Degeyter, Heather. “Upstairs and Downstairs: British Costume Drama Television from The Forsyte Saga to Downton Abbey.” The Journal of Popular Culture 49, no. 3 (June 2016): 678-91. doi:doi: 10.1111/jpcu.12427.
Dirix, Emmanuelle. “Birds of Paradise: Feathers, Fetishism and Costume in Classical Hollywood.” Film, Fashion & Consumption 3, no. 1 (March 2014): 15-29. doi:10.1386/ffc.3.1.15_1.
Erving Goffman, “Embodied Information in Face-to- Face Interaction” from Behavior in Public Places (1963), in The Body: A Reader, Pages 82-86.
This blog post is a creative reflection on Plate 17 from the 1890-1891 “The Ladies Tailor,” (Williamson) which was reviewed at the Royal Ontario Museum, call number: RB P.S. La 120 v. 6-7). The author would like to thank the team at the ROM libraries for their help and guidance. This blog post aims to explore Victorian domestic service and the social structure of working for a middle class family within the context of creating this jacket pictured in “The Ladies Tailor,” (Williamson, 40). This blog entry also references and adapts story lines from “Maud: The Illustrated Diary of a Victorian Woman,” (Fraser and Berkeley, 1987) a published diary of a middle-class woman who kept a diary of her day-to-day experiences along with charming illustrations, some of which are featured below.
Well, hello there! I’m not quite sure how I feel about keeping a diary, but my mistress seems to enjoy it, she certainly writes in hers regularly (Fraser and Berkeley), and at this particular moment I’m fit to burst with the story of my day and no one to tell it to. At this particular moment I can’t recall a day with so many hiccups as this one!
To be perfectly honest – I feel a bit rude jumping into my story without introducing myself properly, so I’ll try to be as brief as possible, but as my Gran says – I’m a bit chatty. My name is Agatha Jones, born and raised in Edinburgh before starting in service at 12 (Higgs, 201), and I’m old enough to have lost any girlish giddiness. I’m a maid-of-all-work for Miss Maud – oh, my heavens – Major-General James Berkeley and Mrs. James Berkeley – although she says I can call her Mrs. Maud, as she’s not one for formalities. You see, I’m not used to referring to my mistress as anything other than Miss Maud, as I originally worked for her parents on the Isle of Wight (Fraser and Berkeley, 6)when Maud was a spinster. I prefer working in Mrs. Maud’s household much better, not that it was all that bad in Wight – just terribly boring looking after her somehow always sickly and decidedly elderly parents and preparing dull food (Fraser and Berkeley, 51), which is perhaps why I admire Mrs. Maud so much, she’s awfully busy and athletic, particularly in regards to ice-skating (Fraser and Berkeley,10), and always going out and about with her friends (with such silly nicknames! ‘Rozie,’ ‘Steakie,’ ‘Tykie,’ and who could forget ‘Noggie,’ ‘Hoggie,’ ‘Shoggie,’ and ‘Toddie!’ (Fraser and Berkeley, 8) — I never knew if she was referring to a man or a woman with nicknames like those). Mrs. Maud would come home and regale me with her adventures. And quite the adventures they would be – the disaster of a billiards cue falling over mid-game, or losing a sash mid-dance (Fraser and Berkeley, 10). However, she’s been married almost 8 months now to Major-General Berkeley, and is step-mother to his children – his two youngest daughters, Miss Lily and Miss Trixie, are teenagers and living at home (luckily all the women get along right as rain) (Fraser and Berkeley, 12). Mrs. Maud is actually a distant cousin of mine (Higgs, 206). As I said, Mrs. Maud isn’t one for formalities and is adjusting quite well to married life and step-motherhood, but apparently someone from her circle thinks she should be more conventional, which is what led to Mrs. Beeton showing up at the doorstep. Oh! How Mrs. Maud has had a time pretending to run the house like a military officer (Beeton, 3), and chuckling when she uses slang and then exclaiming that she is the ‘model of morality’ (Beeton, 9). Maud says that referring to Beeton’s book as a code of conduct for running a household is the same as walking around dressed as if in a fashion-plate (Higgs, 203).
