Liberating Women's Bodies

[Carlisle Blues]

I was reading the aforemntioned titled article here http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/fashion/14iht-fvion.html.

I when saw this

I realized how timeless Madeleine Vionnet fashion design ideas were. Moreover, as she stated, "“What I did is not fashion — it was designed to last forever,” she said much later in 1960.

Further when Vionnet talked about beauty, which is the defining goal of her work. She states, “The final aim of our métier is to create dresses that make a harmonious body and a pleasing silhouette,” Vionnet said. “It is about making beauty. That’s what it’s all about.”

Her ideas are as vital today as they were back in the 1930's. Perhaps this takes her out of the realm of vintage and into the world of classic.

While I am not saying these terms are mutually exclusive, I have never really seen the terms beauty and vintage used in this context.

 

[Anthony K]

I have to say, that is an amazing looking dress! So much class and style!

 

[Lauren]

I actually got to see this exhibit and it was absolutely fascinating and wonderful. I did buy the book and I highly recommend it, though it is quite costly. It has pictures of the dresses on the forms from the exhibit as well as actual photos of the dresses at the time of release on their models and sometimes detail shots or sketches. Really wonderful. She is one of my favorite designers of all time.
Here is he book on amazon.fr, in French only.
http://www.amazon.fr/Madeleine-Vion...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1250521967&sr=8-1
I don't really agree with the idea of "Liberating Women's Bodies," however, in context with the line of her designs. Foundation garments would most likely have to be worn with all her gorgeous gowns. I think it's funny how harmony and nature were used often in actual period references, but they really meaned "harmony and nature within current fashion lines" i.e.- using the foundation garments that are beautiful at the time. haha. Excepting, of course, some very fashion forward designers and aesthetic movements.

 

[Carlisle Blues]

I don't really agree with the idea of "Liberating Women's Bodies," however, in context with the line of her designs. Foundation garments would most likely have to be worn with all her gorgeous gowns. I think it's funny how harmony and nature were used often in actual period references, but they really meaned "harmony and nature within current fashion lines" i.e.- using the foundation garments that are beautiful at the time. haha. Excepting, of course, some very fashion forward designers and aesthetic movements.

I do not know if foundation garments were worn here for example

Classical drapery would be taken up again as a trend in the 1930s by Madeleine Vionnet. Dancer Irene Castle poses in a classical-style dress, 1922."

There would be no need. Further, I do not know if liberation refers to foundation garments or releasing the beauty of the body.[huh]

 

[Lauren]

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to argue with the philosophy behind her clothing. But, indeed, more than likely there is something under there, even if it looks like there's not. It's a big myth that in the 20s they wore no foundation garments, even if in the form of a flattening brassiere.
I do like "releasing the beauty of the body." That's quite beautiful.

 

[Paisley]

There is also another thread on Vionnet here

http://www.thefedoralounge.com/showthread.php?t=38896

with some photos of new Vionnet dresses.

 

[Paisley]

I'm certainly no expert here, but I think there must be something more to the dress in the BW photo above than drapey fabric. It looks like it would be challenging to get the sleeve to stay up. As for foundation garments, most women look a lot better with some support.

 

[Foofoogal]

I do not know if liberation refers to foundation garments or releasing the beauty of the body

I don't know what this person intended but IMHO women will never be truly free as long as foundation garments are expected to be worn.
I have said it a million times on FL and will continue to say I would personally harm the person who invented the brassiere.
fftopic: Though some women will not do without them I truly believe if any man had to wear a tight band around their chest all day long it would be gone by now. Especially in 100 or more degree weather. Loads of fun. :eusa_doh:
Banning the bra was the only Womens Lib idea I ever agreed on.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0895296640/ref=nosim/thelighthouseonl

 

[Miss Neecerie]

Sadly, I think the times mistakes the ' but was asked to leave when she removed boned corsets, draped the freed body and had the models walk out barefoot.' part of Vionnet to mean no underpinnings.

Sure boning went away....but a bias cut dress with nothing on under it...is a scary scary sight. (and you think muffin top is bad....rolls of flesh are just as bad under a bias gown, trust me).

The move to non-boned underpinnings merely moved things to a more human shape...its that whole idea of -you but better-...rather then unnatural waist to hip ratios..etc.

This mistaken thinking that constricting undergarments went away totally is the only error of sorts in the article. She did beautify the female form...just not 100% free of any undergarments.

As a friend of mine said...'dancing the Charleston bra less...? Way too bouncy. '

 

[Carlisle Blues]

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to argue with the philosophy behind her clothing. But, indeed, more than likely there is something under there, even if it looks like there's not. It's a big myth that in the 20s they wore no foundation garments, even if in the form of a flattening brassiere.
I do like "releasing the beauty of the body." That's quite beautiful.

Lauren please this no argument regarding philosophy. I am fascinated by fashion; always have been. This is how I understand Vionnet "liberated or released the beauty of the body":

Typically, her dresses were made from single pieces of fabric and she ordered fabrics 2 yards wider than normal in order to cut them on the bias. A feature of the bias cut was that a Vionnet dress could be slipped on over the head and worn without fastenings or underpinnings.

It appears this if this is done, the body then becomes the art form adorned by the designer's creation.

 

[chanteuseCarey]

To see the difference even in modern wear, look sometime at what a Flexees all in one undergarment looks like compared to Rago Shapette all in one undergarment looks like. The Flexees is a knit fabric (like modern slips are made of) with waist and hip seaming. The Rago has specific control area seaming panel(s), seams and boning. A much stiffer fabric is used. Each works to creates a specific look for smoothing and shaping the body to wear with certain clothes.

In the 20s-40s most women wore a girdle regardless of size. Not a boned corset like in the Victorian and Edwardian periods but still constrictive.

 

[C-dot]

As a friend of mine said...'dancing the Charleston bra less...? Way too bouncy. '

If I'm not mistaken, brassieres made their debut in the Roaring 20's to "strap those babies down" and minimize the bust. A bosom was not welcome when boyish figures and dropped waist dresses were taking the world by storm, rebelling against tightly-laced Victoriana.

But women's figures are not boyish... suppressing this fact is just as tortuous as boned corsets. In actual fact, I've read that corsets of 1900-10 were designed to be more comfortable, but women pulled them up over the breasts, making the lower back indent push into the middle back, creating the popular "S" shape. Ouch!

The 30's seem to be the only Golden Era-era that didn't contort women's body shapes. Undergarments, although uncomfortable (and mostly invented by men) have been around through thick and thin, and probably always will be

 

[Viola]

In the '20s my great-grandmother was a very chesty woman (we all are in my family, pretty much to a woman across the whole extended family the range is from large to whoa boy) and she wore bandages to serve as a soft bra to keep from breaking the line of flapper dresses. "Strapping them down" rather literally. From what was told to me it sounded common among women of certain proportions; boyish was in and thus boyish they would have... though not comfortable.

Foofoo, I can't say I share your ire for the bra. I mean I prefer soft cups, but to me it feels better to wear one than not. As my grandmother (not a terribly reticent woman) said "you don't want to black your own eyes dancing."

 

[Lauren]

If I'm not mistaken, brassieres made their debut in the Roaring 20's to "strap those babies down" and minimize the bust. A bosom was not welcome when boyish figures and dropped waist dresses were taking the world by storm, rebelling against tightly-laced Victoriana.

You are definately correct in why they were made! A bra was invented prior to WWI, apparently by a ladies French maid, and from a triangle of fabric, strangely enough, By WWI they were around, but most women didn't adopt them until the 20s.

 

[Foofoogal]

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/28/b...l-improvement-can-translate-into-comfort.html

One historian privately mused after Professor Farrell-Beck's talk in Toronto that she did not understand why women felt the need to wear bras at all. She seemed to echo the sentiments in 1968 of Marlo Thomas, who gave up wearing a bra on her TV show. ''God created women to bounce,'' Ms. Thomas declared. ''So be it.''

