'Fighting the Corsetless Evil': Shaping Corsets and Culture, 1900-1930 Author(S): Jill Fields Source: Journal of Social History, Vol

Peter N. Stearns

'Fighting the Corsetless Evil': Shaping Corsets and Culture, 1900-1930 Author(s): Jill Fields Source: Journal of Social History, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter, 1999), pp. 355-384 Published by: Peter N. Stearns Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3789627 Accessed: 02/02/2010 08:00

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pns.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Peter N. Stearns is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Social History.

http://www.jstor.org 'FIGHTING THE CORSETLESS EVIL': SHAPING CORSETS AND CULTURE, 1900-1930

By Jill Fields California State University, Fresno

During the nineteenth century virtually all free-born women in the United States wore corsets. Yet from mid-century onward the purpose and meaning of the corset generatedheated debate among physicians, ministers, couturiers, feminist dress reformers,health and hygiene activists, and advocates of tight- lacing. Their lengthy argumentsuggests that keeping women in corsets was an ongoing project. In the early twentieth century these corset debates intensified. Turn-of-the- century corset styles became even more constricting and thus protests against their use gained ground.In addition, young women in the 1910s began to reject the Victorian moral sensibilities-and the fashions inspired by them-which symbolicallyand literallyrestricted women's mobility in both private and public spheres. Women's claims to wage work, to academic and physical education, to public protest over access to suffrageand birth control, and to pleasurable leisure activities such as dancing at tango parties all brought daily corset wear into question. However, in this period, corset defendersgained a powerfulnew ally. The most vigorous supporterof corsetry became the well-organizedand well-funded Corset ManufacturersAssociation, founded in 1907. Arguments supportingcorset use changed as a result. Yet, though most women continued to wear corsets, demandsfor more comfort in clothing and the rising appeal of "modernity"as a sales tool changed their shape. G.B. Pulfer,treasurer and generalmanager of the KalamazooCorset Company, explained in the trade journal Corsets& Lingeriewhy women wore corsets in 1921:

Fear!Fear of ill health,fear of saggingbodies, fear of lost figure,fear of shiftless appearancein the nicestof clothing,fear of sallowcomplexion. Fear sends them to the corsetiere,trembling; the samecorsetiere from whom they fled mockingly a coupleof yearsback, at the beckof a madstyle authority who decreed "zat ze body mustbe freeof ze restrictions,in orderzat ze newstyles shall hang so freely."'

Pulfer addressedthese comments to the journal'snational readershipof corset manufacturers,retailers, department store buyers,and saleswomen. His article was one of a series addressingindustry concerns about women'scontinued consent to wearingcorsets, and part of an intensive coordinatedeffort by manufacturersto revitalize and revamppro-corset argumentation. Thus, Pulfer'sarticle also addressedthe fear of corset manufacturers.Their fear, which exploded on the panickedpages of Corsets& Lingeriethroughout the early 1920s, was of losing control over how and when women changed the way they dressed.2 Scholarship on nineteenth-century women's history and dress explores the power of corsets to regulate women's behavior as well as to signify women's 356 journalof social history winter 1999

Figure 1 1921 Kalamazoocorset. Women's & Infants' Furnisher (January 1921), p. 34.

subordinatestatus. Studies by Helene Roberts,David Kunzle,Lois Banner and Valerie Steele demonstratethe well-establishedand lasting iconic power of the corset as a conveyor of social meaning. As these scholars disagree about just what that meaning was for female corset wearersas well as for corset defenders and opponents of both sexes, their studies also make abundantlyclear that the corset became a locus for a numberof competingsignifications. To move beyond previouscorset controversieswe thus need to asknot only how dressingpractices function as structuresof domination or as resourcesof resistance,but also how these functions are instituted and why these practicesgenerate both contested and contradictory meanings. These questions addressnot only the history of FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 357 the corset as a pervasiveand persistentarticle of women'sclothing, but also the history of how the corset'smeanings affected women's lives as they struggledto alter the shape of femininity and gender relations.3 Building upon earlier studies, this article picks up the chronology with the turn-of-the-centuryperiod when use of the rigid nineteenth-century corset declined, and continues through the firstdecades of the twentieth century when challenges to the corset intensified. Significantly,this time frame also encom- passes an era of heightened agitation for women's political, sexual, economic and social equality. Yet we also know that achievements in one period do not prevent backlashesin succeedingdecades. Analysis of how the commercialized practice and ideology of corsetryworked in significant ways to form the way women viewed, imagined,and experiencedtheir own bodies can help us understand both the persistence and reshapingof problematicgender structuresand identities. Fashionsin dressare particularlyuseful for analyzingculture as contested terrain because a central defining element of fashion is change. Controlling the direction of this change is difficult, not only because of the fashion industry's perpetualdependence upon innovation but also because of the simple fact that everyone wearsclothes. As a result,the apparatuswhich monitorsdressing practices, evident in written and unwritten dress codes and their enforcement by myriadsof "fashionpolice," is widely dispersed.The accepted power of clothing to express identity, in such categoriesas gender,personality, sexual preference, class, and social status, heightens the stakes for how fashion changes take place and take shape. Fashion, both a system of signification and a set of regulatory practices, is thus an arenaof social struggleover meaning.4 Corset manufacturers'coordinated response to women'snew widespreadde- fiance of older fashion standards,which enlisted corset saleswomen to deploy their merchandisingcampaign against the "corsetlessevil," emphasizedyouthful standardsof beauty,developed scientific discoursethat viewed the female body as inherently flawed,and connected ideologiesof racialpurity, national security, and heterosexualprivilege to corset use. Examiningthe marketingstrategies developed and disseminatedto keep women in corsets, as well as the oppositional practices which these strategies sought to corral, reveals how the corset's in- strumentalitychanged in the twentieth century.Nineteenth-century efforts to keep women corseteddrew upon, legitimatedand constructedparticular notions about femininity,propriety, and the femalebody. In the twentieth century,corset discoursesalso incorporatedideas about race, nation, and the importanceof science and modernity to everyday life. The meanings corsetry impressedupon women's bodies thus shifted with industrialization,as women's fears of aging, imperfect,inferior, unfashionable, and unscientific bodies replacedearlier fears of moral turpitudeand questionablerespectability. And most significantly,in- dustrialists'fear of diminishingprofits played and preyedupon the long-standing fear of unrestrainedwomen.

After 1900 corsets got progressivelylonger on the hips, and the top of the corset moved down the torso toward the waistline. The popularityof the un- 358 journalof social history winter 1999 comfortable S-curve corsets favored by Gibson Girls of this era, which threw the bust forwardand the buttocks back, declined after 1905 with wider use of straight-frontcorsets. The S-curve blunted the athleticism and mobility of the Gibson Girl, and the obvious manipulationof the body necessaryto create the S-curve silhouette was an easy target for anti-corset agitation which defended the "natural"body. However, the necessityof wearinga corsetwas also vigorously defended throughoutthis period, and, once the straightfront corsetssucceeded the S-curve corsets, anatomicalreasons were stressedas the basisfor the corset's necessity.5 Havelock Ellis was among the expertscited in the popularpress who claimed that female humansrequired corseting because the evolution from"horizontality to verticality"was more difficultfor females than for males. "Womanmight be physiologicallytruer to herself,"Havelock Ellis insisted, "if she went alwayson all fours.It is becausethe fall of the viscerain womanwhen she imitatedman by standing erect induced such profoundphysiological displacements ... that the corset is morphologicallyessential."6 A supportingargument claimed that recent archaeological finds in Crete and Greece, in addition to the discoveryof cave paintings in Spain and France,proved that women had cinched their waists for the past 40,000 yearsdue to anatomicalnecessity. Thus, corsetingcontinued to be an evolutionaryrequirement. The extent to which presentconcerns colored the interpretationof ancient representationsmay be seen in the detection in cave paintings of the "debutanteslouch," a hunched posture popularizedby young women in the 1910s.7 Straight front corsets continued to be quite long over the thighs in order to conform the body to the slimmer line of skirts. These longer corsets could be extremely confining, as wearing one actually made it difficult to bend the legs enough to sit down. The binding of the legs persistedwith the notorious "hobble skirt" introduced in 1908, which had an extremely narrow hemline around the ankles that inhibited walking. Frenchcouturier Paul Poiret relates his claim to invention of the hobble skirt to another claim, that of successfully waging "warupon [the corset]."Poiret states in his autobiography,"Like all great revolutions, that one had been made in the name of Liberty-to give free play to the abdomen:it was equally in the name of Libertythat I proclaimedthe fall of the corset.... Yes, I freed the bust but I shackledthe legs."8 Women in the United States did not toss away their corsets en masse after Poiret'sintroduction of dressesdesigned to be worn without corsets.Achieving the fashionable line actually still requiredmost women to be corseted. In fact, Poiret's corsetless fashions were in part an appropriationof design ideas from the culturalfringe which he marketedto the middleclass. Since the nineteenth century, the idea of abandoning the corset had been floating in the margins of feminist dress reform and of aesthetic and communitarianmovements. In addition, turn-of-the-centuryhealth and hygiene movements, as well as the availabilityof bicycles, encouragedactive play for adult urbandwellers. Further- more, growingnumbers of women experiencedthe benefitsof organizedsports in women'scolleges. Women'saccess to sportsand physicalexercise in this period heightened their desire for less restrictivegarments and promptedthe development and marketingof sportscorsets made of lighterand moreflexible materials. Embeddedin sportscorsets was thus a measureof give and take between women's FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 359

Figure2 The long corsetof the 1910s. Women's& Infants'Furnisher (January 1910), p. 40.

"P.N Corsets

ModeltotStl tEvery Ft . .ltSUI N Prvnes,rl wreomr." to ..

L NEWMAN& SONS Ig BROADWAY - NEW' YQRK

n~ q~ *V A:t,~ tKl HS

demandsfor greater comfort and freedomof movement and manufacturers'needs for profitsfrom continued corset sales.9 By 1914 another popularphenomenon, the tango, also affectedactive Amer- ican women's corset use. Women began removing their stiff corsets at parties in order to dance, and corset manufacturersresponded once again by marketing dance corsets. But, like the flapperherself, who appearedin the mid-1910s .

360 journalof social history winter1999

Figure 3 Sports corset ad, 1918. Women's & Infants' Furnisher (April 1918), p.10.

I A

:- i --- I ___...... __....._...... ---.Zi[1l ..,.__... n but was not to gain mainstreamattention if not cause outright alarmuntil the next decade, corsetlessnessremained a situational phenomenon practicedby a daring minority of mostly young and slim women at this time. Yet, while Vogue conceded in 1914 that "the mode of the corsetlessfigure is an establishedone- for a season, at least," it also noted that "the point has been reached where women do not have to be dictated to, as formerly,in the matter of corsets." Rather than doing away with corsets entirely, Vogueargued that since many corset models were now available "the present mode is not a uniform one.... A year ago where one or two corsets would answer,it is now not a luxury,but a necessity, to have a greaternumber, and each of a differentsort." Thus, corset manufacturers'decision to supplywomen with lighter and more flexible corsets was not mere concession, but also a meansto increasethe total numberof corsets sold. Nonetheless, increasingthe numberof corset styles available also created a situation in which a monolithic fashionabilitybegan to dissolve, and women's power to determine their own shape within fashionabilityexpanded.'0 Vogueduly noted the dangersof women's expanded power in a 1917 article entitled "WomanDecides to SupportHerself." Giving sportswomenthe credit for the initial blow toward"undermining the powerof fashion"while also casti- gating her "absurdwillingness to supporther figurewithout external aid,"Vogue then proceedsto analyze"the fatal mistakeof couturiers"which caused this turn of events. Couturiers,Vogue explains, did not foresee the ramificationsof their FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 361

Figure4 "A back-lace corset on the tango order ... " Women's & Infants' Furnisher (February1914), p. 31.

a1_'~~ ~ ~-, ~ ;:...-..i.?:i ... U.'_Y. ME g -

i O ..E A R A c BB u ^L :...: N C :; A corset on the tiaot wkbtruivbbr pebin'ac r.'i ack-lace augo orderf, f':ligb-rade x cose the top, and laving the new "lfish-ahad' clap. Practilyl.' boneles From the Intesationa ConsetCo. , ......

? PMi~~~~aa~~~;~~~==i~~~~E-~~~:~~~~~~~~a~~a~.Fe I M '.../yi? 362 journalof social history winter 1999 recent designs based on the so-called "naturalfigure." Significantly, shaping a woman'sbody into the "naturalfigure" required looser corsets than those worn previously.When couturiersattempted to reimpose a more constricted waist, "the unexpected, the unprecedented,happened. Women refusedto wear them; they actually did that unheard-ofthing." Eventually,according to Vogue,fashionable women and couturiersreached a compromise-waists would be taken in, but not much.11 Women's desiresfor self-sufficiency,alluded to in the article'stitle, were not, of course, limited to the sphere of dress. Agitation for suffrageand birth control was in full swing by 1917, including daily picketing in front of the White House until the passageof women'ssuffrage in 1919. In addition, once World War I ended, some of the mid-1910s sub-culturaltrends hit the mainstream. Shorter skirt lengths, which resulted in the shocking appearanceof women's bare legs, became a focus of controversy.While ministersadmonished from the pulpits, college deans instituted dresscodes, and women formedshort skirt de- fense leagues, debates raged in the popularpress over what was seen as either the new immodestyor the new freedomin women'sdress and behavior.12 Debatesregarding the redefinitionof women'spropriety took place in a context of uncertainty duringpost-war reconstruction. In 1919, an unprecedentedfour million workersparticipated in over 3000 strikes to consolidate wartimegains and achieve further improvementsin working conditions. Employerscharac- terized this labor unrest as unduly influencedby the Bolshevik revolution, and saw both as merely the firststage in the undoing of the currentworld order.In 1920 the Department of Justice respondedto this fear by arrestingthousands of radicalsand deportedhundreds of immigrantsto quell opposition. Known as the Red Scare, this state suppressionof dissent disruptedmany lives and raised troubling questions about the government'srole in maintaining power at the expense of constitutional freedoms.13 The constructionof corsetlessnessas a dangerousevil drewupon similarmoral languageemployed in the domesticsuppression of radicalism.Corsetlessness had, after all, been long identified with radical feminist and utopian movements. Confusion also persisted about which post-war changes were American and modern, and which foreign and menacing. New York City resident Mildred Rosenstein, for example, whose lifelong anti-communismprobably began in those years, was called a Bolshevik by her brotherwhen she bobbed her waist- length hair in the late 1910s. As late as 1925 a reporton corset manufacturer's efforts to "reestablisha vogue for their wares,"related the currentposing of the "query,'are corsets only another obsolete tradition to be cast aside," to "the uncharteredfreedom of the Bolshevist figure."14

Tradejournals were an industrymechanism for disseminatingpro-corset argumentation. In 1921, Corsets& Lingerieidentified corsetlessness as a dangerous and evil fad. According to subsequenttrade accounts this fad began afterthe end of World War I. However,as we have seen, corsetlessnesshad been a twentieth- century "look"since Poiret'sintroduction of corsetlessdresses in 1908. Vogue magazineacknowledged this fashion trend in a 1914 pro-corsetarticle entitled FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 363

"Corsetingthe CorsetlessFigure." That same yearCorsets & Lingerienoted "the popularity... of the corsetlessfigure," and a 1915 ad for foundationsadvertised its product on a similarbasis. Yet six years later, this trade joural expresseda decided panic aboutcorsetlessness. Moreover, it continued to referto the specter of the evil corsetlessfad throughoutthe 1920s.15 In his 1921 Corsets& Lingeriearticle, "Fightingthe Corsetless Evil," G.B. Pulferdescribed industry strategies working to stifle corsetlessness:

The samepublicity media which spread this firstcorsetless fad story... is now being utilizedto spreadthe storyof danger,the warningthat has arousedour sanewomen to righteousfear, the warningthat's sending them back to the corset shop ... in droves.... Whenit wasannounced that no corsetshall now be therule, it wasexpected that the Americancorset manufacturer and the merchantwould gasp,then bowtheir heads in gentleand piteous submission to the commandsof the Parisianboulevardier. But did they? They did not..... The publicitycampaign thatsprang into life immediatelycould not have been more ably managed if it had been underone directinggeneral.... The corsetmanufacturers have floodedthe tradewith literatureand advice on how to spreadthe truestory of the corsetless fad.The newspapershave helped considerably.16

Pulfer concludes by exhorting readersto "keep your literature going out Mr. Corset Maker;keep your customersinformed, Mr. Dealer." Trade journal articles, such as "Evilsof the No-Corset Fad,""Flappers Are Responsiblefor CorsetlessCraze," and "EminentSurgeons Endorse the Corset," indicted corsetlessnessas a threatening menace. Reasons given included dissi- pation of muscularstrength, injuryto internal organs, corruptionof standards of beauty, damage to moral fiber,contamination of race pride and purity,and destruction of American sovereignty.Some of these contentions, particularly the medical and hygienic, had been articulatedpreviously as partof nineteenth- centurydebates about the corset.Other claims, like the patrioticand racial,were more recent concerns.17 The identification and explication of corsetlessnessas an evil fad not only served to bolster support among those whose livelihoods depended upon the continuing use of the corset, but also armed the industrywith the weapon of ideology. As G.B. Pulferquite openly pointed out, this ideology could then be furtherdisseminated in a rangeof tactical discourses,from public advertisements in mass circulationprint media to private conversationswith women customers in the intimacyof corset fitting rooms.This deploymentof pro-corsetideologies, culled from the discoursesof professionalizedmedicine, the eugenics movement, and Victorian constructions of femininity, and their circulation through mass media and the marketplace,reveal how manufacturersconstructed the corset as an instrumentof culturalhegemony. Extreme assertionsin the tradejournals about the wide-rangingdetrimental effects of corsetlessnessconvey the panic manufacturersfelt about the potential for women to stop wearingcorsets. Panic is also revealedby many contradictory statements that at one moment expressrelief over the fad'sdemise, at the next moment state the continuing need to exhort against it, and end by bemoaning the fad'songoing effect on sales and profits.In addition, panic can be sensed in confused comments regardingmanufacturers' continuing ability to manipulate 364 joumal of social history winter 1999 women's fickle fashion sensibilities.Moreover, the sensibilitiesexpressed in the tradejournal articles seem to emanatemore fromemotion than fact because the authors never produce any concrete data to supporttheir anxious fears about declining corset sales. As one popularmagazine put it, "Naturallythese groups of elders are in a panic-'Are corsetsdoomed?' "18 The post-wareconomic depressionof 1920 to 1922 also contributedto the climate of anxiety.The clothing industrywas one of the firstto decline, in April 1920. Priorto this time, productionhad finallyreestablished levels close to those in force beforethe 1914-1915 depression.In other words,1919, a yearof "general prosperityand expansion"in the industry,was followed by yet another slump. The lowest level of employmentreached in the garmentindustry occurred in June 1921, and was 35% below June 1914 levels. Figuresfor the underwearindustry, which did not include corsets,show a dramatic50% drop in sales between 1920 and 1921. Profitabilityin that sector of the tradereturned in 1922, though sales remained below 1920 levels for several years.19 Census statisticsfor the corsetindustry, however, indicate insignificantchange in the value of products manufacturedbetween 1919 and 1921, and a 3.2% increasebetween 1921 and 1923. Therefore,there is no evidence to substantiate a frightening drop in corset sales, especiallyconsidering the depressionin the garment industryand in the U.S. economy generally.In fact, the corset industry managed very ably through this short, but sharp,economic decline. Thus, the corset panic looms even largeras a strictly ideological phenomenon, spawned by wider circumstancesof social transitionand economic upheaval.20 The three tactical strategiesof the corset panic articles-denial, attack, and incorporation-utilized assertionsdrawn from medicine, politics and the culture of beautyand fashion, but not economics. Corsetmanufacturers and department store buyers,often the authorsof these articles,drew on proscriptivediscourses to infuse corset use with ideologies of domination. As a result, corset manu- facturersas well as the dominating classes as a whole benefitted because these discoursescirculated in new ways, including the furthercommodified probing of female flesh. The successfulimposition of dominant ideologies via the corset thus worked to reinscribe women's subordinationgenerally. Corset manufacturers'panic about losing control over their female marketwould be eased by invoking, and thus reenforcing,broader structures of control. Denial of the fad's existence worked as a strategy to mitigate the fears of people in the trade. It also reproducedthe deflatingidea that corsetlessnesswas not popular, and therefore not fashionable. In a July 1921 interview entitled "CorsetsStill In Vogue,"Miss O'Neill, a departmentstore corset buyer states that "while the fad for the corsetlesseffect is still raging, it is more a matter of 'effect' than of actuality."Manufacturers accommodated modern sensibilities by offering the new lighter and more flexible girdle to women as the up-to-date alternative to the corset. Though girdles initially were considered appropriate only for smallerwomen, the ElastowearManufacturing Company opened up the girdle marketby producingElasto girdles for "stoutwomen." Trade journals also discussedthe importanceof renamingcorsets as girdlesin orderto shakeoffpasse connotations. In addition, the older corset itself wascited as the cause of current figureproblems which requirednewer corsets and girdlesfor correction.21 Assigning blame for the instigationand spreadof the corsetlessfad was, how- '-i ?p C) 3 3: c g ,- oQ z 11111 C) ... ZX rs: p c: .- I ?cC~ , ( D P" "' EJ :: *"13