Please take note of my mistress’ jacket (in white!). Fraser and Berkeley, 22.
My daily duties are many, but generally each day goes as so: both preceding and following the family throughout the house so that it can be prepped by myself, made a mess of by them, and tidied up once they’ve moved on to another room I’ve just prepared. I clean the kitchen before it needs using and I then use it and help prepare the meal, the dining room before it is dined in, their bedrooms while they’re eating, the front hall before they leave, and use their absence as a chance to clean anything and everything (Beeton, p89). But I’m a smart-worker, and plan out which days I should clean which things and determine how often they need to be cleaned, and review the family’s social calendar to determine if extraordinary items need preparation or mending (Beeton, 92). I do what I can when I can at all times, as being a maid-of-all-work implies. I’ve heard of some in service coming up with all sorts of fancy titles for themselves (Reid, 133), but they’re still in service, and the butler and the housekeeper are always at the top. I don’t generally like mean sketches, but the ones in Punch magazine on this job title fluffing up did test me in stifling my laughter at my friends’ expense (Reid, 133). But I most certainly have fair employers, who are not so high and mighty as to turn their noses up at a bit of work – Mrs. Maud and her step-daughters help daily with the bed making (Beeton, 90). This is most refreshing as my employers have capital in every way: economically respectable, culturally engaged, and social connections abound with Major-General Berkeley’s military service (Bourdieu, 243).
Miss Trixie and Mrs. Berkeley on a stroll last autumn (Mrs. Berkeley must really love that style of jacket!). Fraser and Berkeley, 83.
See now look what I’ve gone and done – chatted away for pages! I’m sure you feel more than properly introduced – perhaps feeling overwhelmed! So, I’ll get back to why I wanted to write today – making Mrs. Maud’s new jacket (even though, if I’m to be bold, she has a perfectly good jacket that looks quite similar already to this one, but I suppose that is more of a skating jacket…). Plate 17 in this month’s The Ladies Tailor, in particular the bottom left jacket, was my goal (Williamson, 41). Now, I don’t know about you, but I find the tone of Ladies Tailor quite annoying – always asserting again and again how you can make variations to the pattern and style (Williamson, 34). Well, of course I can! And so can everyone else making something for someone else, whose individualistic variation requests are more important than the instructions – my Gran taught me that as well as to be the (quite skilled, if I’m honest) seamstress that I am. But, as I found out today, this tone can be even more annoying when one’s requester wants you to make the exact article as pictured, and the accompanying text goes on and on about varying away from what is pictured! Hm. I can tell that I’m still quite flustered from this experience! Why you may ask? Well, I will tell you why – because my afternoon downtime today was to be used to work on this jacket, but this work kept getting interrupted by the silliest things!
Williamson, 40. Image taken by author at the Royal Ontario Museum.
The first incident was with Miss Lily, one of the daughters, having – quite frankly – a very humourous battle with the shower contraption the Major-General installed (Fraser and Berkeley, 126). This invention is meant to provide the bather with a ‘shower-bath,’ but when Miss Lily made an attempt at taking one, the hose took on a life of its own – going every which way all over the bathroom like an elephant’s trunk (Fraser and Berkeley, 126)! I ran to upon hearing the commotion and screaming, and found the room, Miss Lily – and eventually myself – soaked through (Fraser and Berkeley, 126)! After we tamed the beast, and Miss Lily swore that till the end of her days she would bathe as she always had (Fraser and Berkeley, 126), I went upstairs to dry off and get back to my task.
A wretched beast! Fraser and Berkeley, 124.
