by C. Willett
A ‘new undergarment of fine muslin edged with lace combining low bodice, petticoat and drawers, worn over the corset which is worn over the vest,’ was introduced by Marshall and Snelgrove in 1892. And in 1895 ‘charming pale pink llamé combinations with frills of torchon lace at the neck and knee’ provided a pleasing prospect for those fortunate enough to see them.
3. DRAWERS
These, worn over the combinations, were frilled at the knees, becoming extremely wide in the leg, so that by 1895 the garment was as wide as the petticoat itself. A picturesque affair some twenty inches round the knee with a 10-in. lace frill, was regarded by many with moral apprehension as savouring of the demi-monde. Prosaic serge knickerbockers gathered just below the knee was an alternative, while ‘coloured silk knickerbockers, some two yards wide, often lined with flannel’ sought to make the best of both worlds. The knicker-bocker form was made with a buttoned flap at the back, which was beginning to replace the old ‘open’ pattern.
Oddities such as plush drawers edged with lace, or complete sets of underclothing in black surah, were perhaps symptomatic of individual taste ignoring the conventions.
4. PETTICOATS
During the revival of the bustle, from 1883 to near the end of that decade, the petticoat projected in sympathy. The box pleats and flounces at the back developed, in 1883, into the ‘crinolette petticoat,’ the plain front breadths of which buttoned on to the corset, while the flounced back breadth was tied round the waist outside it. Its length ranged from 19 to 39 in., and steels were inserted round the lower part. The crinolette in its turn gave way, in 1885, to a revived bustle.
Two petticoats were still generally worn, or one with combinations; in winter the usual one of coloured flannel, or one of quilted satin or sateen edged with lace.
By the 1890’s coloured shot silk petticoats were in fashion, some being accordion pleated, or with scalloped edge trimmed with lace. In 1891 ‘petticoats are 2 yards wide at the hem, close gored at the top, with a drawing-string behind; trimmed with one or two scanty frills of scalloped embroidery with insertion.’
The white petticoat, which had been temporarily eclipsed by the coloured, recovered its supremacy in 1894, enriched with accordion- pleated frills and coloured baby-ribbons. And the next year this elaborate affair ‘now at the zenith of its glory,’ might be ‘of spotted net with endless rows of tucks, lace insertions, frillings and puffings.’ By this date it was becoming very much gored at the top and wide at the hem, where it was often edged with ruching.
A petticoat guaranteed to produce an intriguing rustle as the wearer moved was made of moreen.
5. THE BUSTLE
This, as a separate article from the petticoat with back flouncing, began to return in 1883, in a short form for the walking dress and longer for the evening. By the next year it was either attached to the bodice or the petticoat, or it might be in the form of crescentic steels introduced into the back of the dress itself. By 1885 a horsehair pad, some six inches square and often called a ‘mattress,’ was added; the American kind, of wire—‘which answers the purpose much better’ —was but one of many other varieties. Unlike that used in the 1870’s, the bustle of the 1880’s produced a prominence almost at right angles so that it was popularly declared a tea-tray could be comfortably rested upon it.
It declined in 1888 and disappeared the following year.
6. THE CORSET
This continued to be long-waisted during the 1880’s, and was often of elegant materials such as silk, satin and brocade, and of a great variety of colours. An evening corset ‘in apricot and peacock-blue satin’ (1886) was perhaps a specially choice example. In the 1890’s yellow was a favourite colour.
By 1890 ‘the corset is now always worn over the petticoat,’ and was elaborately decorated with lace frills and rosettes in colour.
The 1890’s saw a somewhat shortened form, with a considerable degree of tight-lacing. It was a girl’s ambition to have, at marriage, a waist-measurement not exceeding the number of years of her age—and to marry before she was twenty-one. The huge sleeves helped to create the illusion. ‘Nothing could be more becoming to the figure; the waist looks infinitesimal’ (1892); and in spite of the bicycle ‘girls pull themselves in while they pad their hips and the side lines of the bust to make themselves look as much like an hourglass as possible’ (1896).