I;L ;1 CI* (,, cA , iv

i;p rE a Irs 2 F *' *"r \O " 6)3 (: '" L113sr r J

ir FZ"t r E It i. rZ . a " ?r f) ,, crrJ 17 3E Illjt : Pos

U *W MOON . .oKS,tP:1S.4^+#r_:illl.llF1ss 366 journalof social history winter 1999 ever, problematicfor manufacturers.Laying the blame on Parishad its appeal, but was also double-edged.Ultimately this argumentundermined manufacturers' desires to keep women under the sway of elite style makersas much as possible. The idea of a top-down fashion regime appealed to manufacturersbecause it provided a more controlled progressionof fashion changes. Breakingdown the importanceof Parisas arbiterof fashionabilitycould be dangerous. One way out of this dilemmacan be seen in an articlefrom August 1921 entitled "ParisianWomen WearCorsets." This articleclaimed within one paragraph that Parisianwomen had gone without corsets in past years,that the idea circu- lating in the United States in 1920 that these women weren't wearingcorsets was erroneous,that the corsetless trend in Franceexisted but was exaggerated in the American press, and that in any event, all French women, including couturiermannequins, were wearingcorsets once again. Three months later an article entitled "Parison the Corset Question"reasserted Parisian hegemony.

The questionof corsetsor no corsetsas raisedby the recentstyles put forward by the foremostParisian couturiers is beinganswered by Parisiancouturiers in a characteristicallyParisian fashion. The new corsetsare morelike the corsetless figurethan the corsetlessfigure itself.... Thatis Parisiancleverness all over.They have madea figuremore natural than the naturalfigure and far morebeauti- ful.... 22

American women's distinctiveness provideda basis for other argumentsre- gardingnationality. In a curiousCorset and Underwear Review article called "The American Woman and Her Corset,"columnist Gertrude Nickerson claimed that American women must wear restrictivegarments because she hasno definitetype. We area compositerace of women.... [who]must acknowl- edgeour mixed blood and, while we arevery proud of it, let usnot forgetjust what it meanswhere our figure is concerned. As wedevelop and approach maturity some "wayback"foreign grandmother, or severalat once,may and most likely will make herhereditary attack upon us.... Wenow realize that we have indeed a handicap which we must accept as a resultof our mixed races.We can understandnow why the realAmerican woman requires her corsetor confiningfoundation for figure trainingmore than her sistersoverseas.23 Sisters closer to home unfortunatelybore the brunt of racial argumentation. Mr. Leonard Florsheim,Corset and BrassiereAssociation Vice-Presidentand head of KaboCorset Company, constructed the spectreof the "grotesque"Indian squaw to safely position white middle-classAmerican women between overly sophisticated French women and uncivilizedNative American women. In his November 1921 Corsets & Lingerieinterview entitled "The Evils of the No- Corset Fad," Florsheim first preyed upon fears of corsetlessnessas a cause of prematureaging and a thickenedwaistline before launching into his racialattack.

The Indiangirls are knownfor shapelybody lines in theiryouth, despite the fact that they neverget a chanceto enjoythe protectionof corsetor brassiere. Theygrow and develop "wildly." But at the agewhen they acquire the sobriquetof squaw,what a transformation!Squaws, especially those who have become mothers, arewell knownfor theirgrotesque bodies. Nature has given them in youthwell developed,shapely lines, muscles that withstand the firstscore and ten, but then FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 367

nature changes her course and begins to add weight that graduallyrounds out and converts form into the well known "mattress-tied-in-the-middle"proportions.24

Florsheim'sdepiction allowed white women to both identifywith and reject the impact of "nature"upon Native American women. Dutch surgeonDr. Jan Schoemakerbroadened the scope of racialconcerns in an interview printed the following month.

Firmly-muscledwomen are vital, charming,full of that potential race force which must be coined into American supremacyamong men tomorrow.But we are not trying to breedAmazons, nor are we tryingto raisea race of Oriental dancers.Your corsetlessgirl has naturallyto fall into one classor the other.The momentyou beginto get too muchof the Amazonvariation, you begin to get fuzzyupper-lips withthem, and a frothytype of male,a sortof listlesslove-bird, sufficiently spineless to be ableto mateand marry the domineeringfemale of the Amazontype.25

According to the doctor, corsetlessnesspromoted dangerous transformations in male as well as female characterand anatomywith disastrousconsequences for the white American "race"and its globalprospects in the political and economic realignmentsof the post-warera. The homophobic hint about "fuzzyupper-lips" gained furtherembellishment by Dr. Schoemaker in his discussionof the exercise regime requiredin order to maintain muscularhealth without the use of a corset. Thereis in Hollanda Mrs.Dr. Mensendieck who undertakes this sortof workfor womenwho have ambitionsin that direction.She compelsthem to go through theirexercises absolutely nude, and on eachindividual of a class... shekeeps her eye. When a certainset of musclessag down, as of coursethey will, she criesout at the woman,'Keep that stomach in. Holdup therein the rear.'And so on.26 The liberationpromised by renunciationof the corset thus produceda new sort of subjugation.The requiredsubmission to bodily discipline entailed submission as well to the critical and intrusivegaze of a harshand clearlyunfeminine female authority. Schoemaker expounded further on the dangers of women's claims to new forms of authority in spheres outside of fashion and health. While the doctor conceded that women of a certain natural build may go without corsets, he disparagedthese active and politically engagedNew Women as failuresat being either men or women.

[T]hewoman with a tight-muscledtense abdominal wall, flat hips, mannish chest, is usuallyto be pitied.She is unfortunate.If shehas been produced and admired in quantitiesin England... it is not becausethe Englishare producing any health- ier race,but becausethe numberof biologicalmistakes among females are [sic] increasing.

He also linked this type of woman to feministswho favor corsetlessness."There is a certain strident type of woman publican abroad in the land today who welcomes any move towardfreedom appearing to registernew approximationto sex equality."However, the race will survivesuch women because "womenwho :

368 journalof social history winter 1999

Figure 6 Declaring the end to the "corsetless period." Corsets & Lingerie (November 1922), p. 7.

*' :; ,1?:l^ kti CM& -Pk ca r, co'. .. 44 gpleamthe wMjv o o butawgayson /wor to.. ? eth : P 1e ndifI sd to. nhanc

ide. by it, nti toda...... they ar -asomhedand alarmedat their.increased is,a mure and large.hps. andseekthe meas tobringback the

: corsetw-ill mt. all the demando . . yourtrade who wih to abandonthe corw ftad or the all-atoic girdle : and takethe next stepof the "treat o the perfectfi gure hesenew modelf BONaDO TON nd ROYALWORCESTERcor ac r . - : "allof made ik:sti ofped fancy tist, material; $15 and somem $to'm

a dozen; anotherof rocheat onFly : i:i:: : . .'.'ill'id- W.metA. va.ery th^ 11handome JS:e. .en BONoi =j8:'- =' : *: . * **' T.O*N made ofsilk broche at $36. .i . S .