Just as my head was filling with ‘austrian knots,’ ‘crow’s toes,’ and ‘gauntlet cuffs’ (Williamson, 34), another disaster struck! While Mrs. Maud was out for a picnic with her lady friends, the pitcher of lemonade fell over (Fraser and Berkeley, 10) and Mrs. Maud had come running back to replace the lost refreshment. She asked me to make lemonade as quickly as possible, and thank heavens I had made an extra pitcher that morning – with a recipe I find I always gravitate towards:
1 ½ oz. citric acid
1 ½ lb loaf sugar
40 drops of perfectly good essence of lemon
1 pint of boiling water
2 lemons
And, as the recipe – taken from a Keating’s powder advertisement no less – says “Pour the Essence of Lemon on the sugar and acid in a jug. Add the boiling water, then cover till cold’ when required for use, put 1 part to 4 or 5 parts of water and add the juice of 2 lemons” (Loeb, 6).
After bidding my grateful mistress off, I went to check on the chocolate cake prepared for that evening’s dessert. Somehow or other I got some chocolate on my hands, which made its way to my fresh apron! The sight of that perfectly brown smudge on my crisp white apron exhausted me, and as I washed out the stain I felt as though I never detested an advertisement more than the one for Sinclair’s Soap, which makes domestic work looks like a heavenly idyll, instead of the constant mishaps interrupting the routine of labourious tasks (Loeb, 16-7)!
My employers at their leisure! Fraser and Berkeley, 18.
My word! I went back to my workstation, and was able to get some work done without interruption, and no, I did not take the author’s advice to indulge in the myriad of variations I could produce. My Gran always said that a well-tailored piece of clothing upheld one’s respectability (Sayer, 118), and I think my mistress would agree that this upholding is more useful than creative expression (Sayer, 112). Besides, Mrs. Maud would rather her clothing signal that she is as she appears to be – a good wife, step-mother, and at the helm of a happy, well-kept, and respectable home than her individual personality – which shows through quickly enough by her actions. Wouldn’t you agree that it’s more important to have a garment of sound structure, than one that expresses individuality?
Williamson, 34. Image taken by author at the Royal Ontario Museum.
Perhaps my day was all the more dramatic in my head than written down on paper, but there you are. While Mrs. Beeton would recommend that I do needlework at my end-of-day rest (Beeton, 93), I’ve had quite enough of that, thank you very much. I’m going to sit in my chair, rest my eyes, and have a “momentary affair” with the world of leisure – a cup of cocoa (Loeb, 173).
Works Cited
Bourdieu, Pierre. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Greenwood, 1986.
Fraser, Flora, and Maud Berkeley. Maud: The Illustrated Diary of a Victorian Woman. Chronicle Books, 1987.
Higgs, Edward. “Domestic Servants and Households in Victorian England.” Social History 8, no. 2 (1983): 201-10. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4285250.
Loeb, Lori. Consuming Angels. Oxford University Press, 1994.
Reid, Antony S. “Servants in Society: Victorian Servants in Affluent Edinburgh.” Family & Community History 2 (2) (1999): 129-140. doi:10.1179/fch.1999.2.2.005.
Williamson, James. The ladies’ tailor, jacket, mantle and costume cuffer : a journal devoted to ladies high class tailoring, illustrative and practical. The Tailor and Cutter, 1891.
The following is an imagining of the previous “lives” these objects had (Mida and Kim, 26). While none of the objects were donated by the same person, I wanted to explore two elements that I connected them with: their era (1960’s) and their designer’s association with Audrey Hepburn. I also wanted to consider the “lives” these objects may have had, and if they could be connected, possibly over different eras, through different aspects of their biography. While this is a piece of fiction, I did incorporate some aspects of Barbara Moon’s persona, as the black wool dress was donated by her. I also wanted to explore how the “Audrey look” would have been considered by women in different time periods, as it is a “look” I personally love to emulate regularly through clothes and accessories. I would like to also give special mention of Sam Wasson’s book “Fifth Avenue, 5 A.M.,” which is a wonderful resource on the effect “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” had on culture. This post also utilizes “The Dress Detective” (Mida, Kim) methods of dress analysis and sketching.
