close to the body in front, yet allowed the backs to flow out gracefully. Detachable trains were long, short or not used at all. BODICES: From mid-1870s to early 1880s, long tailored jackets. This was called the cuirasse because it fit like the protective body armor of medieval times. This long bodice line was enhanced by newly lengthened, less curvaceous corsets. (See illustrated chart on corsets: Chapter 6, p. 50.) This was the beginning of the two-piece suit that dominated fashion for the next four decades. SLEEVES: Higher armholes, tighter, three-quarter or full-length sleeves with interesting creative cuffs: pleats, straps, bands, buttons, etc. HAIR: Hairpieces popular; buns worn high; curled bangs a clue to the 1870s, after a Frenchman named “Marcel” patented the heated Marcel Waving Iron in 1872.

28

Out-of-Style

Phase Six 1878-1883 THE NARROW TIED-BACK SKIRT WITH THE FAN-TAILED MERMAID TRAIN SILHOUETTE: Narrow-hipped, flat-front sheath skirts had triangular panels that flared out from the back seams into a low fan-tailed train. SKIRT DETAILS: All interest was on the skirt: Front overskirt was draped and trimmed. The elaborate fan-tailed train was long or short. A replaceable dust ruffle was sewn all along the hem which helped to spread it out and which also absorbed floor dust. (Replacement dust ruffles were cheap and sold readymade, by the yard.) All skirts of this era were tied back to keep the fronts close to the body, allowing the backs to flare out. BODICES: Long jackets, still fitted. Softer details at necks and wrists. SLEEVES: High armholes (armscyes) created a long-waisted look (with the help of a long-waisted corset). Interesting new cuff treatments: pleats, straps, buttons, etc. HAIR: Hair pieces dressed high; sausage curls hung low. Frizzed bangs and contrived disarray of hair softened the look. HATS: Taller crowns, larger brims, turned up all around and fancifully trimmed; called round hats. Bonnets reappeared. FABRICS: Fabrics and trims were crisp, trims were sharp, knife pleats instead of soft ruffles. Skirts had crisp pleated flounces at hems.

29

Chapter

3

The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle

Phase Seven 1883-1886 THE RETURN OF THE BUSTLE! THIS TIME, OVER AN A-LINE SKIRT EARLY 1880s: The back waist bustle was BACK! . . . This time, over an A-line skirt. The apron overskirt was draped into the center back and placed lower down from the waist than the bustles of the 1870s (which by contrast covered almost the entire back side of the wearer). NOTE: This is a Transition Style between the narrow, tied-back skirts of Phases Five and Six and the Rump-Hump-Bump soon to appear in Phase Eight. Meanwhile, contemporary fashion writers were afraid to bring back the now unpopular word “bustle,” so they deceptively called it a tournure and the Projecting Back . . . (but everyone knew it was still a BUSTLE!) NOTE: The difference between the 1870s bustle and the 1880s bustle: Bustles were more simplified in the 1880s than they had been in the 1870s; not as exuberant as before. Waterfall draperies cascaded down without as many complicated poufs. SILHOUETTE: Similar to the look of the 1870s, except the new 1880s skirt was narrower and the jacket/bodice longer than before, and the bustle itself was simplified—no more extravagant poufs. SKIRTS: Skirts were getting wider than in the previous phase of “narrow, no bustle, low-back-interest skirts” (Phases Five and Six). Soon, plain skirts developed pleats all around (Phase Eight) and apron overskirts were deeply draped. BODICE/JACKETS: Jackets were long-waisted, buttoned to a high neck with many small buttons. SLEEVES: High armholes (armscyes), narrow sleeves with softening details at neck and cuffs. Elbow-length sleeves with ruffles were popular. 30

Out-of-Style

Phase Eight 1885-1889 THE RUMP-HUMP-BUMP AND THE WATERFALL BUSTLE SILHOUETTE: Contemporary writers variously described women as looking like the Centaurs of Greek Mythology, or like sitting hens. It was said that a tea tray could safely be placed on top of the horizontal bustle. This look was memorialized by the artist Seurat in his famous painting A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte (popularly known as Sunday in the Park with George). Fortunately, most women adopted modified versions of this: The silhouette was achieved by a wire contraption worn underneath, which added the “Hump” to the “Rump.” STYLE CLUE: Whereas before the bustle was a separate, added-on appendage to the skirt, now the skirt itself grew wider to go over the contraption in back. The old A-line skirt of the past was widened by knife pleats or box pleats all around the skirt. These dropped straight down without any flare. SKIRT DETAILS: The apron overskirt became again the main focus when it reappeared in the mid-1880s. It had deeper folds than before, which draped all the way into the center back where it was covered by a simple, waterfall drapery. This differed from the past, because it had no extravagant poufs. The simplified drapery of the 1880s, which spilled down the back, was later incorporated into a one-piece skirt, where it evolved into the Hour Glass Skirt with back fullness of the 1890s. BODICE/JACKETS: Jackets were short again, with small buttons going all the way up to a high neck. All had a tight, tailored, corseted look. SLEEVES: High armholes (armscyes) with narrow sleeves. SKIRT LENGTH: Showed the shoe in front in the sensible length. HATS: High crowns, small brims. Called toques, they looked like inverted flower pots trimmed with feathers or flowers. 31

Chapter

3

The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall and Rise (Again!) of the Bustle

Phase Nine 1887-1892 THE LONG, PLAIN, ASYMMETRICALLY DRAPED SKIRT AND THE FINAL DEMISE OF THE BUSTLE SILHOUETTE: Simplified! The bustle is dead! This is the ninth and last phase in the rise and fall . . . (and final demise) of the bustle. . . . It had taken thirty years to play out all of its many mutations. SKIRT SHAPE: The Rump-Hump-Bump subsided into a small pad at the back. (This is the way it started in the 1860s.) The apron has lost its deep folds. The plain, full-length asymmetrically draped overskirt is tucked only once into various placements of the waistband. This is the beginning of the hour-glass look of the 1890s. BODICE/JACKET: Tailored and boned. Sometimes softened with trim and appliquéd lace. SLEEVES: Late 1880s. It is noteworthy that sleeve caps were now taking focus with bows, trim, or a new vertical puff superimposed on the top of the sleeve. This interest would soon be incorporated into the sleeve cap itself and would become the famous Leg-o’-mutton Sleeve of the 1890s. HAIR: Unique to the 1880s was a fondness for bangs or elaborate spit curls on the forehead. HATS: Small, high-crowned, inverted flower pots, set straight on, or tilted to the back.

32

Out-of-Style

The combination of style details that together makeup a garment . . . is what produces “the look” of an era. Styles that appear late in a decade often continue into the next decade . . . where they evolve and mutate until they die from overexposure and boredom.

33

Chapter

4

The Out-of-Style Fashion Show

Invitation to an Out-of-Style Fashion Show What have you saved That used to beguile . . . But can’t wear anymore ’Cause it’s now “OUT-OF-STYLE.” A wedding gown Yours or your mother’s Would be a delight To share with others. You kept the gown that Used to look great When you were still 40 and wore a size 8! The uptight suit with Shoulders too narrow, The polyester pantsuit that’s now a “Pierce Arrow.” Victims of fashion that used to be hot Show off again (Tho’ you’ve added a pot!) Fit doesn’t count Too big or too tight. Share something meaningful You’ll be dressed right!

34

* Be your own model or we’ll find one for you . . . then tell us the story of WHY you saved the outfit.

Out-of-Style

Chapter

4

The Out-of-Style Fashion Show From Stylish to Obsolete in a Few Short Years

B

ecause a style always evolves to its most extreme before it goes into oblivion, I always tell people to save clothes and shoes that are extreme examples of their time even though they are now unwearable, and . . . Out-of-Style. Whether the clothes are beautiful or now ridiculous, your daughters and granddaughters will treasure them in years to come: The beautiful ones will become heirlooms and the ridiculous ones will go to a lot of costume parties. Just be sure to store them respectfully in archival tissue or 100% cotton coverings—not plastic. I am glad that I was able to salvage, from a damp garage, the moth-eaten, but still beautiful bodice to a dress my grandmother designed and made in 1898. I am able to date it because it has huge Leg-o’-mutton Sleeves which I know reached their maximum fullness in the late 1890s. Featherbone, which produced the corset silhouette, was sewn onto every seam with tiny, perfectly spaced stitches. The beautiful design and workmanship reveals my grandmother’s taste level, her dressmaking skills, and is a significant example of its era. The fit of the bodice reveals for posterity that, even after nine children, she still had a neat waistline. Also saved was my mother’s embroidered lace-on-net, just-above the ankle, wedding gown of 1917. It evokes the World War I era more vividly to me than her actual wedding picture. And . . . I can tell that she was probably a size four. 35

Chapter

4

The Out-of-Style Fashion Show Incidentally, well into the 1950s, a size 12 was still considered “the” model size. Smaller sizes, like size 6, 4, 2, and “zero,” did not yet have these ready-to-wear names: size 12 measurements were 34–24–36. (See photo, Chapter 18, p. 278.) Strangely, pattern companies used measurements not consistent with measurements used for ready-to-wear garments or on dress forms. Paper pattern measurements lagged behind so that it was necessary to buy a pattern one size larger than one needed in a ready-made garment. Later, a complete rethinking of more realistic body-to-garment measurements changed dress sizes and paper pattern sizes to fit modern bodies. Women were becoming thinner and firmer from a new interest in exercise and diet. Old photographs of actresses wearing skimpy costumes or bathing suits, who in their time were considered beauties, reveal fleshy soft bodies with little or no muscle tone. Today’s fashion model is a size 4, 6, or 8; today, a showgirl without good muscle tone to enhance her curves could not get a job. I feel fortunate to have inherited three beautifully beaded flapper dresses of the mid-1920s. Originally there were FOUR dresses, but before I fully appreciated that unique vintage clothes were milestones in fashion history, I cut one down to fit the eleven-year-old body of my daughter for a long-forgotten school theatrical. I have never forgiven myself because I still remember how gorgeous this dress was: Every inch of yellow chiffon was spaced with European crystal rhinestones. The skirt was cut into rhinestoned strips to better undulate to Charleston dance music, and the low waist was sashed in lavender chiffon. How I wish that I still owned it. I tell you this sad story so that you will respect the integrity of any “special” clothes that you might inherit. I time-date these dresses as 1925–1927. In spite of what you may have seen in cartoons and some musical comedies, flapper dresses never got any shorter than just-below-the-knee length. They just SEEMED short because in the early 20s they were still low-calf length (evolving from the cover-your-legs modesty of previous history). Then, in the late 20s skirts dropped again: At that time, “zig-zag” long/short hemlines made the transition to the longer length of the approaching 1930s. There is a family story to these flapper dresses: They were worn by the daughters of my Great Aunt, Ella Farber, who, with her young husband, peddled pots and pans from a pushcart in New York at the turn of the 20th century. From this humble beginning grew the now famous Farberware Company that introduced stainless steel cookware to America. During World War II they

36

Out-of-Style converted their factories to war production, receiving awards of appreciation from President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. What interesting family stories will be brought to life when your favorite gown is unpacked . . . especially if you included WHEN and WHERE you wore it and WHY you treasure it. Because I have always been fascinated by the evolution and psychology of clothes (WHY people wear what they wear), I have been inspired to give hilarious OUT-OF-STYLE parties in my home. These were so much fun, I later produced OUT-OF-STYLE FASHION SHOWS, an oxymoron that always brings a giggle. The table centerpieces were lovely vintage hats on hat stands, and the rules were: “Wear something that you have saved for sentimental or emotional reasons, but you can’t wear anywhere, because it is . . .  OUT-OF-STYLE. Then tell us WHY you can’t part with it.” Prior to the date of my last Out-of-Style Fashion Show, I sent out a request for vintage clothes to be modeled. This elicited a surprising plethora of beloved old furs that could no longer be worn in public. It was now obvious that a wonderful finale for the Out-of-Style Fashion Show should be “The Parade of Obsolete Furs.” And, I realized, yet another milestone in fashion history had passed. It was by now the year 2002. It had already been about ten years since animal activists made it politically incorrect to wear furs. In some cities they actually spray-painted people’s expensive furs—while they were wearing them!­— or they spat upon, insulted or embarrassed the wearers. The pride of wearing a beautiful fur had been extinguished. One of life’s pleasures and rewards had been to own and wear a beautiful expensive fur. There was a saying, “A woman received a gift of a mink coat for being either Very Good or Very Bad.” And, although nothing was as deliciously warm in cold weather as a fur, and nothing looked as glamorous over a cocktail or evening gown as a fur, it was no longer considered socially acceptable. (Enter the Faux Fur Fabric Industries . . . and The Parade of Obsolete Furs.) The audience, delighted to see their furry old friends temporarily released from solitary confinement in mothball prisons, applauded appreciatively as the owners and models paraded a medley of minks: coats, stoles, capes and jackets in every color-mutation of mink. There was a lynx coat, a white fox boa, a silver fox “chubby,” a red fox collar that used to be a coat, a couple of 37

Chapter

4

The Out-of-Style Fashion Show sport furs inset with leather, a beaver fur muff and a grimacing stone-marten shoulder piece (mine!). This brings to mind the “Stone-Marten” episode: In 1947 I eloped to Las Vegas to marry my late, first husband (after knowing him for five weeks). As a wedding present, he offered to buy me a set of stone-martens which he thought were classy. With a shudder, I said, “Aren’t those the things with eyes and ears and tails and toe nails which hang around your neck looking at you . . . ? I don’t want THOSE!” Now, fast forward some twenty years later. . . . My husband, who was an automobile dealer, returned home late from work one night. He had accepted, as a partial down payment on a used car, a set of stone-martens. Playfully he tossed them across the room to me, saying, “Happy Birthday!” As they flew through the air, my brain knew they were harmless, but I screamed in alarm anyway, shouting, “If I didn’t want them in 1947, when they were IN STYLE, why would I want them now, when they are OUT-OF-STYLE!” (I have since used them as a comical accessory in theatricals and parties.) In old movie newsreels and vintage photos, you will see Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, as well as wealthy matrons and movie stars, wearing those wholeanimal fur pieces casually draped over their shoulders. They are now good examples of how taste, mores and fashions change over the years. Here is an amusing update to the Politically Correct Fur Phenomenon. It is the 21st century. My gorgeous $6,500 blonde Revalia mink jacket, made for me by a Beverly Hills furrier, hangs unworn in my closet. (I can’t even sell it.) My wardrobe needed a dressy, warm, “go with everything” wrap, so recently I bought a stylish faux-fur, white mink jacket for $150, but I hesitate to wear it, because now, I’m not sure people will realize that it is FAKE! Other interesting examples of keepsake clothes worn to my parties, and offered to be shown in the OUT-OF-STYLE FASHION SHOWS, were wedding gowns, polyester pants suits (men’s and women’s) and a Hippie outfit, complete with headband, long fur vest, flare-leg pants and love beads. A World War II Women’s Army Corps uniform drew applause, as did a strapless, bouffant Ceil Chapman prom dress of the 1950s. As a teenager, the owner had saved for months to pay for this delightful dream dress, AND she could still get into it with the help of large safety pins and two helpers. . . . It was still beautiful.

38

Out-of-Style A generous fashionista offered to share her beloved Halston Original saved since 1976. It was a long, form-fitting, black satin mermaid gown: black fox fur dramatically bordered, the flared hem —it was still a knockout! Another sentimental “keeper” was a negligee worn on a first wedding night by both a mother and, a generation later, her daughter. This was followed by an acid green Rudi Gernreich, double-knit mini, and a really retro maternity outfit that we used to think was “cute.” The maternity outfit proved to be another significant milestone in changes of morality and fashion: Women used to try to hide the fact that they were pregnant by wearing clothes that were generously full all over (like “Mother Hubbard” dresses and smocks). Today maternity clothes fit normally everywhere except for the obvious “Baby Bulge,” which is acknowledged without apology. Perhaps this reflects the previous “embarrassment” of how women “got” that way, contrasted with the modern attitude of casually accepting the reality of sexuality. However, of all the interesting sentimentally preserved garments modeled, my own personal favorite was one I named “The Barometer Dress.” It was a fitted, 1960s ladylike, sheath dress worn at college sorority events. Every year, the owner tried it on to see if it still fit. . . . If it was tight, she went on a diet!

What is the difference between a dress and a gown? A gown costs over one hundred dollars. (That was before modern inflation.)

39

Chapter

5

When Proportions Change

Proportions Change at Their Most Extreme to a Completely Opposite Look 1985–Late 1990s • Long Skirt Length • Big Shoulders • Big Hair

40

Turn of the 21st Century • “The Shrunken Look” • Short and Uptight

Out-of-Style

Chapter

5

When Proportions Change Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beholder

H

ere is a good example of being on the threshold of changing proportions.

In 1986 I was in Italy with my husband, Lyndon. Knowing that the Italians make beautiful leather garments, we were intent upon buying him a leather jacket. He tried on several styles that looked great on the hanger, but not on him. Disappointed, but determined to buy, we decided to go to lunch and come back later. Upon our return, the salesman brought out the same jacket we had just rejected and asked him to give it another try. Surprisingly, it looked great! What had changed? In the mid-1980s fashionable Europeans were already wearing oversize clothes. American men had not yet become accustomed to this look. The clever salesman had replaced the same jacket, but in a smaller size. It looked so good that we bought it in two colors. Because the jackets had been cut in currently fashionable, generous proportions, the jackets remained in style for years as the oversize look became accepted in America. By the late 1990s, oversize clothes became passé; suddenly they looked too big and too long. Everyone was now into the newest proportion appropriately called the shrunken look. CAVEAT: Do not buy an extreme style late into its reign because its life span will be limited. However, if you are left with an exaggerated garment that is typical of an era, save it for posterity or for costume parties.

41

Chapter

5

When Proportions Change

Ever-Changing Erogenous Zones

The Sexy ’60s

The Belly Dancer

The Cold Shoulder

Hip Hip Hooray!

Red Carpet Overkill

42

Out-of-Style

Ever-Changing Erogenous Zones The Pressure to Conform (Even If It Kills You!) Legendary motion picture costume designer Edith Head, winner of eight Academy Awards, said, “If it isn’t good, don’t show it.” That was why in the 1950s when bosom-revealing strapless dresses were “in,” Edith Head (using the designs of the French couturier Hubert de Givenchy) dressed super-thin, small-breasted Audrey Hepburn in a cocktail dress that would cover her bony shoulders. The resulting Sabrina neckline became a classic style of that decade and beyond. It is also a great example of adapting a current fashion to suit your own body and lifestyle. Not so lucky are the Fashion Victims who, anxious to conform to current looks, blindly wear styles not suited to their body types. Especially vulnerable are teenage girls who, so urgently wanting to “fit in,” wear whatever the “popular kids” are wearing—often with tragic, comic results. Erogenous zones change regularly, each time exposing some area of skin that is newly considered erotic; the focus changes from breasts to cleavage, to midriffs, shoulders, bellies, fannies, hips, thighs, legs, necks and feet, then back to the beginning. In Japan, in the 19th century, the kimono with its beautiful obi sash cleverly obliterated the curves of a woman’s body (this, at a time when the Western World was exaggerating those curves). To compensate, the kimono dipped seductively at the back of the head, exposing the curve of a slender neck; this inviting exposure was considered beautifully sexy. By contrast, in 1864, while Japan was admiring the back of women’s necks, American and English women were hiding their necks by wearing hats with curtains in back called bavolets. When new styles eliminated the curtains in back, exposing necks for the first time in twenty years, a contemporary writer proclaimed that it was “perfectly disgusting and indecent.” (Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.) In the early 1930s, the new erogenous zone was the bare back. Designer Travis Banton dressed actress Tallulah Bankhead in a backless dress; Jean Harlow made history wearing slinky backless dresses and the backless swimsuit became the norm.

43

Chapter

5

When Proportions Change In the 1950s, a new fashion of sleeveless blouses and dresses was introduced (sleeveless had not been seen since the 1920s). At first, the clothes seemed “unfinished,” as though the sleeves had not yet been added (our eyes had not yet become accustomed to the new look). I wonder now, if that was because bare arms were a new erogenous zone or a changing proportion? Rudi Gernreich’s 1960s topless swimsuit was never accepted because too much was exposed at the same time; it wasn’t even sexy. There is an old saying, “That which is concealed is more interesting than that which is revealed.” (In addition, not many women could go topless without a little help from a brassiere.) In the early 21st century, the new erogenous zone was the previously ignored belly. Teenagers took the look to astonishing new lows: They wore low, lowrise jeans that even showed the fanny-crack in back. Boys’ underwear showed above their pants, and girls tantalized the boys by showing evidence that skimpy thong panties were being worn. This crude and outrageous style became the bane of schools all over the country when they unsuccessfully tried to monitor how low pants could go—giving rise to a new meaning of being a “no-show.” Currently, in 2017, it is not uncommon to see almost-bare fannies revealed by skimpy thong-bikinis on beaches everywhere. The Red Carpet Runway of early 2000 began with bias-cut slip dresses that could not be worn with underwear or bras, thus exposing all the erogenous zones at one time! It is interesting to note that when bodies are fit and toned they do not look as naked as soft voluptuous bodies that overflow garments. Hard bodies can get away with less coverage and still look socially acceptable (and very much admired). The trick is to know when not to exceed the limits of good taste.

44

Out-of-Style

Women wear what they wear because of what goes on in their heads. . . . It has nothing to do with their size or shape. —Elizabeth Hawes, influential fashion designer of the 1930s and 1940s, author of Why Is a Dress? and Fashion Is Spinach

45

Chapter

5

When Proportions Change

Foot Fetishes and Fashion Victims

Uncomfortable shoes are an old story with women. Even when they wore tight constrictive corsets and skirts that covered their feet, they wore tight narrow shoes because the flash of a small, neat foot was considered seductive.

46

THIS IS AN ACTUAL FOOTPRINT FROM A VINTAGE SHOE CA. 1888–1904

Out-of-Style

Foot Fetishes and Fashion Victims The Pressure to Conform (Even If It Gives You Bunions!) I once tried to save a young girl from a poor shoe investment while sitting beside her in a shoe store. Heavy, clunky, awkward shoes had recently been introduced as “High Fashion.” They looked uglier than the orthopedic shoes that had been prescribed for my flat feet when I was a child. At age nine, I was too vain to wear them. As I watched the girl agonize over the purchase, I was sure she was saying to herself, “They’re ugly and make my legs look dumpy, but it is the latest style.” Hoping to be helpful, I leaned over and said, “If you buy them, in six months they’ll be out of style.” I realized I had hooked her “Defiant Child” when she looked at me, saw a mature woman who couldn’t possibly know “real fashion” and instantly made the obstinate decision to buy the ugly shoes. The salesman, seeing a commission, breathed a sigh of relief. (I wonder how long she wore those shoes.) When an unsuccessful fashion is suddenly abandoned, it will usually be replaced by the absolute opposite. In the case of the Clunky Shoe, I knew the next look in footwear would be sleek; enter Pretty Shoes . . . for awhile. We used to see pictures of New York women walking to work dressed for success, while wearing athletic shoes; but they were carrying nice shoes to change into on the job . . . then 9/11 happened! Next, we saw pictures of women who had escaped down the stairs of the Twin Towers. Their heels had broken off or their shoes were so impractical they had kicked them off and had run barefoot down countless flights of stairs and for many city blocks with injured, bleeding feet to escape falling debris. One such woman reported she would NEVER, EVER wear anything but athletic shoes to work again! Then, because New York leads America in fashion, I fully expected the next look to feature comfortable and functional footwear. WRONG! Instead, shoes and feet became the new erogenous zone, led by actresses in the TV series Sex and the City, who set the standard for sexy, impractical shoes in 1998, with sky-high, four-inch heels. These can be worn only for short periods of time which is why they are called “dinner shoes”; they are worn to and from dinner where they are often secretly kicked off under the table. 47

Chapter

5

When Proportions Change The popularity of extreme high heels has continued well into the 21st century and morphed into even more extreme styles than before. I worry for the current crop of fashion victims, because some women that I knew in the 1950s later required painful operations to repair the distortions to their feet caused by their pointy-toed, stiletto-heeled shoes, which were only three inches high! Women endure high heels because they cause the thigh and calf muscles to tighten, which creates curves; in addition, the instep is arched, which lengthens the leg, and suddenly one is taller and has great legs! The new erogenous zone was now feet; enter sexy, fanciful designer shoes with prices as high as their heels.

48

Out-of-Style

Arrested Development Women Who Wait Too Long to Change Fashion-aware people sense the subtle mutations of newly evolving styles, always knowing when to stop wearing something that is suddenly “out-of-style.” Conversely, some deliberately choose to remain with a style because it has become their personal look, reinforcing to themselves who they are. (Or, is it an obstinate clinging to a symbolic teddy bear: “You can’t tell me what I can or cannot wear!”) The opposite to this is the knowledgeable woman who stays with a style that looks good on her, but adapts it to changing proportions. It has been said that some women get locked into a time frame where they were happiest or most successful. That is why, in the 1930s there were women still wearing the bee-stung lips and pencil thin eyebrows of 1920s movie star, Clara Bow. In the 1940s some women were still applying lipstick without a center indent, like Bette Davis of the 1930s. Joan Crawford’s 1940s dark red lips, although passé by the 1950s, were occasionally seen. In the 1960s, when women piled their hair in sky-high, sculpted beehives, and wore triple sets of fake eyelashes over pale, invisible lips, some women were still clinging to Audrey Hepburn’s dark, heavy eyebrows and tippy-tilt eyes, a holdover from the 1950s. Today, in the 21st century, I know a woman whose best year was 1969; I know this because decades later she is still wearing the geometric-asymmetrical haircut of Vidal Sassoon. The only change is that her hair is now a beautiful silver/white and she wears glasses. The ingrained habit of tossing her head to get the hair out of her eyes, as it falls over half of her face, is probably comforting to her. Fashion designer/author Elizabeth Hawes, in her book Why Is a Dress?, said, “Women wear what they wear because of what goes on in their heads. It has nothing to do with their size or shape.” HAS YOUR FASHION CLOCK STOPPED?

49

Chapter

6

How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies

How the Changing Shape of Corsets Changed the Shape of Women and Their Clothes 1840s

1850s

1870s

1880s

1890s

50

1860s

1900–1908

The S-curve corset reached its peak in 1904–1905 but was worn until 1908.

Out-of-Style

Chapter

6

How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies All About Corsets—How Fitting!

F

rom 1863 on, the rigid controlling shape of corsets was achieved by steam-molding them onto a heated metal form. This form had been pre-shaped into perfect female proportions, the silhouette of which changed through the decades (as did fashion). In fact we can wonder, “Did the design of the outer garment shape the corset, or did the corset shape the garment?” By squeezing or pouring soft female flesh into these pre-shaped forms, the body was remolded to achieve the perfect Bust-to-Waist/Waist-to-Hip proportion that each era admired: This changed over the decades from short-waisted to long . . . from hippy hips to flattened hips . . . from buxom to no bosom at all! How ironic that it took one hundred years (until 1963) for manufacturers to first experiment with heat-molded bras! Then, it took until the early 21st century for stores to replace most cut-and-sewn bras with ones that have been heatmolded into perfectly shaped breasts in assorted cup sizes (just like nature). The development of corset-making required the understanding and appreciation of the anatomy of the female body. It also required advanced patternmaking and fitting skills to construct these very complicated contrivances: Corsets had numerous intricately shaped pieces that had to be fitted into place like a jigsaw 51

Chapter

6

How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies puzzle; then the pieces were sewn together; finally, whalebone, featherbone or steel stays were superimposed onto every seam. At first this labor intensive work was done by hand (which is why only aristocrats could afford corsets). Eventually, skilled workers made them on sewing machines in specialized corset factories, thereby making it possible for all women to afford them—the difference in cost being in the quality of the fabrics, trim and amount of fancy handwork involved. Corsets were at their tightest from the 1870s to the 1880s so it is a good thing that metal eyelets had been invented in 1828. This relieved the strain on hand-sewn eyelets which had previously burst under the tension of lacing.

Tight Lacing The tight-fitting vintage corset was often criticized in contemporary literature and exaggerated in cartoons. However, there was real concern by medical doctors that women who tight-laced (known strangely enough as “Tight-Lacers”) could, and did, actually damage internal organs by squeezing them out of position and pressing them into each other with sometimes dire results. At the very least, it limited deep breathing (maybe that is why classic literature often had women fainting . . . imagine all those tight clothes and no air conditioning except handheld fans). However, the reality was that most women were not that extreme. Because clothes cinched the waist while they emphasized the bosom and the hips, the illusion was created that the waist was smaller than it actually was. Often Victorian women boasted that they had 18-inch waists. (Remember Scarlett O’Hara?) However, it was not realistically possible to achieve that measurement, even for the most slender of women. This inconsistency was explained in a vintage corset manufacturer’s booklet for the trade: It stated that there was a difference between a woman’s BODY measurement and a GARMENT measurement. They recommended that a woman with a 24-inch waist buy a corset that measured 18 inches CLOSED. That would allow for the corset to be left open in the back from 2–6 inches to allow for personal adjustment of the laces: This could vary, depending upon whether she was dressing for a ball, going for a stroll, or a picnic, or was temporarily swollen—but, she could still boast that she had an 18-inch waist. The reality, of course, was that she wore an 18-inch CORSET! 52

Out-of-Style Of the hundreds of real-life women that I have personally measured and fitted, I only once encountered an 18-inch waist, and that was of a tiny “child-woman” with a straight, up-and-down body. Contrary to anecdotal tales, according to Fashion Historian, Costume Collector and author of The Woman in Fashion, Doris Langley Moore, no one had a 16–18 inch waist! The smallest waist in Langley Moore’s collection was 21 inches. She once tried 200 authentic Victorian and Edwardian dresses on modern women and found no problem fitting them. (Incidentally, many of the dresses that she collected are now in museums.) This proved that women’s natural bodies had not changed; it was their shape that had been temporarily remolded by vintage corsets and fashions. This modern comparison includes modern athletic “hard bodies,” who, although having low body fat, still measure (on average) 24 inches or more in the waist. In addition, the smallest sizes of corsets in museum collections measure from 20–26 inches in the waist, normal even today. And a relic of a Victorian dressmaker’s dummy had a 19½-inch waist, allowing garments to be fitted on top of it. The first corsets originated in the 16th century in the royal courts of Spain and Italy. They were made of muslin and had long, L-O-N-G, pointed “V” fronts to hold whalebone stiffeners. Later, whalebone was added to all the seams; so, of course, before they were called corsets they were known as whalebone bodies. The stiffeners were known as busks. By the 1840s, the points had shortened and the inserts were made of wood (whalebone having by now been depleted). These corsets were known as busk bodices. If the busks were rounded at the waist they were known as spoon busks. The resulting flat-front style pushed the breasts up into the chest without breast separation, creating an unnatural, mono-bosom ridge of overflowing flesh at the top of the chest and across the back. (An ever-present rule of nature, in fitting women’s bodies then and now, is that if you squeeze the flesh one place—it doesn’t just “disappear”—it bulges someplace else!) In any case, in some vintage photographs this appears as a strange chest bulge under bodices of that era. It is therefore a style clue that time-dates it as 1840s. It is said that this stiff-front corset style created good posture—but the truth was that women stood up straight because they couldn’t bend at the waist! It may be surprising to know that men, too, wore corsets. From the early 1800s, men’s clothes and pants were tight, widening in the early 1850s when fashionable men started to wear looser clothing. Elastic (vulcanized India rubber) had become available in 1830. This made possible the new concept that clothes 53

Chapter

6

How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies could combine adjustable comfort, function and fashion all in the same garment. This led to the use of elastic, not only in corsets, but in garters, armbands, and shoe and boot inserts; and eventually, one-piece control garments, girdles, swimsuits and control pantyhose. The first advertisement for ready-made, elasticized garments appeared in 1836. At this writing, in the early 21st century, the most comfortable and popular garments are made of stretchable spandex blended with other fibers. Looking back, we wonder how and why 19th- and early-20th-century women endured the discomfort of inconvenient, uncomfortable clothes (not to mention wearing tight, narrow shoes . . . which is another story!) The truth is, in spite of concerned advice from medical doctors and dress reformers to modernize and make clothes more functional, it was women themselves who continued to enthusiastically adopt styles created and worn by the prevailing arbiters of elite fashion; this was true all around the world. The explanation offered in history books for their obedient compliance to be “in style” was that the exaggeration of the curves of the female body pleased men, and sex appeal gave women the only power they had over men. Women’s innate vanity sought admiration from both males and other females, resulting in increased self-esteem (also a motivating factor in the 21st century). In addition, 19th century clothes were picturesque and beautiful, which is why we keep looking back to study them. I offer another explanation: A corset that supports breasts and stomach feels good and also supports the back. If a well-endowed woman goes without a bra, her breasts ache (and supportive brassieres had not yet been created). My grandmother, who was born in 1859, was said to put on a supportive corset the very first thing every morning of her life until she died in 1958. That was at least fifty years AFTER women were required to be corseted. (I wonder, was it because she had given birth to nine children and was more comfortable when wearing a supportive corset?) Women wore (in order of their appearance) a long chemise, a corset, a corset cover, baggy pantaloons with an open crotch (for convenience), stockings held up by garters, petticoats and perhaps a hoop or a wired bustle, depending on the year. If it was the 1870s, they also wore tied-back skirts, which tied the front skirt to the back bustle with ties at the hips, thighs and knees.

54

Out-of-Style All this before they had real “bath rooms.” How did they manage all this yardage during natural functions? I have never found a history of costume book that explores this. (Maybe I need to study the history of plumbing, privies and chamber pots.)

Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beholder Although the perception of beauty is ever changing, there is one ongoing challenge to the costume designer: Do it “right” and you have created someone’s “All-Time Favorite Dress.” That is, you made her bust look good, her waistline trim, her stomach flat, and her hips trim. (See Chapter 19, The TwentyFive-Year-Old Dress, page 287.)

A Good Body Never Goes Out of Style The difference between a boyish figure, a “good” figure and a spectacular, VA-VA-Voom! figure is the Bust-to-Waist/Waist-to-Hip ratio. The more exaggerated the difference between these measurements, the more spectacular the figure: Think Marilyn Monroe, said to measure 36–23–37 (a 13–14 inch differential); Ziegfeld’s ideal woman measured 36–26–38. Even more extreme were the measurements of beautiful Marie Wilson, the original “Dumb Blonde,” who starred in Ken Murray’s Blackouts in Hollywood (a show for which I designed the costumes) in the 1940s: Marie measured 38–24–38. When I cinched her waist, she lost another two inches. That would be a 14–16 inch differential; no wonder people still remember her! Here is an interesting bit of showbiz history: When the Blackouts moved to Broadway in 1949, its star, busty Marie Wilson, had a TV contract for the series My Friend Irma and could not leave Hollywood. Many starlets were auditioned to replace Marie’s sexy, but naïve persona. One of them, still unknown, Marilyn Monroe, lost the part because she could not fill Marie Wilson’s 38–22–38 costumes (and Murray’s jokes about her having been “born in a grapefruit grove” would have gone “flat”). By the same yardstick (if you’ll excuse the expression), a very heavy woman whose Bust-to-Waist/Waist-to-Hip differential gives her a defined waist is still perceived to be a “fine figure of a woman,” even though she is larger than ideal.

55

Chapter

6

How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies These are the beautiful women who model large-size clothes in catalogs and on fashion show runways—they may be “BIG” but they are “in proportion.” By contrast, in the 1960s the first of the super thin “Mod Hard-bodies” to be admired was Twiggy, an English fashion model famous for her expressive face, exaggeratedly long fake eyelashes, and super skinny body. With the tall stature of a model, she measured only 31–24–33 (translation: flat chest and flat hips). As a young designer, a strange phenomenon regarding “proportion” was brought home to me when, after carefully custom-fitting costumes or gowns for a show, the actresses would often be switched to other roles or would leave the show: New girls with different measurements would be assigned to wear the same costumes. The mystery to me was, in spite of my individual custom fitting, the costume or gown always fit the new wearer anyway! Here is the explanation: If the bust was small I filled it (“stuff with cotton what God has forgotten”). I cinched in a too-wide waist and revealed or concealed the hips (as needed). Then, because costumes were underlined for longevity (hoping for a long run) and usually feather-boned to eliminate garment wrinkles on stage, I had unknowingly built a pre-formed, perfectly shaped body. So, either the new showgirl actually did fit the old costume, or it remolded her pliable female flesh into apparent perfection. (Today we might use more stretch fabrics with a little help from featherbone to achieve that.) For the same reason, here is a caveat for costume designers: Do not over-fit a bad figure or you will end up with a pre-molded “bad” figure! Here is an interesting fact: Freedom from corsets began in 1909 when French fashion designer Paul Poiret introduced a narrow sheath which did not require the stiff, unyielding look of a corset; women’s determination to be free from fashion tyranny evolved from that point. (See Chapter 15, Overview: The March to Modernity.) It is said that when the US entered World War I in 1917, the steel collected from abandoned corsets yielded enough steel to float two battleships!

From Upholstered Bodies to “Look Ma! . . . No Bra!” The evolution of the brassiere is a perfect example of how each inventive improvement creates a new problem; each problem is then solved by the creation of the next logical solution which becomes the newest fashion mutation.

56

Out-of-Style In the 19th century, the commonly worn one-piece boned and tightly laced corset eliminated the need for a separate breast support; therefore, the category of BRASSIERE (at first known as a Breast Support) did not yet exist. The one-piece, long-torso corset already supported breasts by pushing them up, squashing them flatter, or finally (recognizing reality) adding the cup room needed for each breast. At the turn of the century, in a sincere effort to reduce the damaging pressure on internal organs caused by tight corsets that indented into the midriff and ribcage, a lady doctor created a newly shaped corset that did not indent. It was completely flat from under the bust to a deep “V” several inches below the waist, curving up to the back. This pushed the stomach flat and “In” while it forced the buttocks to protrude in the rear. The arched back and protruded rear end created an S-curve silhouette (which caused the uncontrolled breasts to spill over at the top). This had its own unintended and unhealthful result—bad posture (and probably backaches). However, necessity being the mother of invention, because the new S-curve corset did not include the breasts, a separate garment was now needed to control the bosom hangover at the top of the “S.” VOILA!—the birth of the Brassiere and the “S” BEND silhouette of the early 1900s. Several names were given to this new garment in the female arsenal of seduction: The bandeau, the bust extender, the bust supporter, the bust shaper, the bust bodice and, finally, in 1916 the “Brassiere” which came to be also known as the “Bra.” Brassieres evolved and changed to suit prevailing fashions and changing ideas of how breasts should be shaped. (Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.) This ranged from the boyish, flattened breast look of the 1920s, to the pointed, torpedo bra of the 1940s and 1950s (caricatured decades later by Madonna), to the burning of bras and “Look Ma . . . No Bra!” in the 1960s. So it was that by 1909, designer Paul Poiret had introduced revolutionary narrow gowns that did not require a corset: Unyielding corsets were now regarded as orthopedic devices for aging and overweight women. Actresses denied needing them, even while obviously wearing them. This signaled the end of distortion in corsetry.

57

Chapter

6

How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies In 1913, the Tango dance craze and the newly-fashionable, long-line, leg-revealing, hobble-skirt dresses required less restrictive, more supple undergarments: This produced the Tango Corset and a separate slip-on bra. The next year an American socialite, with a little help from her maid, folded two embroidered hankies into triangles, added darts for shaping and ribbons for straps, thereby creating the desire for feminine and pretty brassieres. By the 1920s shaped bras were deconstructed to completely flatten breasts. Meanwhile waistlines and hips disappeared under the tube-narrow girdles of the jazz age. The best compliment a young Flapper could receive was, “My dear, you have positively NOTHING!” Happily, by the 1930s, women’s breasts, waists and hips were permitted to reappear, and brassieres were made in cup sizes A, B, C and D. Well-constructed bras were now available to mold the bosom into whatever pleasing shape was currently admired to enhance clothes. But, alas . . . bust pads were not yet commercially available. When I entered high school in 1938 at the age of 13, although I was proud to be newly curvy in all the right places, my prepubescent breasts had not yet developed as much as I would have liked. I had never seen or heard of bust pads, so I did what any creative and deprived young girl would do (probably unknown to me, what girls had been secretly doing for centuries): I went to the “Dime Store” aka “The Five and Ten Cent Store.” (A now extinct establishment, since replaced by modern discount chain stores.) I bought a size 34B satin brassiere into which I sewed pockets that I filled with a pair of stockings. (Is this where the word “stocking stuffer” came from?) This looked attractive under my school girl sweaters and was the beginning of my reputation in Hollywood for building beautiful bustlines into clothes. I’m happy to say that maturity eventually eliminated my need for bust pads and today I buy “minimizer” bras—a category created by the recognition that different ages and body types require specialized sizing and construction techniques. Minimizer bras reduce one’s apparent size by distributing breast fullness to the sides instead of all out front where they seem to say “Look at Me! Look at Me!” Underwires became a preferred support utilized in almost all sizes and styles of cut-and-sewn bras, and eventually in all heat-molded bras.

58

Out-of-Style In 1956 recognition of the special needs of the growing teen population produced the first “training bras” with tiny AA cups for the bosoms of budding beauties. The special needs of mastectomy patients produced soft, unwired support with pockets for prosthetic pads where needed. Bust pads and breast enhancers became commercially available after Frederick’s of Hollywood introduced them in 1947, followed a year later by the first “push-up” bras which had foam rubber “cookies” that could be inserted into different positions, pushing breasts up, in, or sideways—anywhere but Down. The push-up bra preceded the Wonder Bra™ of later years, which gave every girl intriguing cleavage. Frederick’s of Hollywood then introduced the shelf-like demi-bra (or half-bra). This seemingly invisible support came up only to the nipples, causing the bosom to overflow enticingly on the top (as had the corsets of the 1840s). It created the illusion that a well-endowed woman could not possibly be wearing a bra. This was a very popular look during the reign of strapless dresses in the mid-1950s. Early television actresses, like Zsa Zsa Gabor, Faye Emerson and statuesque burlesque queen Dagmar, leaned nightly into our living room television screens displaying generous cleavage on the early talk shows of Steve Allen and Jack Paar. Other artifices designed to attract (and deceive men) were water-filled, gelfilled, or inflatable bust pads. They were supposed to be improvements over hard rubber pads because, if a fellow hugged a girl, they felt soft, or if they were seen jiggling . . .“I know they’re real . . . I saw them MOVE.” The trouble was, sometimes they would spring a leak! This problem was solved by creating a new kind of foam that was naturally soft like real breasts. In the 1940s I had my own costume shop in Hollywood and was designing and making costumes for shows, nightclubs and films. I had many interesting clients: One, a PR woman for Las Vegas hotels, was really flat-chested, so she always wore padded bras. She looked great in a bathing suit but, alas, she could not go into the water because bust pads were absorbent. So I made her the world’s first plastic bust pads; the seams sealed with waterproof glue. (Perhaps the Esther Williams Swim Team already had them and I didn’t know it.) During this time the film industry had strict rules regarding propriety, decency and obscenity. (How old-fashioned!) I was costuming a period film and used push-up pads to enhance the cleavage of an under-endowed actress. Guess what? . . . 

59

Chapter

6

How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies The Hayes Office censored the scene, which had to be reshot after I modified the neckline. Imagine, censoring fake breasts! Fast forward now to “The Hippie Era of the 1960s” which rebelled against everything Establishment. The Pill had brought with it freedom from the fear of unwanted pregnancy, causing social mores of the past to be boldly abandoned. The mention of anything artificial and man-made (like polyester) would bring a grimace and a vocal “Y-U-C-K!” Au naturel was “IN”—including nudity; brassieres were gleefully discarded. One day while at a stoplight on Sunset Blvd. in West Hollywood (the heart of Hippieville), I watched amused as a fresh-faced, voluptuous (but braless) young girl in a knit tank top went from car to car selling a sub-culture newspaper. She looked fresh off the farm, but her unconfined breasts undulated alternately as she hurried to each car. As she approached my car window, she offered, “Free-Press?” “No Thanks,” I said. “I wouldn’t wrap my garbage in that paper . . .” Her eyes opened wide in surprise and, without guile, she answered, “OH! I wouldn’t either—It’s a wonderful paper!” During the No-Bra Hippie Era, which lasted into the 1970s, I met a pale, plainlooking girl of about eighteen. She announced firmly that she would never, EVER wear makeup or a brassiere because they were so “unnatural.” Since the only thing this nondescript girl had going for her was youth, I have often wondered how she aged without a little help from cosmetics and a brassiere. Not everyone could or would have wanted to go braless; but the Youth Cult was being worshipped by all ages and interest in exercise was producing better bodies. So, a new genre of lingerie was created which was nearly nude-looking with little or no control necessary. Brand names like “Barely There™” described the designs perfectly. Previously it had taken up to 43 pieces (parts and hardware) to construct an average brassiere. Now, we were back to two simple triangles with ribbon straps (as first created in 1914). Since not everyone could wear near-nude undergarments, the brassiere industry continued selling a variety of styles, experimenting briefly with heat-molded bras in 1963. (Ironically, this was one hundred years after the corset industry first perfected the heat molding process for corsets.) Fast forward to about 2005: Oprah, on her TV show, introduced her newest “favorite thing.” It was called a “T-shirt Bra,” because it was heat-molded into perfectly shaped breasts (without nipples) and would not show seams and ridges

60

Out-of-Style or nipples under knits, as did cut-and-sewn bras. The bras were supportive, under-wired, sexy looking, and solved the problem of “show through.” Oprah’s audience whooped with joy when she gave everyone attending the show one of these innovative new bras. Meanwhile, the massive audience watching at home all ran out to buy heat-molded bras for themselves (including me!). The immediate commercial acceptance of this product changed the entire brassiere industry almost overnight as they abandoned labor-intensive, cutand-sewn styles for easier-to-manufacture heat-molded ones. At that time, a foray into a national discount store showed many manufacturers selling almost identical, heat-molded styles . . . hardly a cut-and-sewn bra to be had. At this writing, there seems to be only one “booby-trap” design problem yet to be solved: Where the bra band hooks in the back, the compressed flesh released above and below the bra band forms unsightly bulges on many women. An attempt has been made to solve this problem, so far unsuccessfully . . . but I’m not worried . . . If fashion history has proved anything, it is that the solution will soon be found and yet another phase in the evolution of fashion will be complete.