W:rit.eo th-e arestoffice for sam- p*i.e--s.d it:odayatdnbeI the ir int your community to this time : se ly, ^ '& _. -; ' . im:t,:- -:j., " yr i~~i ":':':':i:':!''":ii~":::i:~:=:. :==':'"= : n~r~:',n~ ~ ?M~fi'i ? :" ." : : ROYAI.Wr ORCEiSTERCOMPA:NYCORSET N8w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. : ' ' 'atare the' Ant*p1 the Annt =OftYo WvoaMcrrryAt VktA I*itS NFwYoim CHcAGo SANF

* ' * . :".--V' ' - ' : : - '' z. I. ."I :" i~~ - -..' :_: ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..7_ '. _ ~_ol.": . .. Tn"tl 'ems COefs4 a_ .LWE4 elp ther#meN to t yo.* FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 369 imitate men arenot the kind that Nature selects to mother the next generation." Connecting corsetlessnesswith a dismissive portrayalof radical politics and ideas about racial degeneracy,Schoemaker attacks all three in an effort to stifle women's desires to control their bodies and their destinies in the post-suffrage era.27 In November of 1922 the Royal WorcesterCorset Company announced the "retreatto the perfect figure,"a figurewhich could only be created with the aid of a corset. Census figuresdo indicate an increasein corset manufacturers'profits for the following year. However, in what is perhapsa measureof their linger- ing anxiety, the trade journalscontinued to proclaim the end of corsetlessness throughoutthe decade.The "renaissanceof the corset"and a decline in popularity of the corsetlessfigure is noted as late as 1930, while Lily of Francepresident Joel Alexander assuredbuyers of the long-awaited return of "real corsets" in January 1935.28

A 1921 seriesof articleson specializedfitting procedures discusses the importance of corseting young girlsbecause they are the "futuremothers of our race."When this time arrivesmaternity corsets will protect not only her health, but also her child's. Utilizing the strategyof incorporation,the new 1920s emphasis on the science and artof corset-fittingacknowledged past discomfort, but laid the blame on the fit, not on the corset itself. The science of corset-fitting,often taught at special sessions organizedby corset companies, particularlyidentified a young girl's first experience in the corset shop as critically important in making her into a lifelong corset customer.29 The discursivelinking of corsetswith "science"dated back to the nineteenth century, with the use of medicinal argumentsfor corset promotion, and for combatting the health claims of opponents to corset use. Nineteenth-century doctors like brothersI. De Ver and LuciusC. Warner,founders of the Warer BrothersCompany in Bridgeport,Connecticut, named their late-1870s designs the "SanitaryCorset" and the "HealthCorset" to stresstheir healthful benefits. In the 1920s manufacturer'sreliance on scientific argumentsintensified, as they expanded marketingstrategies from the focus on corset design to include corset fitting.30 Corset fitting became a partof corsetselling and marketingafter the introduction of the straightfront corset, which needed "to be fitted in nearly every case." This resultedin the installationof corsetfitting rooms within most corset departments. ModartCorset Company Supervisorof InstructionBertha A. Strickler's 1925 publication, "The Principlesof Scientific Corset Fitting,"explained that recent changes in corsetrycompelled a greaterlevel of specializedtraining for corset fitters.The past practice of buying corsets over the counter was possible when corsets served the singularpurpose of suppressingthe waist. She claimed that fitting contemporarycorsetry required more than waist measurementbe- cause "todaycorsets are scientificallydesigned and must be scientificallyfitted." However, an earlieraccount providedan alternativeviewpoint, explaining that "these advantagesare not altogether new in the modem corset except in so far as they are now universalwhereas they were formerlyrestricted to the made-to- 370 journalof social history winter 1999 order corset or the ready-madeone of exhorbitantprice." The wide availability of ready-to-wearcorsets throughtheir massproduction and marketingchanged the nature of their consumption considerably.31 Recasting corset fitting as a science in the 1920s relied on the widespread knowledge and faith in the practicesof scientific management.The transformation of industrialwork in the early twentieth century through implementation of the concepts of efficiencyand rationalization,as well as the turn to technology for problem-solvingpromoted de-skilling of workers,and thus loss of an important basis of their power in the workplace.Utilizing the ideologies of scientific management, corset manufacturerstransformed the consumption experiences of saleswomen and their customerswhen they bought, sold and wore corsets. While this strategysought to keep women customersbound in corsets, it did, at least temporarily,give corset saleswomena measureof new status and prestige. However, women's bodies were literally the vehicle for the successfulshifting of scientific managementideologies from the workplaceto the marketplaceand the home.32 Manyof the majorcorset manufacturers sponsored special courses in "scientific corsetry,""scientific reduction," or "scientificcorset fitting."The courses took place most often in New YorkCity, where many corset companies'sshowrooms and factorieswere located, though companiesalso sponsoredcourses in regional commercialcenters like Chicago, Dallasor Atlanta. These coursesoffered a new way for companies to distinguish their product from others on the market. In addition, the coursesdemonstrated a company'sseriousness regarding women's medical health and their reliance on scientific methods to insure it.3 Some corset school curriculumsespecially stressed the importanceof medical knowledge for corset fitting. The InternationalSchool of Scientific Corsetry sponsoredby the InternationalCorset Companyincluded the subjectsof anatomy and medical fitting in its 1921 curriculum,which also covered modern merchandising, retail advertising,and "scientificsalesmanship." Kleinart's School of Scientific Reduction employed Dr. HarrietVon Buren Peckham in 1925 to explain in a series of lectures "the properway to reduce every part of the body, together with practicalsuggestions for fitting every type of figure."For the latter partof the course, Dr. Peckhamwas "assistedby expertfitters, competent models and an experienced sales woman."Attendees would also have the opportunity to "fit the reducerson a live model."34 The Modart Company'scourse included a section on "The Anatomical Re- quirements of a Corset,"which explained a medical condition called "ptosis." Modart claimed that most women sufferedfrom ptosis, "a loss in muscles of the power to contract."However, while improperlyfitted corsets caused ptosis, properlyfitted corsets were needed to arrestits development. Ptosis was particularly associated with the stress of "moderncity life to which women are not yet adjusted.... Constipation, debility,headaches, backaches, sallow complex- ion, appendicitis,general weakness are some of the ailments associatedwith this condition."35 Departmentstore retailersnationwide becamepersuaded of the value of sending their employees to corset fitting schools as evidence surfacedregarding the profit marginsof corset departments.In 1917 Women'sWear Daily credited the presence of trainedcorsetieres in departmentstores with increasingthe sales of FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 371

Figure 7 The International Corset Company directly addressed"Mr. Merchant" and "Miss Corsetiere" to engage them in the profitablediscourse of "scientific corsetry." Corsets & Lingerie (July 1921), p. 15.

.no:l 'Mr. MYMett education-di portantas a k should know miliar with.e .I. Mi"ssCa

New York,543 FifthA:w'