Objects from the Ryerson Fashion Research Collection:
Givenchy coat, dress, and shoes from the Fashion Reserach Collection at Ryerson University. Accession #’s: 2014.07.006, 1997.04.026, 2014.99.018.
The Coat
Sketch of Givenchy coat, by Emily Mackey.
The early sixties are hinting at a revolution, a departure from the classic, conservative, and chic looks of Betty’s youth, but in that moment Betty Lambert couldn’t care a jot, for before her lay an entire box full of beautifully made Givenchy clothes. While Betty bought some practical pieces, a respectable black wool dress, and shoes that upon second look may be too tall for her comfort, the real apple of her eye is the bright pink wool coat, perfect for a night out with her husband, Bill. Bill never did understand why such clothes must be bought from Paris for such high prices when something similar could be bought at Sears. Betty has given up on trying to explain, Bill just can’t see that their simplicity and craftsmanship is what makes them timeless and elegant (Couturier, 8, 34), Betty then reminds him that these pieces are an investment, something that will “last and be re-worn by our daughter and maybe even her children.” Bill’s reply to this thinking is that their daughter is only ten and too young for such clothes, but at least he responds. Betty turns her attention back to her new coat, which promises to make her feel like Audrey in her latest picture – Breakfast at Tiffany’s.
Coat by Givenchy. Photo by Emily Mackey. Coat from the Fashion Research Collection at Ryerson University. Accession #2014.07.006.
While everyone can’t get enough of the black dress Audrey wore, Betty knows that a good evening dress can be found anywhere, by anyone (Wasson, 129) and she has a couple in her closet already. But this coat is unique, and special, and worth the price. Still, Betty couldn’t help keeping the two-page spread in Women’s Wear Daily showcasing the beautiful clothes worn in the film.
“Audrey Hepburn: A Givenchy Dream” in Women’s Wear Daily, 1961.
She first fell in love with Givenchy’s designs when Audrey Hepburn won her Oscar for Roman Holiday almost ten years ago. Betty was enamoured by the white lace bateau neck gown that Ms. Hepburn had worn to the Oscars. Betty was in Paris at the time studying Baroque-era art, and immediately went to Monsieur Givenchy’s maison and bought a lovely dress she still wears to this day. She even caught a glimpse of the unexpectedly tall yet graceful couturier once (Wasson, 130). Betty has been a faithful member of Givenchy’s clientele ever since, buying pieces whenever she accompanies Bill on his business trips to Paris. Paris has a special place in Betty’s heart as a place where she was independent, and perhaps that’s why she loves Audrey’s films so much – they’re often set there, with Audrey as the sprightly independent protagonist. Betty always finds herself tearing up in the scene of Sabrina where Sabrina is writing a letter while in her Paris apartment, with La Vie En Rose playing quietly in the background, but she’s unsure why.
When a trip from Paris is far off, a bottle of L’Interdit, the fruity and floral perfume that was made specifically for Audrey by Givenchy, gives Betty the feeling that she’s once again a young woman studying art in Paris. It’s not that Betty doesn’t love the life her husband provides for her, but she can admit to feeling a bit bored with her days now that her daughter is old enough to go to school, and it leaves Betty wishing she could have a place to go each day and feel useful again.
l’Interdit advertisement in Vogue, 1970.
The Shoes
Sketch of Givenchy shoes, by Emily Mackey.Photo by Emily Mackey. Shoes from the Fashion Research Collection at Ryerson University. Accession #2014.99.018 A+B.