News Flash! 600-Year-Old Bra Found in Medieval Castle! In 2012, archeologists discovered four tattered linen brassieres in a debrisfilled vault at Lemberg Castle in Tyrol. Carbon testing proved them to be 600 years old! This revolutionary discovery has rewritten the history of women’s undergarments. Unbelievably, these newly discovered garments look just like modern bras with circular cups shaped by darts and held up by attached shoulder straps. They even had lace edges to entice lovers. Previously, it was believed that the world’s first brassieres were designed in the early 20th century. Now, it is known that they were worn as early as the Middle Ages. They then disappeared for a few centuries because they were rendered unnecessary by tight-laced, one-piece corsets which had built-in breast support.

This drawing is reconstructed from a 2012 AP Photo/University of Innsbruck Archeological Institute 61

Chapter

6

How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies

From Thick Stockings to Sheer Pantyhose in a Few Hundred Years The first manual knitting frame to make stockings was invented in 1589. At 600 stitches per minute, it was six times faster than a skilled hand knitter. Modern knitting machines are still built on the same basic principle. By 1860, hosiery production was completely mechanized, able to produce 40 seamed stockings in the shape of a leg all at the same time. For centuries, it had been “shocking to see a stocking,” but in the early 1900s, as skirt lengths rose a little with each fashion change, stockings came newly into focus encouraging the development of novelty stitch patterns. More sheer and attractive rayon fibers were developed, which were more durable and less expensive than silk. In 1938 DuPont introduced the first nylon stockings. As before, they still had seams in the back and were held up by garter supports dangling from girdles or from uncomfortable garter belts. Women loved the strong, sheer, washable and quick-drying qualities of nylon. Unfortunately, during World War II nylon fibers and fabrics went to war to make parachutes and other lightweight, but strong war items. Nylon stockings for women were, therefore, strictly rationed, becoming valuable on the Black Market (along with bacon, butter and booze). There was a World War II joke about an enterprising fellow who kept one nylon stocking sticking out of his handkerchief pocket. When a girl eagerly pulled it out and asked where the other one was, he answered, “In my apartment.” This shortage of nylons led to the creative substitute of leg makeup, which was drafty in winter and rubbed off on clothes (and his uniform). Shortly after the end of World War II the circular knitting machine became available, making possible . . . SEAMLESS STOCKINGS! . . . an instant hit with the ladies. No longer was it necessary to twist around to see if stocking seams were straight, a fashion faux pas akin to having one’s slip show. (A slip is another garment category, now obsolete because hardly anyone wears slips anymore.) In the 1960s nylon pantyhose appeared: Halleluiah! . . . No more dangling garter belts or girdles worn primarily to hold up stockings. Better yet . . . In 1969 control top pantyhose were introduced . . . Now, women could even discard girdles!

62

Out-of-Style When the 1960s brought thigh-high mini skirts, fashion became focused on the legs: Pantyhose and tights appeared in variations of sheer and opaque textures, bold patterns, and colors, simultaneously featuring and concealing shockingly exposed thighs and legs. Happily, in the 1980s stretchy, lycra fibers brought all-day comfort to active modern women. It had taken four hundred years to evolve from thick stockings in 1589 to sheer nylon pantyhose in the 1980s. However, in the early 21st century the final evolution occurred when fashion conscious women, wearing three- to four-inch high-heeled open-toed sandals, chose not to wear stockings at all. A nice pedicure was the only finishing touch required.

63

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes

The Milestones of Reform Dress 1852–1865

Amelia Bloomer, The First “Bloomer Girl”!

1895

64

1909

1917

1925

Out-of-Style

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes The Milestones of Reform Dress and the Birth of the Bloomer Girl

I

t took seventy years for women to win emancipation from corsets and crinolines to become flat-chested Flappers. In 1920, after finally winning the right to vote, women celebrated their long march to victory by exchanging an hour-glass body for one with a boyish silhouette. The best compliment a girl could get was, “My dear, you have positively NOTHING!” In 1852, the Turkish Costume, worn for decades in Europe for exercise, was brought to America by a friend of Amelia Bloomer, who published a Reform Journal for feminists from 1851 to 1865. Ms. Bloomer published a sketch of her outfit and then, by public demand, a pattern. The Bloomer outfit was easily copied by shortening an old dress and using the cut-off fabric to make the pants. Therefore, it is probable that the remodeled clothes shown in vintage photos of women in bloomers were a few years old when the picture was taken. At first called the Shorts, Aesthetic Dress and the American Costume, the outfit and Ms. Bloomer’s followers were soon known as “Bloomers.” The blousy Turkish pants evolved into tubular trousers, like men’s pants, but they were still called bloomers. English women were disdainful of the adoption of men’s trousers for women. With sarcastic logic, Amelia Bloomer asked why the inconsistency, since their men in Scotland and Queen Victoria’s little Prince wore kilted skirts. This author has learned that one NEVER calls kilts “skirts,” so that remark was a really contemporary “put-down!” 65

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes Every effort was made to keep the outfit, from the knees up, looking feminine: dainty collars, cuffs, brooches and even black lace mitts were worn, plus petticoats to hold skirts out fashionably, and ladylike hats or bonnets. Left off were tight corsets and hoops. Ms. Bloomer’s original outfit (illustrated on page 64) shows that she left her bodice open for breathing room, filled in by a pristine white neck fill-in. Hairstyles were uncomplicated. Shoes were sturdy and flat. The object was simplicity and comfort. The Women’s Rights movement had begun in the 1850s, along with anti-slavery and anti-alcohol movements. Women had limited legal and property rights. There were numerous social restrictions as well as no voting rights. In spite of ridicule from men and cartoonists, the Bloomer outfit was courageously worn by one hundred influential Reformists until 1865 when it was discarded as being a distraction from their major cause: Women’s Rights. (However, women’s underpants would forever after be known as Bloomers.) Meanwhile, pioneer women had adopted the garment for their arduous trek west, where they rode horses, helped their husbands pan for gold, or worked on newly homesteaded farms. When possible, they wore fashionable clothes to church and for social occasions. The next milestone in the evolution of functional clothes for women didn’t arrive until many years later in 1895, when easy-to-ride bicycles with two same-size wheels became available. This created a bicycling craze that women eagerly joined. They wore full, divided skirts that bloused below the knee, called knickerbockers. At the same time, women on college campuses, like Berkeley, in California, adopted knickerbockers as the perfect functional garment for their lifestyle. In the early 1890s the first women bicyclists, even those wearing ordinary street clothes, were hissed and booed. By 1895, even when wearing knickerbockers, no one noticed. From 1909 to 1912, a high-waisted, uncorseted, narrow look with simple lines reflected the 20th-century desire for comfort and easy mobility. Originating in England in the 1880s, man-tailored suits with changeable blouses met this criteria. From 1900 to 1920, these suits can be time-dated by recognizing the changing length of their jackets and skirts, and millinery shapes, which changed as the decades evolved.

66

Out-of-Style

1920

67

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes

Wedding Veils and Hairstyles

1840s

1917 1920s

1850s

1890s

1860s

1880s 1870s

These are the changing looks of hairstyles and wedding veils that may help identify passing decades. 68

Out-of-Style

Vintage Wedding Gowns and Veils Is She Wearing Her Own New Wedding Gown or Her Mother’s? In the 19th century not all wedding gowns were white and not all brides wore a veil. Because many brides could not afford to invest in an impractical dress that could only be worn once, a dress in a pleasing color was chosen which would become her new “best dress.” A vintage picture in your family album might show a girl in a plaid, striped or solid-color dress, who had added a wedding veil and flowers to an otherwise ordinary outfit. Her groom would be wearing a newly pressed suit with flowers pinned to his chest. We sometimes see brides without veils who adapted their dresses into bridal wear by adding floral sprigs to their hair—especially orange blossoms (real or wax). Instead of carrying a bouquet, she wore flowers at the neck, the shoulder, the waist, or cascading in garlands down the skirt, her hands free to carry a Bible. “Corsage,” the French word for bodice or bust, became the name for flowers pinned to the chest. Occasionally, we see a vintage bride who, instead of wearing just a wedding veil, gives homage to her family’s country of origin by wearing the headdress of the “Old Country’s” national costume—perhaps worn atop a veil. If a dress was white (or ivory or ecru) and not to be saved for posterity, it would later be stripped of superfluous trim (especially orange blossoms) and worn to parties. Veils with lace, which were not saved as heirlooms, were worn as pretty shawls. White weddings and orange blossoms were popularized when Queen Victoria married her adored Prince Albert in 1840. Since, as Queen, she had proposed to him, from that time on women in most Western societies decided to choose their own husbands. Before World War II, double-ring ceremonies were uncommon. By 1955, most American men had adopted the old-country custom of wearing a gold or platinum wedding band. (Probably compelled by their new brides who thought that men also should be “branded” as “unavailable.”) Because wedding gowns usually reflected the latest fashions of their era, they can be time-dated by their silhouettes, sleeve styles, etc. But since some brides 69

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes of the 19th and 20th centuries chose to wear their mother’s or grandmother’s wedding gown, this can be misleading to genealogists who are time-dating old photographs. In addition, one museum curator with a large wedding collection said that wedding gowns tended to be four to five years behind the latest fashion. But, not to worry … even if the bride is wearing an out-of-style wedding gown, she would have updated her hairstyle and veil. All ladies’ magazines showed fashion plates with the latest hairstyles, so even poor women could recreate the latest looks at home. So, if the bride’s hair and veil seem out of sync with her dress, we can guess that she is wearing her mother’s or grandmother’s gown from an earlier decade.

70

Out-of-Style

A little girl asked her mother, “What is a wedding trousseau?” Her mother answered, “A trousseau, dear, are the clothes a woman wears for the first ten years she is married.”

71

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes

The Comfort of Mother Hubbard Dresses While “Heavy with Child”

1860s–1870s

1840s–1880s

1914

1880s– 1990s

Nursing Waists

72

1890s

1950s

Out-of-Style

The Evolution of Maternity Clothing Nineteenth-century maternity clothes can be identified by uncorseted loose waistlines. They can be time-dated by contemporary style details, especially sleeves. But since women often wore the same dress for subsequent pregnancies, allow for variations in time-dating. (Note: Some loose-waisted dresses were Reform Dresses.) From 1866 to 1872, the fashionable two-tiered dress (Phase 3 of the Nine Phases of the Rise and Fall of the Bustle—see Chapter 3) was adapted for maternity wear. The top was a loose, front-opening tunic over a skirt with a draw-string waist. It was convenient while nursing and with a wide sash could be worn post-pregnancy. The late 1840s brought a new category of at-home leisurewear. Worn uncorseted by non-pregnant women, it was gratefully adapted for maternity wear. Called a wrapper, it was loose, pretty and socially acceptable to be worn mornings and for tea time with the ladies—but never outside the home. In the 1880s, loose, comfortable Mother Hubbard dresses and smocks appeared which covered the baby bulge with folds of fabric. They remained popular for decades as work/house dresses, especially for larger women. In 1914 Sears, Roebuck sold nursing waists. These were mainstream-styled blouses which had openings at the sides that lifted to discreetly nurse an infant in private or public. Returning soldiers of World War II and couples who had put nest-building on hold, produced the prolific Baby Boom of the mid-1940s to 1950s. In the TV series I Love Lucy, husband and wife, Desi Arnaz and Lucille Ball shared her on-going real-life pregnancy with enthralled audiences. This led to modern maternity wear becoming a major category for designers and manufacturers. Society, however, was still self-conscious about acknowledging the sexuality that produced babies. Non-pregnant models advertised maternity wear. Now, in the 21st century, young women make no attempt to hide their babybulge in specially designed clothes: “Heavy with child” (an old-fashioned term), they flaunt their condition in whatever normal clothes will stretch over their about-to-give-birth bellies.

73

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes

First Phase Mourning Dress Worn for a Year and a Day

Silk gauze: heat-crinkled into a rough, textured, special fabric called “mourning crepe.” Used liberally on bodices, collars, cuffs, sleeves and sewn onto skirts in broad bands. Economy version: Vermicelli pattern printed in endless curly-cues of black-on-black. 74

Out-of-Style

How to Recognize Mourning Clothes in a Vintage Photograph The basic rule for mourning dress for both men and women was nothing should be shiny and everything should be black. There were four differing degrees of mourning. Each had its own rules and depended upon how close one’s relationship was to the deceased: Widows were required to grieve longer than widowers—women for 2½ years, men for three months. The most frequently recommended fabric was called “mourning crepe.” (European spelling was “crape.”) This was a semitransparent silk gauze (sometimes combined with other fibers) created by a special heat process that crimped and tightly pleated the fabric into a rough, textured finish (like roughly crinkled crepe paper). An entire industry developed to supply this specialized fabric to the world. The best quality was made in England and was known as English Crepe. A cheaper variation was a fabric that had repetitious swirls of a vermicelli-type pattern, printed black-on-black. It appears in vintage photographs, where it reads like a printed fabric of endless “curly-cues.” A few other fabrics were also utilized for mourning but they had obscure, obsolete names that are not relevant to this audience. However, they all had one characteristic in common: they were dull, lifeless black fabrics. A genealogist reader of my Ancestry Magazine columns sent me a picture to time-date for her. My computer screen showed key style clues of vertical sleeve puffs which pre-dated Leg-o’-mutton Sleeves. But when I enlarged the picture at printout, something more informative jumped out at me! The women were wearing variations of First Phase Mourning Dress, as evidenced by the generous amount of special First Phase Mourning Crepe fabric on their clothes. This meant that someone close to them had died within that year. This was an important clue to date the death of a member of the family tree, based upon the vertical sleeve puff of 1890–1893. Lesson learned: If pictures are small, enlarge them to find hidden style clues.

75

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes

The Four Stages of Mourning in the 19th Century The amount of crepe fabric used corresponded to whether it was used for First Mourning, Second Mourning, Ordinary Mourning or Half Mourning. For First Mourning, the specialized crepe was used more lavishly. It appeared on fronts or yokes of bodices, on sleeve caps, collars and cuffs. It was inset onto skirts in wide bands across the stomach and/or the lower skirt. For Second Mourning, less conspicuous use of crepe was required. Collars and cuffs could now be modified with narrow white liners; for the remaining mourning periods, seamstresses and milliners creatively incorporated the use of crepe into flowers, leaves and various embellishments. 1840s–1850s: Widows wore plain black dresses with narrow white collars and cuffs. These were not very different from the plain black dresses with white collars and cuffs they normally wore. However, widows had to completely cover their hair, allowing no white trim to show under their bonnets. 1850s–1885: From the 1850s to 1885, it was permissible to wear mourning dresses made in the latest styles . . . except they had to be black, and the amount of mourning crepe on a dress was dictated by the particular degree of mourning one was observing. 1860s–1870s: By the 1860s to 1870s, everyone from Europe to America was copying the latest fashion plates and following advice in women’s periodicals on how to adapt the latest fashions and social dictates to mourning dress. Off-limits were shiny black or gilt buttons or buckles; gold was a “no-no.” Men replaced their coat buttons with dull ones for the duration of their mourning. People often dyed their existing clothes black so they could avoid the expense of buying new ones. There were places that rented mourning clothes. Some stores stocked black clothes for immediate use. Here is a quote from a Lord and Taylor mail-order catalog of 1881: “All requisite articles for full or partial mourning are kept in stock or made-to-order. Complete outfits supplied at very short notice.” Later, entire stores were built to cater to the needs of the bereaved. There was a specialty store like this in London, and also a famous one in Paris—La Grande Maison de Noir (The Big House of Black). Store owners tried to instill superstition in people by telling them, “It is bad luck to store mourning clothes in your home for future use.” This created

76

Out-of-Style an endless market for sneaky merchants because someone was always dying. There were even advertisements in newspapers in which poor women tried to resell their used mourning clothes (and get them out of the house). By 1900 the only sign of mourning required for men was a black armband. Women had stricter rules: They had to wear mourning dress for longer periods of time and had more specific “DO’S and DON’T’S.” This reflected how women’s lives in the 19th century were defined by marriage, while men had their own identity. Men could even remarry in a short time, but women could not. When Prince Albert died in 1861 leaving Queen Victoria a widow, she influenced the rest of the world to follow her strict rules of mourning etiquette. She, herself, remained in mourning clothes for the rest of her life. Of particular influence was her adaptation of a millinery design from an earlier era, first worn by Mary Queen of Scots (Mary Stuart). The brim had a distinctive, pinched peak that came to a “V” in the center of the forehead. It had been a fashionable flowered hat of that era; but in black, with a black veil, it was transformed into a mourning headdress and so became a Forever Fashion associated with bereavement. Queen Victoria wore this indoors and out for the rest of her life. It came to be known as a Widow’s Peak, which explains why someone whose hairline grows in a “V” at the center forehead is said to have a “Widow’s Peak.” The average widow had to wait a year and a day to progress to the second degree of mourning, which lasted another nine months. She could then wear less crepe on her dress and bonnet, which could now be trimmed in white. The bereaved woman could then progress to silk—if it had a dull finish. There are descriptions of black satin mourning dresses in books, but they were probably delustered satins, which we know as “peau de soie.” Each decade had differing, and ever-changing, social dictates regarding what to wear and how long to wear it. For widows each degree of mourning eased the rules slightly, until two and a half years had elapsed. The time of official bereavement differed according to which relative had died: father, mother, child, sibling, grandparents, etc. These varied from three months to one year. 77

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes 1870–1885: The greatest influence of strict Victorian mourning dictates reached its zenith from 1870–1885. Although the archaic customs still remained at the turn of the century, by 1904 they were less rigidly observed; 20th-century attitudes were changing. 1890s: By the 1890s even the most respectable widows felt comfortable appearing publicly with their now shorter mourning veils, which covered only the back of their hats. It was now permissible to show hair at the front of their widow’s peak bonnets, which could also show a ruching of white, if desired. Children also wore mourning dress in whatever fashions were in style at the time. Their existing clothes were often dyed black because, by the time the mourning period was over, they would probably have outgrown them anyway. White trim was permissible for children. Handkerchiefs to cry into had black borders. (This was long before throw away tissues.) 1850s–1900: Hat veils were deeply bordered in black—the length of the veils eventually shortening to fingertip or shoulder length. 1894–1904: Until 1894 sales of mourning crepe had been as high in America as it had been in France and England; but starting in 1894, sales dropped considerably.

Mourning in the 20th Century 1904: By 1904 Americans had rejected the strict mourning etiquette of Victorian England, adopting more modern attitudes about everything. This was reflected in women’s more strident demands for social freedoms and equality with men. In addition, they were seeking more comfort and function in their clothing (Reform Dress for sports had been accepted in the 1890s) and more liberated styles were just a few years away. Turn-of-the-century fashion now required fabrics that were soft and flowing, even “wispy.” New, synthetic fibers like rayon were being developed and used. Mourners gratefully replaced the stiff, uncomfortable fabrics of the past with softer ones, causing the closing of textile mills whose specialty for decades had been producing mourning fabrics exclusively.

78

Out-of-Style 1913: White crepe could be worn at home or for evening dress and for Half Mourning. 1914: In France, an enlightened writer suggested that if mourners added a little more white, “It would add a touch of lightness . . . like a smile on a sad face.” There were many compelling reasons to simplify and abandon the strict, and now archaic, mourning rules of Victorian England that had become oppressive in the fast-moving modern world. During World War I, the custom that required long periods of seclusion from society did not fit into the European (and later American) way of life. People, especially women, were active and busy doing important war work. 1915: In the summer of 1915, there were so many war casualties in England and France (and later in 1917–1918 when America joined the fray) that the sight of so many grieving widows, mothers and relatives in somber black clothes was damaging the morale of the troops who were home on leave, as well as depressing the public who still had loved ones at the front. 1919: Widows now mourned only for one year and six months. This was one year shorter than the 2½ years required in the Victorian era.

Mourning Dress Is Dead! 1932–1933: French fashion periodicals proclaimed heavy, textured, mourning crepe veils to be passé. The replacement was light and airy voile or georgette, edged in rayon crepe, to be worn with sophisticated, bias-cut, rayon crepe dresses. This was fashion’s favorite fabric in the 1930s to the 1940s. It was loved for its fluid and drapeable quality. This fashion fabric allowed widows to dress mainstream. The veil could now be shorter. Shoes could have a narrow white trim, and black and white jewelry was permissible. Veils need no longer cover the face. Although widow’s caps were still advertised, some with a widow’s peak brim, they now fit closer to the head, not high, arched and conspicuous as before. 1945: After World War II, formal mourning dress in the United States was discontinued except for State and formal funerals. I remember seeing newsreels (this was before live TV) of President Roosevelt’s funeral attended by the beautiful wife of one of President Roosevelt’s sons. She, the actress Faye Emerson, wore a well-cut, plain black suit, her blonde hair pulled severely

79

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes back, and with minimal makeup; she was stunning in her stark simplicity (it looked almost irreverent to look that good at a funeral). 1950s: By the 1950s, strict Victorian mourning dictates were no longer observed in England except by royalty and working class families who found solace and social status in maintaining the old customs. 1952: The last public appearance of Queen Victoria’s mourning cap, with its “widow’s peak” dipping down on the forehead, was worn by Queen Mary in 1952 when George VI died. 1963: Then, there was the young Jacqueline Kennedy, who planned the dramatically beautiful, and archaically formal, funeral arrangements for her assassinated young husband, President John F. Kennedy, in 1963. No one who watched the trappings of the formal State funeral procession unfold will ever forget it. Mrs. Kennedy, a famous international fashion icon, wore a tailored black coat and pillbox hat. A shoulder-length, black mourning veil covered her bereaved face. I am sure the origin of a face-covering veil was a kind and considerate desire to give a grieving woman much needed privacy in her own space, while hiding the ravages of sleepless nights and endless tears from the curious eyes of others.

The Colors of Mourning White is the most ancient of funereal colors. It is still worn in China, India, Africa and parts of Europe. In the 19th and 20th centuries, white was commonly worn by the European peasantry and by English people living in the countryside. 1861: The death of Queen Victoria’s beloved husband, Prince Albert, in 1861, brought strict rules of mourning for the Royal Court and its aristocrats. The general populace also followed the prescribed customs, as did the Americans. 1860s–1870s: It was generally accepted everywhere that mourning dresses could be of the latest styling. The designs and advice came from fashion plates and periodicals in Godey’s Lady’s Book, Harpers Bazar, Harper’s Magazine and Demorest’s Monthly. They differed from regular clothes only in that they had to be black and the use of mourning crepe had to be incorporated into the design. 1893–1903: Certain colors other than black were permitted during HalfMourning. The color grey was an acceptable alternative color for Second 80

Out-of-Style Stage and Half-Mourning, as were white, mauve and a very dark purple (with the little-known name heliotrope)—a color which was declared unfashionable in 1873.

Life (and Weddings) Must Go On In the 19th century not all brides chose white; for practical and economic reasons, some chose gowns in a style and color that could be worn afterward as their “best” dress. Many grey wedding dresses can be found in museums, not because the brides were in mourning, but because grey was a soft, pleasing color that could be worn again later, a good reason for brides in mourning to also choose grey. In any case, during a mourning period (as when a parent died shortly before a planned wedding) white was acceptable with a few restrictions: The bouquet must be all white with no green leaves showing. The bridal veil must be white with a deep white border. White gloves must have some black sewn down the back. Books on manners warned the bride in a second marriage to be sure to remove her old wedding ring to make room for the new one. In the 19th century, regardless of the fault-free reasons that brought about second marriages, they were never completely accepted socially, because then people would need to consciously accept that a respectable woman had slept with two men. (Here is another milestone in social mores: In the 21st century, no one cares!) Newly married widows or widowers were cautioned to resume the rules of mourning for their deceased, previous spouse the very day after the second wedding until the prescribed periods of mourning had passed. They were also instructed to withhold any exhibition of joy and extreme happiness at the wedding itself. (This was probably easy to do if the second groom was chosen for economic necessity or the bride was chosen because the widower needed someone to cook and care for the children.) This brings to mind the story told about when Abraham Lincoln’s mother died while he was still quite young. His father heard about a nice lady in the adjoining state who had been widowed. Although he knew her only slightly, he rode over to propose, telling her that the next time the preacher came by they would get married; they did, and fortunately she turned out to be a wonderful, loving mother for young Abe, who became one of America’s most honored presidents. 81

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes Here are more rules that governed second weddings: All traditions of first weddings were to be omitted. The couple was instructed that the mood should be “somewhere between joy and regret.” Recent widows were allowed to wear white, but not a white veil. Instead they could wear a hat or a toque (a high, crowned, brimless hat), but never orange blossoms, and they could not have bridesmaids. In spite of these restrictions, there is a curious vintage photograph of a wedding party in the late 1890s. The bride is in all white and the bridesmaids are in light-colored dresses; however, all (except the bride) are wearing black hats. This was the concession to tradition for a bride who had a recent death in her immediate family. There used to be a rule that a guest should never wear black to a wedding. It was thought to be depressing and perhaps an omen of bad luck to the marriage. This outmoded superstition is no longer followed, and the little black dress (or gown if a formal wedding) is the color of choice for many. In fact, since the last part of the 20th century, the preferred color for sophisticated bridesmaids has been black. That is because bridesmaids usually are expected to pay for their own gowns: They are no longer willing to buy overly fancy, pastel dresses that they will never wear again.

Mourning Jewelry After Prince Albert died in 1861, causing the world to mourn along with the bereaved Queen Victoria, mourning etiquette produced rules restricting the wearing of jewelry. 1870s–1880s: By the 1870s and 1880s, all mourning jewelry had to have a dull, matte finish. It would have been a social scandal if one who was in deep First Mourning were to wear a shiny, faceted ornament. Jewelry was limited to only unpolished black jet or black glass for the first year. Unusual pieces were created to commemorate the death of a loved one. For instance, after photography became available in the 1840s, lockets had the photos of the deceased placed inside. At first these were daguerreotype portraits on glass; later they were paper prints. They included “in memoriam” engravings and dates of death. Lockets containing the hair of the deceased were also worn.

82

Out-of-Style Memorial rings, brooches and crosses became popular. These were made of polished carved wood and unpolished jet. Popular symbols of remembrance carved into jewelry were trees, plants, flowers, lilies, ivy, ears of corn, forgetme-nots, pansies and sometimes funeral urns. 1893: By 1893, black glass jewelry was made in America by the still-going-strong Libby Glass Company. These pieces could be worn after the mourning period and for social occasions later, making the original cost worthwhile. Actually, the wearing of mourning jewelry became a status symbol, resulting in the creation of long, large-link chains with or without large pendants.

83

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes

From Baggy Bloomers to Sexy Bikinis 1850s

1920s

84

1880s

1930s

1914

1940s

1950s

Out-of-Style

The Evolution of Bathing Suits 1850s–1950s and Beyond In the mid-1850s, the first made-for-the-purpose Bathing Costumes were manufactured. They were called “Bathing Costumes” because women did not yet “swim”—they dunked! At that time, the long-sleeved, knee-length dress and Turkish bloomers required seven to eight yards of fabric. When wet, the wool became heavy and soggy, which served the deliberate purpose of hiding the female body. A contemporary writer warned, “Care should be taken lest they reveal the figure when wet.” (They had not yet learned the allure of a wet T-shirt as introduced in the 1950s by the voluptuous Italian actress Sophia Loren.) By the 1870s, short sleeves appeared but necklines were still high to protect delicate skin from suntans. Turkish bloomers, separate from the dress, had drawstring waists. In addition, two security buttons guaranteed modesty in case both the drawstring and one button popped on the beach. Dark colors were preferred because red faded to pink. Women wore Turkish bloomers until the 1880s, when they evolved to openat-the-hem trousers, four inches from the ankle. It was now permissible to show the arms, so “sleeveless” became the norm. Trousers shortened to knickerbockers, (aka knickers), and were joined to the bodice, becoming the original basis of one-piece swimsuits. A separate detachable skirt was added: but modesty still reigned. A contemporary writer warned families not to bring young daughters to the beach, where men and boys mingled openly with women and girls. In 1880s England, men and women did not bathe together. In America, beaches were co-ed. American women wore long black stockings with their bathing attire; English women did not, causing an American visitor to suggest that “English women would look more ‘decent’ if they covered their legs!” (Perhaps Englishwomen felt braver to bare more on segregated beaches.) 85

Chapter

7

Special Occasion Clothes The “Bathing Beauty” was conceived by pioneer film producer Mack Sennett, whose Keystone Kops are synonymous with the crazy comedies of early films. A pretty girl in abbreviated clothing, showing a bit of leg, could always get space on the front page of a newspaper. The word pinup came into our language as men everywhere “pinned-up” pictures of pretty girls on the walls of their personal space or in men’s hangouts. Favorites were drawings of curvaceous girls air brushed to perfection by artists Petty and Vargas. These idolized beauties appeared as centerfolds in Esquire. During World War II, the favorite pinup of every soldier, sailor and marine was the back-view pose of film star Betty Grable. Provocatively, she looked over her shoulder displaying her delightfully rounded derriere and famous legs. The two-piece, midriff-baring swimsuit of the 1940s was the most popular style of its time; it was my personal favorite because it showed off my firm midriff and sexy bra; shorts were crotch-length, skirted and waist-high. In the 1950s, influenced by the New Look in clothes, the only swimsuits available in stores were one-piece, corset-like styles. I remember being so frustrated not to be able to buy a two-piece suit that I bought a one-piece suit and cut it into two! By contrast, there was a true story in Reader’s Digest about a woman whose apartment was on fire. The one irreplaceable object she chose to save was a one-piece bathing suit that didn’t make her look fat. In the 1950s, a famous topless French Revue called Le Lido de Paris came to Las Vegas. Americans were shocked! . . . and came to see it in droves! In addition to being topless, the showgirls wore high-cut, skimpy panties, which we now call bikinis or thongs. Since Vaudeville days, showgirls have always worn G-strings (made of nudecolored fabric) for personal hygiene, under their costumes. In fact, wardrobe women and the girls themselves, could often be seen making new G-strings for costume replacements or as sexy lingerie to wear in their real lives. Now, the G-strings had become highly visible costume components with rhinestones, sequins and feathers: their new name was the “Bikini,” named after a tiny atoll in the Pacific that had been decimated by the test of an atom bomb. During this block of time in the mid-1950s, we visited Las Vegas. In the daytime, we went for a boat ride at nearby Lake Mead at Hoover Dam. Boarding a boat

86

Out-of-Style next to us were two Vegas showgirls out on dates. They were wearing the first bikinis I had ever seen worn in public . . . they looked so NAKED! I, who had been in countless backstage dressing rooms in which girls waiting to go on stage sat undressed; I, who had fitted numerous girls wearing just G-strings; I, who, by now, had built a reputation for designing sexy costumes, was totally embarrassed in my husband’s presence at this public display of nudity! . . . proving there is a difference between impersonal, theatrical nudity and “real” life. It was at this time that shapely French actress Brigitte Bardot was photographed wearing a bikini. The world was scandalized . . . but women everywhere quickly welcomed the bikini into their own wardrobes. Here is a sidebar that explains why showgirls and stage actresses often wait undressed backstage: There is a strict rule that to prevent wrinkled costumes, they are not allowed to sit in wardrobe. (Some girls are genteel enough to wear kimonos or dressing gowns—others are not.) In the movies, actresses in full costume who are waiting between takes relax on slant boards to protect their clothes from wrinkles which would be magnified on screen.

87

Chapter

8

Modern Improvements

Early Photography Before “Say Cheese!” They Said, “See the Birdie!”

1890s–1920s

88

Out-of-Style

Chapter

8

Modern Improvements How Early Photography Froze Moments in Time So That We Can Look at the Past

I

leave for others, like Maureen Taylor, The Photo Detective, to show you how to add up all the clues in a photo. I am more interested in how to date pictures by the clothes that were worn and the social history that the clothes reveal.

Photography first became available to the general public after 1840, when the first commercial daguerreotype studio opened in New York. Soon, other studios sprang up in cities and small towns all across America. Itinerant photographers traveled to remote areas, with horse-drawn darkrooms, leaving us the compelling images of people and landscapes of long ago, including graphic coverage of the Civil War. By the 1850s three million daguerreotypes had been sold in America. The cost started at $5.00 each, decreasing as volume increased. The resulting photographic record of how people really looked and how they wore their clothes has enabled us to understand changing fashions and to appreciate different personalities by their attitude, carriage and facial expressions before a camera. Before, only wealthy people could afford to have their portraits painted for posterity. Now, everyone could have their likeness permanently recorded. Having one’s picture taken became a status symbol, resulting in every surface of a Victorian parlor being decorated with family pictures. (The word parlor is now an obsolete word.) 89

Chapter

8

Modern Improvements This brings to mind the story of when my 88-year-old grandmother, born in 1859, came to visit me in my newly furnished, “newlywed” first home. It was 1947. I watched proudly as she surveyed the clean lines of my modern décor, which required minimal bric-a-brac. As I waited for her compliments, she pointed to my exotic ceramic wall sculptures and the smartly framed art groupings and critically exclaimed, “Huh! . . . You should have Ma’s picture, Pa’s picture . . . EVERYONE’S picture!” This was not exactly the response I had expected; but now, in view of my research for this book, I have finally come to understand the source of her fossilized taste level. In 1855, the development of negatives allowed the unlimited duplication of formal portraits. This made possible the social custom of leaving small photographic calling cards, called “cartes de visites.” Many of these calling cards were pasted into family albums, leaving modern genealogists to wonder, “Who are these people and why are they in my family album?” Adding to the confusion, some people collected pictures of celebrities, politicians, Civil War heroes and entertainers, leaving us to wonder if we had famous ancestors. These pictures, however, show us a wonderful array of stylish clothes worn by important people of their era. In early photographs, everyone looks stiff and glum—never smiling. That was due to the fact it took a full five minutes for the camera to take the picture and people had to remain immobilized. Children were not photographed because they could not remain still for that length of time—and neither could a smile. Fortunately, photographs eventually took only a few minutes or seconds to record and now we can study delightful pictures of old-time children. On a more somber note, photos of children, seemingly asleep in baby carriages, are probably “remembrance” photos of children who had died. Internationally, photographs were so prized that when emigrants left Europe for the long voyage to America, they had their pictures taken as mementos for the families left behind, because they knew they might never see them again. And for the same reason they also wanted keepsake photos of their European relatives to take to America with them.

90

Out-of-Style After arrival, as soon as they had enough money, the new immigrants bought fashionable American clothes and had themselves photographed, so they could send pictures back to the Old Country to prove they had safely arrived and were now “Real Americans.” To appreciate the wonder and excitement of what our ancestors must have experienced in first seeing their own likeness reproduced for posterity, I recall how in the early 1970s I watched amazed at my first demonstration of the revolutionary new Polaroid camera, which instantly photographed and developed pictures before your very eyes. I was wearing a green outfit with white polka dots. As I watched the camera spit out my picture, it reminded me of a child sticking out his tongue. As the picture slowly slid out of the camera, my outfit became increasingly greener. Then, white polka dots began to appear (rather like measles breaking out). I was astonished and enthralled! Little did I dream that some day digital cameras would make everything else seem primitive.

91

Chapter

8

Modern Improvements

The First Sewing Machines What an Old Sew and Sew! The invention of the humble sewing machine made possible “democracy” in clothing and created several new industries—Here is “Howe”: In 1846, an American, Elias Howe, patented the first lock-stitch sewing machine which could sew a long, strong seam (beating previous inventors to a registered patent). Earlier, hand-cranked machines produced chain stitches that ran like stockings if a thread broke. The operator used one hand to turn a wheel, while the other hand manipulated yards and yards of fabric as the wheel turned. Prior to that, clothes had been laboriously sewn by hand. Sewing machines for factory and home use improved, allowing American readyto-wear, textile and shoe industries to grow, making available to everyone the world’s first fashionable, affordable, ready-made clothes. This eliminated the social caste system inherited from Europe, whereby people were instantly judged by the quality, and current or passé styling of their clothes. In 1851, Isaac Singer, another American, perfected, manufactured and introduced the foot-pedaled, treadle sewing machine for home use. This replaced hand-cranked machines. Both hands were now free to manipulate fabric. Singer also introduced his invention to England. The Singer Company innovated modern methods for manufacturing, sales and advertising. Singer pioneered the use of standardized machine parts, factory assembly lines, and monthly installment plans. They used pretty women to demonstrate their machines. To make home sewing socially respectable (for women who had always hired dressmakers), Singer sold machines at half-price to ladies’ church groups.They also offered trade-in allowances on old machines to professional seamstresses. The result was the sewing machine became the first mechanical device in the American home.

92

Out-of-Style In 1861, the first year of the Civil War, the immediate need for one-and-a-half million Union Army uniforms was realized by new methods of mechanized mass production, a method used by the government for the first time. This required the first standardized development of measurements for American men. After the war, utilizing these statistics, the ready-to-wear and shoe industries boomed as factories switched from military to civilian clothes. A sidebar to this was that the Confederate Army was increasingly short of uniforms, their soldiers often wearing ragtag or homemade uniforms. This led to some incidents of “friendly fire.” In 1859, the Butterick Pattern Company sold paper patterns for fashionable clothes in reliable sizes accompanied by simple instructions. The styles were modified from fanciful European designs. Eventually these patterns sold internationally by the millions, which helped cross-pollinate fashions worn around the world. In 1872, mail order catalogs offered ready-made clothes for men, women and children while specialty and department stores stocked clothes for immediate sale. By the 1880s, all clothing was sewn by machine, either at home or in factories (except for hand finishing). Sewing machine attachments soon became available to apply elaborate braids, fringes, ruffles and trims, replacing tedious hand sewing. This provided an embarrassment of riches: Victorian furniture and dresses were lavishly embellished with trimming, resulting in clothes of that era to be described as having an “upholstered look.” So, that is “Howe” the humble sewing machine built entire industries and ultimately allowed the average family to be as well dressed as aristocrats.

93

Chapter

8

94

Modern Improvements

Before Washing Machines and Dryers

Out-of-Style

Wash Day Over a Washtub Before Washing Machines and Dryers For centuries, “Wash Day” was a dreaded chore that lasted for days, which is why, in the 17th century, they only washed clothes every three months; in the 18th century, every five to six weeks. Wealthy people hired laundresses. Poor people did the laundry themselves. Some laundresses took the clothes home to wash, thereby creating commercial laundries. Monograms were embroidered on clothes to identify them, which made monogrammed clothes a status symbol. Legend has it that one day designer Charles Worth saw his laundress pull her top skirt up into an apron and tie it in the back—VOILA! The birth of the bustle! Soap had to be made at home with fat scraps and lye. Water had to be handcarried by buckets from wells or creeks to a cook pot boiling over a wood fire. It took numerous hot pots to fill a larger cauldron where clothes were agitated by a wooden paddle, rinsed in another pot, then laboriously wrung out by hand and hung outdoors to dry, or hung all over the kitchen, depending on the weather. By the 19th century, conditions improved. Scented soap became commercially available. The Industrial Revolution brought labor-saving improvements such as hand-cranked washing machines; rubber wringers were attached to the washtub to eliminate painful and difficult wringing by hand. Later, pipes or hoses were attached to allow water to flow directly in and out of the washer. But “Wash Day” still took days to sort, soak, wash, dry, mend and iron. In 1827, a New York housewife, tired of scrubbing her husband’s “Ring-Aroundthe-Collar” (an advertising slogan for a 1930s soap company), impulsively cut off collars and cuffs, thereby creating an industry of replaceable collars and cuffs. Working men are often seen in old photographs wearing shirts without their collars attached. In 1908, the first electric washing machine agitated the clothes mechanically, but hand-feeding each piece into the wringer was still necessary until 1946. Completely automatic wash and spin machines became available after World War II. Automatic dryers did not arrive until the mid-1950s.

95

Chapter

8

Modern Improvements Many fabrics like silks, satins, velvets and brocades could not be washed. Dry cleaning was unknown or in its infancy. Women wore numerous layers of underclothes, which protected their outer garments. People were skilled in spot cleaning. Women wore replaceable white collars and cuffs, and dust ruffles on the hems of skirts were replaceable. Cotton was universally favored because of its washability. Dark calico prints were preferred for everyday chores and for “Second Best” dresses. We have advanced a long way from the time when primitive women washed clothes in the nearest creek, pounded them clean with sand and stones, then dried everything on rocks and bushes. It is hard to believe, but today some third-world countries still wash and dry their clothes this way.

Women’s Hairstyle Notes 19 th to 20 th Century

The Permanent Wave Machine 1906–1950s

96

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hairstyle Notes : 19th to 20th Century Prior to the 1870s women wore their hair parted in the center. Hair was never cut, except for serious illness. In 1872, a Parisian hairdresser, Marcel Grateau, revolutionized hair care when he used heated tongs to create temporary waves in women’s hair. This came to be known generically as “The Marcel Wave.” He later invented an improved “waving iron.” This advanced the hair care industry, creating a new fashion for waved and curled hairpieces, which women pinned into their own hair. Most of this hair came from peasant girls in Germany, Italy and France, and also from prisoners and paupers. In Catholic countries, large quantities of hair came from novices entering convents. In the 19th century, many women washed their hair only once a month using borax or egg yolks for shampoo. Waved hair was again popular in the 1930s and was still called a Marcel hairstyle, even though it was actually finger-waved. The world’s first hair dryer was invented by another French hairdresser when he attached a fabric hood to a stove pipe. A woman sat on a chair with one end of the pipe connected to the stove, the hooded end on her head. . . . Voila! . . . the end of long, wet hair in winter and the beginning of sitting under a hot dryer reading the latest fashion magazine and scandal sheet. The first company to specialize in hair care products and cosmetics especially for African Americans opened in 1881. In 1900, The Wella Corp. invented a special netting on which to build hair pieces. This made it possible to create better wigs and fashionable hairpieces. The Permanent Wave Machine was introduced in 1906. Before the 1940s the results of hair coloring were inconsistent, depending upon the skill of the operator to know how long to keep it on, or what combination of coloring agents to use. In the 1940s, the Lapin Brothers of Hollywood developed a method whereby a specific hair color was contained in a specific bottle; when used as directed, that hair color came out the same every time. They sold the formula to a national hair care manufacturer and the rest is history.

97

Chapter

9

How to Trace Your Ancestors . . . Literally!

Tracing Your Ancestors from Photographs

Here’s a unique way to isolate the style clues that time-date old photographs by eliminating superfluous details. It’s the reason artists squint their eyes while drawing from a live model or still-life. Purpose: to block out unimportant details so that primary lines stand out. The combination of style details that together make up a garment is what places it in its own time frame.

Supplies needed to make tracings

Woman

• Medium weight, transparent plastic cut from notebook sheet-protectors. (Note: Plastic that is too thin may allow ink to bleed through to picture.) • Fine point Sharpie™ ink (ordinary pens smear ink). • Sheet of white paper. • Magnifying glass to bring out hidden details.

• Hair: Center parted, close to head, pulled back, no false hair pieces added, hair tightly waved at top. • Bodice: Long, tailored jacket, corseted fit; high neck, many buttons. • Sleeves: Narrow, smooth sleeve cap, velvet collar and cuffs with white liners. • Skirt: Ample fullness, no hoop, long “apron” overskirt, barely visible bustle covers entire backside with rows of small puffs. Bustle starts at high-back waist, underskirt is flounced. • Jewelry: Wedding ring, gold chain with tassel, pin at neck with throat latch.

Method 1. Lay plastic over picture. Trace silhouettes, hairstyles or hats. Trace only significant details. (Use same method for children’s pictures.) 2. For women, trace sleeve shapes, skirt lengths and styles. Particularly notice if hoops or bustles are visible. For men, trace coat length, shape and fit; necktie styles; collar shapes, especially where collar is placed on the neck; moustaches, beards and sideburns; and hat shapes. 3. Remove tracing and attach white paper underneath. You can now see more because there is less to distract. 4. Write down your observations (see sample), and compare your drawing to illustrations or old photographs in this or other books until you recognize a reliably dated match. (It’s like playing BINGO, but with clothes, instead of numbers!) 98

Man • Hair: Short, close to head, side parted, no sideburns, clean-shaven. • Collar: High, round neckband only, no turn-down collar. • Necktie: Wide cravat knot. • Coat: Four-button sack coat, crotch length, narrow across chest, square-cut front. • Vest: Square-cut front, watch chain with dangling charms. • Pants: No front crease.

Out-of-Style

Chapter

9

How to Trace Your Ancestors . . . Literally! Style Clues That Result from Tracings Look at the tracings on the facing page. (1) Props. The book she is holding can’t be read with a home magnifying glass. Is this a Bible? A wedding certificate? (2) Research reveals a man of the 1870s wearing a round, preacher-like collar with an ascot tie. (3) The woman’s hair is plastered down, with tight “Marceled” waves, created with a heated machine introduced in 1872. Her bodice is long and tailored with a corset-like fit. The ample skirt shows a bustle in back that emanates from the waist. Bustles were out of style by 1875. The apron-like top skirt suggests a flounced underskirt. Deduction: All the style clues date this picture at about 1873.

Using Out-of-Style as a Reference If you are using this book as a reference, first determine if the picture you are trying to date is from the 19th or the 20th century. Turn to the correct century for the specific category: Men, Women, Boys or Girls. Within that section, look for the silhouette that most closely resembles your tracing, and read the descriptive text that accompanies the illustration you feel is the best match.

Style Clues for the Fashion Detective Sometimes clothes were remodeled or designed by the wearer or a “creative” dressmaker and there is a curious mixture of ideas in the garment. In that case, the hairstyle is the best dating clue. Occasionally we see an outfit that is so plain and without distinction that it is difficult to classify. The wearer was probably very poor and is wearing strictly utilitarian clothes. The skirt length would be the only clue here. If the woman in the picture is sitting and her skirt amply covers her lap and knees, the skirt was probably wide. Does a bustle show? If so, does it emanate from her waist? Can you see the ridge of a hoop? If the skirt of a sitting woman fits narrowly over her knees, can you see decorations or a train low in back? These are style clues that will help you date the picture. 99

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Operating a treadle-pedaled vintage sewing machine was like using a modern Stairmaster™ exercise machine while sitting down and trying to manipulate heavy fabric and intricate pieces into a short-arm machine . . . periodically raising and lowering the needle by turning the hand wheel . . . (but it was a lot faster than hand sewing).

100

Out-of-Style

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century Style Clues for the Fashion Detective

I

first became aware of how similarly vintage designers worked to how modern designers work when I read the book The Woman in Fashion by esteemed fashion historian and vintage clothes collector Doris Langley Moore. She said, “By 1867, further enlargement of the skirt was impossible, so it began to be drawn to the back into a new kind of bustle” (Phase 2). This caused me to imagine the progressive steps in the ensuing decades that begat “The Birth of the Bustle.” This was a EUREKA! moment for me that ultimately inspired this book. It led me to imagine the following scenarios: “Well, HOOP SKIRTS CAN’T GET ANY BIGGER, so now that we flattened the stomach (Phase 2) with the triangular hoop and smooth, front-gored skirts, what can we do with the excess yardage? Let’s pull it to the back and leave it longer there, then in the front . . . mmm . . . that looks good, but we still need to keep the small, back waist pad to prop up the fabric that bunches up when a lady walks.” (This pad later evolved into various large, wired contraptions.) Since interest was now focused on the back, someone lifted up the top tier of the apron-like TOP SKIRT and draped it to the back, tying the excess fabric into a POUF . . . VOILA! . . . the BIRTH OF THE BUSTLE! (Phase 4) As mentioned earlier, one day designer Charles Worth saw his laundress pull her top skirt up and tie it in the back to keep it clean, thereby creating the first bustle (sounds logical to me!).

101

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century BUT WAIT! . . . pulling the top skirt to the back had tightened the front and drawn it closer to the body. . . . NOW THE TRIANGULAR HOOP had to be abandoned and the wide skirt (made to accommodate the hoop) had to be narrowed at the hem! The hoop/crinoline was now replaced by the crinolette, a combination stiffened petticoat with built-in wire bustle support. (See illustration: Chapter 3, What Was Hiding Under Her Bustle?) Even without a hoop, underskirts were still full; but from the front, the silhouette looked shockingly narrow, suggesting the shape of the lower body for the first time since the early 1820s (Phase 4). Bustles reached their maximum size in 1875, at which time Paris declared bustles “DEAD.” This happens when a fashion reaches its most exaggerated form. The next look is usually the exact opposite of what came before. 1874–1882: Skirts narrowed to “A” line, then to straight sheaths (Phase 5). • Back interest dropped down to lower hip and back of the knees. • Skirts were more elaborate than bodices; fancy trims circled the skirts around and around. Jackets were tailored. • Skirts were always flat in front, with primary interest at the back. This was the beginning of the Tied-Back Dress that actually had inside ties which attached to the front, pulling it against the body, while allowing the back to protrude into a fan-tailed train. All dresses of the mid-to-late 1870s were tied back. You will note that the one recurring item of apparel worn consistently in all the various phases was the tightly fitted, tailored jacket/bodice that varied from short-to-long . . . to short . . . then long again. This mostly uncluttered tailored top was worn over a tightly laced, boned corset. Design-wise, it was a good counterbalance to the often overly trimmed, elaborately draped and bustled skirts of the 1870s and 1880s. Beautiful trimmings, fringes, ruchings and ribbons were now being mass produced in factories on newly developed machinery, making these previously extravagant decorations affordable and available to almost everyone. Improved sewing machines had mechanical attachments that could apply these trims, thereby eliminating the tedious hand sewing of the past. The resulting

102

Out-of-Style highly embellished clothes, like the furniture and draperies of the Victorian parlor, reflected this abundance of riches . . . which is why this period of fashion has been described as “THE UPHOLSTERED ERA.” Tight-fitted bodices and rigid corsets were as solid as the parlor settee. Fashions changed rapidly from 1870–1900, propelled by new methods of transportation, communication, more efficient sewing machines and the availability of commercial patterns printed in proportioned sizes. After studying hundreds of vintage photographs, the mystery of how there could have been so many creative variations of styles in the mid-to-late 19th century was solved when I became aware that pattern companies not only sold “complete” dress patterns, they also sold patterns “by the piece”—that is, pattern pieces for sleeves, bodices, collars, skirts, bustles, short or long trains, etc. All were available in SEPARATE, interchangeable components (not only for women, but for men and children too). Add to this mix the international army of milliners, designers, modistes, dressmakers, tailors, and seamstresses who each put individual skills and creative ideas into his or her work. These “mix and match” variations account for the infinite variety of ways one could reinterpret an original design; one could modify an exaggerated fashion plate to suit one’s individual taste, purse strings, lifestyle and dressmaking skills. This may account for why so many costume books give differing dates on the history of clothes. I theorize that they are studying different specimens from different collections in different museums and different vintage photographs. All of these clothes had individual “birth” dates and origins, even though they were inspired by the same fashion plates from Paris or London (but not to worry, the differing time dates vary only by a few years). Incidentally, a “modiste” or a “dressmaker” was considered to be more highly skilled than a “seamstress.” Some women patronized their local dressmakers; or some dressmakers went to homes and stayed for a few days, cutting, fitting and sewing the more complicated parts of garments while the home sewer made the simple parts of a garment herself. The intense research for this book has made the past two centuries seem a lot closer and the people more real as I have tried to put myself into their life and times and their mind-set. I have developed an enormous respect for the advanced design and patternmaking skills of our ancestors: Their infinite creativity boggles the mind! They

103

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century were brilliant in their ability to sculpt fabric, draping it skillfully to glorify the female figure. They operated treadle-pedaled sewing machines to create intricate garments with an endless variety of trimmings. I once tried to operate a treadle-pedaled vintage sewing machine. It was like using a modern “StairMaster”TM exercise machine while sitting down, and trying to manipulate heavy fabric and intricate pieces into a machine with a short arm, while you periodically raised or lowered the needle with the machine’s handwheel. I marvel at museum garments with perfectly controlled, decorative stitching done on such primitive sewing machines. In the late 1940s, a treadle-pedaled sewing machine saved the day for me in my costume shop in Hollywood. We were finishing a set of costumes for a film. They were to be picked up at 6 am by the wardrobe man; but near midnight our electric sewing machines lost power. An elderly seamstress who had learned to sew on a treadle machine finished the job on my mother’s wedding gift, a 1917 treadle-pedaled Singer sewing machine in a beautiful blonde birdseyemaple cabinet that had been kept on display as a decorative curiosity. Any modern costumer who has ever tried to re-create period clothes, even with long-arm power sewing machines and modern tools, finds it a daunting, challenging, time-consuming task. Our ancestors were so advanced in their skills that we are still studying their techniques. We must also appreciate the high level of design and development of the beautiful fabrics and trimmings created hundreds and hundreds of years ago on early hand looms and primitive machinery. They produced gorgeous brocades, laces, embroidered satins, velvets, cottons and silks. Thankfully, these can still be admired in museum collections. To sit for a photographic portrait was considered important for one’s social status and immortality, so we can be sure that our ancestors were wearing their best and latest clothes (though for some people their “best” clothes may not have been the “latest” fashion from Paris . . . keep this in mind when you time-date). In the swiftly industrializing 19th century, there was a social stigma to being “old fashioned,” a term used in vintage fashion literature for being “OUT-OFSTYLE,” so everyone tried to keep up as best they could. In studying old photographs, a Fashion Detective might wonder at the sometimes conflicting style clues from differing time frames . . . all contained in the

104

Out-of-Style same garment. This is because some people tried to update their clothes by replacing worn-out bodices or sleeves with newer style details. Fabrics were often turned inside out for renewal. This thrifty exercise salvaged yards and yards of still good fabrics in the voluminous skirts. The skill with which this was accomplished, or even the need to do so, may tell much about the wearer’s life and times. Fabric salvaged from remodeled dresses was made into men’s shirts, children’s clothes or aprons. Some were cut down intact for young girls. So, if you see a vintage photograph in which a sophisticated style seems to overpower the young wearer, she is probably wearing a hand-me-down from her mother or older sister. Starting in the 1860s, fashion literature encouraged women to reuse old clothing. This led to two-piece skirts and bodices in contrasting colors and fabrics, followed by the need to design interesting belts to hold the look together (the Garibaldi shirt and skirt.) Variations like this can be seen starting in the early1860s, finally culminating decades later in the early 1900s, when the Gibson Girl and her friends caused Sears, Roebuck to offer 159 different shirtwaist styles in their 1909 catalog. One of the modifications women utilized to adapt high fashion to their more modest lifestyles was to use less expensive fabrics, like lower-quality woolens and friendly calico. Skirts were made less voluminous (and more functional) by using five widths of fabric in a skirt, instead of the more luxurious eight widths. They wore shawls made of warm blankets instead of buying imported wool shawls or expensive tailored cloaks. A bonnet could be quickly updated with more current trimming, but minus a costly lace veil. However, wearing a fashionably shaped corset and the same number of petticoats resulted in the same up-to-date, stylish appearance as that of wealthier women. In every era (even today) there are always fashion diehards who wear styles past their time of peak popularity, either because they don’t “know” or care, or can’t afford to keep up. So, if you are seriously time-dating for genealogical purposes, take that into consideration. Wealthy women living in large homes stored their voluminous dresses in huge, to-the-ceiling, carved wooden armoires that had drawers on the bottom . . . actual closets would have been taxed as “rooms,” hence the use of cabinets for clothes storage. By contrast, sometimes clothes seen in vintage photographs are “rumpled” looking. This could have been caused by the fact 105

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century that the people were traveling or perhaps they did not have large homes with big storage cabinets. Their clothes were hung on pegs or kept in trunks. (Permanent-Press fabrics had not yet been invented.) Often the clothes look rumpled because limited skills in patternmaking, fitting, sewing and tailoring did not include inner construction such as linings and interlinings that produce crisp, smooth, professional-looking garments. These clues help inform us about the circumstances of the wearer. It should be noted that from cities to farms to small towns, women everywhere were vitally interested in stylish clothes. Current magazines, periodicals and mail-order catalogs were readily available and voraciously read, despite the fact that most readers could not afford the clothes as shown nor had anywhere except church to wear them. In spite of the need for average American women to simplify and reinterpret the often fanciful European designs, fashion was “International,” having been born from the same fountains of inspiration. Following the French Revolution of 1789, skilled fashion artisans fled to London, making that the new fashion capital of the world. English fashions then became more influential, but used French names to sound more authoritative and exotic (like Americans did until recently; although we seem to have recovered from our nouveau riche self-consciousness). Later, reversing that trend in 1858, Charles Worth, an Englishman, opened the world’s first couture house in Paris, becoming for the next several decades the world’s most copied and influential designer. At this time, America had excellent home-grown sources for wearable fashions: Godey’s, Butterick, and Demorest’s offered ideas for simplified designs that were inspired by, but not as extravagant as, the haute couture of Paris. We can safely assume that “average” European women also simplified their clothes to be less expensive and more functional. Much of our knowledge of the history of costume comes from source books first published in Europe (which is why some information needs to be translated into modern “Americanese”). Conversely, Butterick, an American pattern company which pioneered the early development of commercial patterns in graded sizes, sold its Americanized patterns all over the world. Clothes from Germany, Austria and Russia also show cross-pollination of fashion, though their interpretations were somewhat more heavy-handed and

106

Out-of-Style somber, reflecting their national style preferences. English colonies followed English fashions. In mid-century, more and more wealthy Americans could afford the ten-day steamship voyage to Europe, often bringing home trunks full of dresses from the salons of the Paris Couture. Aristocratic Europeans often requested customized changes to the original designs; but intimidated, nouveau riche Americans usually accepted the designs as shown. A century later, some of these American-owned originals were donated to the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, where these unadulterated dress designs are considered to be the best examples of 19th century high-fashion in the Museum’s entire collection. Another source of perfectly preserved 19th century dresses in the museum costume collection came from the London Wax Museum. These dresses had been made at the height of their fashion and, since they had never actually been worn, are in perfect condition. The Industrial Revolution of the 19th century was changing the world by creating new products which provided jobs, which in turn improved lives. By the early 1770s the textile industry was already thriving. By 1830 it was the first industry to be completely mechanized. The first fashion periodicals in the English language appeared as early as 1794. The “lock-stitch” sewing machine had been patented in 1846, which meant that a strong, machine-sewn seam would not “run” like a knitted stocking if a thread broke. This made possible the long, shoulder-to-hem, princess-line dresses introduced in 1859. Princess dresses stayed in style until the late1870s when two-piece jacketed outfits dominated fashion. Subsequent decades brought the transcontinental railroad, the internal combustion engine (which ultimately brought electricity), the typewriter, telephone, vacuum cleaner and the light bulb—which allowed people to sew at night, enabling poor factory seamstresses to bring “piece-work” home (and get the children to help). The end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries brought many new immigrants from Europe who were skilled tailors and seamstresses. This helped build the American Ready-to-Wear Industry, which employed a lot of people, contributing to the national economy. Affordability and accessibility to fashionable new clothes made it possible for most Americans to be democratically well-dressed, thus eliminating the 107

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century social-caste system from Europe, which instantly labeled people by the quality and current (or passé) styling of their clothes. If anyone is wondering what colors were favored in the various decades of the 19th century, you won’t find that information here. That is because vintage photographs were only in black and white, so knowing colors won’t help you time-date; knowing silhouettes and telltale style details will. The only fact relevant here is that new fabric dyes were developed in 1856 from coal-tar derivatives. The colors, at first, were not stable in water or exposure to light. The first colors were vibrant purple, magenta, bright pink, bitter-green and electric blue. It has been said that these early brilliant colors were not very becoming to women’s complexions (remember they did not wear makeup) so perhaps it was a good thing the colors quickly faded.

108

Out-of-Style

In the 1860s, fashion literature encouraged women to reuse old clothing. This led to outfits of separate skirts, blouses and jackets. Interesting belts were born to pull the look together; this was the origin of Separates and Sportswear as we know them today.

109

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

1840

110

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Women’s Clothes 1840–1850s NOTE: The various combinations of style details that together makeup a garment are what produce “the look” of an era. Styles that appear late in a decade often continue early into the next. • Skirts with rows of ruffles were introduced. • Most 1840s dresses had fan-pleated bodices. All had low-sloping shoulder seams with collars set high on the neck. This contributed to the drooping look of the era. Dresses opened in back with hooks and eyes. Late in the 1840s button fronts appeared, but they were decorative only. • An important style clue to the 1840s is that skirt fullness was achieved by tiny, closely-spaced pleats around the waist. 1850s skirts had widely-spaced waist pleats. • Corsets were rigidly stiffened from over the stomach to above the breasts; this flattened the breasts, pushing them up to overflow into the upper chest, causing an unnatural roll. This bulge in a photograph is a clue that dates a dress as 1840s. • The quickest and cheapest way for a woman to update an outfit was to copy the latest hairstyle from fashion periodicals. Therefore, if a hairstyle does not seem to fit with the clothes worn in a photograph, dating the picture by the hairstyle would be more accurate than dating it by dress details. • Small, removable and washable white collars and cuffs were worn throughout this decade. • Fingerless gloves (Mitts) were worn primarily for dinner and parties. Smooth kid gloves were worn outdoors. Small, foldable parasols were treasured accessories. • Cameos, brooches, and (later) photo-portrait lockets accented necklines.

111

Chapter

10

112

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

Out-of-Style

Women’s Dress Variations 1840–1850s ILLUSTRATION #1: The fan-pleated bodice was typical of the 1840s. Early 1840s pleats radiated from the waist and ended at the bust; the front waist point was long. After 1846 fan-pleats radiated from the waist all the way up to the shoulders. The front waist point shortened and held the fan together by small shirring stitches at the point. Late in the decade a belt was sometimes added. ILLUSTRATION #2: The “V” shaped, corseted look was enhanced by added-on shoulder flanges, called bretelles. These were either plain or trimmed. ILLUSTRATION #3: A piece of wood called a busk was inserted into an inside pocket of the bodice to create an unyielding mid-section, which was sewn onto the gathered bustline. Sleeve tops were trimmed at the dropped shoulders. Waist points became shorter and rounder in late 1840s. A crisscross ribbon at the neck was a popular finish. ILLUSTRATION #4: The bodice was becoming plainer with new interest on sleeves. This sleeve had a flared-cap over a sheer Bishop Sleeve (gathered at top and at wrist). Sometimes the sleeve fabric matched the dress. The neck ribbon had a matching ribbon belt which came to a “V” at the center front. ILLUSTRATION #5: Evening looks revealed the shoulders; deep collars framed them. Bodices were boned and corseted. Sleeves were long or short. Early 1840s, the waist point was long. Later the waist point became shorter and rounder. ILLUSTRATION #6: The bodice was becoming plainer but still worn over a rigid corset. The shoulder seam was higher, no longer “droopy,” and the widening lower sleeve signaled the beginning of the Pagoda Sleeve of the 1850s.

113

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#4

#7

114

#2

#3

#5

#6

#8

Out-of-Style

Women’s Sleeve Variations 1840–1850s NOTE: All sleeves in this decade were set into low, dropped shoulders. Collars were set high at the neck. These style lines helped produce the drooping silhouette of the era. ILLUSTRATIONS #1 AND #2: Here is an example of how the final extreme of a fashion often inspires the exact opposite: Top sleeve fullness of late 1830s (Illust. #1) fell to the lower arm in 1841(Illust. #2). Named the Collapsed Sleeve, it lasted until 1843. ILLUSTRATION #3: The narrow Coat Sleeve arrived! Shaped to follow the natural bend of the elbow, it was often cut on the bias for flexibility and became a classic Forever Fashion. ILLUSTRATION #4: The basic Coat Sleeve with various trims on the upper arm. ILLUSTRATION #5: The two-tier Cap Sleeve. Sometimes the cap was close to the arm and only slightly flared. Sometimes it was quite flared (as in Illust. #6). Undersleeve was either plain and fitted (Illust. #5) or a Bishop Sleeve (gathered at top and into the wrist band at the bottom) (Illust. #6). ILLUSTRATION #6: The flared Cap Sleeve topping either a plain Coat Sleeve or a Bishop Sleeve. ILLUSTRATION #7: The plain Bishop Sleeve (gathered at top and into wristband at bottom). ILLUSTRATION #8: The Bell Sleeve, narrow at the top arm, wider at the wrist, shows a lacy, white undersleeve. This is the beginning of the Pagoda Sleeve of the 1850s, where all focus will be on wide, lower sleeves.

115

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#3

#6

116

#2

#4

#7

#5

#8

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hairstyles 1840–1850s NOTE: Hair was almost always center-parted. Foreheads were clear, ears were covered. NOTE: In early-to-mid 1840s, there were two favorite ways to wear the hair: Drawn back into a bun or puffed and folded back into wings that covered the ears (Illust. #3). When this same hairstyle was lifted higher, exposing the ears, it indicated a date in late 1840s or early 1850s (Illust. #5). ILLUSTRATION #1: Hair was draped severely over the ears and pulled into a low back bun. ILLUSTRATION #2: Center part: Look was now softer, as it was loosely drawn into a high back bun. ILLUSTRATION #3: Double side parts divide the puffed and lifted wings of hair to the back. A cutwork or tortoiseshell comb tucked into the top shows in front, like a tiara or coronet. Covered ears date this style as mid-1840s. ILLUSTRATION #4: Front hair circled around exposed ears. Sometimes tiny braids circled the ears. This style was called the Victoria Loop. A coronet braid or bun was pinned high on the crown. ILLUSTRATION #5: Center part: Exposed ears are a style clue to the late 1840s and beyond. Wings of puffed hair were now placed higher than before exposing the ears. (Compare to Illust. #3.) ILLUSTRATION #6: Center part: Hair drawn to the back, ending in a bun and a cascade of curls. ILLUSTRATION #7: Curls were usually worn by girls ages 16 to 20, but sometimes adult women clung to the fashions longer than they should have. Curls, ringlets, fell from various placements on the head: top of temples or back of neck. ILLUSTRATION #8: Center part: Two long braids were looped under each ear and tied at back with ribbons. This was a youthful style.

117

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#3

#5 #4

#6

118

#7

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hats, Bonnets and Accessories 1840–1850s ILLUSTRATION #1: Bonnets were long, deep and close to the head. From a side view, the face was almost hidden. A good way to time-date a bonnet as early 1840s is if it is not yet pulled back in a cuff around the face (Illust. #2). The visible ruffle inside the bonnet was often a separate cap (Illust. #3). Upon removal of the outside bonnet, the cap itself was worn indoors. Older ladies tied bonnets under their chins. Bonnets were considered proper dress for ladies; consequently, all classes of women followed their lead. ILLUSTRATION #2: New to 1843, the hood bonnet folded back from the face, showing more hairline. It had a “hang-down” curtain (bavolet) at back of neck. Strings were left untied by younger women. ILLUSTRATION #3: In the early 1840s, day caps of sheer white cotton and lace were worn by young and old for everyday and dressy occasions. In the early 1840s caps fitted close to the cheeks, but showed some hairline. After young women abandoned day caps, older women continued to wear them through the late 1840s and well into the 1850s. ILLUSTRATION #4: Decorative combs were treasured possessions—especially the tiara-coronet. Also treasured were shaped, openwork and tortoiseshell combs; these tucked into high chignons in the back. Ribbon was used generously as increased ability to manufacture made them affordable to everyone. The crisscross neck ribbon was quite popular, and so was a belt of the same ribbon coming to a “V” at the front waist. ILLUSTRATION #5 Bonnets now “opened up” to show more face. Crowns were shorter, not as deep. Brims were wide (sometimes hooped) to provide a flattering picture-frame for the face. The brim was lined with ruching, frills and flowers. A hang-down curtain at the back of the neck (bavolet) covered the back crown with lace or feathers. ILLUSTRATION #6: Evolving from the day cap, the lappet, was a piece of lace extending from ear-to-ear and decorated with flowers, rosettes and ribbons. Used primarily for dress or evening, it was still worn into the 1860s. ILLUSTRATION #7: The day cap was now less deep in the crown and showed more face, as it sat further back from the hairline. It ended just below ear level and was adorned with pretty ribbons, ruching and rosettes.

119

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

1850

120

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Women’s Clothes 1850–1860s NOTE: Dresses of the 1850s can be recognized by two distinctive style clues: the round silhouette and the wide-at-the-wrist Pagoda Sleeve. At their most extreme, hoops measured up to five yards in circumference, requiring eight widths of fabric to gracefully cover the bony hoops. For work and economy, many women used only five widths of fabric. (See Chart: Chapter 2, The Shape of Hoop Skirts.) Historians use the word “breadths” of fabric, but American seamstresses know this as “widths” of fabric. Another style clue of the 1850s was that skirt fullness was achieved by numerous, widely-spaced knife or box pleats all around the waist. Unique to the 1850s was the concentration of interest and the variety of style details at the bottom of wide Pagoda Sleeves. In fact, this decade was “all about the sleeve.” The lacy undersleeves that filled the Pagoda wrist openings were called Engageantes. These were detachable for washing and interchangeable from plain to fancy as occasion demanded—or left off entirely for work or warm weather. Many pictures of the 1850s exist today because photography had improved and had become affordable to everyone. Studios opened in cities and small towns, while itinerant photographers traveled into remote areas. Being photographed became a status symbol. From coast to coast, from city to remote farms, women who could not afford, or who had no place to wear stylish clothing, eagerly awaited the latest issue of Godey’s Lady’s Book, which reported the newest fashions from England and France—modified, of course, for the lifestyles of realistic American women; other periodicals were also popular. Although affordable, ready-made clothes for men and boys began to be available from newly mechanized factories; women’s clothes were still too complicated to mass produce—that came later. During this period, the lock-stitch sewing machine became available, which saved hours of tedious hand-sewing, and commercial patterns, in reliable sizes, were introduced worldwide. (See Chapter 8, The First Sewing Machines.)

121

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#6

#2

#7

#5

#4

Note: Two bodices were made for one skirt, one for day, one for evening.

122

#3

Out-of-Style

Women’s Dress Variations 1850–1860s ILLUSTRATIONS #1 AND #2: By the mid-1850s every fashionable woman owned a short fitted Basque jacket that flared below the waist of the rounded hoop skirt. The jacket was named after the uniforms of Basque soldiers. Deep necklines were filled in by fancy lace “dickeys,” called chemisettes. Both chemisettes and undersleeves were detachable and interchangeable from plain to fancy, as needed. ILLUSTRATION #3: The fan-shaped bodice of the 1840s was worn until 1853, but by then the front waist point had shortened or perhaps even had a belt. The shoulder pieces, called bretelles, reintroduced in 1858, were now trimmed with braid or edging. Sleeves were either narrow or bishop style (full top and bottom); in the late 1850s, sleeves with only top fullness began to appear. ILLUSTRATIONS #4 AND #5: The large, lace lapel was new. The bodice was now separate from the skirt, making possible two separate looks: one for day, one for evening. This resulted in twice the use from a skirt which had required so much yardage and laborious sewing. Tartan plaids, iridescent taffeta and brocades were popular; so were fringe, soutache braid and ribbon. Because most bodices were now separate from the skirts, they could be opened in the front with hooks and eyes or buttons. (A boon for single ladies without servants or husbands to hook or lace them up in the back.) ILLUSTRATION #6: This is a classic everyday work dress, made in calico prints, checks or solids. It did not require restrictive corsetry and became a forever fashion, readapted in many future decades. The large, broad collar was typical of the 1850s. ILLUSTRATION #7: This dress style incorporates the look that dominated fashion after 1853: Birdcage hoop, widely spaced waist pleats, wide lower sleeves, large collar with oval brooch, and hair center-parted and drawn to the back with a coronet braid.

123

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#3

#4 #6

#5

Note: Undersleeves and neck dickeys were interchangeable from plain to dressy, as needed. 124

Out-of-Style

Women’s Sleeve Variations 1850–1860s NOTE: Most women wore modified versions of the exaggerated sleeve styles seen in fashion plates. ILLUSTRATION #1: The wide-open Pagoda Sleeve reached its greatest popularity in 1857. Some exaggerations appeared through early 1860s. It was named after the multi-level pagodas seen by people newly exposed to information about the Orient. ILLUSTRATION #2: The narrow bias Coat Sleeve carried over from the 1840s to early 1850s. The flared cap at the shoulder sometimes topped a full Bishop Sleeve. ILLUSTRATION #3: This is a Bishop Sleeve. A variation with fullness only at the top was worn well into the 1860s. ILLUSTRATION #4 A deep cuff kept this bottom-heavy sleeve from getting in the way. ILLUSTRATION #5: Notice how the detachable lacy undersleeves (engageantes) changed the look from plain to fancy. In addition, the lacy neckline fill-in (chemisette) could also be changed to a more simplified one as needed. ILLUSTRATION #6: The slashed- or slit-sleeves, which framed undersleeves, were either plain or trimmed.

125

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

# 7A

#6

#3

# 7B

#5

126

#4

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hairstyle Variations 1850–1860s ILLUSTRATIONS #1 AND #2: The coronet braid encircling the head was new in 1856–1858. It replaced the bun or knot of hair at the back; younger women added drop-down curls. ILLUSTRATION #3: The unadorned hair net, called a snood, was first made in chenille. Later, with added embellishments of beads, flowers, leaves and bows, it was worn through the Civil War of the 1860s: We saw it on Scarlett O’Hara in the legendary film Gone with the Wind, which premiered in 1939. This brought the snood back into fashion during World War II in the 1940s. Also inspired by the film, and worn again in the 1940s, was the fascinator. This was an airy headscarf of tulle or lace, which was tied loosely around the head. In the 1860s it was often hand-crocheted in an open weave, making a romantic frame for the face. ILLUSTRATION #4: The late 1850s saw hair drawn to the back, anchored at the nape, then flowing down softly; it was called “The Eugenie” hairstyle. ILLUSTRATION #5: Hair was lifted, exposing the ears. Tendrils of curls dropped down to soften the look. ILLUSTRATION #6: This is a leftover from the 1840s when the hair was lifted and folded high above the ears. The hair ribbons in back are new. ILLUSTRATIONS #7A AND #7B: Girls from age 16–20 wore sausage curls. (Unfortunately, some older women, past their prime, continued to wear them.)

127

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#6

#7

# 3A #5

128

# 3B #4

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hats, Bonnets and Accessories 1850–1860s NOTE: The difference between hats and bonnets: bonnets tied under the chin. By the late 1850s younger women preferred hats. ILLUSTRATION #1: This is a typical bonnet of the early-to-mid 1850s. It is away from the face rather than close, as in the 1840s, and shows more hair in front. The inside of the circular frame is filled with ruffled tulle, lace and flowers. It has a hang-down (bavolet) curtain in back. Older ladies who still wore day caps wore them inside the bonnet when out of doors. ILLUSTRATION #2: The wide-brimmed, shallow-crown straw hat first appeared in 1856–1858 for garden and country wear. It extended into the early 1860s, known as The Flat, sometimes called The Gypsy. ILLUSTRATIONS #3A AND #3B: “At-home day caps” were now worn only by older ladies and invalids. The crowns were variously high or low. ILLUSTRATION #4: Lovely confections of ribbon, lace and flowers were worn at parties and indoors. ILLUSTRATION #5: Favorite accessories were embellished snoods and wide lace collars with oval brooches. Much coveted were shawls imported from India, France, England and Scotland. A small, foldable parasol was an indispensable accessory to protect delicate complexions from the sun. ILLUSTRATION #6: Side view shows the bonnet is not as deep as the coal shuttle bonnet of the 1840s. ILLUSTRATION #7: Queen Victoria honored Scotland by wearing tartan plaids. This led to the popularity of plaid trimming on bonnets and neck ribbons.

129

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

1860

130

1869 to 1875

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Women’s Clothes 1860–1870s NOTE: The various combinations of style details that together makeup a garment are what produce “the look” of an era. NOTE: Styles that appear late in a decade often continue early into the next. • The best clue to time-dating the 1860s is to know that the round birdcage hoop (aka the cage-crinoline) was abandoned in 1866 and replaced by the conehoop. This changed the silhouette from round to triangular: Skirts could now be cut in gores, eliminating excess fabric across the stomach. (See Chapter 2, The Shape of Hoop Skirts.) The triangular hoop, with its flat front, inspired the introduction of princess-line dresses. • Dresses of the 1860s had waist seams placed at the natural waist. Because they no longer dipped to a point in the front, some books describe these dresses as being “round-waisted,” or “short-waisted”; this is a misnomer because it isn’t logical that they would wear tight corsets to produce tiny waists and then place the waists high, where they would be inches bigger. • Small pads that tied around the back waist propped up the skirt fullness that was more concentrated there. This back interest grew into the bustle by 1869–1870. (See Chapter 3, The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall of the Bustle.) • In 1860, “looped-up” and “elevator” dresses, created for newly popular sports, introduced skirt lengths several inches off the floor. These were the world’s first “sportswear.” • Day dresses were two inches off the floor, the optical illusion being that they were full length. Formal dresses were floor length. • In 1865, a transition length appeared that was shorter in front, longer in back. This was the beginning of skirts with trains. • The late 1860s was a sensible interlude between the extreme width of the hoop and the poufy bustle. • In this decade, collars were smaller; buttons were larger.

131

Chapter

10 #1

#4

132

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#2

#3

#5

#6

Out-of-Style

Women’s Dress Variations 1860–1870s ILLUSTRATION #1: The gored dress, with its smooth front, was born when the round hoop was abandoned in 1866 and the flat-across-the-stomach, triangular hoop was introduced. (See Chart: Chapter 2, The Shape of Hoop Skirts.) At first called “The Gabrielle,” it was not called “The Princess” style until 1875, when designer Charles Worth dedicated a trained, gored, one-piece dress to Princess Alexandra, who married King Edward. Alexandra was a fashion leader and a great international beauty. Her sister was Empress Marie of Russia. Every year, they met in Paris for a shopping spree, often choosing the same designs from couture houses. This is one example of how fashion influences crosspollinated throughout the world—in this case, England, France and Russia. ILLUSTRATION #2: This is a typical early 1860s dress made with two bust darts or gathers. It was worn from city to farm in calico, wool or silk. Choices of sleeves, collars or trim differed, but “the look” was the same. ILLUSTRATION #3: This is basically the same dress as style #2, but various placements of real or false yokes on the bodice date this as late 1860s. ILLUSTRATION #4: Fashion literature encouraged remodeling: An old dress could be salvaged by saving the skirt and wearing it with a new Garibaldi blouse and an easy-to-make bolero. A Swiss belt was added to tie the outfit together. This created the need for more belts to define the waist. That is how “Separates” were born, which is still our favorite way of dressing, more than a century and a half later. ILLUSTRATION #5: The Zouave jacket, with all edges trimmed in braids, was easy to make. The jacket matched or contrasted the skirt; added to the Garibaldi blouse for warmth, it also completed an outfit. ILLUSTRATION #6: Sleeved or semi-sleeved jackets and coats flowed over the wide skirts. From hat to hem, the 1860s woman presented a triangular silhouette. These outer wraps were the first women’s garments to be available ready-made, at affordable prices.

133

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#5

#4

#7

134

#8

#3

#6

#9

# 10

Out-of-Style

Women’s Sleeve Variations 1860–1870s ILLUSTRATION #1: The Garibaldi shirt was named after an Italian freedom fighter, whose men wore red and black wool shirts with full sleeves and pleated fronts. Women removed the skirts from worn-out dresses and wore them with new Garibaldi blouses in red, black or white; the Zouave jacket was added, making Separates a new way of dressing. ILLUSTRATION #2: The not-so-wide Bell Sleeve of the early 1860s was longer than in the 1850s—almost to the wrist. It was worn over a plain undersleeve. ILLUSTRATION #3: A good dating clue is to know that in the late 1860s, the Bell Sleeve curved up to the inside elbow. ILLUSTRATION #4: Although fitted, this sleeve gave ease of movement because it was cut on the bias. ILLUSTRATION #5: Also fitted, the two-piece Coat Sleeve was shaped to follow the natural curve of the arm. ILLUSTRATION #6: This sleeve is both fitted and full. ILLUSTRATION #7: The Pamela Sleeve was an occasional novelty. ILLUSTRATION #8: The Bishop Sleeve was very full early in the decade, but grew smaller later. ILLUSTRATION #9: The Elbow Sleeve had fullness just below the elbow. ILLUSTRATION #10: The Banana Sleeve was narrow at the top and bottom, and full at the elbow, just like its namesake.

135

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#8 #2

#9

#3 #7

#6

#4

#5

136

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hairstyle Variations 1860–1870s ILLUSTRATION #1: The fancy snood and the invisible hairnet (made of real hair) continued to be worn until 1866 . . . probably because it was a simple and neat way to manage long hair, especially during the trying times of the Civil War. ILLUSTRATION #2: The coronet braid encircling the crown of the head was another holdover from the past decade. ILLUSTRATION #3: Now the braid encircled the head from under the nape of the neck, with an added-on hairpiece. ILLUSTRATION #4: In the early 1860s hair was worn low on the neck. ILLUSTRATION #5: A clue to the late 1860s was that hair was becoming higher and wider at the temples. ILLUSTRATION #6: By the mid-to-late 1860s added hairpieces and huge chignons were worn higher, wider and deeper. This created a larger head, which required smaller hats. Style clue: big hair, small hats. ILLUSTRATION #7: By the late 1860s, we see hair volume moving to the back to balance the new back fullness of the pre-bustle skirts. By the end of the 1860s, most women owned at least one thick braid and enough false hair for an impressive upsweep. Fancy combs held them to the head. ILLUSTRATION #8: Newly crimped front bangs were the beginning of frizzy hair in the 1870s. ILLUSTRATION #9: Known as the Eugenie-Puff, this hairstyle bridged the early to late 1860s and was a good balance for flat hats with wider brims.

137

Chapter

10 #1

#3

#5

138

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#2

#4

#6

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hats, Bonnets and Accessories 1860–1870s ILLUSTRATION #1: The spoon-shaped Spoon bonnet was out of style by 1862. Everyone, except old ladies, wore hats. The difference between a bonnet and a hat was that a bonnet tied under the chin. Shawls continued their popularity until the end of the 1860s. Imported from India, Scotland, England and France, they cost between fifty and two thousand dollars. They were replaced when affordable, ready-made outer wraps for women became available at the end of the 1860s. ILLUSTRATION #2: The new hats were small and tipped over the forehead, allowing room for large curls, chignons, snoods and hairpieces to show in back. ILLUSTRATION #3: Forward tilting pill boxes, also known as pork pies, had long trailing ribbons in back, provocatively called Follow Me ribbons. ILLUSTRATION #4: Hats were mostly narrow-brimmed and shallow-crowned. ILLUSTRATION #5: Early 1860s saw some wider brims called flats (sometimes called The Gypsy). These seem to have been a continuance from the previous decade. ILLUSTRATION #6: Older ladies who still wore day caps at home and for parties now left the strings untied.

139

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

1869–1875

140

1875–1882

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Women’s Clothes 1870–1880s • There were more fashion changes in the 1870s and 1880s than in any other decades of the 19th century. This was made possible by the now common use of the sewing machine and the wide dissemination of ideas from fashion periodicals. • The tiered, apron-like overskirt of 1866–1872 (Phase Three) was a transition style that preceded the bustle. • The 1870s brought three major changes of silhouette: the bustle; the narrow skirt without a bustle; and the narrow skirt with the fan-tailed, mermaid train. In between, there were style mutations like the Polonaise. This was a long princess line overbodice reaching to below the knees. • The term “narrow skirt” is relative here, compared to the wide skirts of previous years. Narrow skirts varied from tube-like to “A” line with hidden fullness in back which spread when women were seated; this created the illusion, in old photographs, that skirts were fairly wide. However, in a standing position, skirts appeared narrow. All skirts of the late 1870s were tied inside to keep them closed in front, yet allowed them to flow in back. In any case, a style clue to the narrower skirts that eliminated bustles is that they were very fancy with decorations that wound around and around. • Many variations of styles were possible because pattern companies sold, in addition to complete patterns, separate, interchangeable pattern parts for sleeves, bodices and skirts. These could be mixed and matched for endless individual combinations. • Trimmings were churned out by busy factories. New sewing machine attachments helped apply these trims, saving hours of tedious handwork. This abundance of supplies and ease of application led to what was called the upholstered look of women in the mid-to-late 1870s. • A style clue to that era: Mixed combinations of more than one fabric, texture or print were used in the same garment. • There was also a special focus on decorative wide cuffs at the lower arm.

141

Chapter

10

142

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

Out-of-Style

Women’s Dress Variations 1870–1880s How do you tell the difference between the two eras of bustles? Dresses of the early 1870s still had wide skirts under their poufy bustles. After bustles died in 1875, they returned again in the early 1880s, at which time, the skirts were narrower and the bustles more simplified. (See Chapter 3, The Nine Sequential Phases of the Rise and Fall of the Bustle.) ILLUSTRATION #1: From 1866–1872 the two–level Transition Dress looked like a long overskirt in various “apron” shapes: round, square, double paneled or as “false aprons” (created by applied trimming). However, none were yet pulled up into a bustle. The two parts were called overskirts and underskirts. ILLUSTRATION #2: When the apron-overskirt was draped up and back, it pulled the front closer to the body, suggesting from the front view that women had bodies below the waist. ILLUSTRATION #3: At first, the bustle was supported by the crinolette, a stiffened petticoat with built-in wire bustle support. (See Chapter 3, What Was Hiding Under Her Bustle?) By 1875, the bustle was pronounced “dead.” ILLUSTRATION #4: Beginning in 1874, the new look was shockingly narrow: Back interest had dropped to below the hip in back of the knees. Skirts took focus, with trim going around and around, ending in back. By contrast, jackets were long, fitted and tailored—a good contrast to the overly trimmed skirts. The jacket/bodice was smoothly fitted over the new, longer-waisted, tightlylaced corset. It was named The Cuirasse because it resembled the metal armor which had protected the torsos of ancient warriors. ILLUSTRATION #5: The soft, no-waist-seam Polonaise (named after Polish soldiers’ coats) evolved as a more comfortable alternative to the one-piece Princess Dress or the tightly corseted Cuirasse jacket. Its new manifestation, introduced in 1877, was as a long, fitted, below-knee-length top which almost covered a fancy underskirt. Many vintage photographs of seated women show long overskirts overlapping onto fancy underskirts, worn into the early 1880s. ILLUSTRATION #6: The narrow skirt with the fan-tailed, mermaid train had a long, fitted jacket over a draped and fancy skirt. The graceful train was protected by an easily replaceable dust ruffle (called a balyeuse), which could be purchased inexpensively by the yard. Trains were detachable and had alternates that were long or short.

143

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#5

#9

144

#2

#6

# 10

#3

#4

#7

#8

# 11

# 12

Out-of-Style

Women’s Sleeve Variations Mid–1870s to Early 1880s ILLUSTRATIONS #1–#12: There was such a variety of creative designs for sleeve cuffs that it is not necessary to describe them individually. Each cuff was designed to coordinate with its equally fancy skirt. A style clue to the mid-to-late 1870s is that the emphasis was on creatively designed cuffs that covered the lower arm to the wrist. This, combined with narrower skirts, is the key to the look of that era. Jackets were long, plain and tailored, creating a nice balance to busy sleeves and skirts. Necklines were high with frills or jabots to soften the look. The late 1870s saw a simplification of elaborate sleeve cuffs as the birth of newly simplified bustles appeared on the horizon of the early 1880s. However, some importantly styled cuff designs lingered into the early 1880s.

145

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#2

#1

#7

#6

#3

#5

146

#4

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hairstyles 1870–1880s ILLUSTRATION #1: Side hair was now softly puffed over the temples, instead of being severely drawn back. Hair was high and wide at the top falling loosely down the back, with or without added-on curls. The 1870s brought heat-waved hair when French hairstylist Marcel Grateau invented heated tongs to curl hair and, later, a heated waving machine which waved hair. This came to be known as a Marcel Wave. (A version of this was still being used in the 1930s.) Hair became softer and more natural looking. Heavy, solid chignons were replaced with softer hairpieces. Center parts were still worn in the early 1870s, but later obliterated by fringy Marceled bangs and wavy hair. ILLUSTRATION #2: Frizzy bangs and artlessly disarranged hair was a new look of 1876. It was the vintage version of the careless, tousled look of modern day bed heads. ILLUSTRATION #3: There was a fad for deeply waved and plastered-down curls from 1875–1880, which was seen again in the early 1880s. ILLUSTRATION #4: This eccentric variation had long, fake corkscrew curls pinned on the forehead and topped by a large coil of hair; each add-on curl had a hairpin on the end, to insert at will. ILLUSTRATION #5: Hair was now narrow at the sides and high on top. Curls were plastered down flat on the forehead. (Several decades later, we would call these spit curls.) ILLUSTRATION #6: Thick ropes of hair twisted into coils were newer than braids or chignons. Hairpieces were held in place by decorative combs. ILLUSTRATION #7: This is the most charming of the 1870s hairstyles. The artless disarray of waves, bangs and curls was topped by a flirtatious bow.

147

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#4

#8

# 9A

#7

148

#3

# 9B

#6

#5

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hats, Bonnets and Accessories 1870–1880s ILLUSTRATION #1: The first half of the decade saw a continuation of small hats tipped over the forehead. Flirtatious Follow Me ribbons were still worn and hair was still center-parted. ILLUSTRATION #2: By mid-decade most center parts had disappeared. Hair became higher and softer—no more heavy solid chignons. Foreheads were covered by frizzed, fluffed or pasted-flat curls. This set the stage for hats that framed the face by being worn well at the back of the head. 1873 saw a reincarnation of the old Spoon Bonnet, but this time it was narrower and set way back. Its frothy tulle ties emanated from the back, tying loosely and romantically around the face. ILLUSTRATION #3: Small brims were starting to appear by 1870. ILLUSTRATION #4: By 1878 brims were getting somewhat wider. ILLUSTRATIONS #5 AND #6: By 1875–1876 brims were turning up everywhere—literally! Up in front, down in back; down in front, up in back; tilted on one side only, or not turned up at all. ILLUSTRATION #7 By 1878 the crown was growing taller. It would continue to grow into the next decade, where it would resemble an upside-down flower pot. ILLUSTRATION #8: Hats were trimmed with flowers, feathers, birds, beads or all of the above—sometimes at the same time! The modified brim of the Gainsborough hat appeared with a rakish sideways tilt. It grew increasingly larger as decades progressed. ILLUSTRATIONS #9A AND #9B: From 1875 to 1879, there was a fad for decorative and functional patch pockets. These were sewn onto the side hips of skirts where they were an integral design element of the dress. This was very inventive, because when skirts became narrow, there was no longer a place to hide pockets in the seams of a full skirt.

149

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

1883 to 1886

150

1884 to 1889

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Women’s Clothes 1880–1890s NOTE: The various combinations of style details that together make up a garment are what produce “the look” of an era. NOTE: Style details that appear late in a decade often continue early into the next. • The upholstered, overly trimmed look of the past was now out of style. • The 1880s produced even more differing looks than the previous decade. • By 1885, skirts were no longer the fancy focus of an outfit. Symmetrically balanced design elements were gone; focus was more on one-sided, asymmetrical designs for skirts and bodices; this would last until the end of the decade. • The difference between 1870s bustles and 1880s bustles was that earlier ones were combined with wide underskirts and had elaborate puffs, ruffles and draperies. These covered entire backs from side to side. The simplified 1880s waterfall bustle was a separate add-on which covered only the center back. The skirt was rather narrow from the front, but was deep and wide, seen from the side. This was the Rump-Hump-Bump silhouette (aka the projecting back). • By 1888 the bustle had subsided (again) to a small back waist pad (which is how it had begun twenty-five years before!) The Rump-Hump-Bump was still seen, but now the asymmetrically draped skirt would take its place, finally evolving into the Hour Glass look of the Gay Nineties. • Sleeves were unexceptional, being basic fitted sleeves ending just above the wrist; no special illustrations are included here. • An important style clue of the late 1880s is that there was a new focus at the top of the sleeves and shoulders, which were decorated with big bows, beading or textured appliqués. • The appearance of small puffs raised sleeve caps up vertically. First modest in size, they grew into the huge Leg-o’-mutton Sleeves of the mid-to-late 1890s. One can date a photograph by the size and shape of sleeve caps as they evolved.

151

Chapter

10

152

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

Out-of-Style

Women’s Dress Variations 1880–1890s ILLUSTRATION #1: The long over-bodice of the Polonaise carried over into the new decade. It can be recognized in many old photographs of seated women where their long over-bodices “overlapped” onto their laps. ILLUSTRATION #2: In the early 1880s the narrow A-line skirt was decorated in endlessly creative, but symmetrically balanced designs which circled around and around busy skirts. Jackets remained tight, tailored and high-necked, changing only their length, from long to short. These were known as Tailored Suits because they were often made by male tailors. Called Cuirasse jackets, they resembled the metal body armor of ancient warriors. ILLUSTRATION #3: This evening dress, worn over a small back waist pad, was a transition style which bridged the change between the narrow skirt and the return of the bustle (which, in the 1880s, was about to make a comeback, bigger than ever!). ILLUSTRATION #4: In America and abroad, the most commonly worn outfit was the tailored suit with a draped apron overskirt and a pleated underskirt. ILLUSTRATION #5: The bustle of the 1870s had been a pile of side-to-side puffy draperies on top of a wide skirt. Now, a wire contraption inside the skirt was covered by numerous straight-hanging pleats. The skirt was deeper front to back than it was wide. The bustle itself was a separate, simplified waterfall drapery that spilled down, covering only the center back. Contemporary critics said that “women looked like sitting hens” or “the centaurs of Greek mythology minus the two back legs.” This writer calls it The Rump-Hump-Bump (aka the Projecting Back). ILLUSTRATION #6: This outfit was worn by a guest at a royal wedding in 1885. It had prophetic style details which would keep it fashionable until 1892. The one-sided, asymmetrical design of the bodice and skirt was new, as was a narrow pleated skirt which hung straight, without flare. The slightly raised, vertical sleeve puff shows a new focus at the top sleeve. This puff was to evolve into the enormous Leg-o’-mutton Sleeve of the mid-to-late 1890s. The vertical top sleeve and shoulder focus is an important style clue that says “late 1880s.” Variations were big shoulder bows, textured appliqués and beaded trims on the sleeve caps.

153

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#2

#1

#7

#6

#3

#5

154

#4

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hairstyles 1880–1890s NOTE: Contrary to reports in fashion history books that the center part was outof-style by the late 1870s, some photos of real-life women in the 1880s show hair neatly pulled back from center parts. This time, however, some of the fashion holdouts added a couple of curls or sparse bangs high up at the hairline. ILLUSTRATION #1: Renewed interest in bustle backs brought hair that was upswept and higher. Fashion required the forehead to be covered with frizzy, frothy, curly or straight bangs. Hairpieces topped things off, attached by hair jewelry and fancy combs. ILLUSTRATION #2: Hair was sometimes deeply waved by the Marcel Waving Machine. ILLUSTRATION #3: Hair was pulled back into soft coils. ILLUSTRATION #4: Left over from the previous decade was the fad for numerous plastered-down, flattened “spit curls.” A few women even wove ribbons in and out of the curls. ILLUSTRATION #5: Enjoying a popular run was the French Twist softened by curly bangs. This has become a Forever Fashion. ILLUSTRATION #6: Hair was pulled back into a braid at the nape of the neck. ILLUSTRATION #7: This style really says “1880s.” It was piled high, coming to a point on top, where it would fit into the high-crowned, small-brimmed hats of the decade.

155

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Chapter

10

#1

#3

#2

#4 #6

#5

156

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hats and Bonnets 1880–1890s ILLUSTRATION #1: The tall, high-crowned Toque, which looked like an upside-down flower pot, was the primary hat shape of the decade. ILLUSTRATION #2: This is the same upside-down flower pot. It has added a modest-sized brim and a windmill bow perched on top. ILLUSTRATION #3: Here the flower pot has an arched brim and is called a Gable hat. It is said to have been inspired by the helmet of conquistador soldiers. ILLUSTRATION #4: Famous 19th century actress Sarah Bernhardt wore a feminized version of a man’s hat in an 1882 play called Fedora. (This became the name for the hat with a pinched crown.) ILLUSTRATION #5: There was an interest in larger brims which turned up, down, sideways or tilted. Because they were so universally becoming, variations of large, brimmed and trimmed hats called Gainsboroughs lasted through several decades. The difference was in the varying sizes of the brims. ILLUSTRATION #6: Here, the flower pot is lower and has lost its brim. Called a Capote, it looks like an overturned bowl. The string ties emanate from far back, providing a fleeting return to bonnets. Worn by younger women who usually preferred hats without strings, it was out-of-style (again) by 1888.

157

Chapter

10

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

1892 to 1898

158

1895 to 1903

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Women’s Clothes 1890–1900s NOTE: Because new fashions were introduced while older styles were still being worn, there is often an overlapping of dates. •  Starting as small vertical puffs in the late 1880s, by the early 1890s sleeve caps had grown into Leg-o’-muttons or ballooning Bishop Sleeves. Each year they grew bigger, reaching their most extreme size and greatest popularity between 1895 and 1898. Then, as always happens with exaggerated fashions, they died of their own excesses. As early as 1897, new style mutations began to appear with smaller sleeve •  caps, big fanciful ruffles or ball-shaped puffs on the tops of sleeves. •  Waists were as small as corsets could squeeze them. Combined with topheavy sleeves and bell-shaped skirts, the Hour Glass Silhouette was “the look” of the decade. •  The tailor-made suit was universally accepted; it continued to be worn in a variety of proportions until 1920. •  In the 1890s, the need for functional clothes for specific activities was finally recognized. The availability of ready made clothing in stores and mail-order catalogs allowed people to build specialized wardrobes for work and play. The influence of artist Charles Dana Gibson began in 1895 and lasted well •  into the early 20th century. His black and white line drawings glorified the strong, independent and beautiful American girl and also the strong, handsome American man: They came to be known as “Gibson Girls” and “Gibson Men.” . . . Everyone wanted to look like them!

GOODBYE, VICTORIAN LADY . . .  HELLO, GIBSON GIRL!

159

Chapter

10

160

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

Out-of-Style

Women’s Dress Variations 1890–1900s ILLUSTRATION #1: In this decade, the tailor-made suit grew in popularity. Small, vertical sleeve caps date this as early 1890s. ILLUSTRATION #2: The sleeve cap was now growing wider horizontally. By 1893, some fashion leaders were already wearing huge Leg-o’-muttons (as in ILLUSTRATION #3). Skirts were flared and A-line before they evolved to bell-shaped and tulip-flared hems. ILLUSTRATION #3: This is a two-piece brown dress designed and made by the author’s grandmother. It was discovered, covered with moth holes, in a musty garage. Neglect had not destroyed the beautiful inside handwork of tiny cross-stitches that held featherbones onto every seam. A narrower, stiffened inside sleeve supported the large outer sleeve. I date this as 1896–1898 because sleeves were at their most extreme at this time. A separate velvet collar topped the V-shaped yoke on the bodice. All edges were trimmed in gold braid. A chatelaine purse might have hung at the waist by a chain. ILLUSTRATION #4: Beginning in 1897, a change of emphasis at the top of sleeves replaced huge Leg-o’-muttons with ruffles, double-ball puffs or other top of the shoulder creations. ILLUSTRATION #5: This influential new sleeve style arrived in 1897, variations of which lasted through 1900. The sleeve was long and narrow, topped by a separately sewn-on, small (or large) ball-shaped puff . . . like a “lollipop-ona-stick.” Skirts were bell-shaped to emphasize the hour-glass silhouette. ILLUSTRATION #6: The “Gibson Girl” now influenced everything from clothes to hairstyles. The sleeve returned to its previously modest proportion and skirts had a tulip flare.

161

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Chapter

10

#1

#2

#3

#4 #5

#6

#7

162

Out-of-Style

Women’s Sleeve Variations 1890–1900s NOTE: To time-date this decade, one must understand the sequential changes in sleeve cap styles that defined The Gay Nineties. Be aware that some styles overlapped time frames. ILLUSTRATION #1: The vertical, high-top sleeve cap that had begun in the late 1880s lasted through 1892. ILLUSTRATION #2: The early 1890s saw the sleeve puff grow horizontally wider and W-I-D-E-R. It was called a gigot (French for “leg of mutton”). At first modest in size, by 1893–1895, it had grown to enormous proportions: The bigger the sleeve, the closer inward to the neck was the shoulder seam. (This was needed for balance.) ILLUSTRATION #3: The popular Bishop Sleeve also grew from modest to huge; then, it too deflated. When the Bishop was huge and ended at the elbow, it was called a Balloon Sleeve. ILLUSTRATION #4: The enormous Leg-o’-mutton Sleeve that defined The Gay Nineties is shown here on the universally popular shirtwaist blouse. After 1898, exaggerated sleeves deflated in size, reverting to their original modest proportion (as in ILLUSTRATION #7). ILLUSTRATION #5: The fashionable Hour Glass Silhouette still needed a broad shoulder; so, starting in 1897, a prophetic new style appeared. It had a long tight sleeve, topped by a small, ball-shaped puff, sewn on separately . . . like a “lollipop-on-a-stick.” This mutation is a primary style clue to the late 1890s. ILLUSTRATION #6: Variations of this new shape also emphasized broad shoulders with ruffles, large double-ball puffs, epaulettes or other fanciful creations that topped narrow sleeves on late-decade suits and dresses. ILLUSTRATION #7: Tailor-made suits were universally worn by newly active and busy women. Shirtwaist blouses, now available ready-made, varied from tailored to dressy. Blousy fronts signaled the beginning of interest in the droopy mono-bosom that would appear after 1900, when newly redesigned corsets changed women’s bodies to the S-curve silhouette of the Edwardian Era. (See Chapter 6, How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies.)

163

Chapter

10 #1

#4

#5

164

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#2

#3

#6

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hairstyles 1890–1900s ILLUSTRATIONS #1, #2 AND #3: Repeatedly seen in vintage photographs of average women are simple, pulled-back, sometimes careless hairstyles, without added hairpieces. Bangs were gone, foreheads were clear—except for a few short curls at the hairline—but they all had this in common: a small coil, bun or knot of hair on top of their heads. Because of the huge sleeves being worn, a contemporary writer described this look as “a small head between two large melons.” ILLUSTRATION #4: A definitive look from 1890–1898 was hairstyles that built to a point on top of the head. ILLUSTRATION #5: Center and side parts reappeared between 1895 and 1898. The exaggerated top knot was memorialized by artist Toulouse-Lautrec, whose Moulin Rouge posters of Parisienne dance-hall girls showed an exuberant exclamation point on top of their heads, often with a decorative pick stuck into them (something like a unicorn). Hair jewelry was very popular. ILLUSTRATION #6: By mid-to-late decade, women were puffing out their hair in homemade versions of the upswept pompadour hairdos depicted by artist Charles Dana Gibson, whose beautiful “Gibson Girls” became role models; his influence lasted well into the next century.

165

Chapter

10

#1

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 19th Century

#2

#3

166

#4

#5

#6

#7

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hats 1890–1900s NOTE: It is difficult to date hats in the 1890s because vintage photographs show women wearing the same shapes all through the decade. It is more accurate to date this era by sleeve cap styles. NOTE: Ready made hats were now available in department stores, mail-order catalogs and in thousands of millinery shops all over the world. NOTE: In addition, millinery supplies were available to professionals and homesewers to create or remodel hats. This accounts for the variety of styles and the independent choices of when to adopt or abandon a fashion. NOTE: All hats of the 1890s had this in common: Trims were vertical, rising to new heights over smallish brims. Hats were worn straight-on or slightly tipped forward. ILLUSTRATION #1: The future Queen Mary first wore this type of hat in the 1890s. Because it left her face visible to adoring crowds, she continued to wear variations of it after she became Queen in 1911 (and for decades after it became “old hat”). ILLUSTRATION #2: The boater (aka the sailor hat) became the most universally worn hat of the decade. ILLUSTRATION #3: The English walking hat crossed continents to compete with the boater. ILLUSTRATION #4: Famous actress Lillian Russell was photographed in a hat like this. Veils were introduced. ILLUSTRATIONS #5 AND #6: Hat styles with small brims and high vertical trims were typical of the 1890s. ILLUSTRATION #7: The fedora had first been worn in the 1880s. It made an amusing statement with man-tailored suits, so it continued to be worn until the turn of the century, at which time there was a renewed interest in softer looks.

167

Out-of-Style

Chapter

11

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century Style Clues for the Fashion Detective

B

y the 1840s, men’s clothes had stabilized into the basic pieces that still compose a man’s wardrobe: coat, pants, vest, shirt, tie and hat.

Only subtle changes in cut, fit and proportion distinguished one decade from another. From city to countryside, men wore complete outfits every day. Working men and farmers wore vests over their work shirts and even wore hats while on the job. Shirts worn alone were considered intimate apparel, like underwear. Pantaloons and breeches, with their drop-flap front openings, had been forever replaced by long trousers with fly-front closings and convenient side and back pockets. The word pants came from the word pantaloons. The four basic coat shapes were the long frock coat, the shorter sack coat, the cutaway and the tailcoat. The mutation of these shapes changed in each era and can be time-dated by the changing length of coats, lapel size, shoulder width, loose or tight fit, the choice of single or double-breasted closings and by which coat button current fashion preferred to be buttoned. Fashion periodicals were not as available for men as they were for women. Men bought ready-made clothes that were based upon styles for English gentlemen, as presented by the fashion leaders of Savile Row in London; or men depended upon the tastes of their local tailors for fashion direction.

169

Chapter

11

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century In London, frock coats were required dress for gentlemen and respected professionals. The morning coat and cutaway evolved when someone rounded off the front corners of a frock coat. Prince Albert, beloved husband of Queen Victoria, was first to wear a double-breasted frock coat with a black velvet collar. Not surprisingly, in America it became known as a Prince Albert. Because of growing economic and industrial opportunities and the new use of railway travel, men needed clothes that were functional and comfortable. It was now more important to look competent and businesslike than to look elegant and aristocratic. Many men could now afford to own watches, the chains of which hung across their vests. The sack coat had previously been worn by boys, sportsmen and workers. But, its universal adoption became the origin of men’s suits and sport jackets as we know them today. After studying numerous vintage pictures of men in their sack coats, the look that jumps out is that many clothes look wrinkled and rumpled. This was before fabrics like silk, linen, cotton and lightweight wool were treated for wrinkleresistance, or blended with man-made fibers. It was also before the availability of neighborhood dry cleaning. Wedding clothes, worn for the first time, always look neatly pressed. Quality tailoring, with firm inner construction, combined with skilled patternmaking and fitting, helped some clothes look better than others. The sewing machine brought affordable, ready-made clothes for men and boys from stores or mail-order catalogs; this brought democracy to men’s clothing because it was no longer possible to identify a working man from one of the idle rich by the clothes they were wearing. The American sewing machine was introduced to England in 1850, bringing equality to European men’s clothes. (It took longer for women’s clothes to be available ready-made, because they were too complex to mass-produce.) The American fur-trapping industry developed to supply the insatiable international demand for top hats made of beaver fur; the fur was then processed into a fur-felt fabric for millinery use. (Incidentally, this process required the use of mercury, not yet known to be poisonous. Eventually, this drove hatters to insanity, which led to the expression “mad as a hatter.”) In any case, fur trappers pioneered the exploration of newly acquired lands of the American West, opening trade with the Indians. However, by 1840, fickle fashion tastes changed to prefer top hats made of shiny black silk; this decimated the fur-trapping industry, but not before it had helped expand America’s Western Frontier.

170

Out-of-Style Top hats originated in China and Korea. They were imported into France in 1775, where arbiters of French fashion made top hats required accessories for gentlemen all over the world. The height and degree of the taper changed from era to era throughout the 19th and into the 20th century. In 1935, legendary American film star Fred Astaire sang “Puttin’ on my top hat, puttin’ on my tails.” Astaire’s classy formal attire had been copied stitch by stitch from that worn by England’s fashion icon, the Prince of Wales, after the Prince declined Astaire’s request to share the name of his bespoke tailor. The uncomfortable cheek-high shirt collars of the early 1800s, with their thick wound-around-the-neck stock ties, were mostly turned down by the 1840s and worn with a variety of different tie styles. Individualism was expressed by the differing ways to tie a tie, wear a collar (high or low on the neck), or the choice of plain or fancy vests (aka waistcoats). The rakish tilt of a hat or pinch of a felt fedora told as much about a man as did a powdered white wig in the distant past. The hat style that was most popularly worn throughout the 19th and into the early 20th century was the bowler (first designed by a Frenchman named Beaulieu). He replaced the impractical but imposing top hat by lowering and rounding the crown. In each era, the bowler crown changed height and the brim evolved from straight to curved. In England, versions of it were worn as early as 1780 at the Epsom Downs Horse Races, and in 1850 America, at the Kentucky Derby; thereafter, the bowler was also called a derby, the names becoming interchangeable. Lace-up shoes were introduced in the 1860s followed by side-buttoned shoes. Boots with elastic inserts had been worn since the early discovery of rubber. Men were clean-shaven in the 1840s but, toward the end of the decade and into the 1850s and beyond, various combinations of beards, moustaches, sideburns, mutton-chops or the lack of all the above created a mix often difficult to time-date. Since facial hairstyles overlapped decades and repeated at later times, it is necessary to consider the COMBINATIONS of hairstyles, facial hair, shirtcollar placement and tie styles to time-date an era. Uncle Sam first wore a beard in 1858. Suddenly, beards and moustaches sprouted everywhere. Worn by macho men like sheriffs, frontiersmen and gold prospectors, facial hair became a symbol of strong masculinity. A little

171

Chapter

11

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century girl wrote a letter to then presidential hopeful Abe Lincoln, suggesting that if he grew a beard to soften his large features, it would help him get elected. He did, and later, as President Lincoln, he publicly sought her out to thank her. Hair itself was usually ear length and brushed with macassar oil, so naturally, the crocheted doilies made to prevent hair from staining upholstery were named antimacassars. Although modern men’s clothes button from left over right (opposite from women), some photographs of 19th-century men show them inconsistently closed in either direction (or maybe the photographers reversed the photos when developing them). I haven’t yet found out why so many men copied Napoleon’s hand-over-heart pose when being photographed, inserting their hand inside the chest of their coats. (Could they all have had heartburn?) In group photographs, younger men can be seen wearing more up-to-date styles than older men, who often clung to the past (as did some older women). So, time-date old photographs by the youngest men in the picture. An improved way of communicating fashion ideas and transporting readymade clothes and fabrics occurred in 1869, when the two coasts of the United States were indeed “united” by the joining of the tracks of the Central and Union Pacific Railroads in central Utah. Three thousand miles could now be traversed in six days and twenty hours. This eliminated the hazards of travel by shipboard, stagecoach or covered wagon, all of which took weeks or even months. America’s prairies grew into thriving towns along with the growing popularity of travel by rail. Many cities first began as stops along the rail route. By the 1880s there were four railways crisscrossing the continent, supplying clothes, cattle, steel or fresh seafood in iced boxcars.

172

Out-of-Style

By the 1870s, it was more important for men to look competent and businesslike than to look elegant and aristocratic. They preferred to blend in rather than stand out.

173

Chapter

11

174

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Men’s Clothes 1840–1850s FROCK COATS: Early 1840s frock coats had indented waist seams, high armholes and narrow sleeves and lapels. Late in the decade, lapels widened. Dark frock coats were worn in the city with patterned pants and top hats. Large coat buttons and narrow lapels were typical of the 1840s. SACK COATS: The first hip-length sack coats had an indented waist seam. Originally called a lounge coat. Men previously had worn this style to lounge about while smoking. Many decades later, Parisian designer Yves St. Laurent was to design an elegant pant suit for women called Le Smoking. TROUSERS: Narrow trousers (aka pants) were evolving from the tight breeches and pantaloons of the past. The word “pants” was coined from the word “pantaloons”; britches came from the word “breeches.” A strap under the boot kept the pants taut but was passé by 1850, when pants became wider. VESTS: Vests (aka waistcoats) were in fancy silks for dress, matched to the coat for daily use. Novelty vests gave men the opportunity to display individuality. SHIRTS: In early 1840s, collars were still cheek-high and worn with thick wound-around-the-neck stock ties. Collars then lowered to extend just above the neckties (like a mock turtleneck that didn’t close in front). The next mutation was to turn collars down over the ties: Voila! Turn-down collars! A style clue to differing decades is to notice the collar placement on the neck. TIES: In early 1840s, new, softly flowing two-inch bow ties tied in a variety of ways. They reached their most exuberant size in late 1840s, lasting to the 1850s, when ties became smaller, neater and sometimes asymmetrical. Also worn was the barrel tie (a large, flat knot without any bow). HATS: By the 1840s, tall silk hats were worn internationally and replaced fur-felt beaver hats. High-crowned felt hats appeared in the late 1840s. The forerunner of Western hats, these could be pinched to individual tastes. HAIRSTYLES: Hair was side parted, puffed out at ear level, and combed back on top. Distinctive indentation over the ears was caused by always wearing hats. FACIAL HAIR: At first clean-shaven, then jaw-framing saucer beards without moustaches appeared after 1846, leading to numerous individual variations. Moustaches with sideburns were worn from late 1840s on. 175

Chapter

11

176

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Men’s Clothes 1850–1860s FROCK COATS: Frocks no longer had indented waist seams: Oversize was “the look” of the decade. SACK COATS: First called the lounge coat, the new, straight-hanging, hiplength casual sack was the first manifestation of the modern suit and sport jacket. At first, coat, pants and vests contrasted. Later, when all the pieces matched in color and fabric, they became known as a “suit.” TROUSERS: Trousers became wider than before, either lighter in color than the coat, or patterned in checks or stripes. Levi Strauss introduced indestructible work pants made of tent fabric called denim to the gold prospectors of 1849. All stress points were reinforced with metal rivets. The rest is history, as American “blue jeans” were copied around the world. VESTS: Vests (aka waistcoats) were in fancy patterns or colorful silks for dress, matching the coat for daily use. Sometimes, more than one pattern was used in the same outfit. After 1855, fancy vests lost favor to plain or patterned wool. Double-breasted or notched-collar vests were favored. SHIRTS: In early 1850s, shirt collars were larger than later in the decade. Chinhigh collars lost favor to turn-down collars. Separate collars, invented by a housewife who tired of hand-scrubbing grubby collars, were sold to be buttoned onto the neckband of any shirt. Working men often wore just the neckband without a collar. TIES: “The look” was “horizontal.” About two inches wide, ties were often only half bows with one drooping end. After 1857 ties narrowed and became smaller with neater bows. HATS: The top hat, either cream-colored or black silk, was worn with the frock coat. The invention of a machine to make felt fabric brought many new styles to wear with the sack: the flat-brim, low-crown hat called the wideawake; tall-crowned bowlers preferred by professional men; and soft felt hats with wider brims preferred by Westerners. HAIRSTYLES: Hair was full around the face and brushed back, sometimes with stylized “points”: ear length in front, collar length in back. FACIAL HAIR: Facial hair was an assortment of face-framing, saucer beards (without moustaches), mutton chops, sideburns or clean-shaven. In about 1855, young men sported a small V-shaped beard just below their lower lips. 177

Chapter

11

178

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Men’s Clothes 1860–1870s COATS: Frocks were still popular for daytime; cutaways and tails for evening. The oversize look of the 1850s was passé. The sack was a practical choice for most men. Its coat was now more fitted with high armholes and banana sleeves (narrow at shoulders and cuff, wider at the elbow). Most men wore complete outfits of coat, pants and vest every day. Mixed patterns in the same outfit were now replaced by matching two of the three pieces. The first matched three-piece suits appeared, the forerunner of modern suits. TROUSERS: Pants tapered to a “break” at the shoe. They were still longer in back, but now without a strap under the shoe. Pants contrasted with the coat by being patterned or lighter in color than the coat. VESTS: Vests (aka waistcoats) sometimes matched or contrasted with the coat. Shawl-collared or double-breasted vests had watch chain pockets. SHIRTS: By 1860, turn-down collars were almost universally worn. For informal wear, they were worn with a bow tie or a cravat (scarf-like tie). The higher standing collar was worn for evening with cutaways and tails. Working men and farmers always wore a vest over their work shirts, and often a hat, on the job. To be seen in shirtsleeves was inappropriate; shirts were considered to be intimate apparel, like underwear, and never worn alone in public. TIES: Narrow silk bow ties or skinny string ties were popular. Cravats were tucked into vests and anchored with stick pins. HATS: Added to the millinery mix were top hats for businessmen and professionals; low-crown, short-brim pork pie hats, bowlers, visor caps, low-crowned, flat-brimmed wide-awakes, and military kepis worn with the sack coat. HAIRSTYLES: Hair was at ear level, combed back from a side part. Early in the decade sideburns were cut short. The word sideburns was derived from the name of General Burnside, a Civil War hero, whose bushy sideburns, worn without a connecting moustache, gave him a formidable appearance. FACIAL HAIR: Full beards, like Abe Lincoln’s, gained popularity in the 1860s. Face-framing saucer beards were a “coming-of-age” statement for young men. Sideburns (with or without moustaches), moustaches alone or clean-shaven were all worn.

179

Chapter

11

180

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Men’s Clothes 1870–1880s COATS: Coats were full, but not oversize. Wide lapels were typical of the decade until 1876 when lapels narrowed. Sleeves lost their full-at-the-elbow banana shape and returned to classic coat sleeves. Frock coats were worn only for special occasions: It was no longer necessary to dress formally for business; comfort and function were the new criteria. When coat, pants and vest matched, the pieces were called dittos . . . the outfit became a suit. A new style was the hip-length, double-breasted coat with bound edges, or a velvet collar, like a short Prince Albert frock coat. TROUSERS: Trousers were still slightly tapered, breaking over the shoe. Most pants matched the coat and vest; for variety, some contrasted. VESTS: Vests were plain or fancy. Society required vests to be worn day and night. Even farmers and workers wore vests, sometimes over collarless shirts, but complete with hats, caps or even bowlers while working. SHIRTS: Turn-down collars dominated; round, preacher-like collars were sometimes worn, as were lowered fly-away collars. Impeccable white collars and cuffs proclaimed the wearer did not work with his hands. Shirts had removable collars for washing. TIES: A variety of tie styles included wide bows, cravats or cross-overs tucked into vests. Long, four-in-hand ties were preferred by younger men; older men still liked the narrow string ties or small bows from the past. Some fashion writers say that long ties were introduced in the late 19th century, but a picture of sixteen young men in 1873 shows eight of them wearing long ties. HATS: Top hats now had a slight flare at the sides. Bowlers were high-crowned but there were plenty of low-crowned options including soft caps. HAIRSTYLES: Hair was comparatively short, combed to the side (instead of forward over the ears). Traditionally, boys and men had worn their hair side-parted (women, center-parted). In the 1870s, some daring young men began center-parting; they were met with shock and scorn. FACIAL HAIR: Many men were clean-shaven, but there were mix-and-match combinations of moustaches with or without beards, which ranged from wellgroomed goatees and neat sideburns to wild mutton chops or bushy whiskers.

181

Chapter

11

182

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Men’s Clothes 1880–1890s COATS: The oversize look was over. Small lapels topped four- or five-button, single- or double-breasted sack coats. Often, all the buttons to the top of the neck were buttoned. If only the top button was closed, a high vest with a dangling watch chain was exposed. Ties were barely visible at the neck. Boutonnieres and pocket handkerchiefs were new accessories. Although frock coats and four-button cutaways were available, the short, narrowchested, high-armhole sack coat was the universal choice of most men. Some older men favored sack coats in longer lengths. PANTS: Pants of the 1880s were narrow, longer at the heel and had a slight flare at the bottom. A nice detail, occasionally seen, was thickly welted side seams. In 1887, Edward VII introduced sharply pressed front pant creases; it took another decade for this detail to be accepted. Variations show light-colored pants worn with dark coats and vests. These were worn with low-crowned derbies or felt homburgs in winter and straw boaters in summer. VESTS: Vests were buttoned high, just like the coats. SHIRTS: Shirt styles varied from round, preacher-like collars, to wing tips, but turn-down collars predominated. Sold ready-to-wear, each had two sets of detachable collars and cuffs. TIES: White bow ties were for formal or summer wear. Ties were small bows or narrow string ties. Because coats buttoned high, ties were not remarkable in the 1880s. HATS: Low-crowned bowlers with narrow brims were new looking with the short haircuts worn by boys and young men. Classy, black homburgs shared favor with straw boaters, pork pie hats and casual caps. Soft felt hats were variously pinched and tilted to individual taste. HAIRSTYLES: Short hair, cut above the ears, became fashionable: No more sideburns. Hair was flat on the top of the head. FACIAL HAIR: Young men were mostly clean-shaven. Beards were worn by authority figures; handlebar moustaches led the way to the 1890s.

183

Chapter

11

184

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Men’s Clothes 1890–1900s COATS: Coats no longer buttoned high to the neck. Lapels lowered, revealing vests and watch chains. Single- or double-breasted sack coats were now completely acceptable for business. Frock coats, fashionable until the late 1890s, were replaced by cutaway morning coats. The Tuxedo originated with the Prince of Wales as a dress coat for informal evenings. It was copied by a stylish American who wore it to his private club, Tuxedo Park, in New York. The Tuxedo, Tux, or dinner jacket became a “Forever Fashion.” SWEATERS: A new category of sport clothes appeared: coat sweaters and stretchy pullover jerseys, with turtlenecks. College boys adopted them for varsity sweaters. Turn-of-the-century immigrants arrived at Ellis Island still wearing sweaters from their long sea voyage. PANTS: Pants lost their flare at the bottom. Sharply pressed front creases and turned-up cuffs (known as turnups) began to be accepted. In the 1890s, they were a fashionable style detail but average men were slow to adopt them. White flannel pants were worn with dark jackets for a crisp, summer look. Because of newly popular sports, like golf and bicycling, suits were offered with two pairs of pants: one long, one pair of knickerbockers (aka knickers). VESTS: Vests were always worn, either matching or contrasting the coat. SHIRTS: Most collars were soft turn-downs. Variations were narrow standups with or without wing tips. Shirt sleeves were about an inch longer than coat sleeves. Formal shirts had stiff bib-fronts. TIES: Long, four-in-hand ties with wide knots and small, soft bow ties were popular. When worn with stand-up collars, the tie band showed all around the neck. HATS: Homburg hats were for gentlemen; bowlers and derbies were for everyone else. Straw boaters (aka sailor hats) and caps were for sporting types; soft felt slouch hats were for farmers and working men. HAIRSTYLES: Hair was worn short and groomed on the sides and back. Some men parted their hair in the center. FACIAL HAIR: No sideburns. Walrus moustaches were the look of the decade, but clean-shaven was increasingly preferred. 185

Chapter

12

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 19th Century

From Pantaloons to Pants

➡ Drawers ➡

Pantaloons

Short Pants

186

Knickers

Breeches

Knickerbockers

Pants

Plus-Fours

Out-of-Style

Chapter

12

Children’s Clothes in the 19th Century When Little Boys Wore Dresses and Little Girls Wore Pantaloons and UNDERwear Became OUTERwear

H

istory books sometimes use the following terms interchangeably; here are the differences:

• Breeches became britches • Pantalets (French masculine) • Pantalettes (French feminine) • Pantaloons (became pants): unisex Drawers (a 19th century term) were baggy underpants with fancy edges that ended either above or below the knee. Worn by small boys, girls and women, they often had an open crotch with overlapping front and back seams for easy access over chamber pots or outhouses. Pantaloons or pantalettes were long, trouser-like undergarments ending below the calf and trimmed with lace, tucks, or both. Pantaloons became pants when they simplified into well-proportioned trousers. Trousers (English spelling trowsers) were untrimmed full-length pants, sometimes with slits or growth-tucks at the hem. Peg-top breeches with drop-flap front openings (aka fall-fronts) were replaced by fly-fronts for men and boys in the mid-1800s. Knickerbockers (aka knickers) became an alternative to long trousers when pants were gathered just below the knee by elastic, or bloused, banded, and buckled below the knee. Left open, they became liberating short pants. Golfing introduced loose, baggy knickers called plus-fours. These became the world’s first “sportswear.” 187

Chapter

12

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 19th Century

Little Lord Fauntleroy and His Sister

1890s

188

Out-of-Style

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 19 th Century Could that darling little girl in your heirloom photo album really be your great-great-great-GRANDFATHER?!! In the old days boys and girls wore dresses and sometimes even curls until about age five or six. The only way to tell the difference between the sexes was in where their hair was parted—on the side for boys, in the center for girls. The concept of comfort and function in clothes had not yet occurred to people. This explains their tolerance for corsets, hoops and bustles for women; and tight breeches, chin-high collars and top hats for men. Comfort and the need for ease of movement for children was not yet a consideration. In fact, from an early age to maturity, little girls were forced to wear corsets in ever increasing degrees of constriction. The custom of winding yards of swaddling cloth around infants for their first few months had been practiced around the world since antiquity. (There are mentions in the Bible of Baby Jesus in swaddling.) It was universally thought that bindings would help little limbs and spines grow straight. In America, the Native American children were similarly confined and carried as a backpack; but here, the need for mobility of the nomadic parents was the primary consideration. In England, in 1770, after admonitions from concerned journalists, infants’ swaddling clothes were replaced by simplified wrappers allowing convenient access to change diapers. This greatly improved infant hygiene but it took many more decades for the practice of swaddling to disappear completely. Infants wore long gowns until they could crawl. When they were able to walk, and until age five or six, boys and girls wore dresses with short skirts underlined with visible pantaloons (aka pantalettes, trousers, knickers or drawers). These terms seem to be used interchangeably in history books. (See Chart: Chapter 12, From Pantaloons to Pants.) Not only did little boys wear dresses, until the 1870s they sometimes wore off-the-shoulder dresses. That is when the distinction between feminine and masculine garments was visibly acknowledged. However, even at this distance 189

Chapter

12

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 19th Century of time, we can understand our ancestors’ naive pleasure in displaying the sweet, tender necks and shoulders of small children. During the decades when small boys and girls wore off-the-shoulder styles, there was a characteristic “hitching” move kids made when their dresses slid down while they were playing in the uncomfortable clothes. Fanciful fashions worn by the royal children of England brought us the Eton suit, the sailor suit, the Norfolk jacket, and the Scottish kilt. The Little Lord Fauntleroy outfit, complete with long curls, began in 1886 after the appearance of a charming illustration of the title character in a popular novel Little Lord Fauntleroy. The look was inspired by the romantic clothes of 17th century Cavaliers—black velvet jackets with huge lace collars and cuffs, worn with a red sash and knee britches. It was adored by doting mothers and hated by the small boys who had to wear them. The style lasted past the turn of the century. A proud rite-of-passage occurred when small boys grew out of the Fauntleroy stage and graduated into Eton suits for Sunday best and parties. In 1846, Queen Victoria had a miniature sailor suit made for the then five-yearold Prince of Wales to wear on the royal yacht. In a charming painting, artist Winterhalter famously memorialized the little prince wearing his sailor suit. Soon, small boys and girls all over the world were wearing sailor suits—a style that lasted for over a hundred years. The Scottish kilt had a long run after Queen Victoria and Prince Albert visited Balmoral Castle in Scotland and brought back kilts, tartans, clan plaids and tam-o’-shanter hats. These were copied and worn by children in Europe and America. Little boys were dressed in plaid dresses and kilts as late as 1890. Plaid ribbon trim and plaid dresses were also popular with grown women. When I wrote a piece for the Ancestry.com blog, titled “How Kilts Were Built,” I became acquainted with Shirley Oberzud, Scotland’s GenGenie. I learned that first, a leather belt was placed upon the ground, and a length of plaid fabric was hand-pleated onto the belt. A Scotsman then lay down upon the ground onto the pleats and belted the fabric around himself. When he stood up, he flung the extra fabric that was hanging beyond the belt over his shoulder. That became his shoulder scarf. If anyone is wondering what a vintage Scotsman wore under his kilt . . . the shocking but honest answer is NOTHING! I also learned that one never calls anything “Scotch” . . . that is only an alcoholic drink. The correct term is “Scottish” or “Scotsman,” and to be polite . . . never call a kilt a skirt!

190

Out-of-Style Americans brought reality to children’s clothes in the 1860s by making available to the masses affordable, ready-made, wearable children’s clothes. In fact, the need for function and practicality for children preceded that awareness for adults, men eventually adopting styles originally worn by young boys, and women adopting children’s pantalettes in the 1850s to provide modesty in case their hoops flipped up. Boys were said to be “breeched” when they graduated from dresses and pantaloons to knickers or knee pants. From that time to the early 20th century, boys’ pant styles varied from blousy knickerbockers to below-the-knee pants to short pants to, FINALLY . . . long pants. A picture of legendary American film star Fred Astaire at age twelve in 1910 shows him wearing a Norfolk jacket with short pants, long, dark stockings, and an angelic, round Eton collar and tie. In his autobiography, Astaire said, “In those days a boy wore short pants until he was old enough to shave.” Through the years, girls’ clothes echoed their mothers’ fashions except their skirt lengths were shorter and their pantaloons showed. Dresses were worn a little longer each year and were full length when girls reached “maturity” at about age fourteen. (In reality, women’s dresses were two inches above the floor, but the optical illusion of wide, full skirts was that they were floor-length.) On the prairies, cotton fabrics, like calicoes and solids, were doled out in rationed amounts by the government to displaced Indians. Settlers, deprived of easy access to supplies, often bargained with the Indians for their yardage, sometimes collecting enough from different Indians to make a full-skirted dress, men’s shirts or aprons. In the American West, children’s clothes were often made from these goods. In Europe, the anecdotal origin of “blue for boys . . . pink for girls”: It was said that boys were found under blue cabbages; girls were found inside a pink rose. (I like the Stork Story better . . . don’t you?)

191

Chapter

13

192

Boys’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Chapter

13

Boys’ Clothes in the 19th Century Style Clues Decade by Decade Boys’ Clothes 1840–1850s • Boys and girls wore loose little tunic dresses (aka frocks) from the time they could walk to age five or six. Both boys and girls wore dresses with off-the-shoulder necklines. White cotton drawers (aka pantaloons) showed beneath their dresses: plain for boys, eyelet embroidered for girls, often with growth tucks on the bottoms. Sometimes boys wore long, dark trousers instead of mid-calf pantaloons. • After age five, boys began to wear a one-piece garment with attached long pants, called a skeleton suit. This was a “bare-bones” untrimmed garment something like “coveralls.” It originated in the late 18th century and lasted until 1859. Cleverly, the pants of the skeleton suit buttoned onto its high-waisted top. A second, lower-level drop-flap opening buttoned onto the higher one, providing “access.” Twentieth-century mutations of this became children’s sleepers with trap-door openings in back. • In 1846, Queen Victoria had a miniature sailor suit made for the then five-year-old Prince of Wales to wear on the royal yacht. Soon, small boys and girls all over the world were wearing sailor suits . . . a style that lasted for over a hundred years. • In the early 1840s, boys’ coats reflected men’s waist-indented styles with high-flaring collars. By early-to-mid-decade, the short roundabout jacket was preferred. When boys reached age 13, they began to emulate adult men’s styles, especially the sack coat. • In the early-to-mid-1840s, young boys wore their hair short; later, hair was worn longer. • Fly-front pants now replaced drop-flap (aka fall-front) openings. Ready-made boys’ clothes became widely available as early as the 1840s. 193

Chapter

13

194

Boys’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Boys’ Clothes 1850–1860s • From birth to six or nine months infants wore long gowns, then graduated into short dresses over mid-calf drawers. • From age two to five years, they wore loose tunics or sacques (sacques were belted tunics). Underneath, boys wore long dark trousers. To keep them up, trousers were buttoned onto little undershirts worn under the tunic dresses. The one-piece skeleton suit, first worn in the early 1800s, was passé by 1859. (Becoming a prototype for modern children’s rompers and coveralls.) • A unisex variation was a long- (or short-) sleeved apron-like pinafore belted over loose tunics. In hot weather it was worn alone over long trousers. • Stockings for boys and girls were usually white, but sometimes red and white striped ones can be seen peeping out above their high-top shoes. • The width of boys’ pant legs can help date a photograph: Early 1850s pant legs were narrower than in mid-decade, when they widened, as did men’s clothes. • When boys grew a little older, the drop-flap pants opening (aka a fall front) was replaced with a grown-up fly front. • From age ten to fourteen a short jacket, known as a roundabout, was the coat of choice for warmth and dress. It was worn with a plain bow tie, or an asymmetrically tied bow that had one protruding end. This style was typical of the 1850s. • After age 13, the sack coat was the most popular style for boys. • Boys at varying ages wore the collarless, easy-to-make Zouave army jacket, either trimmed on the edges or plain; matched to the pants, it was a suit. • Until age six, boys wore the wide-brimmed wide-awake hat. Boys’ hats were tied with plain narrow ribbons. Older boys wore an assortment of cap styles, such as the low-crowned Eton cap or the high-crowned pilot’s cap; both had short, leather visors. Boys and girls wore straw or felt sailors (aka boaters) with hang-down ribbons. • Hair was side-parted and smoothly combed at ear level or swirled at top.

195

Chapter

13

196

Boys’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Boys’ Clothes 1860–1870s • Toddlers were still wearing loose, smock-like tunics over knee-length drawers. Small boys were still wearing dresses over drawers with lace edging. • Knickerbockers (aka knickers) became popular in the mid-1860s. By age six or seven, boys were wearing knickers with short roundabout jackets, later graduating into knee-length or long trousers. • Until age five, all versions of the previously “bare-boned,” unadorned skeleton suit were still worn . . . but now, trims had been added. However, it was still the same convenient “coverall” that future generations of small children would wear. • The Zouave army jacket of the previous decade was more popular than ever. First worn in the 1850s by an elite group of the French Army, during the Civil War years of 1861–1865, it was worn by a special band of the American cavalry. In those years, military influence was reflected in many details of women’s and children’s clothing. • The short, collarless Zouave jacket (with or without embroidered edges) was easy to make and required little fabric. It was variously worn by boys, with whatever length pants were age appropriate. Matched to the pants, it was a suit (aka a “ditto”) . . . or it contrasted in fabric and color. • President Abe Lincoln’s nine-year-old son, Tad, wore a miniature Zouave army uniform for play in the White House. • Scotch tartans were at their zenith in this decade. American influence in children’s clothing began in the 1860s, bringing styles that were more practical and functional. Ready-made clothing for men and children became available at affordable prices. • Boys wore a variety of caps, from low-crowned visor caps to high-crowned pilot’s caps. Tam-o’-shanters and boaters were also worn. Teenage boys wore low-crowned derbies (aka bowlers) or not-very-tall top hats, known as young gent’s hats.

197

Chapter

13

198

Boys’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Boys’ Clothes 1870–1880s • By the 1870s, reality set in and the need for function influenced the styles American children wore—especially boys. • Younger boys wore coats based on two basic shapes: the short roundabout jacket that buttoned to the neck, worn with a round Eton collar and bowtie, and all mutations of the bolero-like, collarless Zouave jacket of the past two decades. • With these jackets, young boys wore all variations and lengths of knickerbockers and knee pants. • For little fellows, there were still numerous variations of belted tunic-dresses, this time worn over knickers instead of fancy drawers, plus infinite variations of “loving-hands-at-home-designed” dresses or knicker-suits with embroidery or fancy fabric combinations . . . no two alike (so varied in design they cannot even be categorized). •  Off-the-shoulder dresses for small boys continued, but in the 1870s the division of the sexes in clothing was beginning to be recognized. • Scotch kilts and sailor suits, those fanciful styles worn by royal English children, were still seen—especially the sailor suit. Each decade brought a new variation of the beloved sailor suit—for girls as well as boys. • Overalls were a new category for functional clothes; worn over a collarless work shirt, they were worn by farmers’ children to help with chores. Another functional outfit for boys that became a universal look for play and everyday wear was a long-sleeved collarless shirt worn with plain pants. The pants were held up by suspenders (aka braces). • Checks, plaids and stripes were frequently seen in shirts, and horizontally striped stockings often bridged the gap between knee-pants and boots on small boys. • Hair was worn short. • “Like father like son,” older boys wore sack coats with long trousers.

199

Chapter

13

200

Boys’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Boys’ Clothes 1880–1890s • Basically, boys’ clothes did not change much from the previous decade. They were still wearing kilted dresses and low-belted tunics from age two to six years. • The most obvious change was that more short pants and knickers were worn than ever before. These were tapered and fitted to below the knee where they became open-ended short pants or were gathered and banded into knickers. • Knickers worn with Norfolk jackets were known as knickerbocker suits. A similar style had vertical corded stitching down the front worn with an Eton collar. • Large white cotton collars, and sometimes even lace, were popular choices. • In 1886 the title character in a popular novel, Little Lord Fauntleroy, was illustrated wearing an outfit inspired by romantic 17th century cavaliers. It consisted of a black velvet suit with knee britches, large white lace collar and cuffs, a flowing tie and a wide red sash. It was shown with long curls. This started a fashion that was loved by mothers, but hated by the small boys who had to wear it. Variations of the Fauntleroy look lasted for decades. • The Sailor suit had a popular run in the 1880s. It was worn in America, Germany, France and Russia, as well as England. • The short, bolero-fronted Zouave jacket and the buttoned high-to-the-neck roundabout were worn, single- or double-breasted. The difference was that these jackets were now worn with knickers. • Rugged corduroy fabric was a good choice for boys’ pants. • Hair was short. Sport caps and boaters were popular. Shoes were usually high-buttoned, and stockings were dark. • Older boys, near sixteen, wore sack coats with matching vests and long pants . . . just like their fathers. The low-crowned derby with a short brim was known as the young gent’s hat.

201

Chapter

13

202

Boys’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Boys’ Clothes 1890–1900s • Boys’ clothes of the 1890s were similar to those that had been worn for the past twenty years except that fancy striped and trimmed outfits were replaced by simplified ready-mades. • Each era introduced its own variation of the sailor suit, the Norfolk jacket, Little Lord Fauntleroy, the grown-up sack-suit and the Scottish kilt. • Every detail of Scottish dress was newly explored: This time, the tartan-scarf was thrown over a little fellow’s shoulder and anchored with a traditional pin. Sometimes a Scotsman’s pouch-purse dangled from a belt. Plaid ties were worn with suits and jackets, and both boys and girls sported tam-o’-shanter berets. • Little Lord Fauntleroy is illustrated here with his shirt and tie askew (as in the original picture and vintage frame of the author’s father at age three in 1898). (The story has been told that the reason he looks petulant is because he has just been told the bicycle was a photographer’s prop that he could not take home.) • Dresses were still worn by small boys but lacy underdrawers were no longer visible; these had been replaced by knickers and trousers. • Sport caps of all kinds were popular. • Black stockings and ankle-high shoes and boots were still worn. • Hair was worn short. • By late 1890s, the one-piece coverall, first worn by farmers’ children in 1870, had become a “forever fashion” universally worn by all children for play.

203

Chapter

14

204

Girls’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Chapter

14

Girls’ Clothes in the 19th Century Style Clues Decade by Decade Girls’ Clothes 1840–1850s • Until age five or six, boys and girls wore the same styles: short, loose dresses (aka frocks), tunics or pinafores worn over drawers, trousers, pantaloons or pantalettes. • Especially popular were drawstring necks and sleeves because they adjusted to changing sizes (which also made them good hand-me-downs). • After age five, it was common to start little girls in tiny, cotton training corsets (aka underbodies) to acquaint them with increasingly restrictive corsets. It was thought that growing female bodies could be “molded” to achieve fashionably small waists and good posture. (They had good posture because they could not bend at the waist.) What they actually achieved was a childhood in which girls could not freely run, play or bend as nature intended. A contemporary observer noted that when boys and girls played ball, the boys ran, then bent over to pick up the ball. Girls were shorter-winded and could not bend, so they dropped on bended knee to pick up the ball. • After age five to age 13 or 14, girls wore to-the-ankle pantalettes. • After age eight, all fashions currently being worn by adult women were worn by young girls with these exceptions: sleeve styles were modified (short sleeves were most common) and dress lengths changed according to age. Each year girls’ dresses became longer until by maturity, thought to be age 14–16, their skirts were almost full length; and they began to copy women’s hairstyles. Sausage curls were achieved with nightly curl papers. • In vintage photographs, girls’ ages can be guessed by the length of their dresses. 205

Chapter

14

206

Girls’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Girls’ Clothes 1850–1860s • Boy and girl infants wore long gowns until they could crawl. They progressed into short dresses over pantalettes (aka drawers). (See Chart, Chapter 12, From Pantaloons to Pants, which illustrates differences.) • Toddler dresses for boys and girls had full skirts over ankle-length pantalettes. • Stockings were usually white, and sometimes horizontally striped. These could be glimpsed between shoe tops and drawers. • Here’s a dating clue to the mid-1850s: Girl’s pantalettes began to be bloused into a band below the knee. These would later be called knickerbockers or knickers. • Here is a style detail that says “early 1850s”: Waistlines were slightly below the natural waist. By 1853, waistlines rose to natural placement to best complement widening skirts. • French Fashion Plates were showing children wearing exact copies of their mothers’ exaggerated and fanciful fashions. In real-life America and England, girls wore simplified versions of what their mothers were wearing. Example: full skirts but without hoops; modified sleeve details that echoed women’s widely-belled sleeves and lacy undersleeves. • Fabrics used for children’s clothes were often salvaged from their mothers’ remodeled dresses. This economical practice sometimes resulted in outfits in which the fabric patterns for a dress and apron, or a tunic and pinafore were incompatible. • Most vintage children’s dresses have a generous “growth tuck” that allows garments to be worn longer. They appear as fancy tucks or trim on the bottom of skirts, which are intended to be let down as the child grows. • Little girls wore hat and bonnet styles that echoed those worn by their mothers, so we see boaters, wide-awakes and Gypsies framing sweet little faces. Actual bonnets were not worn by girls until they were sixteen. • By age thirteen or fourteen the simple hairstyles of childhood were left behind and replaced by currently fashionable grown-up hairdos.

207

Chapter

14

208

Girls’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Girls’ Clothes 1860–1870s • By 1860 long pantaloons were out of style in England and America. Instead, loose drawers showed one or more inches below the dress. • Infant boys and girls still dressed alike in yard-long white dresses. • Photographs of sisters of varying ages, in the same picture, show them dressed identically in the same fashions, or at least in the same fabric. (Is this what they mean when they say, “cut from the same cloth”?) In any case, the only difference was that skirt lengths were age-appropriate. One can tell the age of girls by their skirt length. • At age four, dresses were just below the knee. At age sixteen, skirts dropped to two inches above the ankle. • Hoops were worn for special occasions from 1853 to 1873, changing shape from birdcage hoop to triangular. In the 1860s, the shape of hoops was triangular. • Wide, pointed Swiss belts were worn by children and adults, a by-product of the fashion for Zouave jackets and Garibaldi blouses, which required belts to pull the look together. This was the beginning of separates and sportswear as we know them. • The triangular hoop brought princess-line dresses and gored skirts into the fashion world; this was reflected in girls’ clothes as well as women’s. • The simplified “Sixties Look” that emerged (gored skirts, no extra fabric gathered across the stomach, and comfortable sleeves) lasted for decades. Made in cotton or silk, it was worn from cities to farms. • By the end of the 1860s, skirts were as wide as they could get, so they began to be pulled to the back. This brought focus to the back, which begat “The Birth of the Bustle.” (See Chapter 3, The Nine Phases of the Rise and Fall of the Bustle.)

209

Chapter

14

210

Girls’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Girls’ Clothes 1870–1880s • As before, girls’ dress styles echoed those worn by their mothers. • In early 1870, the two-tiered transition dress (not yet pulled up into a pouf in the back) bridged the way to the bustle. (See Chapter 3, The Nine Phases of the Rise and Fall of the Bustle.) • Wide sash belts that ended in huge back bows were worn by every age group. • Toddlers and little ones wore tartans, plain yoked dresses and charming off-the-shoulder looks (as did toddler boys). • Skirt lengths grew longer at each age level until ankle-length at age 14–16, considered maturity. • Just like Mommy, hair was swept up high, cascading down the back. This balanced the concentration of interest at the back of dresses. • By 1875, the grown-up bustle had reached its zenith and was declared outof-style. Skirts narrowed to A-line. This was reflected in the clothes worn by young teenage girls. • Bustles were now replaced by bows or ruffles placed from low hip to behind the knees. • Long-line, princess-seamed overblouses were a sophisticated new style (aka the Polonaise).

211

Chapter

14

212

Girls’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Girls’ Clothes 1880–1890s • Girls wore modified versions of what their mothers were wearing. From 1874 to 1883, this meant narrow skirts with decorative interest concentrated at the back of skirts from low hip to back of knees. Tailored, fitted jackets for older girls were worn with the skirts. • Girls’ waistlines were set low. • By 1883 this look was followed by the rise (again!) of the bustle. At first the bustle was an external drapery over a narrow skirt. This differed from the early 1870s bustle, which was over a wide skirt. • Girls’ waistlines rose to the natural waist. • From 1884 to 1889, the bustle was a wire contraption or pad worn INSIDE a wide, pleated skirt that caused women and girls to look like sitting hens. (This author calls the look “The Rump-Hump-Bump.”) • Large, white lace collars framed young faces. • Hair bows were no longer visible from the front; they were now worn at the back. • As before, skirt lengths were age appropriate, dropping a little each year from just below the knee for small girls to ankle-length at Sweet Sixteen, or sooner. • In the late 1880s, the hand-sewing technique of smocking appeared as decorative stitching on yokes of dresses. The fad quickly spread until entire fronts of girls’ dresses were made of this shirred, textured fabric. As with all fads, the look lasted only a year or so and died from overexposure or because it was such a time-consuming task.

213

Chapter

14

214

Girls’ Clothes in the 19th Century

Out-of-Style

Style Clues Decade by Decade Girls’ Clothes 1890–1900s • Vintage photographs of girls in the 1890s show a recurring look of dresses with yokes; the yokes were framed by ruffles. • Waist placement was determined by age: Small girls wore loose unbelted dresses, the fullness controlled by the yokes. Older girls wore yoked dresses with wide sashes at their natural waist. • Styles were influenced by what their mothers were wearing. The 1890s was the decade of huge Leg-o’-mutton and Balloon Sleeves. These reached their maximum size between 1896 and 1898; girls’ dresses reflected this change. • At the end of the decade, there was new emphasis at the sleeve cap, which was achieved by large shoulder ruffles, often a continuation of the ruffled yoke which framed the face. • Another new top-of-sleeve style was a small ball-like puff over a fitted sleeve (like a lollipop-on-a-stick). • The end of the 1890s introduced two competing looks which grew stronger with time: the tailored two-piece suit with its own blouse (aka a shirtwaist or waist) and the airy lingerie look that would soon add a blousy front for the S-curve silhouette of the early 1900s.

215

Part Two

The 20th Century 1900-2000

Chapter

15

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 20th Century

The Bottom Line About Hemlines . . . and 1995 to 2000

1980 to 1990s

1980 to 1990s

1970s

1900 to 1908

1900 to 1908 The development of women’s self-realization can be seen in the ever-changing length of their skirts.

1912 1909

218

1914 to 1918

1918 to 1923

Out-of-Style

The March to Modernity in 100 Years 1964 to 1969

1967 to 1970s

1968 to 1970s

1960s

1947 to 1950s

In the 21st century they have the freedom to wear any length that pleases them.

1940s 1930s

1925 to 1927

1928 to 1931

219

Women’s Clothes 1900-2000

Out-of-Style

Chapter

15

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 20th Century The Evolution of Hemlines Over 100 Years, 1900–2000

I

n the 19th century, all skirts were long. The only variance was in whether they touched the floor, showed a pointed toe or rose slightly above the ankle or instep.

Vintage hoopskirts (aka crinolines) that appeared to touch the floor were actually ankle-length. Because of the wide circumference of the skirts, the optical illusion was that they were floor-length. I came to understand this phenomenon by a personal experience. I was dressing a stage show spoof of Gone with the Wind. A rented hoop skirt costume touched the floor. Because the actress wearing it was afraid she might trip on stairs going up to the stage, we shortened it a couple of inches. Looking down on the costume from a standing position, it appeared to be floor-length. However, when she was up on stage, I could see that it was actually ankle-length. From this experience, I realized that the long skirt lengths of history must not have been chosen by fashion decree, but by individual preference or the need for specific function: like croquet, housework or walking. By contrast, in each decade of the 20th century, there were so many changes of skirt lengths that it is possible to time-date women’s clothes by where on the leg hemlines were worn . . . that is, we could until the end of the 20th century, when freedom from fashion dictators resulted in any skirt length being acceptable. 221

Chapter

15

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 20th Century By the 21st century, at any contemporary function, one can see short, long, mid-calf, somewhere around the knee, Capri, crop length or long pants, all worn simultaneously. We no longer allow designers to dictate what is IN and what is OUT, making entire wardrobes immediately obsolete. Women wear whatever skirt length suits their lifestyles or the God-given symmetry of their legs. It has been said that “skirt lengths follow the ups and downs of the stock market.” I reject that theory as being an unreliable coincidence. Women do not say to themselves, “I am so depressed . . . I think I’ll hide my legs,” or, “Business is booming . . . I think I’ll show my thighs.” What happens, instead, is that moods change, designers get bored and explore the possibilities of a completely opposite look.

The March to Modernity Here is how modern women of the 20th century arrived at freedom from corsets and fashion tyranny. At the turn of the century until 1908, long bell-shaped skirts and the S-curve silhouette dominated fashion. It was created by the S-Curve Corset. (See Chapter 6, How Undergarments Affected the Posture and Shape of Women’s Bodies.) In 1909, French designer Paul Poiret revolutionized the fashion world with a new look: It was narrow, supple, had a high Empire waist, did not require a corset and showed the instep of the foot. The look was widely accepted because it fulfilled women’s newly developing desire for more freedom in their lives and their clothes. In 1912, Poiret introduced another revolutionary new look. This time, the narrow silhouette had a peg top, wide-at-the-hip drape which tapered to a narrow width at the ankle. Because women wearing this style could only take small, mincing steps, they were aptly named Hobble Skirts. To increase mobility, Poiret slit the skirts to the knee, showing a shockingly bare leg for the first time in fashion history. To publicize his new designs, Poiret took several of his beautiful models to the races, where their slit skirts scandalized everyone. The adverse publicity he 222

Out-of-Style received helped launch the new style of slit skirts and furthered his, by now, international reputation as the leading couturier of his time. These dresses became the perfect style to wear during the Tango Dance Craze of pre-World War I, at which time they were called Tango Dresses. The dance also brought into view the Tango Shoe worn by Irene Castle of the famous husband-and-wife dance team, Vernon and Irene Castle. (Together, they popularized the Castle Walk and led the dance mania that swept America from 1912–1917.) In the war years of 1914–1918, English women adopted a shorter skirt length to suit their more active lives, replacing men who had gone to war. American women followed, although America did not join the conflict until 1917. When the war ended in 1918, skirts suddenly dropped to ten inches from the floor for daytime, and floor-length for evening. Shapeless dresses that could slip over the head without fasteners began to appear in 1919. Skirt lengths slowly rose, but by the early 1920s they were still below the calf . . . they just seemed short to contemporaries because, until then, women’s legs had always been covered. Finally, by 1925, the skirts of the Roaring Twenties rose to knee-length, staying there until 1927. (In spite of cartoons and some musical comedies, skirts never got any shorter than knee-length.) Trousers for the beach appeared, called Lido Pajamas, and later adopted for at-home wear as Hostess Pajamas. Another 1920s fad introduced wearing riding britches (aka breeches) for sightseeing and touring (see Chapter 17, Automobile Touring Clothes). When women got The Vote in 1920, they celebrated their emancipation by adopting a boyish look which flattened their breasts and hips, playfully adding soft draperies, feather fans, furs and dangling earrings. By the late 1920s, there was a new desire to again acknowledge their female bodies. Skirts made a tentative transition by dropping into long/short, zigzag hemlines in anticipation of the long, lean, softened silhouette of the 1930s and the Great Depression. This is also when, by contrast, newly emboldened women began wearing tailored slacks and beach pajamas for sportswear, following the lead of film stars like Marlene Dietrich and Katharine Hepburn. 223

Chapter

15

Overview of Women’s Clothes in the 20th Century The longer skirt length and bias-like cut of early 1930s clothes remained until the mid-decade, then inched up and became crisper until December 7, 1941, brought World War II’s fabric rationing, shorter skirts and the authoritative, broad-shouldered look worn by film stars Joan Crawford, Rosalind Russell, Eve Arden and others. American women worked in shipyards and aircraft and weapons factories, replacing men who were at war. They began wearing overalls, denim jeans and wide-legged wool gabardine slacks as part of a well-rounded wardrobe. Designers Adrian and Irene dominated film fashion. Los Angeles became the manufacturing center for casual, Hollywood-inspired, California sportswear. New York designers like Claire McCardell and Elizabeth Hawes pioneered functional, but fashionable, clothes to fulfill the void left by chic French designers whose influence had been arrested by the German occupation of France. (A sidebar here is that the French never regained total fashion influence once American and British designers discovered their own considerable talents: producing wearable and saleable ready-to-wear clothes.) Despite this new fact of life, two years after World War II ended, French designer Christian Dior sent shock waves around the world with his revolutionary New Look of 1947, which brought circular, below-calf-length skirts, jackets and bodices with the corset-like fit of bygone years, narrow shoulders without pads, short hair and small hats. The New Look caught the fancy of women everywhere who were more than ready for this change. The New Look prevailed through the 1950s. In America, in the mid-1960s, there were two competing looks: the knee-length, ladylike, gently fitted sheath as worn by fashion icon Jacqueline Kennedy, First Lady to President John F. Kennedy; and the motley clothes worn by protesting “hippies” (a term coined from the slang expression for avant-garde—to be “hip”). English designer Mary Quant and her cute young Mods (Moderns) brought us miniskirts followed by super-short micro-minis. At this time, designer Courreges and the excited fashion press so intimidated women by proclaiming the mini the ONLY acceptable skirt length that even women whose legs should have remained covered, grudgingly exposed them for all the world to see (and critique). Needless to say, these super-short skirts did not “sit well.” This overexposure brought an unexpected revolt from many women who stopped wearing skirts altogether, accepting as wardrobe staples only pants, pantsuits and wide-legged palazzo pajamas.

224

Out-of-Style In an effort to bring down the skirt length, which many women found unwearable, new options like the calf-length midi and the long-length maxi were offered. These were quickly rejected by the masses as aging and passé in a world that worshipped the youth cult. The compromise, however, was that knee-length skirts became an acceptable alternative (again!) In the early 1970s, another amusing new fad arrived called hot pants. These were short shorts in dressy fabrics, like satin, matched to dressy coordinating tops—or as tailored suits worn with mid-thigh tailored shorts and pantyhose for business and streetwear. At this writing, in mid-2012, tailored jackets with matching shorts, called Bermuda shortsuits, are back in fashion. Here is an amusing true story from the mid-1970s. My husband, Lyndon, a business executive, was entertaining a couple from out of town. He took them to the exclusive Magic Castle, a private membership club in the Hollywood Hills. The woman was wearing a two-piece outfit consisting of a tunic top over matching palazzo pajamas. They were refused entrance because she was not wearing a dress. Lyndon offered to take them back to the hotel so she could change into a dress, but she didn’t own one! The enterprising woman did the only sensible thing: she went out to the parking lot, removed the pants, and returned to the snooty club, where she was welcomed in her newly contrived micro-mini dress! The 1980s to 1990s brought a choice of longish skirts (again) topped by the return of broad, padded shoulders. An alternate proportion in this same time span was a long, oversized jacket, just several inches shorter than the mini-skirt worn with it. Long-over-short was a stylish paradox. During this time, a friend of mine, who manufactured cashmere coats, was wearing a long maxi-length topcoat over a mini-dress when she entered an escalator in New York. After her coat got caught in the moving stairs, she vowed never to wear a long coat again, even in the winter! Now, for the first time in fashion history, it had become acceptable to own and wear varying skirt lengths according to one’s mood or occasion. True to fashion’s reliable pattern of “opposite begetting opposite,” by the end of the 20th century, long, oversized clothes had morphed into short, uptight garments aptly named The Shrunken Look. (See Chapter 5, When Proportions Change.) It had only taken two hundred years to depose international Fashion Dictators.

225

Chapter

16

The First Two Decades 1900-1920

Women’s Dress Variations 1900-1914 The 1905 Sears, Roebuck Catalog offered 150 different shirtwaist blouses for the growing army of working women.

1900–1908

The March to Modernity Begins 1909–1911

1910

Giant Fur Muffs 1900–1914

226

Out-of-Style

Chapter

16

The First Two Decades 1900-1920s Turn-of-the-Century Silhouettes

F

rom 1900 to 1908, there were two primary looks for women: the S-curve silhouette and the bell-shaped skirt with separate blouse. The S-curve (aka the pouter-pigeon look) was produced by a newly designed corset which caused the breasts to spill forward while causing the back to arch unnaturally in the rear. (See Chapter 6, How the Changing Shape of Corsets Changed the Shape of Women and Their Clothes.) A dickey, with rows of small ruffles, worn inside over the bosom, produced the “single-breasted,” mono-bosom look, distinctive to the period. Fabrics were mostly light, soft and flowing. These lingerie dresses were worn for summer events like picnics, games, weddings and graduations. In sturdier fabrics, the S-curve was tailored. Bell-shaped skirts and blouses were favored by active women and working girls who added tailored suit jackets. When you see blouses and dress bodices that hang over belted waistlines, you can be sure they are from 1900 to 1908 (although some fashion diehards clung to this look until 1909).

227

Chapter

16

The First Two Decades 1900-1920

Women’s Dress Variations 1912-1919 1912

1912

1912–1914

1914–1918 1914– 1918

228

1916– 1918

“Loose Dresses” Arrive 1919

Out-of-Style

Designer Paul Poiret and the Demise of the Hourglass Figure French designer Paul Poiret made the corset obsolete in 1909 when he introduced a revolutionary new silhouette. No longer would every gown radiate from an iron-clad waist. Instead, the new dress was a simple, supple long-line sheath with the high Empire waist, last seen a century earlier. The long line was occasionally broken by one to two long tunics, creating multi-levels in the narrow skirts. Dresses were suddenly simplified and unencumbered by the excessive ornamentation of the 19th century. Poiret said, “I strive for omission, not addition.” At first, the new styles were made in soft, light fabrics. But, since Poiret had originally been inspired by the highly stylized Oriental costumes worn in the Russian Ballet’s production of Scheherazade, fabrics soon evolved into rich, exotic gold and silver lamé, brocade and damask. Large, elaborate tassels were often used for belts and trim. The long, simple lines of the new silhouette required small, neatly coiffed heads. Shorter hairstyles required containment, so the bandeau, which encircled the head, was born (later, evolving into the headache band). Small hats and wrapped turbans, with or without feather exclamation points, dominated. An alternative style was a wide-crowned, wide-brim hat, which resembled an upside-down flower bowl. The cocoon-shaped cloaks and kimono-sleeved coats of the period (also inspired by the Orientalia of Scheherazade) are best seen in the 1964 film My Fair Lady, starring Audrey Hepburn. Costume designer Sir Cecil Beaton won an Academy Award for his masterful job in the film. By 1912, all important couturiers were copying Poiret, who also introduced the Hobble Skirt. The simultaneous fascination of artists and fashion designers for exotic Orientalia evolved into the stylized decorative arts suddenly appearing everywhere. This movement was later named “Art Deco” after a 1925 exposition in Paris. It can be seen in the architectural design of the Chrysler Building, built in New York in 1930, and in the stylized, all-white set designs of Hollywood films in the early-to-mid-1930s. This influence on design lasted for an entire generation.

229

Chapter

16

The First Two Decades 1900-1920

How Tailor-Made Suits and Sears, Roebuck Catalogs Helped Unify America By the 1890s, women needed more practical, comfortable clothes to wear for their increasingly active lives outside the home. From that time on, tailormade suits (aka tailor-made costumes in England) became mainstays in women’s wardrobes. Suits outnumbered dresses in the 1909 Sears, Roebuck Catalog. They were loved because changeable shirtwaist blouses could vary their look from plain to dressy, thereby extending women’s wardrobe options. From 1900–1920, the length of suit jackets and the length of the skirts worn with them changed, as did the size and shape of millinery. Because similar suit styles were worn for years, the best way to date photographs of women wearing tailor-mades is to recognize the differences in the hat styles worn with them. At first, tailored suits were made by skilled Jewish tailors in their homelands of Poland, Hungary and Russia. But because of persecution in those countries, by the turn of the century, scores of Jewish craftspeople had fled to America, where they helped create a vibrant Ready-to-Wear Industry. This enabled average Americans to own good quality clothes at affordable prices, bringing democracy to clothing. No longer would people be judged and categorized, as in Europe, by the style and quality of their clothes. By 1902, the postal distribution system of the 19th century, Rural Free Delivery (aka RFD) had grown to 32,000 routes. RFD merged with Parcel Post; together they built new roads enabling the expanded mail service to include cities and towns all across America. Meanwhile, railroads were also crisscrossing the land carrying goods and mail. This meant that newspapers, editorials, fashion periodicals and especially Sears, Roebuck Catalogs (which showed fashions two years after Vogue) provided the same information to everyone from coast to coast. Sears even published its catalogs in German and Swedish for far-flung immigrant farmers. In poor communities lacking proper school books, the catalogs were used to teach reading and arithmetic. Old catalogs were cut up to make paper dolls or relegated to outhouses. As a consequence, rural families were as well dressed and well informed as city folk. This eliminated regional differences in dress and customs, which helped “unite” the United States into a truly national, homogenous, like-minded country—ready for the 20th century as a “NATION.”

230

Out-of-Style From 1900–1910, more than ten million immigrants arrived from many countries to settle in America. They were called “New Immigrants” or “Green Horns” to differentiate them from earlier waves already assimilated. A benefit from the easy accessibility of mail order catalogs, especially Sears, Roebuck, was that they helped teach newcomers how to live and dress like “Real Americans” so they could fulfill their deep desire to “fit in.”

Shirtwaist Blouses and Showbiz Gossip Women first fell in love with the practical, ever-changeable shirtwaist blouse in the 1890s. By 1905, the Sears, Roebuck Catalog offered 150 different styles ranging from plain, thin cotton for 39 cents to a fancy taffeta blouse for $6.95. Lacy, seethroughs were sold underlined with net. I was amused to read that when eyelet-embroidered fabric was first used in blouses, people were shocked because, although the body of a blouse was lined with net, the sleeves were not. It was shocking to see glimpses of a bare arm through the tiny peekaboo openings in the eyelet. I was reminded of a beautiful actress (who shall remain nameless) who patronized my costume shop in the mid-1940s. She arrived with a whispered reputation that she had been the mistress of a very important personage in Mexico. For fun, she often wore an all-over eyelet-embroidered blouse without a bra . . . displaying a “now-you-see-it, now-you-don’t” glimpse of a bare breast. (This international beauty later landed a famous and handsome movie star for a husband.) I still think of her when I see eyelet-embroidered fabric.

The Color Alice Blue and the Birth of Teddy Bears The Edwardian Era began in 1901, when Queen Victoria died and her son, Edward VII, ascended the throne to Great Britain. The end of the Victorian Era, with its repressive social customs and old-fashioned mores, signaled the beginning of modernity everywhere—especially in America, where the new century was throbbing with excitement from the development

231

Chapter

16

The First Two Decades 1900-1920 of electricity, telephones, automobiles, airplanes, theater, vaudeville and stillsilent “moving pictures.” The stimuli from these modern innovations inspired even more creativity and progress; no longer would women’s clothes and corsets be allowed to impede progress. In 1901 America, Theodore Roosevelt became President after McKinley was assassinated, at which time, colorful and adventurous “Teddy” Roosevelt moved into the White House with his brood of six active children. His beautiful daughter, Alice, became a social butterfly and a fashion icon. A popular song of the time, “In My Sweet Little Alice Blue Gown,” was named after her . . . as was the particular shade of blue that she wore.

Among Teddy Roosevelt’s important contributions to history was that during one of his hunting expeditions, he famously spared the lives of a mother bear and her cub,

232

thus inspiring the creation of stuffed “Teddy bears.” Forever after, these adorable creatures became the beloved companions of children everywhere (including this author).

Out-of-Style

1900–1920s The popular tailor-made suit could be worn for years, but millinery styles changed often . . . so, the best way to date clothes of this era is to recognize the changing shapes of millinery.

233

Chapter

16

The First Two Decades 1900-1920

Women’s Hats 1900-1914

The “Boater” (aka “Sailor Hat”)

The “Platter Hat”

The “Gainsborough” (aka “The Merry Widow”)

The “Toque”

The “Wavybrim”

The “Clamshell Scoop”

“Cavaliers” with Aigrette Feathers

1907–1914

234

Out-of-Style

The Changing Shapes of Millinery 1900–1920s NOTE: Overlapping time spans indicate new styles were introduced while older styles were still in fashion. The first decade of 1900 brought a variety of hat shapes that had one thing in common: They were all fanciful and overly decorated. Here is a list of the fashionable styles worn. Straw boaters (leftover favorites from the 19th century) and hats with modestlysized brims were all worn straight-on or tilted forward, as were wavy brims, aptly called wavybrims. The next mutation to these was straight brims, slightly larger, called platter hats. When these projected forward into a “scoop” they were called clamshell hats. Small-brimmed or brimless hats, (aka toques), were worn high on top of “Big Hair.” These featured elaborate concoctions of draped fabric, wide-ribbon bows, whole-body birds, ostrich and aigrette feathers; (sometimes a flower was artistically placed here or there among the feathers.) Until about 1905, because most women were trying to emulate the luxuriant tresses of the Gibson Girl, hair widened into high pompadours, puffed up and out by sausage-like horsehair “rats.” Also used to widen hair were carefully saved, natural hair combings or store-bought switches of human hair. The circumference of hat crowns grew to accommodate Big Hair, thus creating the need for smaller inside headbands and long, L-O-N-G hatpins to secure the hats now perched precariously on top of the head. A wardrobe of hatpins with beautifully jeweled tops became necessary accessories, inspiring the creation of special holders to contain the collections. These enormous hatpins became unintentionally dangerous in theaters and on crowded trolley cars. (I wonder, since this was before mace, could they ever have been used for personal protection?) Hats trimmed with aigrette feathers from the heron/crane/egret species of birds were so popular internationally that in 1911, the Audubon Law was passed to forbid their use. Innovative milliners then created imaginative birds and spreading wings from assorted feathers and plumes of birds that did not require killing to harvest their feathers. On a trip to Florida in the 1980s, I was delighted to 235

Chapter

16

The First Two Decades 1900-1920 see egrets alive and well as they strutted unselfconsciously among tourists, their stately aigrette tail feathers trailing behind them. I still have remnants of aigrette feathers from one of my mother’s vintage hats. Old family pictures reveal that over the years, she reused these feathers on different hats. In fact, the remodeling of hats was a common practice, encouraged by women’s magazines that advertised the sale of milliners’ trims and supplies. Other ads invited women to send in their old hats and feathers to be remodeled by professionals into the latest styles. This accounts for why some vintage photographs show hats that were awkwardly trimmed, sometimes overpowering their wearers; they were probably made by well-intentioned amateur milliners. In 1911, when the law to protect birds from extinction was passed, it forced the next noticeable change in millinery design. Instead of decorating hats with feathers, the newest fashion sprouted complete flower gardens that grew atop and all over wide, deep crowns. Brims that used to be flat were now turned up into deep-sided flower bowls. New options also showed bowl-shaped hats smartly trimmed with draped silk scarves. In 1905, hat brims began to grow in size. The Gainsborough hat, first seen in the 18th century on romantic French Cavaliers, was new again in 1907. It reached its peak of popularity in 1911, when the silent film The Three Musketeers was released. The dramatic Gainsborough, its large, swooping brim overflowing with ostrich plumes, was loved by women (and men) for the mystery it evoked as it side-framed a pretty face. Also in 1907, a somewhat smaller version, designed by Lucille, was worn in the stage play The Merry Widow, which permanently gave this large-brimmed hat its name. By 1906, widebrims, (aka picture hats), began to grow in size and popularity; starting at 18 inches in diameter, they grew to 20 and 22 inches wide, causing international cartoonists to poke fun at their extravagant size. Huge hats with feathers reached their maximum size between 1912 and 1914 (except for a brief rerun in 1921, when dashing actor Douglas Fairbanks, married to movie star Mary Pickford, starred in a remake of The Three Musketeers).

236

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hats 1906-1920s

The “Flower Bowl”

Silk Scarves on a Flower Bowl Brim

“Widebrims” 1906

• Widebrims Began at 18" Diameter 1906 • Grew to 20" & 22" Wide 1910–1914 • Reached Maximum 1912–1914

Smaller Hats Appeared 1914–1920s

The “Cloche” and Droop-Brim “Picture Hats” 1920–1927

237

Chapter

16

The First Two Decades 1900-1920 As usual, when fashion reaches its most extreme, as it did between 1912 and 1914, the next change is to the opposite; so naturally, smaller hat shapes appeared to compete with large hats. There were bicornes, tricornes and stylized toques, exotic turbans and large berets. Hairstyles also became shorter and less complicated. Irene Castle bobbed her hair and everyone followed; shorter hair looked better with smaller hats. By the end of World War I, hair was bobbed and/or shingled. This lasted through the 1920s because hair was mostly hidden by deep-crowned hats and cloche shapes. Incidentally, “bobby pins” were invented to hold newly bobbed hair. Another new fashion arrived in 1914, which became very influential: It was a small round hat with a flat crown that encircled the head without a brim. Mutations of this led to the first appearance of the cloche in 1917. Because hat crowns had become so deep and brims narrow, or non-existent, the next logical mutation was to permanently eliminate the brim . . . VOILA! . . . the bell-shaped CLOCHE. Incidentally, the word for bell in French is cloche. By 1919, hats were either deep-crowned and small-brimmed or deep-crowned with large drooping brims. Tailored picture hats were made of plain wool felt with simplified trim; other times, they were romantic confections of transparent tulle and lace, worn to garden parties, weddings and by celebrity entertainers, like dancer Irene Castle. The picture hat, in various reincarnations, competed with the cloche, and lasted until the late 1920s. When the fashion for frothy fabric hats made of tulle and lace ended, this eliminated the need to build millinery on wire and buckram frames. (Felt hats were steam-molded on wooden hat blocks.) The technique of covering wire and buckram hat frames with fabric was bequeathed to posterity and theatrical milliners. Here is an interesting sidebar: Until the end of the 19th century, milliners did not sell hats and hat supplies exclusively; they also sold haberdashery, small luxury items and luxe personal accessories. Because all these items were made in Milan, Italy, the name milliners came to describe these professionals.

238

Out-of-Style

America on the Road 1900-1920s

239

America on the Road

Chapter

17

Automobile Touring Clothes 1900-1920s

1904– 1916

“Dusters”

Closed Cars Ended the Need for Specialized Protective Clothing

1920s: Jodhpurs and Knickers Worn for Touring and Sightseeing

Hand Knitted “Fascinators” Worn for Ice Skating, Sleigh Rides and Auto Touring

240

Out-of-Style

Chapter

17

America on the Road Automobile Touring Clothes

A

t the turn of the 20th century, the first automobiles were considered toys for the sporting rich. These “horseless carriages” were awkwardly styled, open and mechanically unreliable . . . often inviting the taunting advice, “Get a HORSE!” Unpaved roads were dusty, muddy, or at best, crunchy gravel or bumpity-bump wood planks. Open cars exposed the occupants to sun, dust, wind and cold. Hand-cranking was required to start the cars, but often, temperamental motors died in the middle of the road, requiring the driver to get out and tinker with the greasy, oily innards of the car. Adventurous drivers sometimes found themselves driving against a wind blowing 20 to 30 miles an hour, while they were doing the same in the opposite direction. In 1902, the Automobile Club of Southern California wrote about the need for protective clothing for motorists. Others, also recognizing the need, designed specialized clothes that provided comfort and protection from dust in summer and cold in winter. Automobile clothes were made of sturdy cotton, linen or supple leather; some fabrics were water-proofed with rubber. Full-length coats, (Dusters), had long, vertical box pleats in side seams which opened to completely cover the wearer’s lap and legs when seated. This eliminated a lap robe that could blow away and did not allow freedom of movement. Long gauntlet gloves kept the wind from entering the openings of sleeves. Men wore visor caps with ear flaps. Women adapted large, oversized boys’ caps for their own use. They also abandoned wide-brimmed, overly trimmed hats,

241

Chapter

17

America on the Road replacing them with smaller hats that featured long lengths of veiling to cover hats and faces, thus keeping hats from blowing off and delicate complexions from being covered in dust. Everyone wore large goggles to keep flying debris out of their eyes. Wristwatches replaced pocket watches because time could more easily be read at a glance, freeing one’s hands for driving. The wristwatch had been designed in 1904 by a French watchmaker, Cartier, for early aviators in open cockpits, who could not fumble with pocket watches. Women abandoned parasols as accessories because they blew away in the wind. (Later, when cars became enclosed, they were no longer needed.) The stylish affectation of men carrying canes and walking sticks became passé because now more people rode in cars than paraded down the street. The clothing of gentlemen drivers differed from that worn by hired chauffeurs, who wore a military-type uniform and cap with an overcoat and goggles. In 1904, a New York store, Saks and Co., printed a 270-page catalog selling automobile parts, clothes and accessories. In 1906, the Hammacher Schlemmer catalog showed a kit with 35 basic tools to carry in a car. It cost $25.00 at a time when the average daily wage was 22 cents per hour for a work week of 57 hours. In 1908, Henry Ford introduced his Model T, affectionately called the “Tin Lizzie,” making automobiles affordable to the masses. By 1909, nineteen thousand Model Ts had been sold. By the end of the 1920s, fifteen million passenger cars had been sold. In 1916, my mother (She was then 18 years old) was hired to be photographed in the elegant Elgin automobile to demonstrate that women could drive. Other car companies were now competing with Ford. Closed cars ended the need for specialized protective clothing for touring. New categories of clothes were being developed for the growing middle class of America. Improved mobility helped people move to suburbs, where there was more time and space for recreation and sports. This advanced the design of clothes for specialized sports and informal leisurewear.

242

Out-of-Style Handy Hint for Genealogists: If you need to time-date old photographs that include automobiles in a scene, research the changing shapes of cars as they evolved in the 20th century. An important style clue to know is that until 1933, all cars had a square, boxy shape. In 1933, that changed. The “Streamliner Train” got a lot of press coverage. Automobiles also took a “streamlined” shape with rounded roofs that sloped into the hoods in front and into rounded rear ends in back. “SQUARE” was “OUT.” Caveat: Some cars could have been a few years old when the picture was taken; but, if several cars on the street are similar, that is probably the year the picture was taken.

1916: The author’s mother, age 18, hired by the Elgin Motor Co. to demonstrate that women could drive. She is wearing a fashionable Tricorne hat.

243

Chapter

17

America on the Road

How World War I Jodhpurs and Riding Britches Replaced Dusters and Tied-Down Hats for Automobile Touring World War I familiarized Americans with jodhpurs as worn by returning soldiers. These resembled riding britches (aka breeches) which were full from waist to above the knee, then fitted from knee to ankle. Boots were worn by officers; but enlisted men wore calf-length gaiters or khaki strips wound around their lower legs. These were called puttees. After World War I (1918) and well into the 1920s, women adopted this functional style (without wrappings or boots. . .sometimes with long knit stockings) to wear for the new hobby of automobile touring and sightseeing, an activity made possible by improved automobiles and newly paved roads to everywhere. (It was also a flattering style to show off a small waist and hide full hips.) I have old family pictures showing my parents and their friends sightseeing in 1923 at picturesque places in California; all the women and some of the men were wearing jodhpurs. Men wore jodhpurs for polo. In 1927, Charles Lindberg flew the Atlantic in riding britches; early movie directors are pictured wearing them with backward-facing caps (worn because visors got in the way when they peered into the lenses of box cameras on tripods). Men and women wore them as the bottom half of a formal horseback-riding habit that included a tailored hacking jacket and a smartly turned derby hat. As a little girl in the 1930s, I dreamed of owning such an outfit to wear for my Sunday morning pony rides. As a bribe, my father promised that if I learned to play “Country Gardens” on the piano he would buy me that outfit. Since all of my mother’s family were professional musicians who sang, played (and taught) the piano, they were determined that I, too, follow the family tradition. But, six months later, I knew I would never EVER learn to play “Country Gardens” or anything else on the piano . . . and that I would never own a dashing-looking riding outfit . . . unless . . . I made it myself! . . . I had an IDEA: in the late 1920s, after the fad for wearing riding britches had ended, my mother stored her imported English riding britches in a drawer, carefully wrapped in tissue paper. I did the only sensible thing: I cut them up to fit my eleven-year-old body. My mother saw what I had done and screamed, “Look

244

Out-of-Style what she did! She cut up my Imported English Riding Britches!” At this outburst, my father defended me saying, “Yes, but look, Anna, she tried to make them herself!” With that encouraging green light, I continued to cut up and remodel anything I could get my hands on (including my mother’s hats). As a direct result of my early fascination with riding britches and my inability to play the piano, I became a costume designer.

245

Chapter

18

246

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

Women’s Dress Variations 1920-1930

Early 1920s Garden Party

1924– 1930

1925– 1930

1925–1927 The “Flapper”

The ’20s “Wrap Coat”

1929–1930 First Signs of the Next Decade Begin to Appear

Out-of-Style

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960s Who Put the Roar in the Roaring Twenties?

T

he unprecedented, straight-up-and-down silhouette that first appeared in 1919 continued to dominate fashion through the next decade. In Paris, even the bare-breasted beauties in the Folies Bergère were fashionably flat-chested.

In America, the boyish look fit the mood of women who, in 1920, were celebrating their newly acquired Right to Vote. Militant female activists had finally been successful in making Prohibition the law of the land. This was supposed to prohibit the evils of selling and drinking alcohol by closing all bars. Instead, the unintended result was that the number of places to drink multiplied! Now they were located in supposedly secret, hidden locations. In order to gain entrance, it was necessary to give a secret password in a low, guarded voice. These forbidden places came to be known as Speakeasies. All this made drinking a lot more fun, seducing a new generation of modern female thrill seekers emboldened by their emancipation, their acceptance in the workplace (with their own paychecks) and the freedom to move about (and neck) in automobiles. These free spirits, who smoked cigarettes in long holders, came to be known as Flappers. (The origin of this name has so many illogical explanations, I leave this to continued speculation.) In any case, instead of neighborhood bars and saloons, Speakeasies became glamorous nightclubs with food, entertainment, dance bands and often bad

247

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960 whiskey. Cocktails were invented to dilute bad booze and to make liquor go further. Classy patrons wore the jazzy clothes of the Jazz Age and girls found exciting Bootleggers with whom to flirt. Corsets with dangling garters to hold up stockings had been abandoned; they were no longer necessary to contain female curves or inhibitions. This meant the only way to hold up stockings was to roll them up with elastic garters, thus inspiring the famous song lyric “turned up nose, turned down hose . . . Flapper, YAH, she’s one of those . . . Has Anybody Seen My Gal?” (The abandonment of corsets with dangling garters often resulted in the daring flash of bare thighs while dancing the Charleston). In addition to changing mores, the 1920s also brought changes in tastes and lifestyles: Sleeveless dresses that in earlier times would have required covering underarms with modesty ruffles were cut deeply open, (permissible now because modern women shaved their underarms). Visible lipstick became acceptable and women adopted wide trousers as symbols of their liberation . . . then found them so comfortable and practical that pants became, forever after, mainstays in modern wardrobes. Being slim became an elusive goal, bringing the craze for fad diets and exercise. It also brought long, thigh-length girdles to flatten hips. Emphasis was now at the hip bone and, best of all, the new hip girdles had attached garters that held up stockings! In the early 1920s, fashionable skirt lengths were just above the ankle, worn with black stockings. Younger women gradually began to shorten their skirts as early as 1921–1923 to wear with the new, nude-color stockings, which seductively focused attention on newly exposed legs. For the first few years, however, until entire wardrobes had been updated, women alternated wearing both long and shorter dresses as occasion or whim demanded. Finally, by 1925, everyone, except elderly ladies, had accepted hemlines that covered the knee. (Skirts never became shorter than that, even for Flappers, whose heyday was between 1925 and 1927.) By 1928, designers were experimenting with zigzag, uneven hemlines, anticipating the end of the boyish look—and the beginning of longer, curvier styles in the 1930s. However, vintage pictures and catalogs show that average women continued to wear loose, knee-length dresses and helmet-like cloche hats until well into the early years of the 1930s; the stock market crash, in October, 1929, known as Black Friday, was certainly not a good time to shop for a new look in wardrobes.

248

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hats and Hairstyles 1920-1930

“French Bob” aka “Buster Brown”

• Bobbed hair first worn in 1918 • Grew long again in 1920 • Bobbed and shingled hair finally accepted 1924–1930 • “Bobby Pins” invented to control short hair

“Betty Boop’s” Hairstyle

1924–1930 Hair Worn ½ Inch Below Earlobe “Cloche”

“Turban”

“MuffinTop”

“Widebrim”

“Helmet”

“Cloche”

249

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

The Great Depression and the Golden Age of Radio

250

Out-of-Style

Everything Changed in the 1930s The Great Depression brought reality, sobriety and the renewed appreciation for female curves. Waists returned to their natural placement, breasts were acknowledged and skirts dropped to low- or mid-calf length. The social revolution of the 1920s, which had inspired the sassy, short-skirted Flapper, was over, having accomplished its purpose of female emancipation. At first, hemlines varied from designer to designer, bridging the transition with zigzag hemlines for evening. In spite of changes in fashion, vintage photographs show that because of the shortage of money in the Depression, many women continued to wear their ’20s clothes and hats for the next few years of the 1930s. The prevailing Art Deco aesthetic was reflected in the modern style lines of streamlined trains, autos, household appliances, in the architecture of the new Chrysler Building in New York City and in the sleek bias-cut dresses of French designer Madeleine Vionnet. Although Vionnet’s masterfully cut bias dresses are always included in fashion history books, no one explains what bias cutting is, or does . . . so, I will do that for you. Bias cuts allow fabric to both cling and flow at the same time. Fabrics are woven on looms that produce straight (warp) and horizontal (woof) threads. Most garment cutting is done on the straight of the grain—sometimes on the horizontal. This requires darts and seams to shape to the body, allowing each designer to choose the degree of fit desired. When fabric is cut on the diagonal, or bias, it is stretchy in both directions. This causes it to cling to the body, revealing every nook, cranny and curve, while hanging in graceful folds where it does not. This body-skimming fit also unmercifully reveals one’s undergarments, which is why women who wear soft, thin, bias-cut fabrics do not wear underwear (like Jean Harlow in her legendary 1930s gowns). Modern actresses on the red carpets of the 21st century often seek the sleekness of spandex slips made by SPANX.™ Two quarter circles cut on the bias can become a flattering pencil skirt—with movement. Caveat here to fledgling designers: Bias cuts in soft fabrics can be very “unkind” to bad figures because, while they cling to curves, they also reveal bulges and imperfections.

251

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

Women’s Dress Variations 1930-1940 Early to Mid-1930s

1935–1940

252

Out-of-Style Ordinary cotton fabrics, as used by Coco Chanel, became acceptable in high fashion garments. Meanwhile, man-made fabrics like acetate, rayon and nylon became wardrobe staples (even though acetate, a silk substitute, color-faded by simply hanging in a closet). Nylon, upon its introduction in 1939, had immediate acceptance for its ability to make sheer but strong stockings and beautiful but washable lingerie. Unfortunately, this “love affair” was soon interrupted when nylon went to war to make parachutes and other World War II essentials. Almost every living room in 1930s America centered around a radio, which brought drama, laughter and world news to entire families without any cost for admission, earning this decade the accolade “The Golden Age of Radio.” Some families, however, did not always stay at home. Good roads on newly built national highways had been developed; cars were now comfortable and reliable enough for extended travel. Auto Courts (now called motels) and gas stations proliferated. Auto Clubs stood by to assist tourists and suspenseful, sequential Burma Shave road signs became famous for keeping travelers amused and alert. A popular radio show starring vivacious songstress Dinah Shore had everyone singing her sponsor’s theme song, “See the USA in your Chevrolet; America is waiting for your call. . . .” Everyone escaped the gloom of the Great Depression by going to the movies to see zany comedies, gripping Technicolor dramas like Gone with the Wind and musicals (especially ones with Shirley Temple, Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers). These influenced American culture and, most importantly, AMERICAN FASHION. The clothes worn by beautiful movie actresses and handsome leading men were not always realistic reflections of what working people actually wore (or could afford) . . . which is why they appealed to the fantasies of luxury-deprived audiences of the Great Depression. To watch old movies of this era, one would think that everyone wore tuxedos and evening gowns to dinner every night. Clothes designed for films could not be too avant-garde because they had to remain fashionable for three years after release; it took that long to reach everywhere in the American Heartland (known to the snobbish elite as “the sticks”). In this decade, tailored slacks, beach pajamas and sexy swimsuits became wardrobe staples accepted by everyone from movie stars to everyday people. 253

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

Women’s Hats 1930-1945 1930 “High Brow”

Most Popular Style 1930–1936

Knitted “Toque”

“Feathered Fedoras” & “Slouch Hats” The “Beanie” 1936–1938 Silly Hats Begin 1934

The “Sophisticate”

The “Beanie” 1936–1938

The “Cartwheel” & “Picture Hat” 1939–1945

“Doll Hats” Late 1930s

254

The “Pillbox” With a “Snood” 1939–1945

Out-of-Style The casual, California sportswear look that movie stars wore in their personal wardrobes were compared to those worn on the French Riviera. It is interesting to know that in the 1930s, ’40s and early ’50s, downtown Los Angeles became an important garment center, specializing in the manufacture of glamorous but casual California-style clothes. Top fashion centers of the world included England (their Master Tailors dressed such arbiters of fashion as the Prince of Wales), Paris, New York, and now, Hollywood. Eventually, third-world countries took over the manufacturing of clothes, causing the busy factories in downtown Los Angeles to disappear. In the 1930s, modern America was reaching maturity. The competition of capitalism had encouraged creativity which brought the perfecting of products to new heights of innovation. The process of manufacturing ready-to-wear clothing in the United States benefited from this atmosphere. For example, cutting machines could accurately slice through multiple layers of deeply stacked fabric, producing hundreds of ready-to-sew garments at one time. Power sewing machines zoomed as fast as operators could manipulate garments under a needle. Sewing machine attachments made possible creative dressmaking details. The latest fashions from Europe, New York and California were copied as soon as the International Fashion Press reported them and “knock-off” sketches could be sold; multistoried department stores and specialty shops were abundantly stocked. All this brought prices down so that average people were as well dressed as those more affluent, a fact that visiting Europeans remarked upon. (In spite of the availability of good clothes, there were plenty of Depression Era kids who grew up thinking that the name “hand-me-downs” was a national brand of clothing.) Modernized factories now provided employees with personal lockers, thus enabling them to wear street clothes to and from work and to change into work clothes at the job. The unexpected benefit from this convenience was that it too helped democratize clothes so that people were not immediately categorized by what they wore. It is important to know that FASHIONS OF THE 1930s PRODUCED TWO VERY DIFFERENT LOOKS: In early-to-mid-decade, the look was soft and fluid. Skirts were longish, hats were shallow crowned and small brimmed, worn tilted over one eye. Hair was marcelled (aka finger-waved) and worn close to the head. Some sleeves had small, puffed caps . . . opposite from the boyish look of the 1920s. 255

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960 By mid-decade, the look had evolved to crisp, modern and authoritative. Shoulders were broad, held out by shoulder pads and widened by puffed or pleated sleeve caps. (The first mention of padded shoulders was in 1935.) Hair was longer and smooth at the crown with fluffs of hair to frame the face. These style features morphed into the recognizable look of the 1940s. Starting in 1935, the Big Bands of Benny Goodman, Glen Miller, Harry James, the Dorsey Brothers and others could be heard on everyone’s radio as they broadcasted from ballrooms all over the country. Swing music, swing dancing and jitterbugging became the obsession of young America. This inspired the creation of circular swing skirts, which were worn to school, as well as on the dance floor. New hats ranged from beanies to slouchy, felt fedoras, to amusing concoctions that softened the looks of tailored broad-shouldered suits. Three-quarter-length gloves and veiled hats added glamour and mystery. After the film Gone with the Wind opened in 1939, Scarlet O’Hara’s face-framing cartwheel hats, fascinators and snoods were quickly copied, becoming popular fashions of the 1940s. Snoods, which held hair in a net, were perfect for women doing war work—and they looked good, too. If ever there was a decade that allowed women to change moods and personalities by simply changing hats, it was the 1930s. It was also less expensive to buy a new hat than a new dress or suit. At whim, a girl could go from flirtatious to mysterious, to chic, to sassy or sophisticated. . .she could even go to “knowingly ridiculous” if she wore designer Elsa Schiaparelli’s infamously shocking millinery creations (like a hat shaped like a shoe!) The color “shocking pink” originated with her, and her perfume was named “Shocking.”

256

Out-of-Style

Fashions of the Forties and HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD

257

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

Women’s Hats 1940-1950s “Doll Hats”

“Ear-to-Ear” Flowers

“Sombrero Cartwheels”

New ok

“Snoods”

”

1947

Lo

he T “

“Turbans”

Fur or Feather “Poufs”

The “Cartwheel” War Work Brought Shoulder Bags

Huge Berets

258

Out-of-Style

Women’s Hairstyles 1940-1950s The “New Look” 1947 short hair and the small head

1940–1947

om “P ur

do pa W ut O ” ed at s uf f “ R ” P ll es Ro t yl e irs sag H a S au

Betty Grable’s “Upsweep”

i th Ho r se ir, ha

The “Page Boy” Hairstyles Supported by a Sausage-Roll “Rat”

259

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

Women’s Fashion Variations 1940-1950s

“Draped-Shape Crepes”

Bare Midriffs Wide-Leg Slacks

260

Silver Fox “Chubbies”

“Pedal Pushers”

Broad-Shouldered Suits

“Peasant Dress Dirndls”

“Shirt-Maker Dresses”

The “New Look!” 1947

Out-of-Style

Fashions of the Forties and Hollywood Boulevard The 1940s was a special decade for me and for the world. I was sixteen when the mellow, but newly somber, voice of beloved President Roosevelt proclaimed over our breakfast room radio that December 7, 1941, would forever be remembered as “THE DAY OF INFAMY”—World War II had begun for America! Shortly after graduating from Beverly Hills High School in June 1942, I had the opportunity to design the costumes for two hit Hollywood shows . . .  I was 18 years old (see Betty’s Bio). One of the shows was the legendary Ken Murray’s Blackouts, which played at the original El Capitan Theatre near the famous corner of Hollywood and Vine. (The Capitol Records Building was later built across the street and the El Capitan Theatre, owned by Sid Grauman, was relocated near the modern Kodak Theatre.) Los Angeles, with its many attractions, had always been a Mecca for tourists seeking to find elusive “Hollywood.” They found, instead, the meaning to Gertrude Stein’s oft-quoted observation, “There is no there. . .THERE!” Hollywood was EVERYWHERE . . . and, it was NOWHERE! Movie studios were spread out from Culver City to the San Fernando Valley; film stars lived from Beverly Hills to the beach at Malibu; glamour spots like Ciro’s, The Trocadero and The Mocambo were on the Sunset Strip; Slapsy Maxie’s was on the Miracle Mile; The Coconut Grove was almost downtown. The essence of imaginary “Hollywood” lived on the pages of movie magazines. So HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD (not far from the big wooden sign in the hills that proclaimed it) became an actual location with a centralized place to exist—which is how it became such a famous “go-to” landmark. Now, it was the magnet for numerous military bases which surrounded Southern California and attracted thousands of off-duty soldiers, sailors, marines and air force men who converged upon the glow of Hollywood Boulevard, all looking for excitement, celebrities and GIRLS! Young Hollywood Boulevard of the 1930s and ’40s had the innocent, glamorous, energetic charm of a special place. There was an aura of vitality everywhere. (No bizarre shops or spooky people as when it later declined.) 261

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960 The street was lined with brightly lit shop windows displaying stylish hats, Hollywood-influenced California sportswear and sassy evening clothes. Nearby were small hotels with friendly bars. Novelty stores sold kitschy souvenirs to send home to middle-America. There were attractions like record stores selling 78-speed records, nightclubs, the Broadway Hollywood Department Store, Nancy’s (a specialty store patronized by stars and starlets), the Egyptian and Chinese Theatres and movie star hangouts like Mike Lyman’s and the Brown Derby. Within blocks were NBC, Columbia Pictures, Earl Carroll’s, The Florentine Gardens and The Palladium Ballroom, featuring Big Bands and, of course, the Hollywood Canteen with real movie stars as hosts and hostesses. Boys in uniform mixed happily with civilians as crowds of people strolled down the street to look in store windows and to make instant new friends. (Translation: pick up girls.) In those innocent days there was no fear of talking to strangers—especially service men. Government posters encouraged people to give the service men rides, assistance and hospitality. As costume designer for the Blackouts, (which from 1942–1949 was an ongoing “must see” attraction for locals and visitors alike), I was at the theater often to confer with Ken Murray about costumes needed for new acts, to gain approval for sketches or to deliver finished costumes. I was at an age where I attracted attention from the servicemen I encountered on the Boulevard; I especially liked Air Corps lieutenants and Marine flyers . . . maybe it was their uniforms . . . and often took them backstage to watch the show while I attended to business. Sometimes I brought them home with me, knowing that even after midnight my mother would happily get up to make waffles, and if they had no place to stay, would make them comfortable on our living room sofa. (It was our contribution to the war effort.) During that time I had my own costume shop, designing clothes and costumes for interesting people. All these experiences left me with vivid memories of an exciting time and place and, particularly, of the fabulous fashions of the 1940s.

262

Out-of-Style

The History of Hollywood Boulevard Not generally known is the history of Hollywood Boulevard. In 1926, it was a quiet residential and agricultural area; however, a real estate developer, Charles Toberman, envisioned it as a popular theater district. Along with others, he developed thirty buildings, including the still-beautiful Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel, site of the first Academy Awards. Sid Grauman and others built the Chinese, Egyptian and El Capitan theaters, Grauman’s name becoming synonymous with his Chinese Theater. However, in 1941, the original El Capitan became a movie house, and the name El Capitan was transferred to another theater down the street, at the famous corner of Hollywood and Vine; this theater was also owned by Sid Grauman. This is where Ken Murray’s Blackouts had its record-breaking run of almost seven years. The iconic, circular Capital Records Building was built across the street. Current update: That legendary El Capitan has been torn down and replaced with a giant red building. The famous El Capitan name has been returned to its original location, where Disney uses it for all the Disney Productions.

✦

✦

✦

✦

✦

✦

✦

The war was over . . . two busy decades rolled swiftly by. Suddenly, it was 1965 . . . and my FORTIETH BIRTHDAY! I decided to give a big party. What better theme for a fortieth birthday than a FRANTIC FORTIES COSTUME PARTY! No one had yet begun to think of the 1940s as “picturesque.” They were still doing Flapper and Prohibition parties. In any case, my invitation, printed like a draft notice, as well as the poem I wrote to give guests an idea of what to wear, is reprinted on pages 264–265 because it so colorfully describes key fashions of an era that I knew so well. The party was such a success that Columnist Bill Kennedy of the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner devoted his entire second front page column to describe it. The article is printed on page 266 for your amusement so that you may share this montage of memories from that colorful, chaotic time.

263

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

INVITATION TO MY 40TH BIRTHDAY PARTY

GREETINGS AND FELICITATIONS! YOU HAVE BEEN DRAFTED BY THE RESIDENT AND HIS FIRST LADY TO ATTEND A

“FRANTIC FORTIES PARTY”

TIME: THE SWING SHIFT, 8 PM ATTIRE: FASHIONS OF THE FORTIES ATTN: RATIONS INCLUDE COCKTAILS AND LATE SUPPER.

264

Out-of-Style

To refresh your memory, here are humbly submitted Wardrobe ideas, so that you’ll be admitted . . . Remember hand painted ties on all of the guys, To wear with their reet-pleated zoots? Draped-shape crepes, cartwheel hats, and the shoulders Of her Adrian suits . . . Pompadour hairdos, upsweeps, and snoods; Those days you were young enough to SING

“In the Mood.”

“A slip of the lip could sink a ship.” High-arched eyebrows over “Deep Purple” lips . . . Females wrote “V-mail” and went to canteens To meet soldiers and sailors and darling Marines . . . Nylons were scarce, so were butter and booze. Remember her platform-soled ankle strap shoes? “Fascinators,” turbans, and “Rosie the Riveter,” That mustachioed madman named Adolph Hitler . . . Red Cross workers, the WAVES and the WACS, Slapsy Maxie’s and loose-fitting slacks . . . A “sweater girl” became a star. Peasant dress dirndls on Hedy Lamar . . . Air Raid wardens and USO actors, Use your imagination and some of Max Factor’s . . . We’ll jitterbug and “cut a rug,” form wavering conga lines, Rhumba to old records, from that colorful, chaotic time . . . As a last suggestion, there’s Hirohito, But please be good sports and come incognito!!!

WE

WANT YOU! 265

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

1965

266

Out-of-Style

This photo was taken in 1942, in back of Beverly Hills High School. It shows me and a handsome soldier on our way to the clubhouse of an adjacent golf course. In the background is the back lot of nearby Twentieth Century Fox Studio, where a stage set can be seen. In those days, from second-story classrooms, we could watch them play golf and make movies. This huge empty lot is now filled with the towering buildings of busy Century City. Shortly after this picture was taken, the soldier, Roy Byram, Jr., was sent to active duty in World War II, where he bravely served in the historically decisive Battle of the Bulge, returning safely to his home in Charlotte, North Carolina. 267

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

Women’s Fashion Variations 1950-1960s “Shortclip” Cashmere Sweaters

Fur Collared Sweaters & Mink Stoles

The “New Look” 1947–1960

1953–60s “Capri Pants”

268

The “Sheath Suit”

Interesting Skirts

The “Trapeze”

The “Sack” aka the “Chemise”

The “Balloon” aka the “Bubble”

Out-of-Style

The “New Look” for Women (and the “New Look” for Movies and Las Vegas) in the 1950s 1950–1960s Fashions of the 1950s actually began in 1947, when French designer Christian Dior dramatically changed the silhouette of women’s clothes. Overnight, women’s wardrobes became obsolete. World War II had been over since 1945 and the world was ready for a change. The bold, broad shoulders and narrow knee-length skirts of the late 1930s and ’40s (prescribed by war rationing of fabrics) were suddenly passé; new were unpadded shoulders, cinched waistlines and low-calf-length, circular skirts that swirled when women walked. The newly fashionable hourglass figure was produced by resurrecting old dressmaking techniques which made waists look smaller (this is why the look was so quickly and universally accepted). All this was topped by newly short hair, small hats and an occasional mushroom-brimmed hat. The origin of The New Look is always credited to Christian Dior, but because change was “in the air,” other designers also presented new looks. However, Dior’s interpretation is the one that caught the mood, swept the world and made him famous. After 1955, new silhouettes were launched to coexist with Dior’s original concept. These were the Sack, the Bubble (aka the Balloon), the Trapeze and the Chemise. The chemise was the only look that survived into the 1960s, evolving into the slim Jackie Kennedy look. These body-hiding styles were not generally accepted by mainstream women because they were not universally flattering (unless proportioned by knowledgeable designers). At a country club on a Saturday night, I remember giggling at the fashion victims who were awkwardly dancing in their Trapeze, Sack, Bubble and Balloon dresses. At the same party, other girls in strapless, bouffant dresses, their full skirts propped up and out by frothy petticoats (aka crinolines), provided real-life competition to the sexy television actresses who were nightly leaning into TV screens to reveal their alluring cleavage to families all over America. 269

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960 The fashionable shoe worn with these clothes was a pointy-toed, stilettoheeled pump. This shoe produced painful bunions on many women that years later required surgery to correct. At this time, fashion magazines showed a variety of figure-enhancing undergarments, particularly waist-whittling waist-cinchers, but also one-piece, strapless merry widow corsets to wear under strapless dresses. Bosoms were made conspicuous by the exaggeration of pointy torpedo bras, caricatured decades later by Madonna. However, the mainstream Look of the 1950s that was popularly accepted was very ladylike and well-groomed. Small hats, matched to bag, shoes and (mandatory) gloves, completed every outfit. Early in the decade, an alternative to the full skirt was introduced. It was the narrow, calf-length, sheath skirt, which provided a variety of new looks: the neat little suit, two-piece dresses, cocktail dresses and evening gowns with narrow skirts and, of course, shirtwaist dresses. These became so popular that the fashion press said, “You can tell an American girl by her shirtwaist.” Because they were casual, practical and comfortable, every decade of the 20th century reinvented this style. Sleeveless shirtdresses were introduced in the early 1950s. Until our eyes became accustomed to completely bare arms, they seemed unfinished—as if the dressmaker had not yet added the sleeves. Sleeveless then became accepted as forever fashion. There were even formal shirtwaists. The important design house of Traina-Norell showed a narrow-skirted shirtdress in poppy red chiffon with jeweled buttons. Also typical of the casual, wearable clothes of the 1950s were beautifully detailed skirts, topped by short, to-the-waist, cashmere sweaters. Of special note were cashmere sweaters with large fox fur or mink collars, fastened at the waist with jeweled clips. These provided glamorous evening wraps, worn (unexpectedly) with tweed skirts or (expectedly) with evening dresses. My personal favorite was a white cashmere sweater with a white fox collar. There was a sexy fit unique to some sheath skirts of the fifties: The skirt tapered from hip to hem, creating a focus on the fanny. This was only wearable for some figure types: (think Marilyn Monroe’s rounded back view). The unique makeup style of the fifties was inspired by the much-admired face of actress Audrey Hepburn; her naturally heavy, dark eyebrows and

270

Out-of-Style tippy-tilt doe eyes, worn with really red lips, were copied by top models and hence by women on the street. Incidentally, the clothes designed for Audrey Hepburn by Hubert de Givenchy in the 1950s influenced clothes of that decade, especially the straight-across-the-neckline “Sabrina” cocktail dress from the film Sabrina. Fake eyelashes for real-life daywear were introduced at the end of the decade. This fad carried over to the 1960s, when they grew longer and thicker, worn three pairs at a time, combined with almost-white lips. This became THE makeup look of the 1960s. Hairspray was introduced in the mid-1950s, becoming a dressing table necessity. This contributed to the recognizable neat look of the era. The popularity of hats declined as hair became more important than millinery. By the end of the decade, hats had diminished in size to become more like hair ornaments such as a stylized bow or small buckram shape, adorned with flirtatious veiling. By the 1960s, milliners competed with hairstylists by building “hats” (aka “wig toques”) made of fake hair. These were sculpted into towering concoctions of switches and chignons, coiled high into fantasy shapes. These imaginative styles were perfect for the Moon Maiden Minis of the 1960s. Alternative hairstyles of the 1960s were bouffant beehives, hair-sprayed into stiff, untouchable mounds. At the same time, some young girls were using hot irons to literally iron their hair straight. Hair was held in place by plastic Alice in Wonderland headbands. This style was worn with the baby doll look and by hippies wearing Indian bands on their foreheads. The new stars of the fashion world were modern hairstylists like Vidal Sassoon, whose geometric, asymmetrical haircuts suited new fashion tastes. Never again would ladylike hats be mandatory for every occasion. Meanwhile, the style clue that says “1950s Middle America” was that of careful grooming—every hair in place. Men, women and children were neatly dressed— no “grab-bag. I dressed in the dark” outfits. This neat look is often caricatured by showing a woman with a perfect flip hairdo wearing a kitchen apron to signify a typical, stay-at-home housewife. Remember, this was the decade of nest-building by returned World War II soldiers and their sweethearts, who were at that time happily creating the Baby Boom. Home appliances like electric dishwashers, automatic washer/dryers and other conveniences were making life easier for housewives. Now, instead of “house dresses,” women wore jeans, capris and slacks around the house; 271

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

Women’s Hairstyles 1950-1960s The “New Look” 1947

Short Hair “Pony Tail”

“Page Boy” “Glamour Girl”

The Signature Look of the 1950s: Careful Grooming, Every Hair in Place, a Can of Hair Spray on Every Dressing Table.

The “Flip”

272

Out-of-Style they no longer had to stand outdoors tediously pinning wet clothes to long clotheslines. Natural fiber fabrics, a delight to touch again, were now available after the shortages of World War II. Stores were not then saturated with clothes made of cheap, man-made fabrics from third-world countries. Fabrics had the luxurious feel of good wool tweeds and wovens from Scotland and drapable wool gabardine from Italy. Wool jersey and sheer wool crepe began to reappear, as did silks from Japan, China and France. And, of course, American textile mills were busy making fabrics for civilian use again.

The New Look for Movies Movies were undergoing cultural changes; Italian and French film makers were revolutionizing story telling. Instead of the lightweight escapist films of Hollywood, where actresses playing working girls were dressed in customdesigned clothes (that real-life women could neither wear nor afford), Italian directors Fellini and Rossellini made raw, “reality-of-life” films (aka Cinema Verite) where under-privileged (and over-endowed) actresses Sophia Loren and French actress Brigitte Bardot artlessly wore unexceptional clothes—(and looked FABULOUS!) Brigitte Bardot scandalized the world by wearing a bikini, which envious women all over the world then copied. A by-product of this honest, new way of showing “life” in the real world was that Hollywood stopped making fanciful films; this put film costume designers out of work for a long time. Until that time, only costume designers who had qualified and paid dues to belong to the Costume Designers Guild were allowed to design new clothes and costumes for films. Wardrobe people, Costumers, who belonged to the Motion Picture Costumers Union were allowed to shop for ready-to-wear clothes and get them altered. They also arranged for daily and nightly cleaning, dyeing and mending of wardrobes to keep them ready for filming, and they kept track of who wore what for each take—but they were not allowed to create new clothes. Now, since films were so realistic, only realistic clothes, already available readyto-wear, were needed, so Costumers—who were less expensive than Designers —were hired to wardrobe the new films. This kept Costumers working, which 273

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960 created competition between the two groups; but alas, some Costumers were tweaking the rules by sneaking a few new custom-made garments into the mix. I remember in the 1960s attending a Costume Designers Guild meeting (several famous designers were in attendance). Members were seriously contemplating joining with the notoriously strong-armed Teamsters Union. One designer said, “I want all the muscle I can get.” (Fortunately, this mismatch never took place.) In addition, not many films were being made in those years because television had become a way of life for people who had previously gone regularly to the movies. Some lucky designers found alternative careers in ready-to-wear or television. My personal role model was designer Helen Rose, who had designed costumes for the Ice Follies before becoming an Academy Award-winning designer at MGM. There, she created gorgeous gowns for all MGM’s major stars like Elizabeth Taylor. Helen Rose left the studio in 1966 to open her own ready-to-wear factory, supplying beautiful evening clothes for happy real-life customers who had always coveted her creations. I had the privilege of working for her for a short time.

The New Look for Las Vegas In 1946, notorious gangster Bugsy Siegel opened the first hotel with gambling in the middle of a barren desert known as Las Vegas. He named it The Flamingo, which at first was a modest two-story building capped by his own private suite at the top. In 1947, this author (see photo on facing page) and her brand-new husband honeymooned there, not knowing to whom the suite belonged. (Bugsy had been shot and killed a week earlier in Beverly Hills.) It had the first kingsized bed anyone had ever seen or heard of at that time. The first we learned of who owned the suite was as we were leaving . . . the maid said, “The Boss never did get to sleep in this bed!” By the 1950s, another influence was helping to color life in Las Vegas, which was growing into an exciting place of total entertainment with stars of film and television appearing nightly—IN PERSON! Hotels like the original Flamingo were new, and neon lights illuminated the still-empty desert. All of Las Vegas fit onto one short street, aptly named the Strip. People who went to early Las Vegas considered it a Special Event and dressed for the occasion. Women wore their glitziest, most glamorous cocktail dresses; men, dark suits and ties. Mink stoles were everywhere. 274

Out-of-Style Maitre d’s treated everyone like royalty. Showrooms starred the likes of Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin and others. Guests were not then herded like cattle to sit at communal tables with strangers; people were ushered to private tables without furtive tips to waiters for good service. In a few years, however, as the Strip morphed into a gaudy concentration of increasingly tasteless new hotels, the unsophisticated tourists they attracted from all over America were equally tasteless as they debarked from chartered buses. Enter the world of men and women in polyester pant suits, men in T-shirts and shorts, carelessly worn with dark dress shoes and executive socks (instead of with athletic shoes and socks) and little old ladies in tennis shoes that would trek from casino to casino for cheap “come-on” buffets. A few hotels, like the beautiful Desert Inn, owned by Howard Hughes, maintained their dignity while the Strip continued to worship “gaudy.” This writer was privileged to costume a few major shows at the Desert Inn before it was torn down and replaced with the look of New Las Vegas.

“Honeymooning” at The Flamingo, 1947 275

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

The Phenomenon of the Fifties Felt Skirt I remember the first time I saw a circular felt skirt. It was at a party in 1948, just after “The New Look of 1947” had been accepted around the world. The use of felt fabric for an entire garment was unique (instead of on a pool table or as a cloth under a Christmas tree). Appliqued onto the skirt was a darling poodle on a leash (how charming! how original!). The skirt gave the girl wearing it an incredibly tiny waist and an hourglass figure as the skirt swirled around her. Immediately I wanted one—and so did everyone else! This became the most copied fashion of its time for both girls and women. So much so, that in retrospectives and at costume parties (in spite of the fact that other amusing motifs were also appliquéd onto these skirts), it is the poodle that is remembered. The reason these circular skirts were so readily copied was because felt fabric required minimal sewing and finishing at a time when this fashionable silhouette was usually achieved by complicated inner construction. Anyone could make a felt skirt—and DID!

276

Out-of-Style

POODLE SKIRT

277

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960

Fashion Photography

Spring 1934

This fashion model was my distant cousin. Professional statistics on the back of this vintage photograph state that she was a size 12 and measured 32-26-35. In modern sizing that would be a size 2/4. The size categories 0, 2, 4, and 6 did not previously exist. 278

Out-of-Style

The Changing Styles of Fashion Photography I leave for others to describe the technical advances of cameras and fashion photography. My interest is in noting the changing ways models were directed to pose in order to show clothes. Each decade had a look of its own which reflected contemporary tastes. This affected the posture, stance and facial expressions of models in print and on runways. Throughout the 1930s, either sitting or standing, fashion models posed in graceful, ladylike, legs-together positions. Relaxed hands held gloves, purses or dignified props. Backgrounds showed them leaning against a formal pillar or otherwise simple, elegant backgrounds. Smoking, then considered sophisticated, often showed models languidly holding a cigarette. Experiments in lighting produced theatrical effects resulting in many remarkable fashion photographs. In the 1940s, models posed as sexy pinup girls or were positioned in contrived ways that emphasized female curves. At the same time, other pictures showed the clothes of World War II by featuring the self-confident stance of women of that era. The New Look of the 1950s (which actually began in 1947) brought a recognizable change in the posture of fashion models in high fashion magazines; stiff and posed, they looked as if they were caught in suspended animation: legs akimbo, arms stopped in mid-air, facial expressions—blank. In photographs used to actually sell real clothes, the models were more natural with friendly faces. The 1960s brought another mood to fashion modeling which reflected the influence of the mini, the micro-mini, the highly stylized patterns of Op and Pop Art, and especially the new chic of Moon Maidens celebrating America’s place in Outer Space. To commemorate this, the April, 1965 cover of Harper’s Bazaar showed a face shot of its top model wearing a huge space helmet which filled the entire page. Superimposed over one of her eyes, a glued-on plastic eye patch visually twinkled, moved and changed expression. This was a milestone in fashion photography. Inside the magazine, the stylized Courreges-inspired outer space clothes were modeled by (equally spacey) outer space models who looked so mechanical, it seemed as if the photographer could change their positions by pushing a button.

279

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960 In the 1970s, fashion photographers pursued individual artistic styles. The ability to fly entire crews to exotic locations for a fashion shoot resulted in issues that looked more like travel magazines than fashion magazines. Models were posed in acrobatic positions that concealed the style lines of the clothes that readers wanted to see and study—thus eliminating the primary purpose of a fashion magazine: to show the latest styles. These exotic backgrounds began to dominate each picture, becoming, from the photographer’s viewpoint, more important than the clothes. In addition, the number of pages devoted to commercial ads multiplied, and editorial copy became elitist as blasé fashion professionals played to each other. That is when I stopped subscribing to high fashion magazines . . . They had self-destroyed their own raison d’être.

The Origin of Fashion Shows There is an interesting story of how the profession of fashion modeling began: Designer Charles Worth emigrated from England to Paris, where he became the first world famous couturier when he opened his own couture house in 1858. His clothes were worn by royalty and aristocrats all over the world. Designs by Worth were known for their dramatic simplicity. He never used extraneous trimmings, only those which enhanced his designs. Worth was the first couturier to show a collection to clients BEFORE they committed to an order. At first, he used models (aka mannequins) chosen for their resemblance to his best customers, so that they could visualize themselves in the samples presented. These models were called doubles. Later, models were chosen for their differing types and idealized proportions. A clever showman, Worth showed his clothes in an elegant, spacious room, as brilliantly lit as the ballrooms in which his gorgeous gowns would be seen. Never modest, Worth said, “The French Revolution was not much in comparison to MY revolution . . . I dethroned the CRINOLINE!” (aka the hoop skirt). His taste level was so respected that in 1874, when he got bored with bustles and pronounced them “DEAD,” everyone followed. In 1912, French Designer Paul Poiret pioneered another milestone in the way new fashions were exhibited and publicized. Poiret took a team of nine mannequins on an automobile trip through Europe. The girls all dressed alike

280

Out-of-Style in matching outfits. At the capital of each country, he produced a Parade (before they were called fashion shows) for royalty and journalists to view his revolutionary new designs. After a century of iron-clad female figures, Poiret showed his shockingly narrowed, uncorseted silhouette, which influenced fashion for the next decade.

Chanel’s Influence on Clothes Designed for the Movies Designer Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel began her influence in pre-World War I France, when she introduced wool jersey pullover sweaters and sailors’ coats into mainstream fashion. This was the origin of Chanel’s lifelong love affair with wool jersey. In the 19th century, British actress Lily Langtry was the first to wear a stretchy pullover knit. This, while everyone else was wearing heavily corseted jackets and bodices. Since she was from the island of Jersey, she was known as The Jersey Lily and the stretchy fabric became forever known as Jersey. Photographs of immigrants arriving in New York at the turn of the century show many women wearing these comfortable jersey tops for the arduous ten-day journey aboard ship. Chanel’s influence spread through the 1920s with simple, straight-hanging wool jersey suits which caught the spirit of the times. Because of her success, she was brought to Hollywood in the late 1920s to design for films. Until that time, film clothes had been fancy and inappropriate for the story or for the character wearing them. Chanel insisted that clothes be realistic to the needs of the drama and to the economic lifestyles of the characters. This brought new authenticity to film, establishing ground rules for movie designers for the first time. Chanel’s fashions continued to be influential until she closed her shop during World War II when the Germans invaded France. When she reopened again some years later, her designs brought her a second successful international career. This time, Chanel made her signature Chanel suits in gorgeous, textured silk or wool tweeds edged all around with lavish braid and worn with chunky ropes of Chanel’s own costume jewelry, making fake jewels acceptable. Mutations of this classic style are still worn in the 21st century.

281

Chapter

18

Fashion Changes 1920-1960 Chanel said, “Costume jewelry is not meant to make you look rich, but to adorn you.” She also said, “Fashion changes but STYLE endures.”

Costume jewelry is not meant to make you look rich, but to adorn you. —Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel, influential fashion designer who gave the world an enduring fashion standard—the little black dress!

Authenticity of Period Costumes Designed for the Movies Knowing how to date vintage clothes becomes a fun game to play when you want to time-date a period film that you are watching. (If you can tell by the clothes when the story took place, you are entitled to feel smugly self-satisfied.) Films made in England are impressive in their authenticity because England’s costume rental houses are filled with excellent copies of the actual, original 282

Out-of-Style garments preserved from antiquity to modern times. Especially interesting are old European military uniforms in all their colorful glory; re-creations of uniforms for entire armies are available for rental. Because of ancestral pride and a sense of history, the personal garments worn by royal ancestors and aristocrats were saved for posterity by proud families and dedicated museums, especially the Victoria and Albert Museum in London. These original garments, plus commissioned family portraits, are vital for historians and for film and stage costume designers to learn how clothes were worn. By contrast, in America, anything old was usually discarded because it was—“old.” When I watch a period film made in England, I am in awe of the meticulous re-creation of authentic costumes by English tailors, dressmakers and designers. The cut, fit, workmanship and knowledgeable use of vintage fabrics and trimmings is a joy to see, adding convincing accuracy to any story being told. This accuracy is possible because they have access to so many original garments from which to work. Period films made in Hollywood (especially cowboy movies) are not always authentic examples of the time frames of their stories. Artistic license was often taken to make vintage clothes look sexy by Hollywood standards. In particular, the inauthentic use of fashion can be seen when actresses, who should have been wearing tight corsets to re-create the correct look of the 19th century, are not only uncorseted, but instead are wearing the pointy torpedo bras of the 1940s and 1950s. By contrast, when the film Gone with the Wind was in production, a lead actress complained to Producer David O. Selznick that no one would know whether or not she was wearing the uncomfortable corset ordered by costume designer Walter Plunkett. Insisting on authenticity in every detail, and because tight corsets caused women to stand, sit and carry themselves differently, Mr. Selznick replied, “No, but YOU will know that you are wearing a corset.”

283

Chapter

19

The Psychology of Clothes

Women wear what they wear because of what goes on in their heads. . . . It has nothing to do with their size or shape. —Elizabeth Hawes, influential fashion designer of the 1930s and 1940s, author of Why Is a Dress? and Fashion Is Spinach

284

Out-of-Style

Chapter

19

The Psychology of Clothes The Blue Velveteen Suit

T

his story illustrates a quote by Lady Duff Gordon (aka Lucile), a famous English fashion designer and arbiter of good taste in the early 20th century.

“Put even the plainest woman in a beautiful dress and she will try to live up to it.”

In the early 1950s, after the New Look of 1947 was well entrenched, I made a new friend; her name was Jill and she became the dearest, best friend of my entire life. Jill was a blue-eyed brunette with long eyelashes, a slender boyish figure, and great legs (having been on the stage and in film musicals as a dancer). We had a lot in common: young wives with small children, decorating our first homes; we both loved show business, arts, crafts and sewing. Jill sewed beautifully, having always made her own costumes and clothes. I guided her into choosing more flattering colors and styles to enhance her basic good looks. A charitable woman’s organization, to which Jill belonged, was giving a special luncheon at the swanky Beverly Wilshire Hotel. Jill wanted to make a new outfit to wear to the event. I suggested that she make a suit out of royal-blue velveteen to complement her beautiful blue eyes. Because the full skirts of the New Look looked best on curvy figures, I suggested that Jill wear bust pads and make an inner bustle of hip ruffles to tie around her waist, which would enhance her hips and prop up the circular skirt. The outfit turned out stunning! Jill looked beautiful and she knew it!

285

Chapter

19

The Psychology of Clothes After the event, I called to ask if she had a good time. Angrily, she snapped, “I’ll never go back to that bunch of snobs again! No one paid any attention to me before; now, because my outfit looked expensive, they think I have a lot of money; everyone came over to talk to me!” Surprised by that turn of events, I said, “Jill, that’s not why everyone wanted to know you. Before, you faded into the woodwork. Today, you knew you looked terrific and that made you sparkle with self-confidence. The royal-blue velveteen made your eyes look like blue sapphires. Your outfit was stunning—of course, everyone wanted to meet such an interesting person.” Needless to say, Jill learned a lesson: When you make the most of what you’ve got, people are drawn to you. But, the most important lesson here is that you should have enough sense of self-worth that you do it for yourself because it feels good!

The Eccentric Dresser I know an otherwise attractive girl who wears outrageous clothes that she culls from consignment used-clothing stores. They are odd and inappropriate for average wear, especially when combined with over-the-top hats and accessories. Invite her to a special occasion and you will be embarrassed by some shockingly eccentric and passé concoction that she is wearing. Because I am fascinated by the psychology of why people wear what they wear, I politely asked her why she made these unusual choices. She answered, “Because they bring people to me.” She apparently doesn’t know or care about the difference between admiration and scarcely disguised ridicule, but it doesn’t matter to her, as long as she gets ATTENTION!

What Is Good Taste? When are Costumes . . . Clothes and When are Clothes . . . Costumes? In 1975 I was interviewing for a job with a Los Angeles-based dress manufacturer. He complimented me on my work but said that my sexy, dramatic designs were “not his look.” He referred me to another company down the street 286

Out-of-Style that he thought would love my designs. He was right! Not only did the second manufacturer love my work—he said it was the best he had seen. He asked me to make some new sketches especially for him and come back in a week. I designed some evening gowns that I thought would be sexy but saleable. He looked at them with great disappointment and exclaimed: “THESE are not what you showed me last week!” I said, “No . . . those were costumes.” He said, “That’s what I WANT . . . costumes!” I said, “But who would WEAR them?” “My customers,” he answered. I asked, “WHO are your customers?” “Hookers,” he said. That was when I found out that his most profitable account was a store in Hollywood, famous for sexy clothes and naughty lingerie. This was at the height of the influence of Cher and her stunning, but very theatrical, Bob Mackie costumes. These looked sensational on Cher for TV, but would never have been appropriate on an average woman at an average social event. To quote Oleg Cassini, Jackie Kennedy’s designer while she was in the White House, “THE SECRET OF GOOD FASHION IS KNOWING HOW TO BE DARING IN WAYS THAT ARE NOT INAPPROPRIATE.”

The Twenty-Five-Year-Old Dress When Do “Old” Clothes Become “Vintage” Clothes? In the year 2000 I went to a black tie party where I was thrilled to see a woman wearing a gown which I designed in 1975. It had been admired by the Fashion Press and photographed in the California Apparel News. The woman had kept her figure and the gown was still striking, although it was now 25 years old. I was gratified that a piece of work I had done so long ago was still wearable and still looked fashionable. I introduced myself to her and said, “I designed that gown for a manufacturer in 1975.” I expected her to be friendly and interested; instead, she was mortified that someone knew how old her dress was! 287

Chapter

19

The Psychology of Clothes She apparently did not know there are many vintage clothing collectors who covet old, but beautiful, clothes. Or she was not aware of the famous actresses who, in interviews on the red carpets of the Oscars and Emmy Awards, proudly say, “This is a vintage gown.” Clothes that earn the title “Classic” or “Vintage” are beautiful in their own right. They may look “odd” when worn out of their eras, but they are a treat to see once again. Some are so timeless and becoming that they can be worn forever. Timeless clothes are ones that do not distort the body, but instead flatter it: These are the beloved clothes that become “keepers.” Do not, however, equate “Classic” with B-O-R-I-N-G or “out-of-style.” Classic means it is so functional, wearable and becoming to all that it is perpetually re-created in some version or another. “Boring” comes from designs that are “too safe” and have no personality; therefore, they are ageless for the wrong reasons. “Out-of-style” means it is “OUT.” Barbra Streisand was the first to bring vintage clothes to our attention. She recognized and appreciated the beauty and workmanship of old clothes. Since, at the beginning of her career she could not afford expensive performing costumes, she searched antique shops and flea markets for her finds. She had the good style sense to choose, and the courage to wear, “old,” but still beautiful, clothes. The publicity she received from this not only helped her career, but influenced fashion and made the wearing of certain classic vintage clothes acceptable. . . . Thank you, Barbra!

288

Out-of-Style

Chapter

20

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 20th Century Style Clues for the Fashion Detective

M

en’s clothes evolved slowly. Mutations were sometimes so subtle as to be almost imperceptible, except to the trained eye.

The most revealing style clues are found in noting the placement of collars (high or low on the neck) and in recognizing the various collar and tie styles worn with them. Sometimes two differing silhouettes dominated a decade. HERE ARE STYLE CLUES TO NOTE: JACKETS • Are shoulders broad and padded or narrow? • Are chests full and wide or narrow? • Are waists defined or straight? • Are waists placed high, normal or low? • Are sleeves set high and narrow or deep at armhole and full? • Are lapels small or large? • How many buttons? Which ones are buttoned? • Single or double-breasted? PANTS • Are pants narrow, wide or moderate? • Are they worn breaking over the instep or ankle length? • Cuffed or no cuff? • Center crease or no crease? • Worn high-waisted with a belt? • Pleated or flat front? • Knickers or plus-fours? 289

Chapter

20

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Overview: Men’s Clothes 1900–1960s 1900–1910s: Hats were worn high on the head, which to our modern eye appears out of balance. In fact, early movie comedians Laurel and Hardy looked so comical wearing derby hats perched precariously high on their heads that derbies began to lose favor to other hat styles as the Twenties approached. 1910–1920s: Ads for the Arrow Collar Man by artist J.C. Leyendecker (which ran from 1905–1930) personified the handsome male counterpart of the beautiful Gibson Girl. Suspenders (aka braces) were the first male accessories to be made in America. Usually sold by traveling peddlers, suspenders became obsolete after soldiers returning from World War I in 1918 showed a preference for belts like those worn with uniforms. By the late 1920s, belts were outselling suspenders by four to one. Narrow high-top shoes lost favor to more comfortable shoes after ex-soldiers had become accustomed to hiking in the army’s roomier boots. The Norfolk jacket, first seen in the 1880s, reappeared in 1918; It was America’s first sport jacket. 1920–1930s: The 1920s brought a functional, modern look to men’s clothes which evolved into a free and easy American Look (with a little help from Saville Row tailors). Two proportions created two differing silhouettes of early sport coats: The English Drape, which was broad-shouldered, had a fuller chest with “drape” emanating from the shoulder point to a slightly indented waist and a smoothly fitted hip. By contrast, the American Ivy League sack coat had soft shoulders and a straighthanging jacket with no darts or heavy inner construction. The lapels rolled softly into a 3-button front. The Prince of Wales and his master tailors led the world in men’s fashions. New in England, and adapted for American ready-to-wear, were suits with shaped waists and wider trousers, giving men a “tube” silhouette. American college boys studying in Europe brought back the exaggerated style of Oxford Bags. These twenty-two-inch-wide trousers had originally been created to hide the faculty-forbidden plus-four knickers worn at elite schools.

290

Out-of-Style This style was famously caricatured by artist John Held Jr., whose cartoons of young Flappers and their dates at Prohibition parties were hilarious and insightful valentines to that era. In 1923, the fashionable young men of Ivy League schools made popular the look of odd jackets, worn for spectator or casual wear. These jackets were made of interesting patterns, textures and tweeds . . . not matched to the pants worn with them. Mixed-fabric sport jackets thus became permanent staples in men’s wardrobes. By the Roaring Twenties, women had abandoned corsets. Men, too, now demanded freedom in their clothes. Gone were chin-high stiff collars, which were replaced by softened turn-down collars worn comfortably lower on their necks. Many dress shirts had French cuffs. The more adventurous tastes of college men in England and America influenced new directions in fashion: No longer would “old guys rule.” Europeans criticized Americans for their choice of comfort over “style,” as exemplified by the elegantly stiff, high collars of the “upper crust.” But they, too, finally accepted the new informality. Collegiates discarded formal vests for sleeveless V-necked sweaters, often worn tucked into wider, more comfortable pants. Scottish Fair Isle patterned or colored socks were matched to the sweater-vests and worn with plus-fours for golf or casual wear. (Plus-fours were blousy knickers four inches longer than the knee.) Memorable were bulky, raccoon fur coats worn by college men. Frock coats, no longer worn for business, were replaced by cutaways, tails and tuxedos for formal occasions. Newly important for spectator sports and casual wear were white flannel pants and white shoes, which added a “preppy” look to dark blazers worn with sennit straw boater hats. Incidentally, the name “blazer” originated in the 1880s when spectators watching English sporting clubs compete against each other, all wearing loud school colors, were described as being a “blaze of color” as they whizzed by. After that, their jackets were called “blazers.” Later, dark jackets with gold buttons and school crests embroidered on the chest pocket became forever known as “blazers.” In 1926, Brooks Brothers introduced the pleat-back sport coat which had an action-pleat at the back shoulder and a stitched back-belt which held four pleats above and below it. 291

Chapter

20

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 20th Century Growing interest in sportswear brought tieless, open neck sport shirts. To add finesse to this too casual look, men on the French Riviera were soon wearing printed silk scarves—ascots, tied softly around their necks. This affectation, which was both casual and elegant at the same time, was imported by Hollywood’s leading men and hence by stylish men at America’s favorite resorts. The ascot lasted through the 1930s.

Zippers and the Prince of Wales The first slide fastener to replace buttons, lacings, and hooks and eyes was invented in 1891, but not perfected as a reliable garment closure for many years. By the 1920s, they were functioning well enough for BF Goodrich to use them on rain boots, which they trademarked Zipper Boots.TM The name Zipper caught on and became generically known in the same way that any throw-away tissue is known as Kleenex. Men were hesitant to accept zippers as closures for fly fronts until the Prince of Wales and other aristocrats, who patronized the bespoke tailors of Savile Row in London, validated their use. Top designers, like Italian couturiere Elsa Schiaparelli, first used zippers as decorative elements for the front closures on women’s jackets in 1937. Metal zippers now share popularity with nylon zippers, some of which are so narrow and flexible they are known as invisible zippers. 1930–1940s: From the early 1920s through the late 1940s, fashion leaders of society, business and Hollywood wore English draped suits. Especially stylish were actors Fred Astaire, Clark Gable, Gary Cooper and Adolphe Menjou. An outstanding fashion icon, Adolphe Menjou was always immaculately groomed, impeccably tailored, elegantly handsome and mustachioed. In the 1970s, after the men’s Peacock Revolution and the Hippies of the 1960s had liberated men from fashion conformity, Menjou appeared as a guest on a late night TV talk show. This was decades after his prime. Menjou looked elegant in his double-breasted, pin-striped suit, perfectly tied tie, handkerchief folded in erect points and a boutonniere on his peaked lapel. He looked great—but anachronistic—as though the clock had stopped for him. His host greeted him admiringly with, “You look like a ‘Pierce-Arrow’!” This back-handed compliment was witty but true: The Pierce-Arrow had been an elegant, expensive 292

Out-of-Style and beautiful automobile—but it had been out of production for a long time. This remark is the best one-line description I have ever heard of someone who looks classy, elegant, suave, stylish, well-tailored, well-heeled, but . . . OUTOF-STYLE (See Chapter 5, Arrested Development: Women Who Wait Too Long to Change). Apparently, that which is true for women can also be true for men. In the period between 1920–1940, in spite of the scarcity of money in the Great Depression of the 1930s and fabric rationing of Worls War II, there were many new fashions added to men’s formerly basic wardrobes. It was a time when there was great collaboration between textile and clothing designers. The influence of the fashion press and Hollywood’s leading men produced the best-dressed men of the 20th century, because average men had been guided by knowledgeable experts and taste-makers. Here are some of the key happenings of the 1930s: •  Boldly patterned bow ties worn with a vest reached their peak of popularity by the mid-1930s. •  Suspenders worn in addition to belts returned to hold up the wider, pleated, high-waisted pants worn with draped suits. •  Belt loops were added to pants. Men collected a wardrobe of belts which they matched to shoes. •  New dinner jackets were now worn with soft, turn-down collars—instead of uncomfortable wing-tips. White dinner jackets and informal dress shirts secured with colored studs •  and matching cuff links caused a sensation when introduced at exclusive Palm Beach clubs. •  The hacking jacket with vents, inspired by formal riding clothes, flared below the waist and became the basis of the most popular new sport jacket. •  The casual Safari jacket, first worn as a summer uniform by British soldiers in World War I, had been adopted by legendary figures like Hemingway in the 1920s. In the 1930s, it became a picturesque, but practical, classic for everyone. •  Sport coats and slacks were now acceptable to wear for business as well as personal wear. •  By the late 1930s, knickers worn either on or off the golf course were considered passé.

293

Chapter

20

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 20th Century • Before World War II and fabric rationing, most suits had a vest. 1940–1950s: In the mid-1940s, a sporty new outfit appeared that was at once casual and elegant. It consisted of silky, wool gabardine slacks and shirt of the same fabric. All edges of a long, pointed collar, cuffs and chest pockets were hand-picked in small, even stitches. This gave it the subtle, but expensive, look of custom-made. Hawaiian sport shirts enjoyed new exposure as tourists and servicemen stationed on the islands after the war discovered them. After 1945, chino pants became favorites on college campuses. Soldiers returning to school on the G.I. Bill, and short of civilian clothes, wore them as remnants of their old uniforms. Others bought them at army surplus stores. They were loved because chino fabric (by way of India and China) was a sturdy, smooth, densely woven, dye-fast cotton with “character.” Its olive-drab-beige color coordinated easily with any shirt or jacket. Chinos were so popular with men that alert manufacturers used the fabric to make stylish and expensive, smoothly fitted pants for women. Los Angeles had become a sportswear center with the cool California look that men everywhere coveted. The collarless cardigan suit was a case in point. A long pointy shirt collar overflowed onto the garment’s missing lapels. An ascot sometimes filled in at the neck.

The “New Look” for Men—Early 1950s The fashionable Men’s Look of the 1930s and 1940s was based upon English tailoring and worn by Hollywood’s leading men. The style featured (usually) double-breasted jackets with wide lapels and wide, padded shoulders. These draped to a high waist in the early-to-mid-1930s and to a lowered waist in the 1940s. The pants were generously full and pleated, tapering slightly to cuffs at the bottom (cuffless, if they were made during fabric rationing of World War II). They were worn with loud, wide ties (often hand-painted). I had a sharp-looking uncle who designed and manufactured stylish men’s suits, winning two awards from the men’s clothing industry. His company was named “Hollywood Clothes” and in the 1940s he had a retail store on exclusive Beverly Drive in Beverly Hills. At that time, Beverly Drive was THE place to shop because Rodeo Drive was as yet still undeveloped, with only a few stores and one trendy 294

Out-of-Style restaurant: “Sugie’s Tropics.” This was a movie star hangout and the first of the Polynesian-themed nightclubs. But, I digress. In the early 1950s, men’s fashions changed dramatically, almost over night, to the skinny “Ivy League Look” which was narrow-chested and single-breasted with only slightly padded shoulders. The pants were narrow and cuffless. Suddenly, men’s wardrobes were obsolete! All at once, it seemed, every man was wearing a skinny, charcoal-grey suit, with a PINK shirt and a skinny black tie, just like the chorus of dress-alike, conformist executives in the stage musical and film How To Succeed in Business Without Really Trying. (The color PINK for MEN was a shocker!) Men were suddenly left with now unwearable wardrobes. Consequently, Uncle Sid created a method whereby his tailors would narrow a wide suit, cut it into single-breasted, and narrow the lapels. He also narrowed the wide ties. He coined the phrases “SINGLE-IZE” and “NARROW-IZE” and advertised these services widely, eventually remodeling thousands of suits sent to him from all over the country. A bit of humor resulted from this: One night while setting up for a big party, someone said, “Hey, Sid, help me move this jukebox.”

Sid said, “I can’t. I have a double hernia.”



His friend offered, “I know someone who can ‘SINGLE-IZE’ it for you.”

1950–1960s: While the “New Look” for men of the early 1950s inspired the conformity of grey flannel suits to wear on their climb up the corporate ladder, there was also an interest in travel—especially to Europe. So, one of the new looks was called the “Continental,” which was similar to the new Ivy League look. They both were single-breasted, had narrow lapels, and low-rise, no pleat, cuffless pants. Worn with a narrow tie and small-brimmed fedora, it was the look famously adopted by Frank Sinatra. This look lasted until the 1960s. Newly narrowed sport slacks had a small, buckled strap at the center-back waist; everyone copied it. Popular at resorts around the pool were boldly printed boxer-style swim shorts with shirts to match. They were civilized enough to wear to lunch or for strolling the beach. The American fascination for all things foreign fostered the purchase of newly available imported cars like the shockingly shaped Volkswagen “Beetle” from 295

Chapter

20

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 20th Century Germany, the Triumph sports car from England, the Volvo from Sweden and the Renault from France. (The Japanese had not yet begun to successfully manufacture and export cars.) This interest in foreign products also brought the single-breasted, high-buttoned Nehru jacket with a high-stand collar, as worn by Indian Prime Minister Nehru. This was a fast “flash in the fashion pan” which lasted only briefly. This was an example of how a fashion can be suddenly EVERYWHERE as an “oddity,” but then die a quick death.

296

Out-of-Style

Men’s Clothes 20th Century

297

Chapter

20

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Men’s Clothes 1900-1910 [The Edwardian Era 1901-1910] Boater

High-pointed Collar

High-round Collar

High Wing-tip

High Collar No Turn-Down

Ties tied in a bow were first called “Cravats,” later, “Butterfly Ties.” Hats in this period sat high on the head.

Derby 1900

Derby 1909

Cap

Fedora

Pork Pie

Top Hat

298

Boxy sack coats either single- or doublebreasted Pants: narrow & tapered, no cuffs

The oversized “freak” suit was short-lived. 1908–1911

Out-of-Style

Men’s Clothes 1910-1920s Ads for the “Arrow Collar Man” were much admired.

Individuality was expressed in the choice of collar and tie styles.

Narrow single- and doublebreasted suits High-waisted No cuffs

1918–The “Norfolk Suit” became the first sports outfit. Cuffs on pants became commonplace. 299

Chapter

20

300

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Men’s Clothes 1920-1930s

Open neck sport shirt with “ascot” neck scarf

The “Eton” collar French cuffs are new.

Long pointed “Barrymore” collar (aka the “California” collar)

Softened turn-down collar

Matching vest & socks with “Plus-Four” knickers

Offbeat pocket treatments

The “mixed suit” with white flannels

The “Swing-Back” jacket (aka the “belted-back”

Out-of-Style

Men’s Clothes 1930-1940s Ties were short

Hawaiian shirts

Safari jackets

“Swing Back” jacket (aka belted backs) passé by 1935

Mixed fabric sport coats

White dinner jacket with soft turn-down shirt collars

Double-breasted suits with Peak Lapels

English Drape early 1930s

American Drape late 1930s–1940s

301

Chapter

20

Overview of Men’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Men’s Clothes 1940-1950s

The Brooks Bros. “Hacking jacket” with vents

Corduroy jacket with turtleneck

The two-tone shirt-jacket

The “Eisenhower” jacket

Loud, wide ties often hand-painted

Ties were still short into the 1950s.

Double-breasted peak lapel suit, no cuffs or patch pockets during World War II 302

The gabardine The collarless shirt with hand-picked “California Cardigan” edges suit

Out-of-Style

Men’s Clothes 1950-1960s Belt-back detail

Bermuda shorts

Short sleeve fitted shirt

Leather “Motorcycle” Jackets

•T  he new flat pocket handkerchief did not detract from TVs “talking heads.” • Boxer-style swim shorts with matching shirt in loud prints, called “Cabana Sets” • Madras plaid cottons from India • Wheat-color jeans or Chinos.

“Ivy League” charcoalgrey suit with PINK SHIRT! Skinny tie

The sleek “Continental” Three-piece mixed coordinates

303

Out-of-Style

Chapter

21

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 20th Century Typical Examples of What Children Wore 1900-1960s

T

he children’s clothes illustrated on the following pages were culled from old Sears, Roebuck Catalogs because they are typical examples of what American children wore in each of the first few decades of the Twentieth Century.

For your amusement and amazement, I have included prices of clothes at that time; but to keep this in perspective, you should know that wages at the turn of the century began at 22 cents per hour for a 57-hour work week and child labor laws were as yet unknown. Because Sears Catalogs, which reached all over America, sold practical, attractive, affordable clothes for adults and children, they are accurate representations of their time. Be aware, however, that catalogs (including those of Montgomery Ward) were often two years behind leading fashion periodicals. In the 19th century, children wore miniature versions of what their parents were wearing, including constrictive training corsets for girls and Little Lord Fauntleroy outfits for boys (who hated wearing them). By the early 20th century, child psychologists noted that children did not like to be dressed differently from their peers. They wanted to “fit in” and not be ridiculed or bullied because they looked “different.” For the same reason, the first thing new immigrants wanted was to be able to afford new clothes for themselves and their children so that they would all look “American”—Sears, Roebuck Catalogs helped everyone achieve that. 305

Chapter

21

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 20th Century I am reminded of when my son was in kindergarten in the 1950s; he went to school wearing the cowboy outfit of his TV hero, Wyatt Earp. The minute he returned home from school, he tore off his clothes and declared, “I will never wear that outfit again!—I felt so ’spicuous!”

Long Denims and Short Shorts 1950–1960s In the 1950s, before knit tops were called T-shirts, they were called polos, and before denim pants were called jeans, they were called dungarees—followed by Levis, and finally, just Jeans. Teenagers first adopted denims in the 1940s. By the 1950s, jeans were firmly entrenched in the wardrobes of American teenagers (as well as adult “Rebels without a Cause,” like moody movie star James Dean). This look of comfort and blasé cool was admired around the world as everyone everywhere adopted the coveted American Look. The wearing of shorts was so popular in the 1960s that schools tried to control decency with rules that shorts could not be shorter than halfway between the thigh and knee (Bermuda length). Today, well into the 21st century, even that looks short, because our eyes are currently accustomed to the awkwardly long, baggy, below-knee-length athletic shorts worn by popular role models in professional sports. The opposite of that is the now comical look of the short shorts worn by 1980s Exercise Guru Richard Simmons, who wore a headband on the forehead. (See Chapter 5, When Proportions Change.)

306

Out-of-Style

Children’s Clothes 1900-1960s Boys and Girls

307

Chapter

21

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Boys’ Clothes 1900-1910 59¢

Overalls 89¢

4–10 years $2.75

8–16 years suit with knickers and long pants $3.65

75¢

85¢

50¢ Shirts (aka blouses) 3–10 years $1.25

40¢

89¢

308

10–16 years suit worn with watch & chain $4.50 Play suit 2–7 years 45¢

Out-of-Style

Girls’ Clothes 1900-1910 49¢

48¢

$1.25

48¢

1902 4–14 years $3.25

1909 6–14 years $2.19 1903 4–14 years $2.98 1902 2–5 years 59¢

1906 6–14 years $2.98

1902 Apron 85¢

$1.00/pair 74¢/pair

68¢/pair

309

Chapter

21

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Boys’ Clothes 1910-1920 1913 Suit with 2 pairs of knickers 8–15 years $2.45

“Buster Brown” 5–9 years $3.75

1918–“Young Gents” hat

1912 “Rah-Rah” hat

40¢ “Ear-Flap” cap

Play outfits included: cowboy & indian, policeman, army & boy scout . . . 45¢–$2.65

1913 2–6 years $1.75

310

“Norfolk Suit” 5–16 years $2.25 1913 2–6 years $1.85

39¢ 1919 The “Kazoo Waist” held up children’s stockings 2–16 years, 59¢

Out-of-Style

Girls’ Clothes 1910-1920 1917 $7.75

1914 $1.65

1914 $1.58

1917 6–14 years $2.39

1918 10–14 years $3.98 1912 2–6 years $2.48

1912 2–6 years $1.95

$2.45/pair

$1.75/pair

$1.75/pair

311

Chapter

21

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Boys’ Clothes 1920-1930

1929 Play outfits: aviator, baseball, cowboy & Indian, army, boy scout $1.00–$2.98

1927 Sweaters $1.48

312

1922 Overalls 1–14 years 79¢– 95¢

“LIttle Fellow” 3–8 years 79¢

Little boys now wear lots of short pants $1.25 98¢

1926 “Creepers” 6 months–2 years buttoned crotch $1.45

“Snappy-Peppy” suits sold with long pants & knickers

Out-of-Style

Girls’ Clothes 1920-1930

1923 7–14 years $1.00

1923 7–14 years 98¢ 1927 7–16 years $1.79

1923 7–14 years $2.79 1927 7–16 years $2.98

1924 6 mos.–2 years $1.00

1925–26 2–6 years $1.48

1928–29 8–14 years $1.88

$2.98

$1.65

$1.58

313

Chapter

21

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Boys’ Clothes 1930-1940

1935 “Eton Suit” 3–10 years $1.98

1935 1–4 years 49¢

“Logo” T-shirts begin 2–8 years

Short, 3–8 years

Knee, 3–9 years

“Longies” 4–9 years

“Dick Tracy” “G-Man” hats

1938 Vest outfits $1.69

Leather jacket $4.95

$1.29 Mickey Mouse watches

$2.98 Comic book characters are the new heroes!

314

1935 “Pinch-Back Suit” teens to adults $7.95

Out-of-Style

Girls’ Clothes 1930-1940 “Twin Sweater Suits” 1934 8–14 years

Shirley’s “Bolero” Dress 1935 7–12 years

Comic Book Favorites • Mickey Mouse Shirley’s Dress 3–6 years $1.89

• Orphan Annie • Dick Tracy Watches • Shirley Temple “Look-Alike” dresses and dolls

$2.98

1935–1940 “Swing Skirt” 10–16 years $1.98

$1.89

“Shirtmaker Dress” 10–16 years $1.98

1930–1940 First formal 10–16 years $2.98

315

Chapter

21

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Boys’ Clothes 1940-1950

Long collars without a “stand”: cowboy prints 3–6 years $1.59

Big shirt & jeans 4–16 years $3.79

“Roy Rogers” denim outfit 4–16 years Denim $3.59 “Dungarees” “Eton Suit” 1–4 years 3–6 years $1.29 $4.98

Long collar dress shirt 3–6 years $1.29

Sweatshirt 6–16 years 99¢

“Wartime” motif sweatshirt 4–16 years 99¢

316

Knit “Polo” shirt (later named a T-shirt) 49¢ Boxer shorts $1.39

2-tone jacket Leather jacket 3–18 years 8–18 years $8.95 $12.95 “Overseas Cap”

Out-of-Style

Girls’ Clothes 1940-1950 Fuzzy angora sweaters teens–adults

“Pinafores” 3–14 years $1.98

“Sloppy-Joe” sweaters 7–16 years $1.98

Tailored suits 12–16 years $5.49

“Dr. Denton’s Sleepers” 1–3 years Shorts & pedal pushers

2-piece dress (aka “Frock”) 7–16 years $1.98

“Jumpers” 7–14 years $1.49

“Peasant Dress Dirndls” girls-adults $3.16

Wide-leg slacks 10–16 years $1.98

317

Chapter

21

Overview of Children’s Clothes in the 20th Century

Boys’ Clothes 1950-1960

The “Eton Suit” lives on 2–6 years 3 pcs. $5.98

Hairstyles, the “Flattop”

The “Duck Tail”

318

“Longies” and a “Polo” shirt 3–10 years $2.69

New category: “Car Coats” 3–12 years $9.77

Novelty knit sweaters 4–12 years $1.94

TV heroes • Elvis Presley • James Dean • The Mickey Mouse Club • Howdy Doody • Superman • Baseball Players Cowboys • The Lone Ranger • Wyatt Earp • Roy Rogers • Davy Crockett Hat & shirt 4–14 yrs. $1.79

Blazers 8–18 years $17.90

Novelty coats $5.74

Out-of-Style

Girls’ Clothes 1950-1960

Western play outfits 2–6 years $4.98

Teen party $16.50

Coveralls $2.98

Shirt & Shorts 3–6 years $1.98

Neat little dresses $1.29

Big shirt & roll-up denims 7–Teens $2.29

Jumpers 3 years–teen $5.97

1950–1956 Felt poodle skirt $4.97

319

About the Author

Visiting the costume collection at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London

320

Out-of-Style

About the Author

B

y way of introduction, I would like to tell you that since 1943, I have designed clothes and costumes for stage, screen, television specials, ready-to-wear clothing companies, Las Vegas musicals and Disneyland.

At the age of thirteen, my first dress design was sold to a manufacturer. It became that season’s “Best Seller.” The year was 1938. That was when I first began collecting a picture file of clothes in all their miraculous variations, for men, as well as women. I have continued to collect pictures of interesting or significant fashions until the present, and, in addition, pictures from eras not of my time. Saved also are several formerly au courant fashion magazines from each decade since the 1940s, as well as several decades of significant clippings from Women’s Wear Daily and W, the “Bibles” of the American Ready-to-Wear Industry. Because knowledge of the history of fashion has been a compelling lifetime interest of mine as well as a career necessity, I own a valuable research library of my own. It includes books and pictures that begin in antiquity and continue through the 19th and 20th centuries, the periods of primary interest to genealogists, vintage collectors and costume designers. During my visit to London in 1985, I netted personally photographed color pictures of the costume collection at the Victoria and Albert Museum. I attended Beverly Hills High School from 1938 through 1942, taking all the art, design and sewing classes I could fit into my schedule. Because the Beverly Hills Education System treasures talent and helps it to flourish, I was encouraged for 321

About the Author all four years to design and make costumes for the school productions, winning the Lektos Award for “Outstanding Art Student.” Happily, a theatrical producer, Jay Gorney (who co-wrote the theme song of the Great Depression, “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime,” and who became a recipient of a special Tony Award) came often to see his son perform, and always admired my costumes. When I attended the Senior Prom with his son, wearing a beautiful gown of my own design, he said, “Next time I do a show I’ll let you do the costumes.” (Let it be noted that not only did Jay Gorney discover Shirley Temple, he also discovered me.) So it happened, at barely eighteen years of age, following a three-month internship at Western Costume Company (owned by the major film studios), that I had two hit Hollywood shows to my credit. My first show, Meet the People, spawned several stellar careers—including mine. Good press reviews led to my designing the costumes (see facing page) for the legendary, always sold-out Ken Murray’s Blackouts. This assignment began for me in 1943 and lasted for the record-breaking run of the show, until 1949. Blackouts was a Vaudeville/Variety type show, always changing acts and costumes. It starred the original “dumb blonde,” Marie Wilson (radio and TV’s My Friend, Irma). Marie’s appeal was that she was not really “dumb.” She was sweetly naive and innocently a KNOCKOUT! She was famous for her beautiful gowns and cleavage-revealing costumes. Blackouts played at the original El Capitan Theatre at the famous corner of Hollywood and Vine. The building was owned by Sid Grauman, who also owned the Chinese Theatre down the street. Grauman was often a backstage visitor whom I came to know. Ken Murray’s backstage dressing room was a hangout for Murray’s Hollywood buddies, like Bob Hope, Bing Crosby, Edgar Bergen and numerous other luminaries. They loved to do spur-of-the-moment walkons and participated in comedy sketches to the surprised delight of audiences. Here is a bit of show biz history—Blackouts closed in 1949 after its long run and moved to Broadway. Busty, naïve comedienne Marie Wilson had to stay in Hollywood to film her TV series. Murray had to replace her. He auditioned numerous starlets including the yet unknown Marilyn Monroe. Marilyn, who measured 36-23-37, didn’t fill Marie’s 38-22-38 costumes. She did not get the part because Murray’s jokes about Marie, having been “born in a grapefruit grove,” would have fallen “flat.” On my 19th birthday, Hollywood Daily Variety described me as “the youngest designer in show business.” During that time, I opened my own costume shop 322

Out-of-Style

From the Hollywood Citizen-News, Monday, May 31, 1948: BLACKOUTS star Marie Wilson continues to lend her charms to Ken Murray’s popular revue, now in its sixth year at El Capitan Theater.

Marie Wilson dons a big feathered hat to pose with Ken Murray in BLACKOUTS OF ’47, continuing popular run nightly at El Capitan Theater.

323

About the Author to control the construction of my costumes. This led to other assignments around town: two forgettable films for Monogram Pictures, and a Ziegfeldthemed show for the then-popular Florentine Gardens Nightclub, which headlined Sophie Tucker and Harry Richman. I designed camera girl and cigarette girl outfits for the best nightclubs in Beverly Hills and Hollywood. I made custom clothes and costumes for entertainers, such as the vocalist with Xavier Cugat at Ciro’s, and a hat for the Fashion Editor of the Los Angeles Times. I also constructed period costumes for Charles Le Maire, Fox Studio’s Head of Wardrobe (he had been a Ziegfeld designer). In my shop I employed skilled seamstresses, milliners and cutter-fitters from the Motion Picture Costumers Union and learned advanced fitting, millinery and custom patternmaking from these master craftspeople. I realize now that this knowledge is the basis of my ability to analyze and illustrate the construction of vintage clothes for my book, Out-of-Style. Blackouts played to almost five million people in its six and a half years as a “must see” in Hollywood. It closed in 1949 and moved to Broadway for a run at the Ziegfeld Theatre. I designed a new set of costumes for the Broadway show. Meanwhile, Ken Murray, a veteran star of vaudeville, radio and theater, was offered the first million-dollar contract to compete against Milton Berle’s hugely popular television show. Thus began the weekly Ken Murray Budweiser Show in New York for which I designed all “Special” costumes by “long distance.” Now married and starting a family, I closed my shop to freelance, but continued to send costume design sketches to New York for the Budweiser Show, to be made by Brooks Costume Co. I also designed costumes for television specials such as The Esquire Calendar Girls for CBS. Ken Murray brought me to New York to do the National Automobile Show, a TV Special at the Waldorf Astoria for CBS. Other assignments followed—Jimmy Durante’s Dancers and the Jimmy McHugh Show at Ciro’s. McHugh was the composer of Sunny Side of the Street; I Can’t Give You Anything But Love, Baby; I’m in the Mood for Love, and others. I created special costumes for each of his many hit songs. In addition, there were other assignments too numerous to mention or remember. My costumes appear in a history book of TV entitled How Sweet It Was, published by Bonanza Books and in Ken Murray’s autobiographical book, Life on a Pogo Stick, published by John C. Winston Co. Other photographs of my costumes appeared in Life Magazine, the Saturday Evening Post, Esquire, and 324

Out-of-Style numerous newspapers such as the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Examiner, Variety, Las Vegas News, USA Today, Women’s Wear Daily, Men’s Stylist and California Apparel News. A parallel career evolved out of this which has spanned the decades until the present. I created a genre of unique theme aprons and uniforms for international hotels, restaurants, racetracks (Hollywood Park) and cruise lines; my designs for Holland America Line and Carnival Cruise Lines were worn on all their ships for ten years. I may even have originated the concept when, in 1944, I designed the FIRST EVER theme uniforms in Las Vegas for the El Rancho Vegas Hotel, long before GANGSTER Bugsy Siegel came along in 1946 and built the Flamingo Hotel for gambling. It was originally only two stories tall and the only hotel on the block. In 1947 I designed cashier and usherette outfits for a special Klieg Light Opening of the world’s first pre-fabricated theater for Charles Skouras, head of Fox West Coast Theatres. In 1964, I studied patternmaking specific to the requirements of the readyto-wear industry. My teacher was George Trippon, author of several design books and mentor to famous designers (such as Rudi Gernreich). This brought assignments with three Los Angeles sportswear manufacturers. In 1974, the Chairman of the Board of Angelica Uniform Company sent for me to give a seminar on uniform design to his executives at their corporate offices in St. Louis. I prophesized to them that in one year food service uniforms as we knew them would be obsolete, replaced by unisex half-aprons and “logo” T-shirts . . . and it came to pass! I also told them that service uniforms are really specialized “sportswear for people who work,” and I initiated the wearing of sport caps for the fast food industry. One of my sketches from that period reads, “the first new chef’s hat since the French invented the omelet.” I was sketch artist on the movie How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying, starring Rudy Vallee, for the Mirisch Corp., ghost designing some of the costumes. From 1969 through 1974, I was House Designer for Scotti Manufacturing and Costume Company in Hollywood. In addition to executing costumes for my own shows, I supervised the work for other designers who patronized the shop. A partial list includes overseeing costumes for Disneyland, the Supremes, Mae West and several amusement parks. 325

About the Author This brought a happy episode into my life—working for Disneyland. In 1974, as assistant to head designer Jack Muhs, I designed the first costumes for the then-newest attraction at Disney World’s Space Mountain. I did all the elaborate millinery for the Easter Parade, worked on costumes and uniforms worn all over the park and purchased all needed fabrics for the costume department. In 1998, working as part of the Disney Imagineering Team (they did the architecture and décor and I designed the uniforms), we received the “Outstanding Achievement Award” from the Theme Entertainment Association for our combined work in remodeling the Theme Building at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). My daughter, Kathryn Gale, built a successful uniform company from my designs (Kathryn Gale of Beverly Hills). Some of my best work and favorite design assignments were for gorgeous showgirl costumes for several shows in Las Vegas and Reno. This included a musical comedy starring Broadway legend John Raitt, at the Desert Inn, for the Howard Hughes Organization, for which I designed comedy-character costumes, show costumes and formal clothes for the principal male and female actors. I hold four United States design patents and trademarks for products as diverse as a travel organizer, “Pack-A-Page”; a shaped shower cap with a “Wiser-Visor”; and a fold-up display rack. Also patented was a sexy apron with a bustline, trademarked “Your Halter Ego,” which sold for several years to stores nationally. It was worn by Lucille Ball on I Love Lucy and by Danny Thomas’ TV wife on his show. Jack Benny wore it while helping George Gobel wash dishes on Gobel’s show. The travel organizer, “Pack-A-Page,” led to designing luggage for a Los Angeles–based manufacturer who sent me to Korea to supervise the making of samples. I first became aware of how fashion and good taste were entwined when I was in the first grade. My mother had bought me two school outfits. One, a “Little Red Riding Hood” ensemble, had a red wool skirt and a short, matching cape. The other, an orange, cream and brown plaid dress, had its own orange velveteen jacket. So far . . . so good. The problem was my mother sent me to school thoughtlessly mix-matching these not interchangeable pieces (or maybe she was sleepy and my father picked my clothes for the day). At school, I noticed two older girls whispering, giggling and pointing at me. Sarcastically, 326

Out-of-Style one said to me, “What are your favorite colors?” (giggle, giggle, giggle) All of a sudden I knew! My colors did not go together! From then on, I chose my own clothes and watched what people wore and how they wore them—what looked good and what didn’t but, more importantly, WHY? I became a tiny critic and an OBSERVER! This awareness prepared me for theatrical design where one must understand the psychology of clothes. When actors walk across the stage or screen, their clothes, makeup and hairstyle must telegraph everything about their character: the time, place, age, season, locale, how much money they have or don’t have, their self-confidence or lack thereof. A good designer needs to be an astute observer so that he/she can convey all this to help tell and propel the story and character. I have always been interested in writing. I took a course in comedy writing from the writer/producer of The Jerry Lewis Show. Through the years, I have taken numerous adult education classes at UCLA in such diverse subjects as art, life drawing, graphic arts, relationships, conversational French, the psychology of humor, dreams and the growth of personality. I am famous among my friends for the original holiday greeting cards I have sent over the years. (Some people collect them.) We live in a VERY active adult community in beautiful Mission Viejo, California (halfway between Los Angeles and San Diego, near two lakes). We have golf, tennis, aerobics, a gym, three pools, lots of live-band parties, activities and clubs for anything that could be of interest. Before I retired (again!) to write my book, I consulted for my daughter’s uniform company, wrote and produced shows, designed sets and costumes for the annual “Grand Tennis Ball,” which became so successful it required three nights to accommodate all who wanted to attend. The success of these shows made me realize I could write; so, why not write a BOOK?! I also helped start a Military Veterans Club whose mission is to “Help Our Wounded Warriors in Ways That Are Meaningful.” My first project was to produce a 1940s-type Canteen Party and “US-OH!” Show, which raised $10,000 for this noble cause. In addition, I recruited several famous cartoonists to accompany me to the Wounded Warrior House at the Marine Base in Camp Pendleton. They drew cartoons on the spot for the boys and I drew pretty girls in costumes, just as I had done many decades earlier for the wounded soldiers and sailors of World War II. 327

About the Author A casual idea I had to entertain Marines and their families at our privatemembership lake in Mission Viejo resulted in a now-annual “Day at the Lake” for 1,500 Marines and their wives and children, with a barbecue, entertainment, boat rides on the lake, toys and a jump house, all provided free by our very active Vets’ Club and community. From 2008 to 2010, I wrote and illustrated a column for Ancestry Magazine called “Out-of-Style,” which was all about vintage clothes, written for the special interest of the magazine’s genealogist subscribers. The parent company of Ancestry Magazine is Ancestry.com. In my blog for Ancestry.com, I timedated the old family photos sent by the website’s subscribers based upon style clues revealed in my book. I want to share the accumulated knowledge of a lifetime and my educated observations of evolving fashions that put fashion changes into logical perspective. I want to make those other complex history of costume books already in libraries more easily understood. This is the book I wish had been available to me when I was a young costume design student, and later, a working professional. Thanks for listening!

Betty Kreisel Shubert Note: My early credits were under my maiden name, Betty Colburn.

A guiding rule for creative designers . . . If it looks right, . . . it is right!

328

Out-of-Style

Bibliography About this Bibliography

T

he clothes described and illustrated in this book are not “designs”; they are “composites” of real clothes worn by real people in real life (rather than clothes shown in fashion plates). Although countless history of costume books were studied for facts and relevant social history, many of the most illuminating sources used for research did not come from traditional history of costume books. Especially informative were excerpts from periodicals, newspapers, magazines, and random pictures of street scenes. Pictures in assorted vintage biographies revealed authentic details of clothes as actually worn. Sometimes only one or two pictures or anecdotes of social history could be culled from an entire book, but each provided fascinating gems of information that, when combined, reveal a logical picture of the changing evolution of fashion. I would like to recommend the following outstanding sources that were particularly useful to me: • The Woman in Fashion by Doris Langley Moore, B.T. Botsford Pub. Ms. Moore was an author, fashion historian and costume collector who later donated her treasures to museums like the Victoria and Albert Museum in London. When I first read her book in 1965, her appreciation and love for vintage clothes caught my imagination and her words inspired me to, decades later, write Out-of-Style, so that others could better understand this subject. • Joan Severa’s Dressed for the Photographer: Ordinary Americans and Fashion, 1840–1900, (Kent State Univ. Press), is the reference book I turn to for “the last word.” Severa has an eagle eye for the smallest detail and the ability to describe mutations of style to the reader. Her book is packed 329

Bibliography with information and very complex; therefore, I recommend it for really serious students researching the 19th century. • Particularly educational was my daily infusion of fashion news from decades of subscriptions to Women’s Wear Daily (WWD) and W, the bibles of the fashion industries, plus their occasional Special Supplements (Fairchild Publications, NY). My collection of significant clippings from these sources were valuable in verifying the events that influenced changing fashions in the 20th century. • One of the best books that shows changes in hat styles and the clothes worn with them is Susan Langley’s Vintage Hats & Bonnets, 1770–1970, Collector Books, Div. Schroeder Pub. Co., Kentucky, 1998. • For men’s clothes, no one understands this subject better than menswear designer/stylist Alan Flusser, whose Dressing the Man: Mastering the Art of Permanent Fashion is a “classic.” • Also, for general history, I recommend the eight-volume set, This Fabulous Century, by Time-Life Books, N.Y. Each volume covers a different decade. These are unparalleled for the numerous photographs that chronicle the history of popular culture in America from 1870–1970. • Outstanding in general history from 1900–2000 is This Glorious Century by Readers Digest Assoc., N.Y. One fat volume of magnificent photographs chronicles everything and everyone of cultural importance in those years. • Of special mention for clothes of the 1930s and 1940s is The Way We Wore by actress/model/author Marsha Hunt, whose collection of fashion photographs from her personal and film wardrobe is the best look at wearable high fashion in those years. To enable readers to pursue specific interests more easily, this bibliography is separated into categories as follows: 1. Children

10. Immigrants

2. Corsets and Underwear

11. Men’s Beards

3. Dressmaking

12. Menswear

4. European Styles

13. Military

5. Fashion History

14. Mourning Dress

6. General History

15. Twentieth Century

7. Hairstyles

16. Vintage Photographs

8. Hats and Accessories

17. Weddings

9. High Fashion 330

Out-of-Style

Bibliography 1. Children • Bode, Carl, ed. American Life in the 1840’s. New York: Anchor Books, 1967. • Ewing, Elizabeth. History of Children’s Costumes. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1977. • Schimpky, David, and Kalman, Bobbie. Children’s Clothing of the 1800’s. New York: Crabtree Pub.,1995. • Leiner, Katherine. First Children: Growing up in the White House. New York: Tambourine Books, Div. of Wm. Morrow & Co., 1996. • Martin, Linda. The Way We Were: Fashion Illustrations of Children’s Wear 1870–1970. New York and Canada: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1978. • Olian, JoAnne, ed. Children’s Fashions, 1860–1912: 1,065 costume designs from “La Mode illustrée. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1994. • Olian, JoAnne, ed. Children’s Fashions, 1900–1950, as pictured in Sears Catalogs. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 2003. • Ransom, Candice E. Children of the Civil War. Minneapolis: Carolrhoda Books Inc., The Lerner Publishing Group, 1998. • Sichel, Marion. History of Children’s Clothing. London: Batsford Academic & Educational Text, 1983. • Sills, Leslie. From Rags to Riches, a History of Girls’ Clothing in America. N.Y.: Holiday House, 2005. • Toynton, Evelyn. Growing Up in America, 1830–1860. Brookfield, Ct.: The Millbrook Press, 1995. 2. Corsets and Underwear • Ambrose, Bonnie Holt. The Little Corset Book. New York and Hollywood: Quite Specific Media Group, 1995. • Bressler, Newman, and Proctor. Century of Lingerie: Revealing the Secrets and Allure of 20th Century Lingerie. New Jersey: Chartwell Books (Div. of Book Sales), 1997. • Cunningham, C. Willett, and Phillis Cunningham. The History of Underclothes.1951. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1992. • Lord, W.B. The Corset and the Crinoline. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 2007. • Steele, Valerie. The Corset: A Cultural History. New Haven and London: Yale Univ. Press, 2001. 331

Bibliography • Waugh, Norah. Corsets and Crinolines. New York: Theatre Arts Books, 1954. 3. Dressmaking • Ambrose, Bonnie Holt. The Little Bodice Book: a Workbook on Period Bodices. New York and Hollywood: Quite Specific Media Group, 1995. • Bryk, Nancy Villa, ed. American Dress Pattern Catalogs: 1873–1909. New York: Published for Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield Village, Dearborn, Michigan by Dover Pub., 1988. • Catalogs of American Dress Patterns. • Catalogs of Butterick Dress Patterns. • Handford, Jack. Professional Patternmaking for Designers of Women’s Wear. Los Angeles: Handford Enterprises, 1974. • The Standard Dress Cutting System. Chicago: The Standard Garment Cutting Co. Masonic Temple, 1900. • The Standard Leads Them All. Chicago: The Standard Garment Cutting Co., 1897. (private collection) 4. European Styles • LePage-Medvey, artist, and Andre Varagnac, curator, National Museum of Folklore. National Costumes. London, Paris, and New York: Hyperion Press, 1939. • Onassis, Jacqueline, ed. In the Russian Style. New York: Viking Press, 1976. • Schmidt, Clara. Costumes/Kostume/Trajes (German). Paris: L’Aventurine, 2002. • Vedres, Nicole. Un Siecle D’elegance – Francoise. Paris: Les Editions Du Chene, 1943. 5. Fashion History • Ashelford, Jane. The Art of Dress: Clothes and Society 1500–1914. New York: Harry N. Abrams (Times Mirror), 1996. • Baker, Carlos. Ernest Hemingway: A Life Story. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1969. • Batterberry, Michael, and Ariane Batterberry. Fashion, The Mirror of History. New York: Greenwich House, Dist. by Crown Pub., a Chanticleer Press Edition, 1982. • Black, J. Anderson, and Madge Garland. A History of Fashion. New York: Wm. Morrow & Co., 1975. 332

Out-of-Style • Blum, Stella, ed. Victorian Fashions and Costumes from Harper’s Bazar: 1867–1898. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1974. • Boucher, Francois. 20,000 Years of Fashion: The History of Costume and Personal Adornment. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1967. • Byrde, Penelope. Nineteenth Century Fashion. London: B.T. Botsford, 1993. • Clothing and Furnishings. New York: Lord & Taylor, 1971. • Cunningham, C. Willett. English Women’s Clothing in the Nineteenth Century. 1937. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1990. • Dalrymple, Priscilla Harris. American Victorian Costume in Early Photographs. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1991. • Ewing, Elizabeth. Everyday Dress 1650–1900. London: BT Batsford, 1984. • Gardiner, Florence Mary. The Evolution of Fashion. 1897. New York: Soho Press, 2009. • Gernsheim, Alison. Victorian and Edwardian Fashion: A Photographic Survey. 1963. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1981. • Gorshine, Douglas. What People Wore. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1994. • Harris, Kristina. Victorian Fashion in America. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 2002. • Hawes, Elizabeth. Why Is a Dress? New York: Viking Press, 1942. • Johnston, Lucy. Nineteenth Century Fashion in Detail. Victoria and Albert Museum, London: V&A Pub., 2005. • Kalman, Bobbie, and Schimpsky. 19th Century Clothing. New York: Crabtree Pub., 1993. • Moore, Doris Langley. Fashion Through Fashion Plates, 1771–1970. New York: C.N. Potter, 1971. • Moore, Doris Langley. The Woman in Fashion. London: B.T. Botsford, 1949. • Peacock, John. The Chronicles of Western Fashion from Ancient Times to Present Day. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1991. • Pembrook, Theodore K. Treatise on Wash Fabrics. New York: Sweetser, Pembrook, 1897. • Peterson, Amy T., ed. The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Clothing Through American History, 1900–Present. Westport: Greenwood Press, 2008. • A Pictorial History of Jewish Los Angeles. From a corporate souvenir calendar of early Ralph’s Markets in 1881. 333

Bibliography • Rothstein, Natalie. Four Hundred Years of Fashion. London: Victoria and Albert Museum, in assoc. with William Collins, 1984. • Schnurnberger, Lynn. Let There be Clothes: 40,000 Years of Fashion. New York: Workman Pub., 1993. • Schroeder, Joseph J. Jr., ed. The Wonderful World of Ladies’ Fashion, 1850– 1920. Chicago: Follett Pub., 1971. • Severa, Joan L. Dressed for the Photographer: Ordinary Americans and Fashion, 1840–1900. Kent, Ohio: Kent State Univ. Press, 1995. • Tortora, Phyllis G., and Keith Eubank. Survey of Historic Costume: A History of Western Dress. New York: Fairchild Pub., 2015. • Wilcox, R. Turner. The Mode in Costume. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 2008. 6. General History • Harvey, Edmund H. Jr., ed. Our Glorious Century. Pleasantville, New York: Reader’s Digest Assoc., 1994. • Johnston, Robert D. The Making of America. Washington DC: National Geographic, 2002. • Korn, Jerry, ed. This Fabulous Century, 8 vol. 1870–1970. New York: TimeLife Books, 1969. • Kunhardt, Phillip B. III, Peter W. Kunhardt, and Peter W. Kunhardt, Jr. Looking for Lincoln. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2008. • Lauber, Patricia. What You Never Knew About Tubs, Toilets and Showers. New York: Simon & Schuster Books for Young Readers, 2001. • Life Magazine. The author’s collection of articles and pictures that chronicled the life, times, and fashions worn by people from all walks of life, collected over several decades. • Prokopowicz, Gerald J., ed. American Eras: The Reform Era and Eastern U.S. Development 1815–1850. Detroit: A Manly, Inc., 1998. • Shulman, A. and R. Youman. How Sweet It Was, Television: A Pictorial Commentary. New York: Bonanza Books, 1966. 7. Hairstyles • Clemente, Deirdre. The Way We Were—American Salon 1877–1900. The Wella (Hair Care) Corp. trade pamphlet. • Doyle, Marion I. An Illustrated History of Hairstyles, 1830–1930. Atglen, Pennsylvania: Schiffer Pub., 2003. 334

Out-of-Style • Taylor, Maureen. Fashionable Folks Hairstyles: 1840–1900. Laurel, Maryland: Picture Perfect Press, 2009. 8. Hats and Accessories • Amphlett, Hilda. Hats: A History of Fashion in Headwear. 1974. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 2003. • The Costumer Catalog of Rental Costumes and Hats. • Frost, Bob. “Fur Frenzy – From Felt to Pelt.” The History Channel Magazine. March-April 2008. • Grafton, Carol Belanger. Shoes, Hats and Fashion Accessories: A Pictorial Archive, 1850–1940. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1998. • Gray, Francine du Plessix. Them: A Memoir of Parents. (A biography of hat designer Tatiana of Saks 5th Avenue.) New York: The Penguin Press, 2005. • Kilgour, Ruth E. Pageant of Hats—Ancient and Modern. New York: R.M. McBride Co., 1958. • Langley, Susan. Vintage Hats and Bonnets 1770–1970. Kentucky: Collector Books, Div. of Schroeder Pub., 1998. • Pratt, Lucy, and Linda Wooley. Shoes. London: V&A Pub., 1999. • Shields, Jody. Hats: A Stylish History and Collector’s Guide. New York: Clarkson Potter Pub., 1991. 9. High Fashion • The Costume Institute. 100 Dresses. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2010. • DeMarly, Diana. The History of Haute Couture 1850–1950. New York: Holmes & Meier Pub., 1980. • Harper’s Bazaar Magazine. (Several decades from author’s collection). • Koda, Harold. Extreme Beauty. Metropolitan Museum of Art, NY: Yale Univ. Press, 2001 • Vogue (magazine). (Several decades from author’s collection). 10. Immigrants • Hoobler, Dorothy, and Thomas Hoobler. We are Americans: Voices of the Immigrant Experience. New York: Scholastic Inc., 2003. • Moreno, Barry. Images of America Ellis Island. Mt. Pleasant, S.C.: Arcadia Pub., 2003. • Torr, James D. Immigrants in America – Primary Sources. San Diego: Lucent Books, 2002. 335

Bibliography 11. Men’s Beards • Peterkin, Allan. One Thousand Beards—A Cultural History of Facial Hair. Vancouver, BC: Arsenal Pulp Press, 2002. 12. Menswear • Beard, Tyler, and Jim Arndt. One Hundred Years of Western Wear. Salt Lake City: Gibbs-Smith Pub., 1993. • Flusser, Alan. Dressing the Man: Mastering the Art of Permanent Fashion. New York: Harper Collins Pub., 2002. • Jon J. Mitchell Co. (selected by Jean Druesedow). Men’s Fashion Illustrations from the Turn of the Century. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1990. • Menjou, Adolphe. It Took Nine Tailors. New York and Toronto: McGrawHill, 1948. • Men’s Wear . . . 75 Years of Fashion. Fairchild Magazine. New York: Fairchild Pub., 1965. • Men’s Wear Supplement: The Great Look of Each Decade 1890–1965. New York: Fairchild Pub., 1965. • Peacock, John. Men’s Fashion: The Complete Sourcebook. London: Thames & Hudson, 1996. 13. Military • Spychalski, Brad. “Flash Back” in History Channel Magazine. May–June 2007. 14. Mourning Dress • Taylor, Lou. Mourning Dress—A Costume and Social History. London: Allen & Unwin, 1983. 15. Twentieth Century • 1920’s Fashions from B. Altman & Co. Reprints from Altman Catalog. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1999. • Astaire, Fred. Steps in Time: An Autobiography. New York: Harper & Row, 1959. • Baker, Patricia. Fashions of a Decade, the 1950s. New York: Chelsea House, 2006. • Biddle, Julian. What Was Hot! A Rollercoaster Ride Through Six Decades of Pop Culture in America. New York: Citadel Press, 2001. • Blum, Stella, ed. Everyday Fashions of the Twenties—As Pictured in Sears and other Catalogs. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1981. • Blum, Stella, ed. Everyday Fashions of the Thirties—As Pictured in Sears Catalogs. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1986. 336

Out-of-Style • Bolino, Monica, ed. Fashion: Examining Pop Culture. Michigan: Thomson and Gale, The Gale Group, The Greenhaven Press, 2003. • Bowen, Ezra, ed. This Fabulous Century 1870–1970. 8 vols. New York:TimeLife Books, 1970–1972. • Fashions of the Thirties. Selected by Carol Belanger Grafton. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1993. • Glennon, Lorraine, editor in chief. The 20th Century: An Illustrated History of our Lives and Times. No. Lighton, MA: J.G. Press, 1999. • Great People of the 20th Century. The Editors of Time Magazine, Time Books, 1996. • Hunt, Marsha, The Way We Wore. PO Box 5103, Sherman Oaks, CA 91413. • Langley, Susan. Roaring 20’s DECO Fashions. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Pub., 2006. • Mackie, Bob. Dressing for Glamour. New York: A&W Pub., 1979. • Mendes, Valerie D. 20th Century – An Introduction to Women’s Fashionable Dress 1900–1980. Victoria and Albert Museum, Dept. of Textiles and Dress, Leaflet #1. London, 1985. • Miller, Bettina, ed. Reminisce Magazine. Greendale, WI: monthly 2007–2012. • Olian, JoAnne, ed. Everyday Fashions, 1909–1920, as Pictured in Sears Catalogs. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1995. • Peacock, John. 20th Century Fashion. New York and London: Thomas & Hudson, 1993. • WWD (Women’s Wear Daily) . . . 75 Years of Fashion 1910–1985. Fairchild Magazine, Special Edition. Fairchild Pub., 1985. • Women’s Wear Daily and W. The author’s collection of excerpts from several decades of contemporary fashion news. New York: Fairchild Pub., 1940s–1980s. 16. Vintage Photographs • Armstrong, Jennifer. “Photo by Brady.” A Picture of the Civil War. New York: Athenaeum Books, Simon & Schuster Children’s Pub. Div., 2005. • A collection of old family photographs, from sources unknown from garage sales. • Dating Old Photographs 1840–1929. 2000. Toronto, Ont.: Moorshead Magazines Ltd., 2004. • Frisch-Ripley, Karen. Unlocking the Secrets in Old Photographs. Salt Lake City, UT: Ancestry Publishing, 1991. 337

Bibliography • Katz, D. Mark. Custer in Photographs. Garryowen, MT: Custer Battlefield Museum Pub., 2001. • More Dating Old Photographs 1840–1929. Introduced by Maureen A. Taylor. Toronto, Ont.: Moorshead Magazines Ltd., 2006. • Photographs from the life of Ernest Hemingway. Partial pages from a salvaged, torn book. Author, publisher, and date unknown. • Pritzker, Barry. Mathew Brady. Bridgewater, MA: World Publications Group, Inc. & J.G. Press, 2004 • Taylor, Maureen A. Uncovering Your Ancestry Through Family Photographs. 2nd ed. Cinn. OH: Family Tree Books, 2005. 17. Weddings • McBride-Mellinger, Marion. The Wedding Dress. New York: Random House, 1993. • Olian, JoAnne, ed. Wedding Fashions, 1862–1912. Mineola, New York: Dover Pub., 1994. • St. Marie, Satenig, and Carolyn Flaherty. Romantic Victorian Weddings, Then and Now. New York: Dutton Studio Books (Penguin Group), 1992.

338

Out-of-Style

Index Page numbers in italics indicate pages with illustrations.

A Adrian (designer), 14, 224 Aigrette feathers, 234–36 Albert, Prince, 69 Alexandra, Princess, 133 American drape coats, 301 American look, 290 Apron overskirts asymmetrically draped, 23, 32, 151, 152–53 tiered style, 22, 26, 141, 142–43 Arm bands, 77 Armoires, 106 Arnaz, Desi, 73 Art Deco movement, 229, 251 Ascots, 292, 300 Astaire, Fred, 171, 191 Asymmetrical designs, 23, 32, 151, 152–53 Athletic shoes, 47 Audubon Law, 235 Automobile touring clothes, 240–45 Automobiles, 242, 243

B Backless dresses, 43 Back waist pads, 25, 151 Ball, Lucille, 73 Balloon dresses, 268, 269 Balyeuse, 142–43 Banana sleeves, 24, 26, 134–35 Bandeaux, 229

Bangs, 28, 32, 136–37, 146–47, 154–55 Bankhead, Tallulah, 43 Banton, Travis, 43 Bardot, Brigitte, 87, 273 Barometer dresses, 39 Barrymore collars, 300 Basque jackets, 122–23 Bathing suits, 44, 84–87 Bavolets, 43, 118–19 Beach pajamas, 223 Beaton, Cecil, 229 Beaulieu, Mr., 171 Beaver fur, 170 Beehive hairstyles, 271 Bell-shaped skirts, 226–27 Bell sleeves, 114–15, 134–35 Belt-back pants, 303 Belt loops, 293 Berets, 258 Bermuda shorts, 303 Bermuda shortsuits, 225 Beverly Drive, 295 Beverly Hills High School, 267 Bias-cut dresses, 44, 79, 251 Bicycles, 66 Bikinis, 86–87 Bishop sleeves 1840s, 112–13, 114–15 1850s, 122–23, 124–25 1860s, 24, 134–35 1890s, 159, 162–63 Blackouts (show), 262, 322, 323 Blazers, 291, 318 339

Index Bloomer, Amelia, 64–66 Bloomers, 64–66, 84–85 Boater/sailor hats, 166–67, 182–83, 184–85, 194–95, 234–35, 298 Bobbed hairstyles, 238, 249 Bodices. See also Dresses, women’s 1860s, 24, 25, 26 boned, 32, 53, 113 cuirasse, 22, 28, 142–43, 152–53 fan-pleated, 111, 112–13 length variations, 28, 29, 30, 31, 102 multiple, 17, 122–23 in New Look of 1947, 224 Bonnets, 24, 118–19, 128–29, 148–49, 207 Books, 1, 15, 103, 107 Boutonnieres, 182–83 Bowler/derby hats 1850s, 171, 176–77 1860s, 178–79, 196–97 1870s, 180–81 1880s, 182–83, 200–01 1890s, 184–85 1900–1910, 290, 298 Bow ties 19th century, 174–75, 178–79, 182–83, 184–85, 195 20th century, 293, 301 Boys’ clothes. See also specific clothing types 19th century, 189–203 20th century, 305–6, 308, 310, 312, 314, 316, 318 Brassieres, 56–61, 270 Breeches, 186–87, 223, 244. See also Pants Bretelles, 112–13, 122–23 Bridesmaids’ gowns, 82 Brooks Bros., 291 Bubble/balloon dresses, 268, 269 Busks, 53, 113 Buster Brown outfits, 310 Bustles development, 19, 21, 101–102, 140–41, 142–43 nine phases, 22–23, 24–32 340

poufy, 22, 26, 27, 140, 142–43 for teenage girls, 210–11, 212–13 waterfall bustles, 23, 30, 31, 150–51, 152–53 wire supports, 20 Worth legend, 95 Bust pads, 58–60 Butterfly ties, 298 Butterick Pattern Company, 93, 107 Buttons, 25, 76, 172, 183

C Cage-crinoline hoop skirts, 16, 17–18, 131 California sportswear look, 255, 294, 302 Calling cards, 90 Capote hats, 156–57 Capri pants, 268 Car coats, 318 Carter, Ernestine, 1–2 Cartwheel hats, 254, 258 Cassini, Oleg, 287 Castle, Irene, 223, 238 Chanel, Gabrielle “Coco,” 253, 281–83 Changing World of Fashion, The (Carter), 1–2 Chemisettes, 122–23, 124–25 Cher, 287 Children’s clothing. See also specific clothing types 19th century, style clues, 192–215 19th century overview, 189–91 20th century, illustrations, 308–19 20th century overview, 305–6 Chino pants, 294, 303 Clamshell scoop hats, 234 Classic clothing, 287–88 Cloches, 237, 238, 249 Coats, boys’ 19th century, 192–93, 194–95, 198–99, 200–01 20th century, 314, 316, 318 blazers, 318 Norfolk jackets, 200–01, 202–03, 310

Out-of-Style roundabout jackets, 192–93, 194–95, 198–99, 200–01 sack coats, 192–93, 194–95, 198–99, 200–01 Zouave army jackets, 194–95, 196–97, 198–99, 200–01 Coats, men’s 1840s, 174–75 1850s, 176–77 1860s, 178–79 1870s, 180–81 1880s, 182–83 1890s, 184–85 20th century, 290–91, 298–303 American drape, 301 basic shapes, 169 blazers, 291 cutaway coats, 169, 178–79, 184–85 dinner jackets, 293, 301 double-breasted, 170, 180–81 dusters, 240–41 Eisenhower jackets, 302 English drape, 301 frock coats, 169, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79, 180–81 hacking jackets, 293, 302 morning coats, 169, 185 motorcycle jackets, 303 Nehru jackets, 296 Norfolk jackets, 290, 299 Prince Albert coats, 170 sack coats, 169, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79, 182–83, 184–85, 290 safari jackets, 293, 301 shirt-jackets, 302 sport coats, 290, 291, 301 swing-back jacket, 300, 301 tuxedos, 184–85 Coats, women’s 20th century, 229, 240–41 cocoon cloaks, 229 dusters, 240–41 kimono-sleeved, 229 Zouave jackets, 132–33, 135 Coat sleeves, 24, 26, 114–15, 124–25, 134–35

Colburn, Betty. See Shubert, Betty Kreisel Collapsed sleeves, 114–15 Collars 20th century, 298, 300 collar height, 171, 175, 177, 179, 181, 185, 291 lace, 190, 200–01, 212–13 removable, 95, 96, 111, 177, 181 standing, 174–75, 178–79, 291, 298 turn-down, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79, 180–81, 182–83, 185, 291, 293, 300 Collegiate fashion, 291–92 Collins, Joan, 14 Colors for children, 191 fabric dyes, 108 mourning clothes, 75, 80–81, 82 pink for men, 295 wedding gowns, 69 Combs, 118–19 Cone-hoop skirts, 16, 18, 131, 132–33, 208–9 Continental look, 295, 303 Corduroy fabric, 201 Coronet braids, 122–23, 126–27, 136–37 Corsages, 69 Corsets construction, 51–52, 53 fitting tips, 52–53, 55–56 for men, 53–54 merry widow, 270 reasons for wearing, 54 S-curve corset, 50, 57, 222, 227 tight lacing, 52 training, for girls, 205, 305 unnatural bulging, 53, 111 Costume design, fitting tips, 56 Costume designers, 273–74 Coveralls, 202–203, 319 Cravats, 178–79, 298 Crawford, Joan, 14 Creepers, 312 Crinolettes, 19, 20, 26, 102, 143 Crinolines, 16, 17–18, 131. See also Hoop skirts 341

Index Cuffs, pant, 184–85, 295, 299, 300 Cuffs, sleeve decorative wide, 141, 144–45 lace, 190, 200 removable, 95, 96, 183 Cuirasse bodices/jackets, 22, 28, 142–43, 152–53 Cutaway coats, 169, 178–79, 184–85

D Daguerreotypes, 89 Daycaps, 118–19, 128–29, 138–39 Demi-bras, 59 Denim fabric, 177, 306 Derby hats. See Bowler/derby hats Desert Inn, 275 Dickeys, 227 Dinner jackets, 293, 301 Dinner shoes, 47 Dior, Christian, 10, 224, 269 Dirndl dresses, 260 Disneyland, 325 Dittos, 180–81 Doll hats, 254, 258 Drawers, 186–87, 192–93, 209 Drawstring openings, 205 Dresses, boys’ ages worn, 189, 195, 201 off-the-shoulder, 189, 192–93, 199 with pants, 203 pinafores, 194–95 tunic dresses/frocks, 192–93, 194–95, 196–97, 199 Dresses, girls’ 19th century, 204–05, 206–07, 208– 09, 210–11, 212–13, 214–15 20th century, 309, 311, 313, 315, 317, 319 dirndl dresses, 317 frocks, 204–05 hoop skirts, 208–09 jumpers, 317, 319 lengths, 204–05, 208–09, 210–11, 212–13 narrow skirts, 212–13 342

off-the-shoulder, 189, 210–11 pinafores, 204–05, 317 Shirley Temple, 315 shirtmaker dresses, 315 sweater suits, 315 two-tiered apron, 210–11 waistlines, 206–07, 212–13, 214–15 yoked, 210–11, 214–15 Dresses, women’s. See also Bustles; Hoop skirts; Sleeves 1840s, 110–11, 112–13 1850s, 120–21, 122–23 1860s, 130–31, 132–33 1870s, 142–43 1880s, 152–53 1890s, 160–61 1900s, 226–27 1910s, 228–29 1920s, 246 1930s, 251–52, 255–56 1940s, 260 1950s, 268, 269 back interest, 30, 102, 140, 142–43 balloon/bubble dresses, 268, 269 bias cut, 44, 79, 251 draped-shape crepes, 260 flapper dresses, 36, 246 Gibson Girl style, 160–61 for girls, 190–91 gored, 18, 25, 132–33 multiple bodices, 17, 122–23 narrow skirted, 22–23, 28–30, 102, 140–41, 142–43, 152–53 New Look of 1947, 260, 268, 269 peasant dirndls, 260 Sabrina cocktail dresses, 271 sack dresses, 268, 269 sheath dresses, 11, 56, 224, 229, 270 shirt-maker, 260 shirtwaist dresses, 270 tailored suits, 66, 152–53, 159, 160–61, 162–63 tango, 223 trapeze dresses, 268, 269 two-tiered apron, 22, 26, 141, 142–43 Dress improvers, 25

Out-of-Style Dressmakers, 103 Drop-flap pants, 187 Dry cleaning, 96 Duck tail hairstyles, 318 Dungarees, 316 Dusters, 240–41 Dust ruffles, 29, 96, 142–43 Dyes, 108

E Ear-flap caps, 310 Ears, exposure of, 116–17 Ear-to-ear flowers, 258 Edward, Prince of Wales, 171, 185, 190, 193, 290, 292 Edwardian era, 231–32, 298 Eisenhower jackets, 302 Elastic, 54 Elbow sleeves, 134–35 El Capitan Theatre, 261, 322, 323 Elevator dresses, 22, 24, 132 Emerson, Faye, 79–80 Empire waists, 222, 226, 228–29 Engageantes, 121, 124–25 English drape coats, 290, 301 English walking hats, 166–67 Erogenous zones, 42–44, 47 Eton caps, 194–95 Eton collars, 300 Eton suits, 314, 316, 318 Eugenie hairstyles, 126–27, 136–37 Evolution of style designer creativity, 10 overview by decade, 6–7 social influences, 9–15 timing, 13 Extreme styles, 35, 40–41, 159, 238 Eyelet-embroidered fabric, 231

F Fabrics for automobile touring, 241 for children’s clothes, 207 corduroy, 201

cotton, for high fashion, 253 denim, 177, 306 eyelet-embroidered, 231 gabardine wool, 294 government rations, 191 historic quality, 104, 273 jersey, 281 man-made, 253 for mourning clothes, 75, 77, 78, 79 natural fibers, 273 nylon, 62, 253 rayon, 79 salvaging, 105, 207 Scotch tartans, 128–29, 190, 197 washability, 96 Facial hair 19th century, 171–72 1840s, 174–75 1850s, 176–77 1860s, 178–79 1870s, 180–81 1880s, 182–83 1890s, 184–85 handlebar moustaches, 182–83 saucer beards, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79 sideburns, 174–175, 178–79 walrus moustaches, 184–85 Fairbanks, Douglas, 236 Fan-pleated bodices, 111, 112–13 Fan-tailed trains, 23, 29, 102, 140–41, 142–43 Farber, Ella, 36–37 Farberware Company, 36–37 Fascinators, 240 Fashion dolls, 13 Fashion shows origin of, 280–81 Out-of-Style shows, 34, 37–38 Fashion victims, 43 Fauntleroy outfits, 188, 190, 200–01, 202–203 Fedoras for men, 298 for women, 156–57, 166–67, 254 Flapper dresses, 36, 246 343

Index Flappers, 247–48 Flared-cap sleeves, 112–13, 114–15 Flat/gypsy hats, 128–29 Flattop hairstyles, 318 Flip hairstyles, 272 Flower bowl hats, 236–37 Fly-away collars, 180–81 Fly-front pants, 187, 192–93, 194–95 Four-in-hand ties, 180–81, 184–85 Frantic Forties costume party, 263–66 French twist hairstyle, 154–55 Frock coats, 169, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79, 180–81 Furs, 37–38, 268, 270 Fur-trapping industry, 170

G Gabardine shirts, 294, 302 Gable hats, 156–57 Gainsborough hats, 148–49, 156–57, 234–35, 236 Gale, Kathryn, 326 Garibaldi blouses, 132–33, 134–35 Gernreich, Rudi, 2, 44 Gibson, Charles Dana, 159 Gibson Girls, 159, 164–65 Gibson Men, 159 Girdles, 248 Girls’ clothes. See also specific clothing types 19th century, 189–91, 204–15 20th century, 305–6, 309, 311, 315, 317, 319 Givenchy, Hubert de, 271 Gloves, 111, 241, 256, 270 Godey’s Lady’s Book, 121 Goggles, 242 Gone with the Wind (movie), 283 Gordon, Duff (Lucile), 285 Gored skirts/dresses, 18, 25, 132–33, 209 Gorney, Jay, 322 Grable, Betty, 86 Grateau, Marcel, 97, 147 Grauman, Sid, 322 344

Growth tucks, 207 G-strings, 86

H Hacking jackets, 293, 302 Hairdryers, 97 Hairpieces, 97, 136–37, 271 Hairstyles, boys’ 19th century, 192–93, 194–95 20th century, 318 side parts, 189 Hairstyles, girls’, 207, 210–11, 212–13 Hairstyles, men’s 19th century, 172 1840s, 174–75 1850s, 176–77 1860s, 178–79 1870s, 180–81 1880s, 182–83 1890s, 184–85 part placement, 180–81, 184–85 Hairstyles, women’s overview, 97 1840s, 116–17 1850s, 126–27 1860s, 136–37 1870s, 146–47 1880s, 154–55 1890s, 164–65 1900s, 226 1910s, 228–29 1920s, 249 1930s, 252 1940s, 258 1950s, 271, 272 bangs, 28, 32, 136–37, 146–47, 154–55 beehive, 271 Betty Grable upsweep, 258 bobbed, 238, 249 center parts, 116–17, 147, 149, 155 coils, 146–47, 154–55 coronet braids, 122–23, 126–27, 136–37 flip, 272

Out-of-Style Hairstyles, women’s (cont.) French twist, 154–55 headbands, 229, 271 New Look of 1947, 258, 272 page boy, 258, 272 pompadour, 164–65, 235, 258 ringlets, 116–17 sausage curls, 126–27 spit curls, 32, 146–47, 154–55 time-dating process, 111 top knots, 164–65 for weddings, 68, 69, 70 Hammacher Schlemmer, 242 Handkerchiefs, 182–83 Handlebar moustaches, 182–83 Harlow, Jean, 43 Hatpins, 235 Hats, boys’ 19th century, 194–95, 196–97, 200–01 20th century, 308, 310, 314 boater/sailor hats, 194–95, 197 bowler/derby hats, 196–97, 200–01 Dick Tracy hats, 314 ear-flap caps, 310 Eton caps, 194–95 pilot’s caps, 194–95, 197 rah-rah hats, 310 tam-o’-shanters, 196–97 visor caps, 196–97 wide-awake hats, 194–95 young gent’s hats, 197, 200–01, 310 Hats, girls’ 19th century, 206–07 20th century, 309, 311, 313 Hats, men’s 1850s, 176–77 1860s, 178–79 1870s, 180–81 1880s, 182–83 1890s, 184–85 1900s, 290, 298 for automobile touring, 241–42 boater/sailor hats, 182–83, 184–85, 298 bowlers/derbies, 171, 176–77, 178–79, 180–81, 182–83, 184–85, 298

fedoras, 298 homburg hats, 182–83, 184–85 kepis, 178–79 pork pie hats, 178–79, 182–83, 298 slouch hats, 184–85 top hats, 170–71, 174–75, 176–77, 180–81, 298 visor caps, 178–79 wide-awakes, 176–77, 178–79 Hats/bonnets, women’s 1840s, 118–19 1850s, 128–29 1860s, 138–39 1870s, 148–49 1880s, 156–57 1890s, 166–67 1900–1920s, 234–38, 237 1920s, 249 1930s, 254, 256 1940s, 258 for automobile touring, 241–42 beanies, 254 berets, 258 boater/sailor hats, 166–67, 234–35 Capote, 156–57 cartwheel hats, 254, 258 clamshell scoops, 234 cloches, 237, 238, 249 daycaps, 128–29 doll hats, 254, 258 ear-to-ear flowers, 258 English walking hat, 166–67 feathered, 234–36 fedoras, 156–57, 166–67, 254 flat/gypsy hats, 128–29 flower bowls, 236–37 gable, 156–57 Gainsborough, 148–49, 156–57, 234– 35, 236 helmet style, 249 high brow hats, 254 muffin-tops, 249 pill box hats, 138–39, 254 platter hats, 234 345

Index Hats/bonnets, women’s (cont.) poufs, 258 slouch hats, 254 spoon bonnets, 138–39 toque hats (flower pot), 156–57, 234–35, 254 trimmings, 148–49, 167 turbans, 249, 258 widebrims/picture hats, 236–37, 238, 249, 254 widow’s peak headdress, 77, 79 Hawaiian shirts, 294, 301 Hawes, Elizabeth, 45, 49, 224, 284 Head, Edith, 43 Headbands, 229, 271 Health issues from corsets, 52, 57 from shoes, 48, 270 Heat-molded bras, 60–61 Held, Jr., John, 291 Hemlines 20th century development, 218–19, 221–25 for girls, 204–05, 208–09, 210–11, 212–13 zigzag, 223, 248, 251 Hepburn, Audrey, 43, 271 Hippies, 11, 60, 224 Hobble skirts, 58, 222–23 Hollywood, California, 261–63 Homburg hats, 182–83, 184–85 Hood bonnets, 118–19 Hoop skirts 1850s, 122–23 1860s, 131, 132–33, 208–09 evolution of, 16, 17–19, 101–02 length of, 221 Horseback-riding outfits, 244–45 Hosiery, 62–63 Hostess pajamas, 223 Hot pants, 225 Hourglass silhouette, 11, 269 Howe, Elias, 92 How Sweet It Was, 324

346

I Immigrants, 231, 305 Infant gowns, 194–95, 206–07 “In My Sweet Little Alice Blue Gown” (song), 232 Irene (designer), 224 Ivy League look, 295, 303

J Jeans, 177, 306, 316 Jersey fabric, 281 Jewelry, 69, 82–83, 282 Jodhpurs, 240, 244–45 Jumpers, 317, 319

K Kazoo waist, 310 Keepsakes, 38–39 Kennedy, Bill, 263, 266 Kennedy, Jacqueline, 11, 80, 224 Kepi hats, 178–79 Kilts, 65, 190, 198–99, 200–01, 202–03 Kimonos, 43 Knickerbockers/knickers for automobile touring, 240 for boys, 187, 190, 196–97, 198–99, 200–01, 308, 310 history of, 186–87 for men, 184–85 plus-fours knickers, 186–87, 291, 300 for women, 66, 84, 85 Knicker-suits, 198–99

L La Grande Maison de Noir (The Big House of Black), 76 Langley Moore, Doris, 53, 101 Langtry, Lily, 281 Lapin Brothers, 97 Lappets, 118–19 Las Vegas, Nevada, 274–75 Laundry, 94–96

Out-of-Style Leg-o’-mutton sleeves, 35, 151, 158–59, 160–61, 162–63, 215 Le Lido de Paris, 86 Lido pajamas, 223 Life on a Pogo Stick (Murray), 324 Lincoln, Tad, 197 Lincoln family, 81 Lingerie look, 215, 227 Lipstick styles, 49 Little Lord Fauntleroy outfits, 188, 190, 200–01, 202–03 Lockets, 82 London, England, 106, 169 London Wax Museum, 107 Looped dresses, 22, 24, 132 Loren, Sophia, 85, 273 Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, 263, 266 Lounge coats. See Sack coats

M Mackie, Bob, 287 Madagascar, Queen of, 18 Magazines, 16, 106, 280 Mail service, 230 Makeup styles, 49, 248, 271 Marcel Waves, 28, 97, 146–47, 154–55 Mary, Queen, 80, 166–67 Maternity clothing, 39, 72–73 McCardell, Claire, 224 McHugh, Jimmy, 324 Measurements, 36, 52–53, 93. See also Proportions Menjou, Adolphe, 292 Men’s clothing. See also specific clothing types 19th century, 169–85 20th century, 289–303 Merry widow corsets, 270 Merry widow hats. See Gainsborough hats Miller, Nolan, 14 Millinery fashions, 234–38. See also Hats/ bonnets Mimeograph machines, 13

Minimizer bras, 59 Mini-skirts, 224 Mitts, 111 Model T Fords, 242 Modistes, 103 Mods, 224 Mono-bosom look, 226–27 Monograms, 95 Monroe, Marilyn, 55 Morning coats, 169, 185 Mother Hubbard dresses, 72, 73 Motorcycle jackets, 303 Mourning clothes overview, 75 colors, 75, 80–81, 82 fabrics, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78 jewelry, 82–83 phases, 74, 76, 77 relaxation of rules, 79–80 widow’s peak headdress, 77, 79 Mourning crepe, 74, 75, 76, 78 Moustaches, 171, 175, 179, 181, 182–83, 184–85 Movies authenticity, 281, 282–83 fashion influence, 253, 273–74, 281–82 Muffin-top hats, 249 Muhs, Jack, 325 Murray, Ken, 262, 322, 323 Mutton chops, 176–77

N Nehru jackets, 296 New Look of 1947, 224, 258, 260, 268, 269–73, 279 “New Look of 1947,” 10–11 Norfolk jackets/suits, 200–01, 202–03, 290, 299, 310 Novelty clothes, 12 Nudity, 87 Nursing waists, 72, 73 Nylon, 62, 253

347

Index

O Orientalia, 229 Outer space look, 279 Outer wraps, 138–39 “Out of Style” column, 328 Out-of-Style fashion shows, 34, 35–39 Overalls, 198–99, 308, 312 Over-bodices, 141, 152–53 Oversize clothes, 41, 176–77 Oxford bags, 290

P Page boy hairstyles, 259, 272 Pagoda sleeves, 121, 124–25 Pamela sleeves, 134–35 Pantalets, 186–87 Pantalettes, 186–87, 190, 204–05, 207 Pantaloons, 17, 186–87. See also Pants Pants, boys’ 19th century, 192–93, 194–95, 200–01 20th century, 314, 316, 318 denim/jeans, 316 evolution of style, 186–87, 190 knickers, 200–01 leg width, 194–95 short pants, 200–01 Pants, girls’, 317, 319 Pants, women’s 1920s, 248 1940s, 260 capri pants, 268 chino pants, 294 jodhpurs, 240, 244–45 pajama style, 223 as reaction to mini-skirts, 224 tailored slacks, 223 Pants/trousers, men’s 1840s, 174–75 1850s, 176–77 1860s, 178–79 1870s, 180–81 1880s, 182–83 1890s, 184–85 20th century, illustrations, 298–303 348

breeches, 186–87 chino pants, 294, 303 evolution of style, 186–87 front pant creases, 182–83, 184–85 jodhpurs, 240, 244–45 knickerbockers, 184–85, 186–87 Oxford bags, 290 turnups, 184–85 Pantyhose, 62–63 Papooses, 189 Paris, France, 13, 106, 107 Patch pockets, 148–49 Patterns, 36, 103, 141 Pedal pushers, 260, 317 Petticoats, 17, 25, 27 Photography, 89–91, 103–05, 121, 278–80 Pickford, Mary, 236 Picture hats/widebrims, 236–37, 238, 249, 254 Pill box hats, 138–39 Pilot’s caps, 194–95, 196–97 Pinafores, 194–95, 317 Pinch-back suits, 314 Pinup girls, 86, 279 Pioneers, 66 Platter hats, 234 Play outfits, themed, 310, 312, 319 Play suits, 308 Plunkett, Walter, 283 Plus-four knickers, 186–87, 291, 300 Poiret, Paul, 56, 58, 222, 229, 280–81 Polonaise dresses, 142–43, 152–53, 210–11 Polo shirts, 316 Pompadour hairstyles, 164–65, 235, 258 Poodle skirts, 276, 277, 319 Pork pie hats, 178–79, 182–83, 298 Poufs, 258 Prince Albert coats, 169–70 Princess-line dresses, 18, 107, 132–33, 209 Prohibition, 247 Proportions, 40–41, 51, 55–56. See also Silhouettes

Out-of-Style Psychology of clothes, 285–88, 327 Pullovers, 184–85, 281 Push-up bras, 59

Q Quant, Mary, 224

R Rah-rah hats, 310 Railways, 172 Rayon, 79 Ready-to-wear industry affordability, 92, 255 development of, 14, 108, 230 mail order catalogs, 230–31 for men, 93, 170, 290 sizing, 36 tailored suits, 230 Red Carpet Runway look, 42, 44 Reform dress, 64–66 Remembrance photos, 90 Remodeling, 133, 207, 236, 295 Riding britches story, 244–45 Rings, 69, 83 Roosevelt, Alice, 232 Roosevelt, Eleanor, 38 Roosevelt, Theodore, 232 Rose, Helen, 274 Roundabout jackets, 192–93, 194–95, 198–99, 200–01 Rump-hump-bump silhouette, 20, 23, 31, 150–51, 152–53, 213 Rural Free Delivery (RFD), 230

S Sabrina necklines, 43, 271 Sack coats 19th century overview, 170 1840s, 174–75 1850s, 176–77 1860s, 178–79 1870s, 180–81 1880s, 182–83 1890s, 184–85 20th century, 290

for boys, 192–93, 194–95, 198–99, 200–01 Sack dresses, 268, 269 Sack suits, 202–03 Sacques, 195 Safari jackets, 293, 301 Sailor suits, 190, 192–93, 198–99, 200–01, 202 Saks and Co., 242 Sash belts, 210–11 Sassoon,Vidal, 271 Saucer beards, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79 Sausage curls, 126–27, 204–05 Schiaparelli, Elsa, 256, 271, 292 Scotland’s GenGenie, Shirley Oberzud, 190 Scottish dress, 128–29, 190, 197, 202–03 Sears, Roebuck Catalog, 230–31, 305 Self-confidence, 285–86, 327 Selznick, David O., 283 Sennett, Mack, 86 Separates, 133, 135 Sewing machines, 92–93, 104, 107 Shawls, 128–29, 138–39 Sheath skirts, 28, 29, 270 Sheath suits, 268 Shirt-jackets, 302 Shirt-maker dresses, 260 Shirts, boys’ 19th century, 198–99 20th century, 308, 316, 318 Shirts, men’s 1880s, 182–83 1890s, 184–85 collar height, 171, 175, 177, 179, 181, 185, 291 as intimate apparel, 169, 178–79 removable collars, 95, 96, 111, 177, 181, 183 turn-down collars, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79, 180–81, 182–83, 185, 291, 293, 300 Shirtwaist blouses, 105, 162–63, 226–27, 231 Shirtwaist dresses, 270 349

Index Shoes, girls’, 309, 311 Shoes, men’s, 171, 290 Shoes, women’s, 46–48, 270 Short pants, 186–87, 190, 200–01, 312 Shoulder flanges, 112–13 Shoulder pads, 14, 256 Shrunken look, 40–41, 225 Shubert, Betty Kreisel, 261–62, 263, 264–65, 266, 320, 321–27 Shubert, Lyndon, 41, 225 Sideburns, 175, 178–79 Silhouettes. See also Proportions overview by decade, 6–7 boyish look, 229, 248 hourglass, 11, 269 lifecycle of, 14–15 rump-hump-bump, 20, 23, 31, 150–51, 152–53, 213 S-curve, 50, 57, 163, 222, 227 triangular, 16, 18, 24, 25, 131, 132, 133, 209 Silk gauze, 74 Singer, Issac, 92 Singer Company, 92 Sizes, 36, 278 Skeleton suits, 192–93, 196–97 Skirts. See also Dresses circular felt skirts, 276, 277, 319 hoop, 16, 17–19, 102, 122–23, 131, 132–33, 208–09, 221 kilts, 65, 190, 198–99, 200–01, 202–03 sheath, 28, 29, 270, 271 swing, 256, 315 Slashed-sleeves, 124–25 Sleeve caps, 32, 151, 152–53, 158–59, 160–61, 215 Sleeveless styles, 44, 248, 270 Sleeves, women’s 1840s, 114–15 1850s, 121, 124–25 1860s, 134–35 1870s, 144–45 1880s, 151 1890s, 159, 160–61, 162–63 ball-shaped puff topped, 161, 162–63 350

banana, 24, 26, 134–35 bell, 114–15, 134–35 bishop, 24, 112–13, 114–15, 122–23, 124–25, 134–35, 159, 162–63 coat, 24, 26, 114–15, 124–25, 134–35 collapsed, 114–15 cuff variations, 144–45 elbow, 134–35 flared-cap, 112–13, 114–15 leg-o’-mutton, 35, 151, 158–59, 160–61, 162–63, 215 pagoda, 121, 124–25 Pamela, 134–35 slashed, 124–25 Slouch hats, 184–85, 254 Smocking, 212–13 Snappy-peppy suits, 312 Snoods, 24, 126–27, 136–37, 254, 258 Spit curls, 32, 146–47, 154–55 Spoon bonnets, 138–39, 148–49 Sport coats, 291, 292, 301 Spring-steel hoops, 17 Stiletto pumps, 48, 270 Stockings for boys, 194–95, 198–99, 310 garters, 248 for girls, 206–07 nylon, 62–63, 253 Strauss, Levi, 177 Streisand, Barbra, 288 String ties, 178–79, 180–81 Style clues. See also specific clothing types 19th century overview, 101–108, 169–72, 189–91 20th century overview, 220–25, 289–94, 305–06 Suits, boys’ 20th century, 308, 310, 312, 314, 318 Eton suits, 316, 318 Suits, men’s 20th century, illustrations, 298–303 California cardigan, 294, 302 Continental look, 303 English draped suits, 292, 301 grey flannel, 296

Out-of-Style Ivy League look, 303 mixed coordinates, 300, 303 three-piece, 178–79 Suits, women’s 1940s, 260 Chanel suits, 281–82 sheath suits, 268 tailored suits, 66, 152–53, 159, 160–61, 162–63, 225 Suspenders, 198–99, 290, 293 Swaddling cloth, 189 Sweaters angora, 317 for boys, 312, 318 cashmere, 268, 270 coat sweaters, 184–85 fur-collared, 268, 270 pullover jerseys, 184–85, 281 sloppy-Joe, 317 twin sweater suits, 315 V-necked vest, 291 Sweatshirts, 316 Swim shorts, 296, 303 Swimsuits, 2, 44, 84–87 Swing-back jackets, 300, 301 Swing skirts, 256, 315 Swiss belts, 208–09

T Tailored suits for girls, 214–15, 317 ready-to-wear industry, 230 for women, 66, 152–53, 159, 160–61, 162–63, 225 Tam-o’-shanter hats, 196–97 Tango corsets, 58 Tango dresses, 223 Tango shoes, 223 Tartan plaids, 128–29, 190, 197 Taylor, Maureen, 89 Teddy bears, 232 T-shirts, 314, 316 Textile industry, 107 Thongs, 86 Tiara-coronets, 118–19

Ties, men’s 1840s, 174–75 1850s, 176–77 1860s, 178–79 1870s, 180–81 1880s, 182–83 1890s, 184–85 20th century, 292, 293, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303 ascots, 292, 300 bow ties, 174–75, 178–79, 182–83, 184–85, 195, 293, 301 cravats/butterfly ties, 178–79, 298 four-in-hand ties, 180–81, 184–85 string ties, 178–79, 180–81 Time-dating age of subjects, 172 automobiles and, 243 fashion diehards, 106 for films, 282 hemlines, 99, 221–22 maternity clothes and, 73 mourning clothes, 75 photography, 89–91, 104–05 process of, 12–15 reference books, 1, 14–15, 103 tracings, 98–99 wedding gowns and, 69 Top hats, 174–75, 176–77, 180–81, 197, 298 Top knots, 164–65 Toque hats (flower pot), 23, 31, 32, 82, 156–57, 234–35 Tornure, 30 Torpedo bras, 57, 270 Toulouse-Lautrec, Henri de, 165 Tracings, 98–99 Traina-Norell, 270 Trains, fan-tailed, 23, 29, 102, 140–41, 142–43 Trapeze dresses, 268, 269 Triangular 1860s dresses, 22, 25 Trimmings, 93, 102–103, 141 Trippon, George, 325 Trousers. See Pants/trousers Turbans, 249, 258 351

Index Turkish bloomers, 84, 85 Turkish costumes, 65 Turn-down collars, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79, 180–81, 182–83, 185, 291, 293, 300 Turnup pants, 184–85 Tuxedos, 184–85 Twentieth Century Fox Studio, 267 Twiggy, 56

U Underskirts, 19, 24, 27, 102 Undersleeves, 122–23, 124–25 Underwire support, 58–59 Uniforms, 93, 325 Up-dating methods, 105 Upholstered era, 103, 141

V Varsity sweaters, 184–85 Veils mourning, 78, 79, 80 wedding, 68–69, 80 Vest outfits, for boys, 314 Vests/waistcoats, 171, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79, 180–81 Victoria, Queen, 69, 77, 129 Victoria and Albert Museum, 107, 282 Victoria Loop hairstyle, 116–17 Victorian era, 231–32 Vintage clothing Streisand’s influence, 288 timelessness of, 287–88 Vionnet, Madeleine, 251 Visor caps, 178–79, 196–97

W Waist-cinchers, 270 Waistcoats, 171, 174–75, 176–77, 178–79, 180–81 Waist points, 112–13

352

Waist seams, 132 Waist size, 52–53, 159 Wales, Prince of (Edward), 171, 185, 190, 193, 290, 292 Walrus moustaches, 184–85 Wash day, 94, 95 Washing machines, 94–95 Waterfall bustles, 23, 30, 31, 150–51, 152–53 Wedding gowns, 69–70, 81–82 Wedding veils, 68–70 Western Costume Company, 322 Whalebone bodies, 53 Wide-awake hats, 176–77, 178–79, 194–95 Widebrims/picture hats, 236–37, 238, 249, 254 Widow’s peak headdresses, 77, 79 Wilson, Marie, 55, 322, 323 Winfrey, Oprah, 60–61 Winterhalter, Franz, 190 Woman in Fashion, The (Langley Moore), 101 Women’s Rights movement, 66 Wonder Bra™, 59 Work dresses, 122–23 Worth, Charles, 95, 101, 106, 133, 280 Wrappers, 73 Wristwatches, 242

Y Young gent’s hats, 200–01, 310

Z Zippers, 292 Zoot suits, 2 Zouave jackets for boys, 194–95, 196–97, 198–99, 200–01 for women, 132–33, 135

ANTIQUES & COLLECTIBLES/TEXTILES & COSTUME

R OF E N N I W

5 BEST BOOK AWAR

DS

2016 Hollywood Book Festival Awards: History ✦ 2015 Beverly Hills International Book Awards: Performing Arts, Film & Theater ✦ 2014 USA Best Book Awards: Performing Arts, Film & Theater ✦ 2014 Family Tree Magazine UK: “OUR TOP CHOICE” ✦ 2013 Kirkus Reviews: Best Books ✦

W

inner of five Best Book Awards, this volume for fashion detectives weaves fascinating elements of social history into tales of how, why, and when fashions evolved. Hundreds of sequential illustrations highlight the style clues that identify garments for men, women, and children as products of their individual eras. The images are accompanied by highly readable—and often humorous—comments and explanations by author and illustrator Betty Kreisel Shubert. A noted fashion historian, Shubert was a columnist for Ancestry Magazine and has designed clothes and costumes for stage and screen as well as hotels, restaurants, and casinos all over the world. Ranging decade by decade from the nineteenth through the twenty-first century, this book offers a simple way to date photographs and clothing. It also provides background that makes less-accessible histories of costume easier to understand. This second edition, enhanced with a selection of new photographs, offers a valuable resource for costumers, vintage fashion enthusiasts, social historians, genealogists, and collectors of nostalgia items. The easy-to-follow format makes it a great browsing book even for those who are unversed in fashion design and history.

$29.95 USA

PRINTED IN CHINA

ISBN-13: 978-0-486-81988-4 ISBN-10: 0-486-81988-4 52995

www.doverpublications.com

9 780486 819884