DRESS REFORM FOR WOMEN

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22515, 24 September 1938, Page 23

DRESS REFORM FOR WOMEN

NOWADAYS, when girls have adopted shorts for tennis or tramping, and slacks ' for tamping or the beach, what would be said if Mrs Amelia Jenks Bloomer, revived from the 1850’s,’ reintroduced her scheme of fluffy peg-top trousers as part of the everyday costume of women? In her day she was derided And called everything from a corrupter of Inorals to a foolish crank, but it appears that her “new reformed tostume,” or “bloomer costume,” as it was popularly called, was far |nore “feminine” in the Victorian fcense, than the modern woman’s slacks or shorts. Even if her attempts came to nothing, Mrs Bloomer gave a new Jfcrord to the language, and now, pearly 90 years after her pioneer efforts, it appears that women have freally gained the emancipation from conventional dress that she strove for. It would be a pleasant gesture, Ifcow that the latest craze in our «omes is to return to part of the (Victorian mode in interior decoraJtion and ornament, to bring Mrs [Jjloomer’s fashion to life again, even [|f only for the fun of it. It was a polite fiction of Mrs ! [corner’s day that ladies did not »ve legs—at least they were never be spoken of or be obvious in ixed company. Mrs Bloomer—she as an American, by the way—defied that they had a right to posss legs and to show them, but ider discreet cover. So she beftame a dress reformer. Mrs Bloomer, described as “a llady of rare accomplishments and ibeauty,” made her scheme public in DBSO, in America. The new style Svas to consist of “a special skirt, .Teaching to a little below the knees, Stend covering moderately full trousers, finishing just above the ankle, i»nd there gathered in with an elas- ’ ntic band.” Such a style, she claimed, •'did not offend propriety, and was [ln fact more proper than the current fashion. “If delicacy requires that the skirt should be long, why do our ladies a dozen times a day commit the indecency of raising their dresses tq prevent them 'draggling in the mud of the street?” she asked. In popularising her costume, Mrs Bloomer led the way by wearing it herself. She wore a short skirt and .black satin trousers. She gained a few followers, but not as many as she hoped for. Some of her converts soon lapsed, and because of pressure brought to bear by the ‘members of their family, reverted to long skirts. - Part of the opposition to Mrs Bloomer was based on her general reputation as an advo- • cate of women’s rights, and all such ideas were frowned on by the stern fathers of the day. She edited a monthly journal, the “Lily,” devoted “to temperance and literature.” “The dress need have no mascu-

(SPECIAI.X.I WHITTEN FOB TBX PBESS.) [By C.R.S.] line characteristics about it,” wrote Mrs Bloomer. Various American newspapers appeared at' first to support the idea, which was hailed as “a decided novelty in female costume.” The “Hartford Times” wrote: “There was nothing in the appearance of the garments at all immodest, but on the contrary they were evidently convenient and appeared becoming and graceful.” In a note on the illustration reproduced with this article, which appeared originally in the “Lily,” Mrs Bloomer wrote: “The purpose of the drawing is to let our readers see just what an immodest dress we are wearing, and about which people have made such an ado. We hope our lady readers will not be shocked by our masculine appearance,* or •gentlemen mistake us for one of their own sex.” She next appeared in London, and began a campaign to convert Englishwomen to her ideas. The files of the “Illustrated London News” of 1851 and later provide illustrations of Mrs Bloomer and others in her famous costume. .The London campaign opened with an address by a Mrs H. M. Tracy, who was “appropriately garbed in full bloomer costume.” . Other public addresses followed, the advertisements announcing to women, “ ’tis for your good we come among you.” On September 22, 1851, one of the converts, Mrs C. H. Dexter, gave a lecture upon “Bloomerism,” at the Literary Institute, Fitzroy square, “the lecturer, of course, wearing the new attire, of black satin, consisting of a jacket, a skirt scarcely reaching to the knee, and a pair of very wide trousers tied at the ankles. The illustrations were smart and the advocacy vigorous;” There was a Miss Atkins, who spoke at a Mechanics Institute in the Mile End read. The report of the occasion sta< “On removing the cloak in which her .form was enveloped, she curtsied and bowed to the audience, and a full-blown bloomer stood revealed. Some of the rougher sex jeered, others roared with laughter, and the ladies joined in the general hilarity.” The most splendid effort to popularise the costume was the “Grand Bloomer Ball,” held at the Hanover square rooms. The advertisements stated that no lady would be admitted except in correct’ bloomer costume, and gentlemen had to wear full evening dress. .Something went wrong about the ball, however. It seems to have been regarded as an excuse for horse-play. “The conduct of the masculine patrons (among whom were several Guards officers and men-about-town) was perfectly scandalous,” one report states. “They cheered and pestered the ladies in an unmanly fashion; and at supper the fast gents pelted them with oranges and bits of bread. The females were terror-stricken and

Mrs Bloomer’s Pioneering In Victorian Days

fled from the hall. We hear that the profits are to be given to charity. If so, good may yet come out of evil.” Enterprising advertisers, ready to make the most of the latest novelty, existed even in those days. A hotelkeeper dressed his barmaids as “Bloomers,” and there were the “Bloomer Waltz” and the “Bloomer Polka,” as well as pantomime songs on the subject. Mrs’ Bloomer’s disciples did their best to popularise the costume by wearing it in public. They had such a hard time of it at the hands of the public that they dared not parade singly, and had to go out in bands. Most of them “belonged to the upper classes.” The newspapers record that they were followed by crowds whenever they appeared, and were subjected to very coarse jokes. One group escaped being ducked in the/ Serpentine only by the lucky arrival of a cab. In spite of all the campaigning the new costume was never more than a public joke. It might have had a different history if it had come from Paris, the centre of fashion, instead of America. An attempt to revive it was made in 1882 by Lady Haberton, who pressed

its claims at an exhibition of “hygienic wearing apparel.” Something like it began really to have a vogue in the ’nineties, when the popularity of cycling madd it necessary for women to wear a more sensible costume than the skirt of the day. At first the cycling costumes, especially the French ones, showed the influence of the bloomer costume, but they soon became tweed knickerbockers, very like the men’s, and finally they were replaced by short and sensible tweed skirts. But Mrs Bloomer, who lived to see all this at last, did not see the modern open-air girl’s clothes. What would she think of the modern woman’s cult of exposing as much of the body as possible to the sun? She had much of the Victorian about her, as shown by this tribute from an admirer: “Whenever she appears in public Mrs Bloomer portrays that elegance of breeding so admired in our best women. If she should chance to come upon lowminded persons who utter uncomplimentary opinions, she neither drops her head in shame and pouts her lips, nor turns on her heel with a cold look of contempt. Instead, she just walks past them, her countenance indicative of purity and happiness, and her thoughts occupied with the goodness and wisdom of an all-wise Providence.”