Ann unpacks the last of her things into the room she has just rented. It’s just a small basement apartment, but it has its own entrance, a kind landlady, and affordable rent. The rent is especially important to Ann because it must be covered by her salary as a secretary in a downtown office building. It’s the 1970’s, and while Ann may not dress like a hippie, she certainly sees the value in their principles, especially women’s rights. Ann bore witness to the dissolution of her parent’s marriage, one where her father ruled over her mother by using his money as leverage every time. Ann didn’t want to have a marriage like that – one where the wife must ask for her husband’s money just to buy a new handkerchief, needing to justify her wants and needs only to be met with complaints over every penny and choice. Ann will pay her own way and buy her own things. Ann took as little as possible from her childhood home to prove that she could be self-sustaining, but she couldn’t leave her mother’s pair of Givenchy shoes that had barely been worn. The shoes remind Ann of an outfit Audrey Hepburn wears in How to Steal a Million, in which Audrey plays a woman with her own job that she studied for, where she was treated as an equal by the male characters (von Dassanowsky, 112) and of course, a beautiful wardrobe that has been inspiring Ann in her wardrobe-building for her new job.
Detail of blood stain on inner right heel of shoes. Photo by Emily Mackey. Shoes from the Fashion Research Collection at Ryerson University. Accession #2014.99.018 A+B.Audrey Hepburn and Peter O’Toole on the set of How to Steal a Million, 1966. http://footwearnews.com/2017/fashion/womens/kitten-heels-trends-audrey-hepburn-princess-diana-451649/.
One outfit in particular has been a goal for Ann, she calls it the “navy suit,” as Audrey wears a beautiful pair of navy shoes, stockings, wool coat and skirt, and a scarf. Ann is sure that her old school uniform skirt will work perfectly as it’s not too long (Vogue vol. 155, 125), as will the scarf she made in Home Economics. Ann had just purchased a navy wool coat from the consignment shop for $5, and stockings for $0.75. Feeling excited about her new outfit, Ann decides to try on her version of Audrey’s “navy suit.” Putting these pieces together, Ann felt transformed into a confident, chic, yet minimalist 1970’s Audrey (von Dassanowsky, 107), for only $5.75 (Moseley, 72).
Ann ignores the fact that the heels are taller than what Audrey wore, Ann is much shorter than Audrey anyways. Ann also ignores the digging in she feels on the inside right heel, and she’s sure she’ll break them in without injury. Ann consoles herself with the thought that she could always sell the shoes if they really are uncomfortable, she doubts her mother will notice they’re gone anyways and it’d be easy money, a pair of Givenchy shoes would cover a month’s rent surely (Stallybrass, 183).
The Dress
Dress by Givenchy. Photo by Emily Mackey. Dress from Fashion Research Collection at Ryerson University. Accession #1997.04.026.Dress by Givenchy. Photo by Emily Mackey. Dress from Fashion Research Collection at Ryerson University. Accession #1997.04.026.Dress by Givenchy. Photo by Emily Mackey. Dress from Fashion Research Collection at Ryerson University. Accession #1997.04.026.
Nicole sits down on her childhood bed while putting on her black stockings. She can’t escape the heavy melancholy she feels over losing her grandmother. Her grandmother’s health had been failing for years, and in the end, she knew her grandmother was ready to pass on.
Sketch of Givenchy dress, by Emily Mackey.Detail hidden clasps and zippers on dress by Givenchy. Dress from Fashion Research Collection at Ryerson University. Accession #: 2014.99.018 A+B.
Nicole stands to put on her dress for the funeral – her comfort on this day, for her grandmother had given it to her a month before she passed (Bride, 450). It’s a Givenchy design, which comes as no surprise since he was her favourite designer, and still in perfect condition despite being 30 years old. All the women in Nicole’s family loved to watch Audrey Hepburn films, and her grandmother was fortunate enough to afford pieces from the golden years of Audrey’s career. At that moment Nicole’s mother comes in to check on her and gives a chuckle when she sees the dress Nicole has picked out.
“The Audrey Dress,” in Women’s Wear Daily, 1993.
Nicole soon finds out that her grandmother had bought that dress, and when showing it to her husband described it as a sensible dress one could wear to work, a comment her husband mocked because she didn’t even have a job. The next day she went out to the local art gallery and got one and told her husband she had had enough of his begrudging. While it wasn’t until a few years later that they got a divorce, it was the start of her grandmother recapturing her independence. Nicole was elated to hear such a wonderfully “modern” story of her grandmother and felt connected to her once again through the dress (Bride, 450).
