WAR AND FASHION

New Zealand Listener, Volume 6, Issue 140, 27 February 1942, Page 18

WAR AND FASHION

When Men March To Battle, Women Change Their Clothes

¢¢ HE study of female fashion is very far from being the trivial pursuit it is sometimes considered," says James Laver. "The common view" (we presume he means the man’s eyeview) "is that the cut of a dress, the shape of a hat, a waistline high or low, the angle of a feather, are things quite arbitrary, decided by a small group of designers sitting in London, Paris or New York, and imposed willy-nilly on an unsuspecting and herd-like public. The history of costume confutes this view completely. There is a rhythm in dress, there is a meaning in fashion." Fashion, Mr, Laver goes on to say, is always the epitome of an epoch, and in it can be seen reflectéd in miniature the whole of an age. If this is so, we can expect to see the history of a nation reflected in the costume of its women, But not all the more important social, economic, or political changes are commemorated in woman’s costume, In fact fashion often seeks its inspiration from more personal, romantic quarters. Rather than an expression of great historical changes, women’s clothes often seem to be merely an expression of the mood of the passing moment.

‘When War Is Picturesque If this is so in what way does war affect fashion? If we look back over the nineteenth century it appears as though the minor wars have had far more immediate effect upon woman’s clothes than the major ones. To be really satisfactory as a subject worthy of fashionable record a war should be quaint and colourful. The further removed it is from woman’s daily life the larger will be its yield of exotic and picturesque ideas for her adornment, And the 19th century was particularly rich in little wars, .The Bolivar hat of 1825, the burnouse in 1856, the cuirasse bodice and dolman of the ‘seventies may all be traced back to the successful little wars of the last century. But all wars are not picturesque. If we consider the more important wars of the last’ century and a half we see that their direct effect, on fashion has been considerably less than their direct effect on history. In her dress woman is an escapist. She tends to ignore the unpleasant, and thus her costume seldom commemorates events, however topical, which have unpleasant associations for her. Thus, although khaki was the colour for women’s dresses in the first year of the Boer War, it did not outlast our first few months of victory. Indirect Effects But if the two big wars of the last century and a half had little direct effect on fashion they have made up for it by their indirect effect. A major war (on» which gravely disturbs the domestic life of the average woman) always produces at first psychological and later economic results which are reflected in her fashions. And this is

shown in the effect upon feminine attite of the Napoleonic Wars and of the First Great War. The first effect of a major war on fashion is an increased elaboration and an increased femininity in dress. Man overnight becomes a hero. The creature who was formerly a prosaic fellow-in-habitant of the globe is now endowed with the glamour of a uniform-symbol that he is about to give up all for woman’s protection. She is increasingly conscious of him. ; ; She redoubles her efforts to attract. If appealing for his protection her costume becomes more wistfully feminine, if claiming his attention it may become more audacious. But it does not remain indifferent.

Daring Styles The Napoleonic Wars affected the English domestic circles only gradually, but by the turn of the century warmindedness was infecting the rising generation and feminine modes became as daring as possible. Military and naval designs were adapted for feminine use. Presently the economic factor began to rear its ugly head, and we find cotton jn the form of muslin replacing the silk that could be smuggled only at great cost from France. With the opening of the Peninsular campaign. in 1808 all sorts of Spanish effects were introduced, though’ the gayer note permitted by the approach of final victory did not seriously threaten the note of classical simplicity characteristic of female fashion. As The War Went On In Great War No. 1 women for almost the first time in history found themselves active participants. The effect on fashion was naturally profound. > For the first year or two costumes remained piquant and attractive — there’ were flounces and feminine furbelows. Striking hats with a military or naval flavout made _ themselves noticed. Then as the war dragged on there was both an economic and a psychological reaction, Materials became dearer and the cheap dressmaker replace the modiste. Less aterial could be used and elaboration’in the form of frills and embroidery was no longer possible. And hand in hand with this economic change went the psychological. In the first; year or so of the war woman was standing on the sidelines cheering on her man, and her céstume was designed to attract and (Continued on next page)

WAR AND FASHION (Continued from previous page)

fiatter him. But now she was taking an active part, and whether she was in or out of uniform her costume tended to be influenced by it, so that straight lines and trimness replaced furbelows and femininity. The Corset is a Symbol Wars are usually followed by periods of social change. If we look back over the history of/ costume we will notice that ir times of settled prosperity and commercial well-being woman's costume becomes more elaborate, and the more elaborate and cumbersome her costume the more restricted her activity. Thus in times of social upheaval, woman's costume tends to grow less, and woman's greater degree of freedom is reflected in the greater freedom of her dress. We can see this in both the period following the Napoleonic Wars and that following the Great War. In _ both periods underclothes were reduced to a minimum, and the corset, usually a sign of woman’s captivity, was either completely discarded or appeared as a mere reminder of its former self. The flinging away of the corset is a symbolic gesture. It means female emancipation and always-accompanies it. Once tight-lacing has gone there is no reason why waists should remain in their norma! position. And a waist line either below the bosom, as in 1800, or round the hips, as in the nineteentwenties, is in general more flattering to the younger woman than the older. The abnormal waistline is therefore a symbol of the revolt of youth against maturity. When Women Must Work But whereas after the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars woman’s emancipation gave her merely added freedom of conduct and action, after the Great War it gave ‘her a job. Woman’s costume in the ’twenties was striving to adapt itself to a wholly new -concaption of social life in which Woman suddenly found herself Man’s rival. It was essential that she appear youthful and efficient, and so fussy futilities were abolished from her dress and every woman was clothed like a schoolgirl. In the presen. war we are still in the first phase of war’s effect on fashion -the increased emphasis on the sexattractive power of costume. The waistline is normal, and silhouettes are feminine. We are still at the stage where we flaunt mementoes of war in our headgear, glengarries modelled on the air force, peaked felts imitative of those worn by men of the services. There is a jaunty army or naval flavour about the new jackets. But even from the beginning of this war, excessive femininity and elaboration have been modified by the economic factor, and ‘shortage of materials and rationing in France and England have succeeeded in hastening the coming of the second stage of war’s effect on fashion. But as the war goes on we may assume that woman’s ordinary dress will approximate more and more closely to the uniform as competence becomes an asset of greater value to the individual and the community than oomph, glamour, or sex-

appeal.

M.

I.