...... *.... " '-" ** ' i 372 journalof social history winter 1999 higher priced, and thus more profitable,corsets. Trained corsetieres also inhibited the number of returns and the need for alterations, the bane of retailers. Moreover,corset departmentsfrom the 1920s throughthe 1940s usuallyhad the highest profit marginsof all departmentswithin a store.36 The Warer BrothersCompany noted the profitabilityof corset departments in a 1921 tradejournal advertisement, citing a National Retail DryGoods Asso- ciation report.Warner's then arguedthat merchantswould see even betterprofits if they carried fewer corset lines. Their seven point plan for improvementsin retail profit-makingalso includedthe admonitionto "educateyour salesgirls that they can ably assistthe customerin her selection. It is the worstpossible mistake to sell a woman a corset that is not designedfor her figure."37 Corset schools primarilyserved to educate retailersand saleswomen on the finer points of selling their particularbrand. With the proliferationof types and styles of corsetsby the early 1920s, manymajor companies produced several lines of corsets for some variation of "stout,""average," and "slender"figure types.38 These figuretypes might be furthercomplicated by additional styles for bodies heavier on the top or the bottom, forthose long- or short-waisted,or by maternity and post-surgicalstyles. Companiesalso had differentstyle lines basedon price. As Good Housekeepingnoted, "Nowadaysa single corset company will have almost one hundredmodels, each one madeup in a varietyof sizes."Retail buyers and saleswomen thus needed to know quite a bit about how each company's productswere organizedin orderto determinewhich corset would best fit each customer.Companies were dependent upon saleswomen'ssuccessful mastering of this informationto sell their products.Warner Brothers, for example,sent out pamphletsin 1921 to corsetdepartments throughout the United States to explain their figuretype classificationsand the corsetsdesigned for each type, with the expectation that having an illustratedguide on hand woulddirect saleswomen to show and to sell Wamer'scorsets. Corsets & Lingeriealso endorsedcollaboration between manufacturersand retailersin a 1925 editorial,stating that "the lines which were going best were the lines in which the manufacturercooperated with the store in teaching the girls how to sell corsets."39 Corset companies'creation of figuretypes classification schemes also bolstered their claims to scientific validation of their products,and to the need for professional fitters. Each company'sclassification scheme correspondedto the corsets which they producedto fit each type. Selling retail buyerson a figureclassification scheme was thus a means of selling retailerson their line of corsets as well. Thus, these differentschemes did not usuallyconcur on the "scientific"classifi- cations of women'sbodies. Gossard'searly twentieth-century chart definednine figure types, Warer's 1921 classificationhad eight, and Berlei's 1926 study of Australian women found five.40 Figuretyping schemes allowed corset companiesto standardizeproduct lines and formed an organizingprinciple for merchandising.In 1929, the Bon Ton companyexplained that its chartof nine figuretypes, entitled "WhatFigure Type Are You?",forms "the basis of our entire merchandisingplan ... and makes possible for the first time real scientific control of fit, balanced model stocks, smaller inventories, fast turnoverand more sustainedprofits." Yet an unstated but critical element of this plan was persuadingwomen to identify with the figuretypes presented.Once a woman identifiedherself in terms of "her"type, FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 373 she would be more easilysold on the corset deemed appropriate,if not necessary, for her body.41 Commercial classificationof figuretypes intensified both the notion of the "problemfigure," and the identification of "figurefaults." Previously,corsets constructed the hour glass figureof the late nineteenth century by remolding women'sbodies into a generalcurved shape with a nipped-in waistline. Dressde- sign and strap-ongarments like bustlesprovided additional shaping. Twentieth- centuryouterwear was less elaborate,and constructedby fewerlayers of clothing. Foundation garmentsassumed the entire burdenof molding the body into the fashionable silhouette. The identification of figure faults thus came about as women'sbodies became more publiclyvisible. The greater public presence and freedom in body display and movement achieved by women in the 1920s were attenuated by this reformulatedand internalizedemphasis on female imperfection.Marketing corsets on their ability to solve "figurefaults" meant that the identificationof faults assumedgreater importanceas a persuasivemeans of guidingwomen into corsetswhich resolved their defects. Corset saleswomen,for example, were instructedto firstidentify a customer'sfigure type, and then her particularfigure problems. However, it was not necessarilyconsidered good form to point out figureflaws to customers.One saleswoman'sguide suggestedthat "the salesgirlsshould be cautioned never to point out figurefaults to a customer.If she had a roll at the waistline and a long girdle is selected to minimizethis, the salesgirlshould not say, 'That terribleroll will not look as bad with this corset.' Insteadshe should remark,'What a lovely, smooth waistline this girdlegives you. Yoursilhouette looks so well in it."' An- other guide admonished,"Never tell the stout customershe is stout. Emphasize the fact that she has good proportions.... Rememberyou are selling the joy of possession as well as comfort and fit."42 Figureclassification schemes and the identificationof figurefaults objectified and commodifiedwomen's bodies in new ways. Manufacturersand retailerscol- luded in subjecting women's bodies to the scrutiny and discipline of scientific rationalization.Corset saleswomenwere on the front lines of enacting the reg- ulation of women'sbodies throughcorsetry, and implementedcorset discourses to sell corsets. Ethel Allen, Supervisorof Instruction at the Kabo School of Corsetry,acknowledged this function, stating that "withevery sale by an expert corsetieregoes the all-importantand invaluablemessage to her customerof the properselection of a model and the propermethod of adjustment.They get the many 'dos and don'ts' of our profession,and the assurancethat a properlyfitted corset can be a thing of beauty,of comfort and of greatself-respect."43 The relationship between corset saleswomen and customers both worked against and assisted the rationalizationprocess. Exposing intimate figureproblems to a corsetiere,and grantingher the probingaccess to the body requiredfor measurementcreated a special relationship between customer and corsetiere. As Women'sWear Daily noted, "A corset fitter gets much closer to her customers than the averagesalesperson can. Customerstalk much more freely to their corset fittersthan they do the girl who sells gloves, and they are willing to confide, in a manner of speaking,to the fitter,because usually the corset fitter has her own clientele, who insist on coming to that particularfitter each time they purchasea new corset."Charlotte Drebing, a corset buyer for the Crosby 374 journalof social history winter 1999 BrothersMercantile Companyof Kansas,agreed. "Corset customers ... are the most appreciativepeople in the world. Becausea good foundationgarment can do such a vital job for a woman, she is eternallygrateful to anyone who helps her find one-and that's why any service you can give her is worth while."44 A corsetiereespecially benefitted from customers with identifiablefigure faults, as women's desires for rectificationpromoted dependence upon the corset fitter'sexpertise. Ethel Allen, referringto the problematicfull-proportioned figure type, knew "no other class of customerswho are more appreciativeand loyal," while the top-heavy figuretype "iswilling to pay almostany price for a garment which will give her comfortand at the same time give her the easygraceful figure she so much desires."The top-heavy figure"will not only give to the corsetiere her patronage but will become a loyal booster among all her friends and ac- quaintances."Another sales manualnoted that "the largerwoman knows she is difficult to fit, and is willing to pay more than the slender woman.Juniors and slender women can buy garmentsany place at any price, but the largerwoman, when correctly fitted, is everlastinglygrateful and becomes a loyal repeat customer."Large women customersalso augmentedjob prospectsfor largewomen as corsetieres,as "Mrs.Larger Woman feels morecomfortable when a largerwoman fits her."This customeralso provideda sourceof job satisfaction."Larger women are important to your businessbecause properlycorseted she looks 'smart'and gives you the feeling of having accomplishedsomething."45 The relationship between corsetiere and customerwas not without tension. One guide for saleswomen noted that "the worst faux pas of all is to say: 'I wear this girdle myself for my own roll.' No woman wants to be identified in any way with the salesgirl."46However, Ethel Allen avoided the potential for a subservientrelationship to customersinherent in the shopping encounter by positing an alternative metaphor.

As corsetieres we must never lose sight of the fact that we stand in the relation of a hostess to our guest, the customer,while she is in our shop or department. Were we serving afternoon coffee and one of our guests refusedcoffee we would immediatelysay, 'Let me make you a cup of tea.' Even so with our businessguests. If they are prejudicedagainst either front-lacedor back-lacedcorsets, show them first what you considercorrect. Call their attention to the correctivepoints of the garment for their particularneeds. Then if you cannot convince them that your judgement is correct, without argumentsimply give them what they want and give with it a sweet smile and willing service.47

The professionalization of corset fitting through specialized training, and as- sumption of the title "corsetiere" also bolstered these saleswomen's status with both customers and department store managers. Corset schools thus served to enhance manufacturer's promotional needs, retailer's profit margins, and corset saleswomen's power as workers, while also heightening the presence of "scientific" epistemologies and the processes of specialization in women's daily lives. Corset fitting manuals, usually written by experienced corsetieres employed as teachers in corset schools, consistently stressed the professional aspects of this work. Positioning the corsetiere as "physician to her customer's body," a role fostered by instruction in anatomy and the work of fitting maternity and post- FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 375 operative corsets, encouragedthe constructionof the corsetiereas professional. Jean Gordon, authorof"The Good Corsetiere,"published by the Strouse,Adler Company explained, "When one is ill, the patient wants the family doctor who comes to the bedside with a friendly,gracious attitude.... When a customer enters the corset departmentwith a sick figure,she too, wants kindness."48 Another strategyfor professionalizationcharacterized corset fitting as an art. "A new salesgirlmust be taught to considerher job as one of beautifyingwomen. Instead of workingwith cosmetics she workswith garments.Instead of beauti- fying the face and head she must improvethe entire body of her customer.It is in some cases a tall order.She may be called upon to achieve the impossible. But whatever she can accomplish helps to increase beauty and in this respect is a work of art." Ethel Allen noted that women seek "the services of a thor- oughly competent and trainedprofessional corsetiere, one who understandsall the alluring intricaciesof the human form divine."49

Figure type classification included the bodies of girls and younger women in the category of problem figures.However, their figureswere actually more of a problem for manufacturersbecause the "younggirl figure,"described as slim and "undeveloped,"did not conform to usualdescriptions of figuretypes which requiredcorseting. The 1920s corset panic heightened manufacturers'attention to the young girl figurenot only because younger women were most likely to achieve the corsetless look without a corset, but also because the fashionable 1920s silhouette was based on the young girl figure. By targeting the young girl figure and convincing women that this figurerequired a corset, manufac- turersthereby convinced all women concerned with fashionabilitythat corsets remained a necessity.50 The special corsetsdeveloped for the younggirl figurewere part of the growing specializationfor the youthfulmarket (termed "junior" by the late 1920s) taking place in the garment industrygenerally to increasesales. Corset manufacturers were especiallyinterested in exploiting the growingdistinction between clothing for youngerand older women because "the junior customerhas no set habits or buying tendencies which must be overcome"and thus seemed "to be a new hope for the corset industry."Lucien T. Warer noted "the necessity of courting this trade,for upon the youngergeneration of women the futureof the corset industry depends.... "51 Manufacturersstill maintained concerns that younger women in the 1920s might never wear corsets if they did not undergothe initiation into corset wearing that women had in previousgenerations. They looked closely at the circum- stances of a young girl'sfirst corset fitting in order to find ways of luring young women to a corsetiere.Once at a corset fitting, a young woman, and perhapsher mother, could also be drawn into corset discourseswhich worked to convince her of a life-long need of corsetry."Even the young girls who have never before ventured into a corset departmentfind a new delight in looking at the attractive garments,and convincing sales talk ... soon bringsthem into the fitting rooms." Concerns regardingthe initiation into corsetrypersisted into the 1940s, when 376 journalof social history winter 1999 Corsets & Brassiereadvised, "It may take urgingto get her into her firstgirdle, but your effortswill be rewardedas she blossomsinto a model customer.... It's up to you to win her confidence and build her into a life-long customer."52 Since the early twentieth century,the "collegegirl" had been identifiedas a customerwith special needs basedon age and lifestylerather than on figuretype perse. The college girlcategory also includedthe white collarworker, or "business girl,"whose corsetneeds presumablydiffered from older women who did not work outside the home. A 1910 advertisementfor H. & W. Sheathlyne Corset Waists aimed towardcollege girlsnoted that "byencouraging deep breathing,it quickly develops the chest and bust."In 1915 Wanamakers,a large departmentstore, created the firstspecial corset fitting room for young women who wear "misses" sizes. The Women'sand InfantsFurnisher felt that this innovation was "one of the most striking that has come out in some time," especially because of the "undevelopedpossibilities" of "cateringparticularly to young girls."