Audrey Hepburn in a promotional still for Sabrina, 1954. https://www.aol.com/view/15-most-influential-style-icons-all-time/#slide=35340#fullscreen.
Nicole slipped on the dress, after fiddling with the intricate clasp system, and inspected her image in the mirror, the v-neck shaped back of the dress reminded her of the all-black outfit Audrey wore in Sabrina. Despite the modest front of the dress, Nicole is surprised by the open back and marvels at Givenchy’s ability to incorporate such a visual trick in his clothes (Wasson, 130). Nicole feels comforted by the heavy wool dress and knows her grandmother would have been delighted to see her in it. Her grandmother had given Nicole the gift of being able to tell how well a piece of clothing is made, to be able to recognize and admire craftsmanship (Couturier, 44), although she’s unsure whether she’ll be able to match her grandmother’s keen eye for detail and subtleties (Couturier, 43).
With one last inspection in the mirror, Nicole is reminded of how what’s old is new again (Moseley, 72), and that the dress her grandmother Betty bought in the 1960’s looks like it could be in the latest issue of Vogue or Women’s Wear Daily. More importantly, knowing what this dress signified for her grandmother’s independence, Nicole thinks she’ll start wearing it to the office.
“The Little Black Dress” in Vogue, 1991.“The Little Black Dress” in Vogue, 1991.
Discussion question: Do we hold on to and value clothes for their sound construction, or for their sentimentality?
___________________________________________
Works Consulted
Bethan Bide (2017) “Signs of Wear: Encountering Memory in the Worn Materiality of a Museum Fashion Collection,” Fashion Theory, 21:4, 449-476.
Couturier, Myriam. “Professional Glamour And Feminine Mystique: Barbara Moon’s Style In Words And Wardrobe.” Ryerson University, 2015. Ryerson University Library and Archives Digital Repository, digital.library.ryerson.ca/islandora/object/RULA%3A5541.
Dassanowsky, Robert Von. “A Caper of One’s Own: Fantasy Female Liberation in 1960s Crime Comedy Film.” Journal of Popular Film and Television, vol. 35, no. 3, 2007, pp. 107–118., doi:10.3200/jpft.35.3.107-118.
Fashion: Doing it their Way—Only: The Nifty Dressers Think A Lot and Go Ahead. (1970, Mar 01). Vogue, 155, 125. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/docview/904336520?accountid=13631.
Mida, Ingrid, and Alexandra Kim. The Dress Detective: A Practical Guide to Object-Based Research in Fashion. Bloomsbury, 2015.
Moseley, Rachel. “Trousers and Tiaras: Audrey Hepburn, a Woman’s Star.” Feminist Review, no. 71, 2002, pp. 37–51.JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1396020.
Peter Stallybrass, “Marx’s Coat” in P. Spyer (ed.) Border Fetishisms: Material Objects in Unstable Spaces, NY: Routledge, 1998.
“Funny Face (1957) – “On How to Be Lovely” Song – Audrey Hepburn (8 of 10)” EverythingAudrey.com. Youtube, 20 Dec. 2014. Web. 16 Feb. 2018.
“Sabrina – The letter from Paris” SimplyPerfectAudrey. Youtube, 29 Sep. 2011. Web. 16 Feb. 2018.
“Audrey Hepburn: A Givenchy Dream.” (1961, Jun 23). Women’s Wear Daily, 102, 4-5. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/docview/1540384299?accountid=13631.
“Advertisement: L’interdit Givenchy.” (1970, Dec 01). Vogue, 156, 75. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/docview/897871993?accountid=13631.
Kazanjian, D. (1991, Jul 01). “Vogue’s view: The little black dress.” Vogue, 181, 52-52, 54, 56, 65. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/docview/879282889?accountid=13631.
“The Audrey Dress.” (1993, Jan 28).Women’s Wear Daily, 164, 1. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/docview/1445648364?accountid=13631.
