The myths and fables of corsets

By Kellie Murphy

 I was sitting in a seminar when a girl said to me that she wouldn’t wear a corset. We were in a history seminar so her comment surprised me, after all it was a key piece of clothing in the past, so her comment interested me. I was curious why she said it, and what she meant. This led to an article about the history and criticisms of corsets, both past and present.

 Corsets have appeared in many forms throughout history and I will give a short account of it instead of regurgitating the encyclopaedia of undergarments (I don’t know if this exists but I would read it). Corsets are an undergarment worn underneath clothes, with a piece of clothing, like a shift, underneath it to act as a barrier for the skin. It was used to shape the body and was fitted tightly to the form. The corset had many names and took many forms throughout history and usually extended from the hips to below the chest, it achieved its rigidity from boning and lacing to shape the torso. Corsets made an appearance in western fashion in the sixteenth century and  carried on from there into the twentieth century. The corset sounds like something to dread and to be honest the words ‘rigidity’ and ‘fitted tightly’ don’t sound comfortable. The rest of my narration doesn’t exactly soothe fears, though it does offer a more balanced summary. The corset began as a sleeveless close-fitting bodice that was used for modesty and to shape your torso but it evolved to be made from whalebone and steel which compressed the waist. Tight lacing involved steel, as it was a very tough look to achieve without the aid of this durable metal. The drawing of a woman’s organs and waist altered through tight lacing is incredibly striking and it looks like by the 1880s to the 90s, when tightlacing reigned supreme, that corsets had reached their peak. Corsets alternated throughout history in style, shape, material and length and the Edwardian period was no different. The Victorian period favoured the more natural hourglass figure that would give rise to tightlacing, but the Edwardian period of the 1900s adored the ‘S’. By the 1920s a more innovative corset was ushered in. The sport corset was also introduced, using elastic which gave women more freedom to move. As the name suggests, it was used to play sports, giving women a more attainable active lifestyle. The corset was used in the twentieth century to shape the body alongside the brassiere (an early form of the bra) and compression underwear.The reign of the corset came to a close with the sixties and seventies which discarded the corset in favour of exercise and diet to change your body shape. 

In today’s world and in the past corsets faced a backlash. The response against corsets throughout history informed the negative view of corsets in the present. The drawing of the female body below presents an irrevocably changed body to an extreme hourglass figure instead of the natural curves on the left. Another critical view of the corset came from the actress Emma Stone, who stated that her corset in the film ‘The Favourite’ moved her organs. One is blatantly horrifying while the other is subdued. But both are negative depictions of corsets. So, we have to look at the past to see why corsets are seen so negatively today. 

  In the past in the west women had to marry to live freely, to have their own homes and lives, to move from daughter to wife and later, if they lived up to the expectations of which marriage was formed, mother. But men had their own lives. They could earn money, buy assets and property more freely than women. Men did not have to care about their appearances if they didn’t want to as they didn’t need looks to secure marriage, only the ability to provide for their family. They could be confirmed bachelors without it being seen as a shame. The same could not be said for women. It was seen as an embarrassment or a failure if you ended up as a spinster, so to make yourself more attractive for marriage you would adhere to the beauty standards of the day. Of course, this was criticised, which can be seen in the satirical cartoon below from the 1830s. Jane Hill brilliantly analyses the negative depictions of corsets in her article ‘Fighting the corsetless evil’. Hill recounts that ‘fashion police’, health concerns, ministers and feminist dress reformers criticising the corset from the mid-1800s onwards. There was a raging discourse between anti-corset and pro-corset groups with the anti-corset groups advocating a new style of clothing for physical comfort, exercise, work and modernity, for health and beauty while the pro-corset side did the same, stating that a fear of ill-health and an unattractive body is a reason to wear the corset. 

 I believe this fraught argument about corsets is connected with women’s want and need to appear beautiful, and societies’ problem with that. The satirical drawing illustrates this to us. We see a woman with a pinched up face with exaggerated puffy sleeves and a bell skirt, a stark contrast to her dramatically thin waist. Of course, this is on purpose because the drawing is mocking the lacing of corsets in the 1830’s. The lady is using a flamboyant new machine to achieve this thin waist and we know why. She needs to adhere to the beauty standards of the day to appear attractive, to gain a husband. The drawing does not comment on why women have to go such extremes, why corset lacing is so imperative to them, instead it mocks women’s position in society which has led to such extremes. Society has placed great importance on women’s appearance in both the past and present. The consequences of not adhering to beauty standards were generally more extreme in the 1830s than today in the west. Not appearing attractive could mean spinsterhood, with society putting so much pressure for women to be beautiful, but when they go to such efforts to appear attractive in order to gain their own life they are mocked for it, like the use of corsets in this drawing. 

 I can’t help but wonder if corsets are in fact all that uncomfortable and painful? Corsets were tailored to your body, they were fit to measure you and a protective barrier was worn between your skin and the corset to protect your skin from marks, and the corset from sweat and dirt. It sounds a lot more comfortable than what Emma Stone endured. Corsets were also worn by every social class, virtually everyday. Both upper class women and lower-class women wore corsets, it conveyed respectability and morality. Corsets were worn at work, in factories and on farms, when doing hard physical labour. They had to be comfortable enough for you to do your job, they had to be comfortable enough for you to breathe while doing labour. Corsets were also worn when exercising from climbing mountains and  for fun like dancing. I found a photo of a woman cycling while encased in tight lacing and I think this all shows that it was possible to exercise and have fun while still wearing a corset. It was the norm to wear one and because of this and the fact that they were worn when working, they must be comfortable enough not to constrict breathing, especially when they were designed specifically for the individual. 

 Corsets have a much more nuanced history then is first realised and its reproval is so complicated that this article has barely scratched the surface. If anything, it reveals that women are still vulnerable to criticism for something that society has made feel necessary to them and I’m sure we can all see that even in today’s progressive society.