Oneof theprincipal reasons that very few retail stores have the business that should come to themin misses'corsets is the failureof storesto takeinto consideration the naturalreticence of girlsto enterinto anydiscussion of the individualcorset problemswith matrons and dowagers about. By providing a specialdemonstration and fittingroom for misses,it is safe to say that any storeso doing will reap the benefitof an immediateappreciation of thisdelicacy. And, since appreciation expressesitself in termsof dollarsand cents, it canhardly be otherthan a profitable investment.53

Manufacturersdid indeeddevelop this profitableconcept, and by 1929 Corsets & Brassieresincluded a monthly "JuniorDepartment" in each issue.Juniors were girls between 12 and 18 yearsof age, and the column often dealt with the special care requiredfor their commercial rite of passage."Each child is fitted as her individualneed requiresand for this workthere are special fitterstrained to care for the children..... The youngergirls do not like being disrobedand fitted, but now that the new silhouette is so apparenteven the 12-year-oldsare offering much less resistance."54 Miss Mildred Tucker,head of a corset departmentin Denver, discussedthe importanceof "tactfulness"in dealing with the "littlegirls and even college girls [who]are not quite usedto the returnof youth to corsets,which the new Princess line in dressstyles has necessitated."She explainedthat "tact ... usuallyconsists of compliments and direct conversation to the child." Another column noted, "Buyerswho are wise will put their best foot forwardto encourageand capture this class of customers."By March 1930 LucienT. Warnerreported that "a large number of smallersizes are being called for by the youngergirl."55 In July 1930 the Corset and BrassiereManufacturers Association laid plans for the firstNational JuniorCorset Week to take place the following September.56 This was a specialized version of the previouslyheld National Corset Week, a coordinated national advertisingcampaign by merchants,retailers and trade journals to boost corset sales. The need for a such a cooperative effort was explained by Corsets& Lingeriein a 1924 editorial.

WhyA Week?.... mostpeople found out theycould do a lot in a weekif theyall startedto talkat once andtalked long enough and loud enough.... If the corset FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 377

industrywants to putcorsets on everywoman and keep them there; all they'vegot to do is talka languagethat most American women understand-English. Talk to eachage-group of womenabout their particular corset problems and if the industry is smart,and economical as well, they'llalso get about10,000 merchants to do a lot of talkingfor them.... "57 The editorial also encouragedmanufacturers to imitate other branches of the garmentindustry in their use of "theprinciple" of style. Style playedan especially importantrole in the youngermarket, as the editorialnoted, "Ifcorsets were as crazyas some of the shoes we see, the flapperwould buy a pair of corsets with every new dress."58 The National JuniorCorset Week'spurpose was clear. "Insistentpropaganda has really arousedan interest on the part of the young girl, and buyersrealizing that they have succeeded in luring the girl into the departmentare tireless in these efforts to keep her interest."Lauding the junior departmentat Gimbel's Department Store in New YorkCity, Corsets& Brassieresreported that "every possible kind of restraininggarment that is manufacturedfor the young figure is found here ... made to appeal to the eye of the discriminatingyoungster.... There are many girls,not only the debutantesand society girlsbut even working girls who are willing to pay for better class merchandise,just as these girls have alwaysbeen fastidiousin the matterof their lingerie."The month following the JuniorWeek, Corsets& Brassieresreported "increased sales among the younger women in all the largerretail centers. Girls who never beforewore a foundation garment came in to buy some type of fashion-forminggarment and college girls stocked up generouslyfor the season'sneeds." Three years later, the trade journalstated that "nearlyall the storesnow have special sections in their corset departmentsdevoted to garmentsfor the young figure."59 Making lighter and more flexible girdles in junior sizes was one means of keeping young women in foundationgarments. These were available in increasing numbersas the means of producingelastic stretch fabricsimproved. In the 1910s elastic insets in corsets provided an early form of augmenting flexibil- ity. The number of elastic and rubbersections utilized in corsets increasedinto the 1920s. However, the primarilyelastic girdles available in 1921 were still considered a novelty item. Several years later, when the youth appeal of elastic girdles was more apparent,manufacturers' and retailers'resistance to them ended. By 1924 elastic step-in girdles were sold in corset departmentsnation- wide.60 As use of elastic girdlesspread, novelty status transferredto rubberreducing corsets, an extremely popularphenomenon for several years. One of the most well-known brands sold nationally was the Madame X. These controversial all-rubbercorsets were marketedon their ability to not only slim the wearer's appearance, but also to achieve actual weight loss. Manufacturersand retail buyersdebated the staying powerof rubbergirdles on the market,but acknowledged that their presence raised the price of foundationsgenerally. The ability to sell great quantities of the more expensive rubbercorsets let manufacturers and retailersknow that women were willing to pay more for corsets.61 378 joumal of social history winter 1999 The decline of the "boyshform"silhouette in the late 1920s, and the returnto the "womanly"figure in the 1930smeant a strongmarket for corsetry, even during the worstyears of the Depression.The industryhad respondedon manyfronts to the 1920s threat of the corsetlesslook. Profitabilitycontinued as the foundation market broadenedto include young girls, juniorsand college co-eds, as well as the numerousfigure types of older women. Identifyinga varietyof types allowed manufacturersto produce, and retailersto market,corsets aimed at particular groups of women. This strategyof segmentation also produced and marketed new understandingsof the female body, which personalizedand intensifiedthe presence of scientific discoursein women'sintimate everydaylife. The new perceptionsabout the femalebody which the industrydeployed also encouraged most women to accept identification in terms of flaws and faults and to thus construct their subjectivityin termsof self-negation.However, the industrywas unable to completely dismisswomen's desires for greatercomfort and freedom of movement. While the corsetlessfad did not free women from the obligation to be corsetted,some women were able to at least wear the more flexible and lightweightstretch girdles. Yet the popularityof even the light pantie girdleworn extensively in the 1930s did not mitigatecontinuing widespreaduse of more binding foundations. "All-in-one"garments, for example, which first appearedin the 1920s, firmlyshaped and controlled the entire torso from bust to hips. The well-organizedcorset industrycontinued to benefit from their persistent interventions in fashion changes and the construction of women's desires for "ideal figures."They reaped the resultswhen the waistline was once again ac- centuated in the 1930s, but at this point were too close to the corset panic yearsto rest on their laurels.Their ongoing machinationsreceived even greater rewardsafter the end of World War II when fashionablecorsetry returned with pinching vengeance and fetishizedglory in new structuredforms such as waist cinchers or "waspies"which supportedthe popular,and contested, New Look of 1947.62 Corsets' fading fashionabilityand their replacement by the new restrictive girdles in this period occurredwithin a processof contestation and negotiation among women who purchasedand wore these garments,manufacturers and retailers who producedand sold them, and fashion experts like departmentstore saleswomenand fashionwriters. As moralimperatives which controlledwomen's fashions declined, women sought, and in some measureachieved, greaterfree- dom of choice and mobility in dress. However, fashion industrialistsworked hard to maintain control over the shape of women'sbodies and over women's fashion choices. Drawingon modernistideologies, they counteredclaims about the damaging health effects of corset use by repositioningcorsets within con- temporaryscientific discourses,and refutedyoung women'srejection of corsets as old-fashioned by designing lighter and more flexible foundation garments and marketingthem as contemporarygirdles. Making use of existing fashion in- stitutions, including popularmagazines, trade journals,and departmentstores, and creating new ones, such as corset-fittingschools, corset manufacturersand retailers actively interceded in influencingfashion change. Women'sdemands for more comfortable attire, and their demonstratedwillingness to defy con- ventional notions of feminine propriety,prompted manufacturers' organized op- FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 379 position to the "corsetlessfad," and the subsequent development of policing strategies aimed at women of all ages. Their efforts sustained the importance of figureshaping garmentsas essential elements in women's wardrobes.While wearing these garmentswould no longer be a measureof a woman'smoral propriety,they could attest to her knowledgeof moderntechniques of constructing a fashionablebody, and the importanceshe gave to maintaining an up-to-date appearance.Women's "spontaneous consent" to wearingthese garmentswas an ongoing and contested processwhich served fashion industryneeds for contin- ual purchase.Innovations in dresswhich supportedwomen's desires for comfort would continue because industrialistssought not to end women's desires for fashion change, but to contain them. Throughoutthe early twentieth-centuryand in succeedingdecades, the high profit marginsof departmentsselling corsets, girdles and other foundation garments in stores nationwide provide one measureof the success of marketing strategies mounted by manufacturersand retailers.American women's continuing preoccupationwith conforming to particularnotions of beauty in regard to body size and shape serves as another.The late twentieth-centuryinterest in diet drugs and programs,willingness to undergo liposuction surgeryto reduce and reshapethe female abdomenand hips, and the strongsales of "bodyshapers," the currentterm for flexible foundationgarments, all demonstratethat women's strugglesgetting in and out of corsetshave not entirely ended. For,the meaning of these various methods of reshapingfemale bodies is not restricted to their immediate physical effect. As Michel Foucault notes, "the endlessly repeated play of dominations ... is fixed, throughoutits history,in rituals, in meticulous proceduresthat impose rights and obligations. It establishesmarks of its power and engraves memories on things and even within bodies."63Imbuing 1920s corsetrywith essentialistnotions about flawedfemale bodies, racial hierarchies, nationalist imperatives,dubious sexual identities, and suspect political stand- points inscribeddominant ideologies upon women'sbodies. Persuasivebecause of their power in other spheres,these particularmediations of women'srelation- ship with their own bodies long outlasted the corsets and girdles worn in the early decades of the twentieth century.