FIG. 88. JAEGER CORSET, 1886
7. THE VEST
The usual material was merino, though silk was favoured by the smart world. Though colours were, by many, considered ‘not quite nice,’ there was a growing liking for them. A specimen of plum- coloured silk stockinette (Platt Hall, Cunnington collection) belongs to this period.
8. THE BUST BODICE
A device to support the breasts introduced in 1889, and worn above the corset. Usually it was made of white coutil, with side bones, and laced front and back.
9. BUST IMPROVERS
These were commonly used all through the period. In 1887 they were in the form of cup-shaped wire structures. Early in the 1890’s appliances of flexible celluloid were advertised. A simpler type consisted in a shaped piece of material with circular ‘pockets,’ each with a slit behind in which a pad could be inserted. A specimen of this kind (Cunnington collection) has pads of assorted sizes; the original wearer explained that at a dance the size she would select ‘would depend on who my partner was to be’ (figure 89).
FIG. 89. BUST IMPROVER, C. 1896
10.THE CAMISOLE
High and close-fitting for day wear, and with a low V neck for evening; either plain or trimmed with lace edging. In 1891 it was sometimes made without fastenings, the fronts, cut on the cross, crossing over and tucking under the petticoat band.
11. THE NIGHTGOWN
In the 1880’s, gauging and frilling round the neck, with lace ruffles and jabot, added to the effectiveness of this garment; while in 1883 ‘white silk is used for nightdresses and pajama suits.’
‘The combination nightgown or lady’s Pyjama’ of 1886 required 4 yards of calico or flannel, and was made as combinations, with frills at the knees and wrists, and a high collar, and was buttoned down the front.
By 1887 ‘nightgowns are no longer simple garments but pretty and becoming; for example, made of soft pink silk with a Watteau pleat, a tucked yoke, lace frill down the front and lace ruffles.’4 ‘Coloured zephyr nightgowns (blue and pink) are superseding white ones.’ And as the 1890’s dawned ‘delightfully cosy winter nightgowns of cream and pink flannel trimmed with lace and ribbons,’ and others in the Empire style, composed of pink nun’s veiling, with gathered waist and puffed shoulder sleeves, frilled all down the front and lavishly trimmed with baby-ribbons, were a feature in the bridal trousseau.
The garment became even more decorative, with a lace yoke and Toby frill, and full bishop sleeves ending in ruffles; or with a cape-like collar, or a frilled plastron and tucked front (1894). And ‘the copious use of pink baby ribbons,’ commented on in 1895, was perhaps inspired by the subconscious rather than the aesthetic sense. ‘Ladies’ pyjamas in pale blue and white silk mixture, tied round the waist with an encased ribbon and finished at the wrist, ankles and throat with lace; large bishop sleeves; a cascade of lace down the bodice.’4 seem to suggest an expression of sex distraction. In fact, the garment of this period, in its various forms, supplied abundant material on which the modern psychologist can exercise his imagination.
* * *
1 The Tailor and Cutter.
2 The Tailor and Cutter.
3 The Tailor and Cutter.
4 Fashion journal.
XI
1897–1908
THEenviable Victorian era celebrated its pinnacle of progress in the glitter of the Diamond Jubilee. The top of the world had been reached, and beyond stretched the promised land of luxury spreading smooth and lush, apparently for ever.
The spirit of costume, anticipating the actual Edwardian period, changed in character, and we might say that a new epoch began in 18
97. Man’s clothing was profoundly affected by the growing taste for sports, the influence of which was two-fold. For one thing, it materially broke through the barriers of class; no longer did each social group confine its attention to exclusive games. Cricket, football and even golf were essentially democratic and required for those participating much the same sort of clothing, irrespective of rank. The cricket field, it is true, still distinguished ‘gentlemen’ from ‘players,’ but not by their dress.
The other influence of sport was to spread a taste for more comfortable clothes in daily life, and ‘the top hat and frock coat’ were gradually becoming a specialized uniform for particular occasions. The ‘high collar’ fetish saw a growing resistance to its iron rule and the very fact that the ‘boiled shirt’ earned that contemptuous title was in itself significant of its decline from power. The rule of starch was tottering, and when the dickey and detachable cuffs—to say nothing of the washable rubber collar—aped gentility, it was becoming clear that the genuine article was ceasing to mean what it once did.
The Edwardian gentleman shut his eyes, of course, to these encroachments creeping in from the ranks below; all he could do was to be, if possible, even more precise as to the exact shape of such items as collar and tie, and the proper moments when a little relaxation was permissible. An error meant a social disaster. Thus, in 1900 it was comforting to be assured that ‘the striped, coloured or pique collar almost invariably bespeaks the bounder.’ But alas! only six years later we read, ‘Mr. George Alexander has just adopted the woollen collar.’1 When so eminent a leader of gentlemanly modes went over to the enemy in this way, what hopes were there of holding the fort? The fact is, the Edwardian period, seen from a distance of nearly half a century, may look to us like a luxuriant plain, but it was in reality a declivity; its surface becoming rougher and more barren as it approached the abyss. The economic burden was growing more oppressive, and the common man was treading on the gentleman’s heels. Even underclothes were bearing marks of democracy.
Feminine fashions, however, seemed oblivious of these threatening changes. Having suppressed, for the time being, the aggressive new woman, the mood reverted to one of picturesque, nebulous mystery, while Edwardian underclothes developed a degree of eroticism never previously attempted. The technique was distinctive; women had learnt much, since the 1870’s, of the art of suggestion. Instead of caricaturing the physical outlines of nature they invented a silhouette of fictitious curves, massive above, with rivulets of lacy embroidery trickling over the surface down to a whirlpool of froth at the foot.
The ideal model was the mature woman; her weapons were the straight-fronted corset and the flounced petticoat, which, in experienced hands, were highly effective, though very expensive. A woman of breeding and affluence was thereby distinguished from vulgar imitators. When petticoats were advertised at fifty guineas we may assume they were of a quality fit only for the Best People.
Although, no doubt, prudery would have been shocked by the suggestion, it is apparent that Edwardian underclothes were designed to be erotic, in keeping with the rest of the attire. They were given a more lyrical title—‘lingerie’—while ‘drawers’ became ‘knickers.’ The crudity of the Victorian garments was obliterated, but there was, as yet, no flippancy and no ‘undies.’ The purpose of those garments was far too serious for that. Never had man been quite so susceptible to amorphous masses of mere textiles; never had underwear occupied so much attention in the fashion journals where ‘garments not destined for a public career’ are described with enthusiasm. ‘There is something very attractive,’ writes one in 1901, ‘about the elaborate petticoat and its frou-frouing mysteries. Our countrywomen realize at last that dainty undergarments are not necessarily a sign of depravity.’2 Another, in 1903, declares, ‘lingerie is an enthralling subject’; and presently the descriptions become positively rapturous. Beneath ‘Simple Evening Seductions’ are worn ‘these beautiful persuasions,’ while ‘petticoats of an affectionate character’ support ‘Temptations in Teagowns.’ The appeal of these seductive undergarments even became audible with their mysterious ‘frou-frou,’ and we are told ‘we must all frou-frou till we can’t frou-frou any more.’ Man’s ear could scarcely escape the music of these sirens.
The craving to be alluring under all circumstances affected the more intimate garments to a degree which shocked the elders. Evangeline’s nightdress, for example, of embroidered cambric with short sleeves and Valenciennes ruffles, provoked the comment: ‘I consider this garment not in any way fit for a girl—or for any good woman, for that matter,’3 for the cobweb was positively transparent.
Those diaphanous garments were indeed revealing. They exposed —as did most of the undergarments of the period—a new and remarkable attitude of mind, very remote from the Victorian. It was a kind of highly artificial, highly refined and probably unconscious, sensuality. Perhaps it served as a substitute for the purely physical attractions which were prudishly concealed. To a more realistic generation it would seem to have been the ultimate illusion of an unreal world, floating blissfully towards—1914.
MEN
Already in 1898 it was remarked that ‘there never was a time in history when everybody was dressed so nearly alike’; and that whereas the coloured shirt had been ‘the distinct badge of the working man as the white shirt was of the middle and professional classes,’ this, at the time of the Diamond Jubilee, no longer applied. Uniformity was creeping in, in spite of the desperate efforts of the gentleman to keep his head above the crowd.
