Victorian Dressing was a Pain

[Anne]

Interesting article about dressing and undressing a hundred years ago
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 44338.html

[Ralitsa]

Yes, quite interesting.
It doesn't say how many women acutally wore all that though, and whether they wore it all day or only for certain occasions. Certainly the nobility would have dressed that way, and the common people would not, but I wonder about those in between.

[KimberlyS]

I have a victorian outfit and some of the underthings. Picture in the gallery. Not all of the under things are period correct. Yes it is a bit of a pain getting into it and have never done it all by myself. Would be tough to do it by ones self and know why they had ladies maids. But it is fun to wear and I love it. But I also love vintage garments go figure. Guess I was born a bit too late.

[Carolynn]

From what I read for a class many years ago, the Victorian ideal of dress was pretty much limited to the upper classes, and the emerging upper middle class. Most would don the clothing, but the "stays" would be loosened except when receiving guests, and most of a day would be spent in sewing, embroidery, knitting and other "womanly pursuits". They had "house coats" that covered the petticoats and pretected them from food stains. The dresses and the separate over shirts most often buttoned or hooked in the back (no suppers, you know) and since they were often small and the bodice with tight, assistance was required.

The servants, cooks, laundresses, candle makers, etc. and other workday women might wear much more relaxed versions or none at all unless it was required (and purchased) by the employer. Upstairs maids generally did wear all the foofoory, though the petticoats were not as numerous and the dresses were often only ankle length to facilitate negotiating stairs. When wearing a corset a woman would be unable to put on shoes last in the dressing sequence so they usually put shoes on before the corset, especially the high top things with all the laces or hooks, and changing them after they were dressed (due to the cost of handmade shoes one did not have the Imelda Marcos syndrome back then) was nigh impossible without help.

The "tight lacing" fashion was accompanied by fainting couches that would not require the young woman to bend to sit in the full seat of a chair of the time, and since their diaphram was severely constricted most of the time, they were always short of breath and suffering from the "vapors" and had pallid complexions. The lack of torso flexibitlity and the encumbrance of the poofy clothes also made the fainting couches attractive, even when the stays were loosened.

Again, most all that stuff practised it were of the upper crust or young women with maids or sisters to help with the lacing and maneuvering the petti's. Various ingenious designs to enable self lacing were made during this time as well, but due to the volume of material, it was very time consuming to get all the petticoats on and laundress types probably hated them.

My great-grandmother and grandmoter were from the later Victorian and Edwardian eras. My great-grandmother did have a corset in the 1880s that was for special events that she wore until her first pregnancy, and never again after that. My grandmother had one as well, but didn't bother with it after her 15th birthday, which was when she was married, and then it soon wouldn't fit anymore anyway. They were farm girls, and worked at various tasks like cooking, canning, basket making (part Choctaw Indian they continued crafts from that culture for a long time), gathering wild plants to supplement the garden larder, preserving root crops, making clothing (they only bought shoes once a year, my Great-grandfather repaired them on a shoe last if they needed it), embroidery through the winter months in the evening or if snowed in, made pickles, pickled okra, pickled tomatos, kraut, dried fruit for use in the winter months, hauled water, sometimes milked cows when the men were busy with harvest, fed chickens, gathered eggs, and in general did those thing necessary for daily life as "normal" farm families during that period. "Going to Town" was a major event, everyone went, and they were gone pretty much all day. It was 10 miles one way, in a horse drawn wagon in either a buggy if for a special event (when the corset and nice dress might be worn, each girl had one, usually sewn at home and a new one each year or hand-me-down to the younger girl that it would fit), or a two horse drawn wagon for supplies to be purchased. A couple of times a year they would make the 40 mile trip to Fort Smith, once to the fair where the ladies had food and crafts entered, and once for supplies they could not get from 10 miles away. Not all could go at that time because it would be a two or more day trip, and someone had to milk cows, feed chickens, etc.

Free standing, wide mouthed, "slop jars" that the petticoats could surround "so they didn't have to be removed" were also used for urination during this time, and pantaloons had slits in the crotch that were closed with knotted strings in my Great-grandmother's time. Hummm, I just realized I did not hear or read about any adaptation to the monthly visitor, whether there were pads of absorbant cloth or what were in use. I do recall hearing that often women just went to bed until the monthly had passed in upper crust England.

The idea that being laced in a corset was healthful was, of course instituted by male doctors in the 18th century (who may have had multiple motives not associated with feminine health), which were the only kind at the time. Wearing the finery of the time also made it more difficult for hanky panky that was not in the bedroom since the foofery, petticoats and knotted pantaloons made it hard for the young swains to get access to the sweets of the lady. All the petticoats were both to enhance a tight laced waist (as were things like bustles, the earlier hip rolls, and painiers) and make the female more helpless and submissive, and suggested higher status since she would be unable to do anything productive in such encumbrance. Again a sort of status thing. They could wear these things because they had people to do the other things for them.

Being so encumbered also meant that certain concepts of gracefulness were essential adaptations, the curtsy rather than a bow, sitting on the edge of a chair if the fainting couch was not available becase the torso was too inflexible to sit back in the chair, holding the back straight, of necessity that carried over to feminine graces post corset period and even into today in some circles, stepping daintily with short steps so one would not step on the dress and trip, and lifting the long dresses that obscured vision when going up or down steps so one would not, again, fall down the stairs, and many others. Jobs, such a footmen to assist the ladies into and out of coaches came from these needs as well.

Modern tight lacers always claim that the modern, properly fitted corsets do not prevent them from doing whatever they want. To me, the jury is out on that one. Personally, I am just delighted corsets and voluminous, starched petti's are no longer in style, ya' know?

[Absaroka]

Sort of reminiscent of the foot binding upper class Chinese women had inflicted on them at one time.

Zari