Body Shape Trends

Reflective Writing

Do People in Fashion Communication and Promotion Help Form Body Shape Trends or Are They A Result of Economic, Social or Political Changes?

Katie Ottewell N0367214 FASH20031

“The glamour girls of today would not have caused a head to turn, while the greatly acclaimed beauties of the Edwardian period would be considered good candidates for weight watchers” (Carter 1977: 154). This quote rings true in society today with the changes of the ideal figure having moved further along the fashion line of evolution. “Cultural ideas of acceptable body shapes have changed radically over the years” (Grogan 2005:3) making it appear our species is evolving before our very eyes, or at least our ideologies are. We can trace this cultural change from the voluptuous figures favoured in the middle ages to the thin body types preferred by fashion magazines today (Grogan 2005:13), where men and women are looking for almost artificial perfection (McGarry 2011:48). “Western culture prescribes a narrow range of body shapes as acceptable” (Grogan 2005:3) dictating what we can call beautiful with a tendency for those people whose body shape falls outside this narrow range to encounter prejudice. It is the responsibility of people in fashion communication to help broaden the ideas of beauty within body shapes but throughout history this hasn’t always happened. I will be exploring a range of jobs in fashion communication including painters, advertisers and photographers, in relation to how they have changed or portrayed body shape. I believe fashion communication uses written, visual and verbal communication to convey its ideas of beauty. But the important question to ask is, do we, as people who communicate fashion, help to form these ideas of body image or do we just jump along for the ride of the current body shape trend?

To answer this question we must consider the major changes in body shape and notion of beauty throughout the centuries and how the idealisation of slenderness in women can be viewed as the product of an historical evolution (Grogan 2005:13). We need to look deeper as to whether these changes have been triggered by communication in fashion or if they have been affected by economic, social or political happenings of the time, as is argued by English in a Cultural History of Fashion in the 20th Century (English 2007:153). To begin we can look back to the Middle Ages, where painters were the influential communicators of trends at the time, compared to the fashion publications and advertising of today.

In the Middle Ages plumpness was considered fashionable and erotic and the reproductive figure was portrayed, as I saw first-hand at the Pre-Raphaelite Victorian Avant-Garde exhibition. The body was often depicted with full round hips, breast and stomach as this was a symbol of fertility (Grogan 2005: 13).This figure can be seen in the painting by Rembrandt Harmensz (figure 1 ) which shows a medieval woman who has all the attributes to be a desirable woman of the time. She appears to be flaunting her body, trying to seduce the viewer, showing she knows her figure is desirable. Being of a larger more curvaceous figure was also a sign that you were of a higher social class as these were the people who had the most to eat. This point of view is still prevalent in many of today’s third world countries. At this time in history painters were the professionals responsible for recording beauty trends and often accentuated desirable figures to show what was considered attractive. Their paintings helped promote the ideas of the beautiful body shape but were not necessarily the founders of them. Having the figure to carry children was what women of the time considered beautiful. This therefore was also how men viewed women as they wanted their bloodline to continue.

Admiration and desire to be like the upper classes could also have played a role in this beauty trend.

This female body shape continued to be favourable into the 1800s. During this century there was just as much prejudice against the unconventionally beautiful body shape as there is in western culture today. When Manet’s painting Olympia (figure 2) was revealed it was denounced in Paris, as the nude woman was an average size and not considered plump enough to be erotic or desirable (Myers and Copplestone in Grogan 2205:14). In today’s society the woman in this painting would be considered a normal size for a real woman today but doesn’t have the Barbie body ideals now sought after. In the painting the woman does not look content which could be because she doesn’t have the desired body shape of the time. Again at this time painters had an enormous amount of influence but were not necessarily successfully creating the trends of body shapes. It could be argued that this what Manet was trying to do, create a new ideal, or he could simply have been showing a true representation of the woman portrayed, demonstrating that not all women could have the perfect body.

Figure 1 - Bathsheba Bathing, 1654

Figure 2 - Olympia, 1863

It wasn’t until nearly a decade into the twentieth Century that the definition of the beautiful body shape changed once more. By 1908 the shackles of the past had been removed with the hourglass corset banished from the scene (Carter 1977:27). The wider use of the camera meant that women were seen to look uncomfortable in their restricted clothing in photographs, unlike previous paintings where there facial expression could be altered. As the “eye of the camera gained sway, the sense of discomfort was even more painfully evident” (Carter 1977:23) as can be seen in figure 3 where the American actress Carroll McComas can be seen looking uncomfortable in her clothing. A more relaxed figure shape followed with the introduction of the empire line in 1911 which created a less curvaceous body shape. In figure 4 the woman’s pose suggests she is comfortable and relaxed. The new ideal body was a more elongated figure with fewer curves and constriction banished from the scene. These new fashions in clothing and body shape seems to mirror the freedoms of a changing world with the invention of motor cars and increasing popularity of cycling the new unrestricted dress and subsequent body shape became acceptable.

Into the twenties a slighter figure was still favoured. Many women had gained confidence since having to be independent in the First World War during which many women were taking on part time jobs as well as driving themselves (Lehnert 2000:20). In society they were beginning to be seen as individuals and not just the pretty companion of men. I believe this dramatic change in the ideal body had more to do with the social changes of the time and as a consequence of the First World War, rather than because it was being communicated and dictated that this shape was the next big thing. It could be argued that initially photographers capturing the discomfort of women prompted the change, but I think this was circumstantial, as women had been suffering to create the illusion of a desirable body shape for decades previously. Yet it was because of publications like Vogue and it’s illustrators such as Harriet Meserole, that word spread about ‘The New Silhouette’ ( Figure 5) and the currently sexy body to have, reaching women who were not affected by the social changes.

Figure 5 - ‘The New Silhouette’ Vogue Cover 1925

Figure 3 - Carroll McComas 1905

Figure 4 - Frances Alda 1920

Figure 6 – The Dior New Look 1947

A major figure change occurred in 1947 with a brief return to the past century of tiny waist corsets that formed the basis for Dior’s New Look (figure 6). Dior “gave women back their natural shape. He accentuated their breasts, rounded their hips and made their shoulders slender and feminine” (Cawthorrrne 1996:111). However, ironically the curves of this shape were entirely artificial (Cawthorrrne 1996:111).

The effects of war changed the pattern of life, and fashion reflected that change, which left women wanting to feel luxury, and what was more luxurious than the silks and lace of pre-war clothing (Carter 1977:226). However this beautiful body trend didn’t last long. With the arrival of the fifties came Hollywood stars such as “Marilyn Monroe who shot to fame in 1953” (Carter 1977:70). As you can see in figure 7 Marilyn Monroe has a curvaceous figure which then came back on trend in terms of perfect body shape. This was due to the wide spread communication of Hollywood films and the promotions of the brand that was Marilyn Monroe. I feel that this return to a rounder body shape trend was influenced by those who communicated the idols from Hollywood to the wider world and the photographers who shot them both in promotional material and in the paparazzi. A positive example being the front cover of Picturegoer Magazine which uses the famous hot air shot (figure 8).

Figure 8 - ‘Seven Year Itch’ Front cover of Picturegoer1954

Figure 7 - Marilyn Monroe in Gold Dress 1973

Figure 9 - Patrick Macnee and Twiggy 1967

Figure 10 - Virginia Slim advert 1968

The 1960s bought an “appetite for novelty and heavy accent on youth” (Carter 1977: 52). They conformed to their own set of values, refusing to be dictated to (Quant 1966: 75). Second Wave feminism empowered women of the next generation with the youth finding it “less easy to settle into domestic quietude” (Wheleham 1995:9). “Advertising glamourized and eroticised single life and heightened the importance of sex as a source of fulfilment and self-esteem” (Luciano 2002:97). With this new found confidence of being the predator rather than the prey in bar situations, the advertisement of the cosmopolitan woman and the introduction of the contraceptive pill women had a new found sense of freedom, and with this new feeling were searching for a new look to accompany it. “The trend for slimness became particularly acute in the 1960s when the fashion model Twiggy become the role model for a generation of young women” (Grogan 2005: 15). As you can see from figure 9 Twiggy was flat chested and had a boyish figure, emphasized in this photograph. Her pose suggests attitude and youthfulness.

Slimness unconventionally came to represent freedom, youth and was “adopted as the ideal by women of all social classes.” (Grogan 2005: 15). I feel that this size and body shape change occurred due to the combination of two factors: a social shift including second wave feminism and the rising of the youth. People dictating fashion created an outlet by changing body shape ideals completely, possible creating the start of something negative in our culture today.

However, Mary Quant once said that “you can be publicized on the national network television programmes, be written up by the most famous of the fashion columnists and the garment still won’t sell if the young don’t like it” (Quant 1966: 76). This argument suggests that it is the connectors, mavens and salesmen of society who have the influence to spread these trends, not people who write and promote fashion as a career (Gladwell 2002:34). The ideas may have originated from people who communicate fashion but it was the fervour of youth which exaggerated them.

In the 1960s advertising had heavy influence on consumers. An example of an advert that could have affected body shape is the famous Phillip Morris Cigarettes, Virginia Slims. These were cigarettes aimed specifically at women, another independence and empowerment boost for the females in society. The advert (figure 10) used the slogan “You’ve Come a long Way, Baby” and shows contrasting images from the past to illustrate the changes in society and how attitudes towards women had changed (English 2007:111). The slogan enraged feminists of the time but could be an example of how people in advertising have an effect on the desired body shapes at the time. The adverts “promoted the idea of slimness being equated with smoking rather than eating” (English 2007:111) and it could be viewed that they used the body shape of the time to promote their product, saying it could help you achieve the ideal slim figure. This is an example of how people who communicate fashion help encourage and create trends purely for popularity and financial means. They have helped create and ride the trend of slimness by incorporating it into their advertising without thinking of the consequences, not only of their product but the message they are sending to women. I feel that more responsibility should be taken with brands that use advertising to encourage women to change their body shape, especially if it leads to an unhealthy outcome.

Figure 11 – Jerry Hall 1980

The 1960’s seem to have been the tilting point where the scales have leant over towards the extreme ideas of slimness we see today. Moving slowly to start with the idolized physically fit body figures such as Jerry Hall in the 1980s(figure 11) were the ideal, but then came the serious slide over the next two decades to the “trend for thinness as a standard of beauty” (Grogan 2005:15). Role models became made of such idealisations and exaggerations in fashion and celebrity culture that the everyday women couldn’t possibly achieve them (Rogers 1999:24). But now change needs to happen. We need to start influencing women’s thinking, so they can appreciate the range of body shapes that are beautiful and healthy. People in fashion communication have the power to do this.

Change has already started on the edges of the industry and now needs to extend inwards. Many alternative magazines such as ‘Naked but Safe’ are now taking the natural beauty and body shape of women and creating a magazine totally focused on this. I believe it will begin with articles and photoshoots on topics such as this making regular appearances and gradually creeping into mainstream fashion magazines. They will help promote positive body image and solidify the belief that a range of healthy body shapes are acceptable and desirable. It will take many small steps, involving a wide range of communication, from advertising campaigns and magazine spreads, to inspirational writing, to help edge into the psyche of women. I also suggest that introducing positive body image into school curriculums would help develop healthy self-image due to children becoming aware of their bodies from the age of 6 (Am I normal :2008).

Currently “women cannot escape endless messages about how to improve, enhance, rework and even perfect their deficient, flawed bodies” (Rogers 1999:122) and this is often the result of being bombarded with images of ‘photo-shopped’ women. This type of imagery and overpowering feeling of dissatisfaction needs to move towards getting a wide range of shapes to be seen as beautiful, which will have to happen gradually with the commitment of those over several areas of the industry, to eventually be seen as the norm.

Writers, photographers, illustrators and others who communicate fashion often are not the ones who are setting the trends in beauty but throughout history they have communicated these trends, seemingly without looking further ahead to the effect it may have on body shape trends of the future. We are now so far down into the pit of skinny ideals it will take a long time for us, as a society, to claw our way out, but it can be done with gentle encouragement by those who are responsible for communicating fashion. Therefore we now have the responsibility to tip the ideas of society in a new direction, increasing the diversity of beauty. As the next generation of fashion communicators could we be the first in history to solely dictate the subjective nature of beauty in the human form, whatever its shape?

Word count: 2196

References Am I Normal, 2008. [TV] BBC Two, 29 April 2008 Carter. E, 1977. The changing world of fashion, 1900 to the present. London: Butler and Tanner Ltd Cawthorne. N, 1996. The New Look: The Dior Revolution. London: Reed Consumer Books Limited English. B. 2007. A Cultural History of Fashion in the 20th Century: From the Calkwalk to the Sidewalk. New York: Berg Publishing Gladwell. M. 2002. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. New York: Back Bay Books Grogan. S, 2005. Body Image: Understanding Body Dissatisfaction in Men, Women and Children. New York: Routledge Lehnert. G, 2000. A history of Fahsion in the 20th Century. Cologne: Druckhaus Locher Luciano. L, 2001. Looking Good: Male Body Image in Modern America. New York: Hill and Wang McGarry, J., 2011. Girls On Film. Stylist, p.46 – 48 Quant. M, 1966. Quant by Quant. London: Cassell and Company LTD Rogers. M, 1999. Barbie Culture. London: SAGE Publications Inc Wheleham. I, 1995. Modern Feminist Theory: From The Second Wave to ‘PostFeminism’. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd

Illustrations Figure 6 French, J., 1947. ‘New Look’ Suit [Photograph] Figure 1 Harmensz, R., 1654. Bathsheba Bathing [Oil on Canvas] Figure 2 Manet, E., 1863. Olympia [Oil on Canvas] Figure 5 Meserole, H., 1925 ‘The New Silhouette’ Vogue Cover [Illustration] Figure 11 Penn, I., 1980. Jerry Hall [Photograph] Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 7

O'Neill, T., 1967. Patrick Macnee and Twiggy [Photograph] Unknown, 1968. Virginia Slim advert [Photograph] Unknown, 1973, Marilyn Monroe in Gold Dress [Photograph]

Figure 8 Unknown, 1954. ‘Seven Year Itch’ Front cover of Picturegoer [photograph] Figure 3 Unknown, 1905. Carroll McComas [Photograph] Figure 4 Unknown, 1920. Frances Alda [Photograph]

Bibliography Books Carter. E, 1977. The changing world of fashion, 1900 to the present. London: Butler and Tanner Ltd Cawthorne. N, 1996. The New Look: The Dior Revolution. London: Reed Consumer Books Limited English. B. 2007. A Cultural History of Fashion in the 20th Century: From the Calkwalk to the Sidewalk. New York: Berg Publishing Evans. J, 1995. Feminst Theory Today: An Introduction to Second-Wave Feminism. London: SAGE Publications Inc Gladwell. M. 2002. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. New York: Back Bay Books Grogan. S, 2005. Body Image: Understanding Body Dissatisfaction in Men, Women and Children. New York: Routledge Lehnert. G, 2000. A history of Fahsion in the 20th Century. Cologne: Druckhaus Locher Luciano. L, 2001. Looking Good: Male Body Image in Modern America. New York: Hill and Wang Quant. M, 1966. Quant by Quant. London: Cassell and Company LTD Rogers. M, 1999. Barbie Culture. London: SAGE Publications Inc Walters. M, 2005. Feminism, A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press Inc Wheleham. I, 1995. Modern Feminist Theory: From The Second Wave to ‘PostFeminism’. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd

Magazines Ings- Chambers, E., 2012. Face in the Future. Style, December, p.30 – 33 Kastrisianakis, S., Kykrilis, V,. 2011 I’m-perfection Project. Naked But Safe, #1, p. 60 – 63 McGarry, J., 2011. Girls On Film. Stylist, p.46 – 48 Stemp, S., 2012. Now That’s What I Call Gamour!. You, September, p.52 – 55.

T.V and Film Am I Normal, 2008. [TV] BBC Two, 29 April 2008 The Hard Sell, Episode 2, 2008 [TV] BBC Four, 04 March 2008 You've Come a Long Way Baby, 1969 [TV Advert] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQZAGL2M_Us

Websites Boothroyd , 2012. Thinness in media feeds body size obsession [online].

Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-20251825 [29.11.12] Hickman, M., 2006. Shock as designers go smaller than size zero [online] Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/shock-asdesigners-go-smaller-than-size-zero-420848.html [12.01.2013] Smith, A., Barringer, T., Rosenfeld, J. , 2012. Pre-Raphaelites: Victorian Avant Garde: Room 5 [online] Available at: http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tatebritain/exhibition/pre-raphaelites-victorian-avant-garde/pre-raphaelitesvictorian-0-4 [10.01.13]

Exhibitions Barringer. T, Rosenfeld. J, Smith, A. Pre-Raphaelites: Victorian Avant Garde, Tate Britain 12.07. 2012 –13.01.2013 [Exhibition]