Slim was in; bulk was out back in 14th century Europe. Unlike today’s head-to-toe anorexic silhouettes, however, the fashionable folk of that era preferred tiny waists atop flared bottoms reinforced by flounces, petticoats, and layers upon layers of voluminous chemises. This Elizabethan body image was brought about by a preference for lacing and all manner of whale-boning that, if it were made to stand on its own, would do so like another body. Hence the bodies or “bodice” as it soon came to be known, became the prototype for achieving the figure of the day, and later gave way to stays in the 1600s, and the corsets of the late 1700s.
And those very things that made such gowns in that era the layered wedding cake-like affairs that they were: the petticoats; why, they merit their own undergarment history! In the 15th century, these “petty coats” or little jackets were tied to the bodice of the dress with laces, and were considered the precursors of the waistcoat. Once well into the 18th century with its muslin sheaths and Empire-cut necklines, however, petticoats became unsuitable and cumbersome. The underwear trend then pointed toward drawers or pantalettes for young women, made of cotton to match the “bust improvers” that were their top counterparts. Thus, the top and bottom undergarment set for women came to be.
That’s not to say all-in-one undergarments went to the back burner, because in the 1870s, combination chemise and drawer sheaths came into vogue. The men’s version of these were one-piece garments that had under vests and drawers beneath their outerwear. More breathable, woollen versions of these were produced as well, with concerns about health, body odor, and suchlike rearing their aromatic heads.
Underwear became lighter, simpler, and easier to wear as the decades wore on. Short-sleeved tops and shorts combos became the fashion for men’s undergarments after 1910, and in 1935, the first Y-Fronts were manufactured in America. What we now have come to call the “briefs” was actually inspired by a picture in a magazine of a man wearing a pair of trunks on the beach. Its “stiffest” (pun unintended) competition, however, were the boxer shorts issued to Army men during the war.
Women, on the other hand, went for the more natural line and shed all the whalebone trappings for brassieres that covered the breasts as well as the midriff. This became a cause for rebellion among those who still want to go the more natural, unrestrained route. In 1913, for instance, one Mary Phelps Jacob, an American debutante, went to a dance without the cumbersome brassier under her dress, but with two hankies tied by a ribbon to cover her bosom. This sparked the more modern brassiere versions, totally stamping out the rigid shape and silhouette of what was in during the Elizabethan era.
Fast-forward to today, and from what we can glean of Hollywood’s nipple slips, beaver flashes, and wardrobe malfunctions, it seems anything goes in the underwear arena. Anything or nothing, I should say. Underwear has gone full circle, with corsets now being worn as sexy tops and bikinis as stage costumes for any aspiring starlet.
Related Directory Categories:
