Fashion Forward The History of 20thCentury Womens Clothing

Clothing styles and popular apparel fashions are constantly in flux, and the fashion world is continuously inundated with runway innovations and fly-by-night fads. Over the last century, fashion in the Western world in particular has experienced continual upheavals and major changes. From 1900 to 2007, popular fads have included such fashion statements as rear-enhancing bustles, short flapper dresses, wide-leg bell bottoms, and deliberately ripped jeans. These and other major fashion trends make up the fascinating history of twentieth- century womens clothing. Haute Couture Era: 1900-1920 Womens fashion in the early 1900s highlighted the silhouette of the mature, full-figured body. Low busts and curvy hips were flaunted by the dress styles of the era (Pendergast 2004). In the early years of the first decade, skirts were long and full and often contained a small train, similar to what is commonly seen in todays wedding gowns. However, as the decade drew to a close, skirts gradually grew shorter and began to reveal tantalizing glimpses of the ankle. The overall silhouette of dresses also changed slightly, moving toward a narrower, straighter line. The early 1900s also marked the flowering of the haute couture movement in Paris. Parisian designers set the fashion tone for the rest of the Western world, and their designs were highly sought after by women of the upper classes. Quite frequently, horse races served as a debut for important new fashions, as well-known designers sent models to attend these races wearing their latest creations (Pendergast 2004). From 1910 until the start of the First World War in 1914, fashion continued to move toward slimmer, narrower silhouettes that emphasized flat busts and slim hips (Pendergast 2004). Bustles and trains were removed from dresses, as fashion designers played with the length of skirts to reveal enticing new areas of skin. However, as the war began in 1914, attention and materials were drawn away from fashion design, and no significant fashion developments occurred again until peace was declared at the end of 1918. Modern Era: 1920-1940 During the 1920s, clothing styles officially entered the modern era of fashion design. During this decade, women began to liberate themselves from constricting clothes for the first time and openly embrace more comfortable styles like pants and short skirts. While popular fashions remained relatively conservative prior to 1925, short skirts, low waistlines, and revolutionary styles of the flapper era characterized the latter half of the decade (Hall 1992). Dresses were made to fit close to the body in order to emphasize youthful elegance. Hems were cut to the knee, and waistlines disappeared almost entirely. Cloche hats without rims also became a key popular clothing item during this period (Pendergast 2004).

Flapper styles of short skirts, low waistlines, and bobbed hair characterized fashion in the late 1920s

The fashion styles of the flapper era lasted throughout the 1920s and into the early 1930s before the hardships of the Great Depression forced more conservative trends. During this time, skirts became longer and the natural waistline became a more important part of dresses as society began to move back toward a more traditionally feminine look (Hall 1992). While some trends of the 1920s, such as cloche hats and bobbed hair, lasted slightly longer, the difficult times of the 1930s definitely called for more conservative wear. The decade of the 1930s also saw the first true distinction between day and evening styles. During the

affluent era of the 1920s, women could easily wear impractical clothing during the day without worry, so long as domestic servants took care of the chores (Pendergast 2004). However, the hard times of the Depression caused many women to do more work at home themselves and necessitated more practical clothing for the daytime. Simple skirts and pared-down outfits allowed for ease of mobility in the daytime, while new fabrics such as metallic lam became popular for more luxurious evening wear. The newly improved, synthetic fabric rayon became an important part of many designers fashions during the 1930s, and cotton also moved into more stylish clothing designs; however, silk remained the primary fabric of most fashion designers. Rationed Fashion and the New Look: 1940 1960 As Europe, and later America, entered the landscape of World War II, fashion responded to the restrained mood and economy of the war. Drabness and uniformity in clothing were embraced, and people were encouraged to make do with and mend the clothing they already had. Service uniforms were constantly seen on both men and women at all types of social functions, as the reality of the war became impossible to ignore. During the war, all types of cloth were needed for a variety of wartime purposes, and material for clothing was severely rationed. Women were issued a limited number of ration coupons to use for clothing purchases each year, and this number declined steadily as the war progressed. Due to the limited materials, fashions of the era emphasized shorter skirts than ever before and short, blocky jackets (Pendergast 2004). Buttons for any type of apparel were limited to three per clothing item. Nylon stockings were very scarce, and women were encouraged to make do with ankle socks and bare legs. During the war and its aftermath, there was rarely an adequate amount of any clothing item available, and women were forced to do the best they could and dress as femininely as possible with the available stock. By the late 1940s and early 1950s, designers had quickly grown tired of the utilitarian, minimalist clothing of the wartime era. Longings for elegance and luxury that had been suppressed during the war years began to creep out again with the New Look of fashion in the late 1940s in which clothing styles emphasized rounded shoulders, full skirts, and narrow waists (Hall 1992). The garments were often lined with luxurious, expensive fabrics, and ornate accessories became necessary items. Although critics complained about the extravagance of the clothing while rationing was still mandated, women throughout the country clamored for the revitalized femininity of the New Look. And it would prove to be popular enough to last well into the affluent decade of the 1950s. Fashion Revolution: 1960 1980 The 1960s and 1970s witnessed a youth explosion that completely revolutionized the fashion system. Prior to 1960, designers generally created styles for runways, and clothing manufacturers mass produced the designers styles for the general public. However, during the 1960s, youth throughout the Western world began to rebel against traditional clothing styles and create their own trends. Soon, fashion designers and manufacturers were madly trying to keep up with the trends and implement the youths' popular creations into clothing for the masses.

Youth of the 1960s rebelled against traditional styles and created their own trends

During the 1960s and 1970s, a huge variety of clothing became popular, including bell bottoms, increasingly short miniskirts and hot pants, and blue jeans (Pendergast 2004). It was no longer shocking for women to wear pants on a daily basis, and many of the styles of the era were somewhat androgynous. By the 1970s, it was nearly impossible to tell what was in fashion and what was not, as the choices for available clothing had become very diverse. During these two decades of rapid social

revolution and change, it was anything goes in terms of fashionable clothing. By the late 1970s, popular styles had turned somewhat more conservative, but the freedom of choice inspired by the two decades would live on. Present Era: 1980 2007 While high fashion had greatly declined during the free-for-all of the 1960s and 1970s, the 1980s saw a definite rise in the popularity of designer styles. Wealthy people across the country flocked to New York boutiques and Paris fashion shows to purchase directly from designers lines, while mass producers replicated the high fashions for the general public. Power and money dominated the styles of the 1980s, with women donning expensive business suits and dresses during the day and extravagant designer gowns in the evening (Pendergast 2004). While not everybody could afford the expensive designer clothing, some top fashion designers such as Calvin Klein and Ralph Lauren also produced ready-to-wear lines to appeal to less-affluent customers. During the 1980s, clothing was a sign of power, and the top designers reigned supreme with their fashionable apparel. But by the 1990s, women had begun to reject the moneyed, designer styles of the 1980s and opt for more comfortable, casual clothing. Flannel shirts and ripped jeans inspired by the grunge movement in rock and roll became popular, while the rising hip-hop movement brought baggy pants into fashion (Pendergast 2004). Whatever its expression, comfort remained the key factor in clothing choice for most women in the 1990s and 2000s. Even standards for work relaxed somewhat, and casual dresses and pants became popular workplace attire. Today, while expensive designer clothing is still sought after by some women, casual, comfortable clothing styles at reasonable prices are the popular choice at the start of the new century. But one never knows what new trendy or outrageous style will emerge next on the fashion scene. History of fashion Any account of historical Indian costumes runs into serious difficulties not for want of literary evidence or of archaeological and visual materials: of both of these there is a fair measure that is available. The difficulty arises when one tries to collate the information that can be culled from these sources. The descriptions in literary works, for all their great poetic beauty and elegance, are, in the nature of things, not precise and one has to guess and reconstruct. Sometimes the descriptions are so general that they can fit more than one costume quite different from each other. All this is not to say that a broad, general idea cannot be formed of the kinds of costumes worn in the ancient, medieval or the late medieval periods in India. What one is denied is the possibility of going into the many subtleties that Indian costumes possess. Their range is remarkably wide, according to the great size of the country, and geographical differences, and the bewildering diversity of its ethnic groups is added the complex factor of the coming in, at regular intervals, of foreign peoples into India at different periods of time and in varying numbers. The costumes that these people brought along did not stay necessarily apart from the mainstream of Indian dresses - that one could have dealt with - but, with the Indian genius for adaptation and modification, these costumes become altered, even metamorphosed, and eventually assimilated to the broad, native Indian range of dress. One has, therefore, to sift and isolate, and then relate and bring together, the evidence available which is not the easiest of tasks in the context of Indian history where material culture does not always get the attention it does elsewhere. Through sharp analysis of Sanskrit, Prakrit, and Hindi, as much as Arabic and Persian sources, they have brought within reach a rich body of material. The inherent difficulty in the matter of interpreting this material and relating it to surviving archaeological and visual evidence naturally leaves some matters obscure, and others open to controversy. But a very substantial body of information has been collected. A question that needs to be disposed of rather early is whether, in the indigenous Indian tradition, stitched garments were known or used at all. From time to time statements have been made that the art of sewing was unknown to the early Indians, and that it was an import from outside. Serious and early students of Indian costumes, like Forbes Watson, have stated, mostly on the authority of other scholars, that the art of sewing came to India only with the coming of the Muslims.' This statement needs no longer to be taken seriously. As has been established, not only was the needle and its use

known to Indians from the very beginning of the historic periods that we know of; the art of sewing was practised, and one comes upon clear and early references to stitched garments that leave very little doubt about the matter.' It is possible that the view that "before the invasion of India by the Mohammedans, the art of sewing was not practiced there" was formed not on the basis of any historical or scholarly inquiry into this matte but simply 'observation': observation of the dresses of two different categories of people, those who were far more rooted in the Indian soil and could thus be taken as representing the long Indian tradition of wearing costumes in a particular fashion, and those who could be linked with outsiders' who came to India late, and visibly preferred different kinds of dresses. This observation could only have been superficial; besides, clear distinction needs to be made between the knowledge of, and the use of, sewing. It is possible perhaps also to draw a distinction between what, in the Indian context, can be designated as "timeless" costumes, and those that are time bound". The 'timeless' Indian dress of men, thus, consists of garments that use no stitching, garments in other words that, as Forbes Watson says, "leave the loom, ready for wear". The Dhoti, the Scarf or Uttariya, and the Turban, which have never really disappeared from any part of India, belong to this category, and their marked visibility in India could have led one erroneously to conclude that the early Indians did not use any sewn garments. Likewise, for women, the Dhoti or the Sari as the lower garments, combined with a Stanapatta or breast-band for covering the breasts, forms a basic ensemble, and once again consists of garments that do not have to be stitched, the breast garment being simply fastened in a knot at the back. And the Dhoti or the Sari worn covering both legs at the same time or, in the alternative, with one end of it passed between the legs and tucked at the back in the fashion that is still prevalent in large area of India. But the preference of Indian men and women for these garments, rational and understandable in the context of the generally hot Indian climate, does not afford any proof that for long periods of time the Indians knew no other garments than those which "left the loom, ready for wear". It is not easy to make out everything in Alberuni's description, but there is little doubt that he is referring to a dhoti when he speaks of 'turbans used for trousers', and a kaupina when he is speaking of 'a rag of two fingers' breadth bound over the loins. But the amusing reference to 'trousers lined with as much cotton as would suffice to make a number of counterpanes and saddle rugs' is not easy to make out. Possibly he is referring to dhotis of considerable length and fullness that were tucked between the legs and at the waist behind. Similar problems arise with the accounts of Chinese writers. Wherever they speak of costume, not too much is added to our information although there is much precision and detail when it comes to their description of the trade in textiles from different parts of the country. This is understandable because one of the principal concerns of the many travellers to India was trade precisely of this kind, sometimes in these very materials. All the same, the information made available is not without interest, and one notices carefully the comment of someone like Chau j ' u-kua, the inspector of foreign trade in Fu-kien in the 12th century, concerning the dress worn by the ruler of Malabar: -"The ruler of the country has his body draped, but goes bare-footed. He wears a turban and a loin-cloth both of white cotton cloth. Sometimes he wears a white cotton shirt with narrow sleeves". The period of the Sultanates in northern India is marked, once again, by much interest, both on the part of the Indian writers, and of the newly arrived Muslims in matters concerning fabrics and dyes and costumes. But the earlier difficulty of accurately interpreting this information persists, for even though long lists become available, these remain confined to names for which we have no pictorial equivalents in the matter of costumes, and no analytical descriptions in respect of fabrics and the like - in the paintings from the Sultanate period, an area in which our knowledge has increased remarkably in the last quarter of a century or so, there is much that one can observe, but to give precise names to costumes still remains difficult. One can at best try and find relationships between terms for costumes or verbal descriptions, and the dresses that we see men and women wearing in Sultanate period paintings, whether of the Indo-Persian style or those that we associate with western India, principally Jaina paintings produced in Gujarat and Rajasthan. When one makes the effort, however, interesting results sometimes emerge. Thus, in the paintings of the Laur Chanda in the Prince of Wales Museum of Bombay, or the Aranyaka Parva of the Asiatic Society of Bombay, or the recently discovered Devi Mabatntya in the Himachal Pradesh Museum at Simla, the long-sleeved kutia-like garments made of fine cotton material, with fastenings at the right or the left, come remarkably close to the early description by Alberuni of the kurtakas worn by Indians which have lappets with 'slashes' both on the right and the left sides. But this kind of close correspondence is not always easy to establish in other articles. The Varna-ratnakara of jyotirishvara of the early 14th century, the Prithvichanda-charita also of the 14th or 15th century, and the compilation by Sandesara, the Varnaka~Samuccaya, have remarkably

long and detailed lists of stuffs known to India in that period, but there is no correspondingly detailed information on costumes. An interesting development at the same time is that certain Persian writers,including Amir Khusrau, begin using Hindi words, or words of the vernaculars, in their descriptions of Indian fabrics. in his usual engaging style, thus, Khusrau speaks of 'cloths that redeem the past life, decoration of the person and ornament of the body likejbanbariali and bibari - that are like a pleasant gift of a springtide and sit as lightly on the body as moonlight on the tulip or dew drops on the morning rose'. Khusrau's enthusiasm for Indian fabrics, especially the fine muslin's manufactured in Deogiri, far exceeds his notions of precision in the matter of description, but whatever he says is never without interest. Thus, writing of Deogiri in A.D. 1322, he says:" 12 The fineness of its cloths is difficult to describe; the skin of the moon removed by the executioner star would not be so fine. One would compare it with a drop of water if that drop fell against nature, from the fount of the sun. A hundred yard of it can pass the eye of a needle, so fine is its texture, and yet the point of the steel needle can pierce through it with difficulty. It is so transparent and light that it looks as if one is in no dress at all but has only smeared the body with pure water. When it comes to a description of the costumes worn by the Sultans or the notables at any of the Islamic courts of north India, the flavour changes completely, for the writers, nearly all of them Muslims of foreign extraction, suddenly seem to move into a world of terms and articles that they are familiar with. Thus, while ibn Batutah might write in very general terms of the costumes worn by Indian women ('the women of this city and of the whole coast do not wear sewn cloths but only unsewn garments. They form a girdle with one of the extremities of the garment and cover their heads and breasts with the other.), the description by Umari of the dresses worn by the notables of Delhi suddenly becomes animated and more vivid:" The linen garments which are imported from Alexandria and the land of the Russians are worn only by those whom the Sultan honours with them. The others wear tunics and robes of fine cotton. The make garments with this material which resembles the robes (makati) of Baghdad. But these latter as also those called wasafi differ very much from those of India as regards fineness, beauty of colour and delicacy. Most of their Tartar (Attar) robes are embroidered with gold (muzarkasa bi-dhabab). Some wear garments with both sleeves having a tiraz border of gold embroidery (zarkasb). Others, for example the Mongols, place the tiraz inscription between the shoulders. It is in this very strain that we have other descriptions from this period, Firuz Shah T'Ughlaq and his courtiers wearing different kinds of dresses. The Sultan himself is said to have worn a kulab costing a lac of tankas which once belonged to his predecessor. In public audience, he is said to have worn a barani with embroidered sleeves, but in private he wore a shirt. The officers are said to be wearing silken robes in public and shirts in private life. Again the Amirs and the Maliks and other officers at the Sultanate courts are described as wearing "gowns (tatailyat),jakalwat and Islamic qabas of Khawarizm tucked in the middle of the body" and short turbans which did not exceed five or six forearms. Of other Amirs we learn that they were as well dressed "as the soldiers except that they did not use belts and at times they let down a piece of cloth in front of them after the manner of the sups. The judges and the learned men wore ample gowns (farajiyat) that resembled jaradiyat (striped material from jand, Yemen) and an Arabic garment (durra) (a garment opening in front and buttoned)

People in Indiawore mostlycotton clothing. India was the first place where cotton was grown, even as early as 2500 BC in theHarappan period. By the Aryan period, women wore one very long piece of cloth called a sari,

that they wrapped around themselves in different ways. The word sari comes from a Sanskrit word that just means cloth. Saris are first mentioned in the Vedas, about 600 BC. Rich women wore saris made of silk, but most women wore cotton ones.There were many different ways of draping saris to dress up women wore them like skirts with a top part thrown over their shoulder or worn over their heads as a veil. Working women often pulled their sari up between their legs to make a sort of pants. Women who were fighting with the army tucked in the top part of the sari in the back, to free up their arms for fighting. Most saris were five or six yards long, although some saris were nine yards. Younger women generally wore brightly colored saris, but widows and other women in mourning wore only white ones. Men also wore one long piece of cloth called the dhoti, which was generally white. They wrapped the dhoti (DOE-tee) around their legs to make sort of pants like the working women. Dhotis though were shorter so they didnt have the part that covered the chest and shoulders. Men also often wore long cotton cloths wrapped around their heads as turbans. With the Islamic invasions around 1000 AD, Persian fashions in clothing entered India and became popular especially in the north, though they never replaced the sari or the dhoti. Both women and men began to sometimes wear trousers with long tunics over them down to their knees. The trousers are called churidar. Women generally wore churidar with a long veil or scarf over it. Indian women who could afford it generally wore a lot of silver or goldjewelry, especially earrings and nose-rings. Sometimes they also put a spot of red on their foreheads called a bindi (BINN-dee) as a decoration. Perfume and cosmetics
Embalming made it possible to develop cosmetic products and perfumery very early. Perfumes in Egypt were scented oils that were very expensive. In antiquity, people made great use of it. The Egyptians used make-up much more than anyone else at the time. Kohl, used as eyeliner, eventually was obtained as a substitute for galena or lead oxide that had been used for centuries. Eye shadow was made of crushedmalachite, and lipstick of ochre. Substances used in some of the cosmetics were toxic and had adverse health effects with prolonged use. Beauty products generally were mixed with animal fats in order to make them more compact, more easily handled and to preserve them. Nails and hands also were painted, with henna. Only the lower class had tattoos. It also was fashionable at parties for men and women to wear a perfumed cone on top of their heads. The cone usually was made of ox tallow and myrrh and as time passed, melted and released a pleasant perfume. When the cone melted it was replaced with a new one (see the image to the right with the musician and dancers).

[edit]Wigs

Queen Ahmose, Pharaoh Thutmose I, and daughter Neferubity - note the youthful sidelock on the child and theroyal attire and wigs on the adults

Wigs were used by both sexes of the upper class. Made of real hair, they contained other decorative elements. In the court, the more elegant examples had small goblets at the top filled with perfume. Heads were shaven; shaved heads are a sign of nobility.[1] Usually children were represented with one lock of hair remaining on the sides of their heads (see the image to the right). [edit]Ornaments Wigs contained ornamental decorations. A peculiar ornament which the Egyptians created was gorgerin, an assembly of metal discs which rested on the chest skin or a short-sleeved shirt, and tied at the back. Some of the lower class people of this time also created many different types of piercings and body decorations; some of which even included genital piercings, commonly found on women prostitutes of the time. [edit]Jewelry Jewels were heavy and rather bulky, which would indicate an Asian influence. The lower classes wore small and simple glassware; braceletsalso were heavy. The most popular stones used were Lapis Lazuli, Carnelian, and Turquoise. They wore a large disk as a necklace of strength, sometimes described as an aegis. Gold was plentiful in Nubia and imported for jewellery and decoratrive arts

Bottom of Form