FIG. 90. (left) MAN’S PINK AND BLACK STRIPED DRAWERS, C. 1900; (right) MAN’S SHIRT, STRIPED IN GREEN, BLACK AND WHITE, WITH ATTACHED COLLAR, C. 19OO
1. THE SHIRT
By day the white shirt was usually made with longcloth body and linen cuffs and front; the attached collar was giving place to the detachable, and, by 1900, the coloured shirt for day wear was becoming accepted.
Thus the correct wear for various occasions was given as: For morning or business, coloured shirt and cuffs to match, white collar, fancy silk tie. For a wedding, white shirt and high white collar, with black satin or light-coloured tie or scarf. For church and Sunday, white shirt, collar and cuffs, fancy silk Ascot tie or scarf. For evening dress, white shirt, high collar, broad-end white tie, mother-of-pearl studs and links. For ‘sports’ a regatta or Oxford stripe or fancy flannel shirt, polo collar or a linen stand-up.
For business men the front of the white shirt was small, and the cuffs had a double-button arrangement at the wristband to permit shortening while at work; alternatively there were the detachable cuffs. Many of these shirts were made to button at the back. But the coloured cambric shirt was steadily encroaching on the domain where formerly the white shirt had reigned supreme. By 1906 the soft-fronted white shirt, for business men, appeared, together with soft-fronted shirts of Oxford or zephyr shirtings, the fronts often tucked; sometimes the collars and cuffs were still of white linen, but this was no longer essential. Indeed flannel collars were popular ‘in keeping with the rage for soft-finished shirts.’ There were negligee woollen shirts in green stripes,4 and in 1908 shirts of ‘the new unshrinkable flannel,’ Viyella, with neckbands of Italian cloth and slightly shaped at the waist.
Throughout the period the double collar, commonly known as a polo collar, or its variation ‘the Rosebery,’ was the favourite for day wear, its height diminishing from 3 in. to 2 in. by 1906, and even less the year following. But ‘the high collar is always connected with ceremonial occasions.’ It was observed, in 1907 that ‘the double collar has killed the cravat and the large knot.’
Neckties were of necessity small, whether the Oxford tie, 1 in. wide throughout, or the silk or satin scarf expanding at the ends, or the bow (either made up or to tie), or the small four-in-hand. The knitted silk tie (1903) was acceptable because it could be tied tightly without damaging the material. The ‘washing tie’ of 1906, and the washable collar, seem to imply economical subterfuges.
FIG. 91. TENNIS S
HIRT, 1907. FROM ‘THE TAILOR AND CUTTER’
The dress-shirt, with or without attached collar, changed but slightly; and the front diminished somewhat in size. Though one- stud fronts were often worn, three studs were usual until towards the close of the period when one or two became more fashionable in a pleated front 9 to 10 in. wide (1908). While the day cuff was rounded, the dress cuff was square.5
The dress-collar was generally of the ‘masher’ or stand-up type which by the end of this period was not deeper than 2 in., when, in fact, it was being rivalled by a return of the winged collar.
The dress-tie was a small plain bow with square ends, and ‘it is a canon of good taste that dress bows should be self-tied.’
2. THE DRESS-SHIRT PROTECTOR
This ingenious novelty, popular at the end of the 1890’s, though actually it was a revival, was a pad of black satin, often quilted, worn over the dress-shirt front to protect it when the overcoat or evening cloak was worn out of doors.
FIG. 92. MAN’S DICKEY WITH ‘SHAKESPEARE’ COLLAR, c, 1905
3. THE UNDERVEST
Of natural coloured wool, or, in summer, of spun silk or cellular cotton. ‘The vast majority of gentlemen dispense with underwear altogether during the summer months’ (1906).
4. DRAWERS AND PANTS
Of similar materials to the undervest. The distinction between the two was becoming recognized; ‘pants’ were either ankle-length or to mid-calf; drawers were either just below the knee or just above (when they became known as ‘knicker drawers,’ which by further shortening later became ‘trunks’).