Departmentof History Fresno,CA 93740-8019

ENDNOTES I wish to thankscholars Lois Banner, Adrienne Hood, Ruth Linden, Tania Modleski, Steve Ross,Peter Stearns, and the anonymousreader of the JSH for their thoughtful commentsand helpful suggestions on earlierversions of thisessay. I alsowould like to ac- knowledgethe supportI receivedfor my research on thistopic from the Veronika Gervers ResearchFellowship in Textileand Costume History at the RoyalOntario Museum, and the StellaBlum Research Grant awarded by the CostumeSociety of America. 1. G.B. Pulfer,"Fighting the CorsetlessEvil," Corsets & Lingerie,November 1921, p. 30. 380 journal of social history winter 1999

2. Examplesof tradejournal articles sparked by panic regardingcorsetlessness include "The Evils of the No-Corset Fad,"Corsets & Lingerie,November 1921, pp. 24-25; "Flap- persAre Responsiblefor The CorsetlessCraze," Corsets & Lingerie,November 1922, p. 33; "EminentSurgeons Endorse the Corset,"Corsets & Lingerie,December 1921, pp. 32-35. 3. Helene E. Roberts,"The ExquisiteSlave: The Role of Clothes in the Makingof the Victorian Woman,"Signs: Journal of Womenin Cultureand Society(Spring 1977): 564- 569; David Kunzle,"Dress Reform as Antifeminism:A Response to Helene E. Roberts's 'The Exquisite Slave: The Role of Clothes in the Making of the Victorian Woman,"' Signs(Spring 1977): 570-579; Helene Roberts,"Reply to David Kunzle's'Dress Reform as Antifeminism: A Response to Helene E. Roberts's'The ExquisiteSlave,"' Signs(Winter 1977): 518-519; Joanna Russ,"Comment on Helene Roberts'The ExquisiteSlave: The Role of Clothes in the Making of the Victorian Woman,' and David Kunzle's'Dress Reform as Antifeminism,"' Signs (Winter 1977): 520-521; David Kunzle, Fashionand Fetishism:A SocialHistory of the Corset, Tight-Lacingand OtherForms of Body-Sculpture in the West (New Jersey,1982); Lois Banner,American Beauty (Chicago, 1983); Valerie Steele, Fashionand Eroticism:Ideals of FeminineBeauty from the VictorianEra to theJazz Age (New York,1985).

4. The concept of cultural hegemony is integral to analysis of culture as contested terrain. As the meaning of hegemony is also contested, please see Antonio Gramsci, Selectionsfrom the PrisonNotebooks, translated by Quintin Hoare and GeoffreyNowell Smith (New York,1971), especiallyp. 12, and RaymondWilliams, Marxism and Literature (Oxford, 1977), p. 110 for interpretationswhich inform the analysis presented here. See also more recent debates among culturalhistorians such as T. Jackson Lears,"The Concept of Cultural Hegemony: Problemsand Possibilities,"The AmericanHistorical Review (June 1985): 567-593, and George Lipsitz,"The Strugglefor Hegemony,"The Journalof AmericanHistory (June 1988): 146-150. In regardto culture and clothing, costume historiansgenerally, and feminist critics particularly,have long understoodthe powerof fashion to regulateand signify.However, the sensibilityexpressed here regarding fashion as a regulatorypractice draws upon Michel Foucault, The Historyof Sexuality, Volume1: An Introduction,translated by RobertHurley (New York),1978 and also upon Judith Butler'sanalysis of Foucault in GenderTrouble: Feminism and the Subversionof Identity(New York, 1990). This article is in some sense a response to Butler'scall for a "critical inquiry that traces the regulatorypractices within which bodily contours are constructed [that]constitutes preciselythe genealogyof 'the body'in its discretenessthat might further radicalizeFoucault's theory," p. 133. For semiotic analysisof fashion as a system of signification see Roland Barthes,The FashionSystem, translated by Matthew Ward and Richard Howard (New York, 1983). For an excellent discussion of many of the majortwentieth-century works of fashion historyand theorysee FredDavis, Fashion, Cultureand Identity(Chicago, 1992). 5. Elizabeth Ewing, Dressand Undress:A Historyof Women'sUnderwear (New York, 1978), pp. 110-113.

6. Havelock Ellis, "An Anatomical Vindicationof the StraightFront Corset," Current Literature,February 1910, pp. 172-174. 7. "HowPrehistoric Woman Solved the ProblemOf HerWaist Line,"Current Opinion, March, 1914, pp. 201-202. 8. Paul Poiret, My First50 Years,pp. 72-73.

9. Ewing, pp. 89-91, 93, 108-110; C. Willett and Phillis Cunnington, The Historyof Underclothes(London, 1981, 1951), pp. 87,114, 125-6; Norah Waugh,Corsets and Crino- lines(London, 1954), p. 87. See PeterWollen, "Outof the Past:Fashion/Orientalism/The Body,"in his Raidingthe Icebox:Reflections on Twentieth-CenturyCulture (Bloomington, 1993), pp. 1-34 regardingthe influenceof both the RussianBallet and the rationaldress FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 381 movement upon Poiret'sdesigns. Fashion layouts and advertisements,such as "New Low Bust Flexible Model" and "New Supple FigureCorsets," Women's and Infants'Furnisher, January1914, pp. 42-43 and "The Athletic Girl's Experience,"Bon Ton Corset advertisement, Vogue,May 1914, p. 93, displayedthe more flexible and sportscorsets. 10. Ewing,p. 120;Mitchel Grayand MaryKennedy, The Lingerie Book (New York),1980, p. 15. "A GracefulDancing Corset,"Women's and Infants' Furnisher, February 1914, p. 31. Banner,p. 176 offersevidence regardingthe emergenceof the flapperin the mid-191Os; "Where Efficiencyand Economy Meet," Vogue,April 1914, pp. 54-55. "Corsetingthe Corsetless Figure,"Vogue, January 1914, p. 58.

11. "WomanDecides to SupportHerself," Vogue, August 1917, pp. 67, 80. 12. See EleanorFlexner, Century of Struggle:The Woman'sRights Movement in the United States (Cambridge, 1959, 1975) and Linda Gordon, Woman'sBody, Woman'sRight: A Social Historyof BirthControl in America(New York, 1977) regardingthe suffrageand birth control movements respectively.The New YorkTimes reported extensively on the fashion debates. For example, see August 30, 1922, p. 17 regardingthe skirt length controversy;see January17, 1919, p. 5; February16, 1921, p. 15; February17, 1921, p. 6; May 22, 1919, p. 9; May 23, 1921, p. 15; June 15, 1921, p. 7 and June 21, 1921, p. 19 regardingmodesty and morality;and February26, 1922, p. 12 regardingcollege dress codes.

13. HowardZinn, A People'sHistory of the UnitedStates (New York,1980), pp. 366-372.

14. My grandmother,Mildred Rosenstein Schwartz (1902-1998), on many occasions provided me with historical data drawn from her life experience; "The Renaissance of the C-rs-t",The Independent,July 25, 1925, p. 88. 15. Corsets & Lingeriefirst identified corsetlessnessas dangerous in "BuyersAgainst CorsetlessFad: New YorkDepartment Store BuyersAll Against Fadand Say It Is On the Wane,"Corsets & Lingerie,September 1921, p. 27, 29. The firstassertion that it was also evil can be found in "TheEvils of the No-Corset Fad,"Corsets & Lingerie,November 1921, pp. 24-25. Corsets& Lingerie,January 1924, p. 31 and Women'sWear Daily, September 24, 1924, p. 28 identify the fad'sbeginning date. Nicole Thornton, Poiret(New York,1979), p. 1; Poiret, My FirstFifty Years, pp., 72-73); Julian Robinson, BodyPackaging: A Guide to Human SexualDisplay (Los Angeles), 1988, p. 78. "Corsetingthe Corsetless Figure," p. 58; "TangoPopularizes Corsetless Figure," The Women'sand Infants'Furisher, January, 1914, p. 68; Anderman Form Company advertisement,Women's and Infants'Furnisher, February,1915, p. 20. The Women'sand Infants'Furnisher, first published in 1895, changed its name to Corsets& Lingeriein July, 1921, and then again to Corsets& Brassieresin March, 1926. Its publication continues today under the name IntimateFashion News.

16. Pulfer,"Fighting the CorsetlessEvil," p. 30. 17. "The Evils of the No-Corset Fad,"November 1921, pp. 24-25; "FlappersAre Re- sponsible for The CorsetlessCraze," November 1922, p. 33; "EminentSurgeons Endorse the Corset,"Corsets & Lingerie,December 1921, pp. 32-35. 18. "Woman'sFriend, The Corset,"Literary Digest, November 5, 1921, p. 20.

19. "The Depressionof 1920-1922 in the Women'sClothing Industry,"Research De- partment, International Ladies Garment WorkersUnion (ILGWU). Report included with letter fromMitchell to Dubinsky,May 11, 1945. ILGWUCollection, Labor-Manage- ment Documentation Center, Cornell University,David DubinskyBox 160, Folder 2B. "Table1-Corsets and Allied Garments-Summary for the United States: 1899-1929," 1930 Census of Manufacturers,M1930.2, p. 385; Profitsof UnderwearManufacturers, 382 journal of social history winter 1999

1918-1942: A SurveyMade for UnderwearInstitute, Research & StatisticalDivision (New York, 1943); Joseph Swanson and Samuel Williamson, "Estimatesof National Product and Income for the United States Economy,1919-1941," Explorationsin EconomicHistory (Fall 1972): 53-74. I am gratefulto Kathleen Barrettfor providingthe latter citation and sharingher expertise in businesshistory with me. 20. 1930 Census of Manufacturers,p. 385; "The Corset," Fortune,March 1938, pp. 95-9+.

21. "CorsetsStill in Vogue,"Corsets & Lingerie,July 1921, pp. 37, 52. "New Novelties for Fall,"Corsets & Lingerie,p. 32. "ElasticGirdles and Novelties,"first appeared as a "new department"in Corsets& Lingerie,June 1922, p. 43. Corsets& Lingerie,October 1922, p. 4. A discussionof the girdle as merelya new name for the corset appearsin Corsets& Lingerie,April 1924, p. 32. Corsetand UnderwearReview, December 1924, p. 89 blames the older corset for figureproblems.

22. "ParisianWomen Wear Corsets,"Corsets & Lingerie,August 1921, p. 31; "Parison the Corset Question,"Corsets & Lingerie,December, 1921 pp. 25-26. 23. Gertrude L. Nickerson, "The American Woman and Her Corset,"Corset and Un- derwearReview, November 1924, pp. 83-84.

24. "The Evils of the No-Corset Fad,"November 1921, pp. 24-25. 25. "EminentSurgeons Endorse the Corset,"December 1921, pp. 32-35. 26. ibid.

27. ibid. See Steven J. Ross, "StrugglesFor the Screen: Workers, Radicals and the Political Uses of Silent Film,"American Historical Review 96 (April 1991): 333-368, for more on the mocking of radicalwomen as failed men in a varietyof popularmedia. 28. Royal Worcester Corset Company advertisement,Corsets & Lingerie,November 1922, p. 7; 1930 ManufacturersCensus, p. 385; Helen Walser,"The Renaissanceof the Corset,"Corsets & Brassieres,February 1930, p. 55; "CorsetShow Big Help,"Corsets & Brassieres,December 1930, p. 33; "JoelAlexander Looks at 1935,"Corsets & Brassieres, January1935, p. 45.

29. Ethel Allen, "CorsetFitting the YoungGirl Figure,"Women's and Infants'Furnisher, April 1921, p. 28; Ethel Allen, "Corset Fitting the Top-Heavy Figure,"Women's and Infants'Furnisher, May 1921, p. 28; Ethel Allen, "CorsetFitting the CurvedBack Figure," Women'sand Infants'Furnisher, June 1921, p. 32; Ethel Allen, "CorsetFitting the Full ProportionedFigure," Corsets & Lingerie,p. 34; Ethel Allen, "CorsetFitting the Thigh Figure,"Corsets & Lingerie,August 1921, p. 30; Ethel Allen, "CorsetFitting the Maternity Figure,"Corsets & Lingerie,September 1921, p. 34. In 1921, Ethel Allen wasthe Supervisor of Instructionat the Kabo School of Corsetry. 30. Corsets& Lingerie,January 1921, p. 64.

31. Women's& Infants' Furisher, January1921, p. 44; "Corsetsof Distinct Types," Women's& Infants'Furnisher, September 1906, p. 35. 32. For other sources on the movement of scientific rationalizationinto the domestic sphere see Dolores Hayden, The GrandDomestic Revolution: A Historyof FeministDe- signsfor AmericanHomes, Neighborhoods,and Cities (Cambridge,MA, 1981), and Ruth Schwartz Cowan, More Workfor Mother:The Ironiesof HouseholdTechnology from the Open Hearthto theMicrowave (London, 1989). FIGHTING THE CORSETLESSEVIL 383

33. Corsets& Lingerie,July 1921, p. 15; January1925, p. 23; The Principlesof Scientific CorsetFitting (New York,1925); Women's& Infants'Furisher, March 1921, p. 49; Corsets & Brassieres,July 1928, p. 41. 34. Corsets& Lingerie,January 1925, p. 23. 35. The Principlesof ScientificCorset Fittingp. 12; "Woman'sFriend, The Corset," p. 20; Modart'semployment of ptosis to sell corsets was similar to other discoveries of medicalizedconditions foradvertising purposes in the 1920s,such as Listerine'spromotion of halitosis. See Stephen Fox, The MirrorMakers: A Historyof AmericanAdvertising and Its Creators(New York,1984), pp. 97-8, and Roland Marchand,Advertising the American Dream:Making Way for Modernity,1920 to 1940 (Berkeley,1985), pp. 18-20, 218-19. 36. "The corset stock is one of the safestof all the stocks in the drygoods store."Women's & Infants'Furnisher, 1896 quoted in their 25th anniversaryissue, January1921, p. 61; "Corset DepartmentsLead in Store Profits!,"Warner Brothers ad, Corsets& Brassieres, January1933, p. 3; Corsets& Brassieres,February 1938, p. 25; CorsetPreview: The Bulletin of the NationalRetail Dry GoodsAssociation, July 1941, p. 13; Corset& UnderwearReview SalesTraining Manual Issue, August 1942, p. 122; "CorsetSelling Is An Art," Corsets& Brassieres,February 1946, p. 34. 37. Women's& Infants'Furnisher, April 1921, p. 2. Gossardalso encouragedthe reduction in the number of lines each department carried. Their 1921 analysis of the current economic depressionsuggested that the problemof "stockliquidation" could be resolved by carryingcomplete lines by fewer companies.The point of view expressedby Warner's and Gossardobviously favored largercompanies that widely advertised their products. Women'sand Infant'sFurnisher, January 1921, p. 3. 38. These are the categorynames used by ModartCorset Company in The Principlesof ScientificCorset Fitting. 39. "How to Choose the Right Corset,"Good Housekeeping,September 1921, pp. 52- 53; "ModernStyles Do Not Cater to One Type of Silhouette But to Several," Corsets & Brassieres,May 1933, pp. 26-7; Corsets& Lingerie,January 1921 p. 43; "A Matter of Opinion," Corsets& Lingerie,February 1925, p. 35. 40. Ewing, p. 136; Corsets& Lingerie,July 1921, p. 43; Ewing, p. 137. 41. "A Significant New Development in Modern Merchandising,"Bon Ton Corsets advertisement,Corsets & Brassieres,1929, p. 14.

42. "CurriculumFor the Corset Salesgirl,"Corsets & Brassieres,July 1941, pp. 34-5; Corset& UnderwearReview, Sales TrainingManual, August 1942, pp. 26-27.

43. Allen, "Corsetingthe Curved Back Figure,"Corsets & Lingerie,June 1921, p. 32. 44. Women'sWear Daily, May 19, 1917, p. 15; November 14, 1940, p. 31. 45. Allen, "Corset-Fittingthe Full ProportionedFigure," p. 30; Allen, "Corset-Fitting the Top-HeavyFigure," p. 28; Corset& UnderwearReview, Sales TrainingManual, August 1942; ibid. 46. "CurriculumFor the Corset Salesgirl,"Corsets & Brassieres,July 1941, pp. 34-5. For a fuller discussionon the tensions between departmentstore saleswomen,customers and managerssee Susan Porter Benson, CounterCultures: Saleswomen, Managers and Customersin AmericanDepartment Stores, 1890-1940 (Chicago, 1986). 47. Allen, "Corsetingthe Curved Back Figure,"p. 32. 384 journal of social history winter 1999

48. Women's& Infants'Furnisher, April 1918, p. 38; Gordon, p. 9. 49. "Trainingthe New Salesgirl,"Corsets & Brassieres,September 1946, p. 48-9; Allen, Women's& Infants'Furnisher, June 1921, p. 32. Regardingcorset selling as an art see Women's& Infants'Furnisher, May 1925, p. 27 and "CorsetSelling Is An Art,"Corsets & Brassieres,February 1946, p. 34. 50. Allen, "CorsetFitting the YoungGirl Figure,"p. 28; Corsets& Brassieres,January 1933, p. 35. 51. "New Interest in Junior Garments,"Corsets & Brassieres,January 1929, p. 28; "WarnerOpening Well Attended,"Corsets & Brassieres,March 1930, p. 41. 52. The retailer B. Altman & Company,for example, focused on this commercial rite of passage in their advertisementswhich announced "that a young girls' first corset is an importantevent." Women'sWear Daily, April 2, 1931; Women'sWear Daily, April 30, 1931, Sec. 2, p. 4; Corsets& Brassieres,August, 1946, p. 16. 53. Women's& Infants'Furnisher, February 1915, p. 49. 54. "The JuniorDepartment," Corsets & Brassieres,April 1930, pp. 34-5. 55. "The Junior Corset Department,"Corsets & Brassieres,January 1930, p. 41; "A ProsperousOutlook-Corset Buyersand ManufacturersAre All VeryOptimistic," Corsets & Brassieres,February 1930, p. 25; Corsets& Brassieres,March 1930, p. 41. 56. Corsets& Brassieres,July 1930, p. 43; October 1930, p. 27. 57. Corsets& Lingerie,January 1924, pp. 31-32. 58. This point is also made in Corsets& Brassieres,January 1933, p. 35. 59. "JuniorWeek ArousesInterest," Corsets & Brassieres,July 1930, p. 43; "JuniorCorset Week A Success,"Corsets & Brassieres,C&B, October 1930, p. 27; Corsets& Brassieres, January1933, p. 35.

60. Corsets& Lingerie,September 1921, n.p.; October 1922, p. 34; July 1921, p. 37; June 1922 p. 43; Women's& Infants'Furnisher, January 1914, p. 39; Corsets& Lingerie,April 1924, p. 29; Women'sWear Daily, September3, 1924, p. 32. 61. Corsets& Lingerie,June 1924, p. 49; Women'sWear Daily, September 3, 1924, p. 32; September 24, 1924, p. 28; Corsets& Lingerie,February 1925, p. 9; "What Others Say About RubberGoods," Corsets & Lingerie,February 1925, pp. 40-1; "Do CorsetsFurther Femininity?"Corsets & Lingerie,April 1925, p. 29. 62. Formore on the New Lookfrom 1947 to 1952, see "Returnof the Repressed(Waist)," chapter 7 ofJill Fields,"The Production of Glamour:A Social Historyof IntimateApparel, 1909-1952" (forthcoming,University of CaliforniaPress). 63. Michel Foucault,Language, Counter-Memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews, edited by Donald F. Bouchard(Ithaca, 1977), p. 150.