Amen.lol :eusa_clap

 

[Tomasso]

bra was invented prior to WWI, apparently by a ladies French maid

That's not the way I heard it. [huh]



[YOUTUBE]xqxWhBZXF8Q[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Miss Neecerie]

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/28/b...l-improvement-can-translate-into-comfort.html



Amen.lol :eusa_clap

Sorry...bouncing -hurts-.

Or at least it does if you are a certain size and doing things like sports, or running.

Bouncing is also what causes one to eventually look like a national geographic pictorial spread...which is fine if one likes things around ones waist.

Me....I will wear the bra.

 

[Foofoogal]

''We don't have a perfect bra because if you look at the whole range of women you have vast differences in what women need,'' said Professor Farrell-Beck, who earlier this month in Toronto delivered a scholarly paper on the brassiere at the annual conference of the Society for the History of Technology.

Some women covet a bra that will give them a sexy silhouette while others need a bra that will keep their breasts from getting in the way when they swing a tennis racket, Professor Farrell-Beck said in a telephone interview.

Moreover, bodies differ vastly. Breasts can be pear-shaped, apple-shaped or melon-shaped. They can be asymmetrical. They can be spaced close together or far apart. And breast tissue can range from as little as 8 ounces in one woman to as much as 10 pounds in another.

And so a bra design can pose engineering challenges as formidable as those encountered in building a bridge or a skyscraper. This is why the bra continues to benefit from small, incremental improvements, Professor Farrell-Beck said.

engineeringly (is that a word) impossible. What we have currently is not in the
least bit more farfetched than the video Tomasso put on.
This quote above makes total sense to me. Cheap or very expensive seems to me no difference.
Shoes are not as bad but the difference in fit for one person vs another is the closest thing. Point is most everyone likes to chunk their shoes off when they want to get comfortable.

I do know (don't understand but) do know several very ample women that insist on wearing their bras. I do know they get backaches just from the weight of their bosoms and I can sort of understand the need for something. One kin to me I am always fussing at as they want to wear their underwire bra even to sleep at night.
I just think if they can do scans of things for design why can they not do an individual scan of a woman and form the bra specifically to them. They are still hot and uncomfortable so not sure how to deal with that issue.

 

[Paisley]

They say that a lot of women are wearing the wrong size bra. That could be a comfort factor.

From an engineering standpoint, a reducing bra should, I would think, spread the load left and right instead of flattening it, thereby decreasing comfort, or worse, shift it forward, increasing the moment arm. Straps should be wider to reduce pressure on the shoulders. The band should be wide (2" at least, I think) and perhaps not elasticized so that it doesn't dig into the rib cage. I'd have to know more about the problem to make anything but these hypotheses, which may be way off.

 

[Carlisle Blues]

They say that a lot of women are wearing the wrong size bra. That could be a comfort factor.

From an engineering standpoint, a reducing bra should, I would think, spread the load left and right instead of flattening it, thereby decreasing comfort, or worse, shift it forward, increasing the moment arm. Straps should be wider to reduce pressure on the shoulders. The band should be wide (2" at least, I think) and perhaps not elasticized so that it doesn't dig into the rib cage. I'd have to know more about the problem to make anything but these hypotheses, which may be way off.

Howard Hughes designs the steel underwire push-up bra for sweater girl Jane Russell to wear in The Outlaw. Hughes, an airplane designer, adopts modern technologies to up-lift the contour of the bosom. The film's release is delayed for three years because of Russell's sensuous portrayal, and Hughes finally decides to release it without a Motion Picture Code seal. It marks the beginning of the end of film censorship. Hughes will live on to become one of the richest men in America, retiring to Las Vegas where he buys a hotel, moves into the penthouse. He buys a local TV station so he can watch movies after midnight.

Is this because of the bra he designed???:eusa_doh: