HOME / the book club: New books dissected over e-mail.

Uplift

Leotards, Pearls, a Guy Without a Shirt, and Other Bra Accessories

Posted Tuesday, Jan. 29, 2002, at 4:12 PM ET
Book cover

Who are these people?

This week's reading.

Buy the book.

Dear Jodi,

Uplift, even with 70 pages of notes and appendices, is slimmer than the hips of a runway model and a surprisingly dull treatment of a delectable subject. Like you, I would like to have seen less on who got what patent and a little more about the culture and the very colorful people involved. Warnaco's Linda Wachner, on the imperiousness scale somewhere between Leona Helmsley and the Queen of Hearts, is just one recent example.

The insular, world-through-bras approach gives the authors a rather skewed perspective. The authors seem positively resentful when the smaller lingerie companies are bought or merged, though they don't give us enough of a sense for the personalities or issues involved to make us care about it. For example, they describe Loveable as "surrendering" its brand names to Sara Lee and note that "the integrity of design-to-production that once typified these labels has disappeared," without discussing the worldwide changes in manufacturing and distribution that made these changes inevitable.

It was nice to have them authoritatively debunk some bra mythology, like the notion that there was widespread bra burning. As you point out, it would have been nice to pursue the story further to find out how the term "bra-burner" became a shorthand to dismiss feminists who sought equal rights for women. I got a kick out of hearing the real story behind the legend of the special bra Howard Hughes designed to show off Jane Russell's magnificent bosom in his movie The Outlaw. It turns out that Russell found it "uncomfortable and ridiculous" and never wore it. Without telling Hughes, she just adapted her own bra to make it achieve the seamless appearance he was trying for.

But I thought the authors seemed oddly eager to sweep aside socialite Caresse Crosby's claim to have invented the brassiere. They insist on calling her by her maiden name (Mary P. Jacob), which seems a little snippy, and they dismiss her design as "innovative but commercially unimportant." They never mention that she sold it to Warner's, still one of the biggest manufacturers of lingerie, which seems overly dismissive.

One fascinating part of the bra story is the way that manufacturers and consumers influenced each other. Women were sometimes swayed by advertising, but they also insisted on some of the changes of styles, fabrics, comfort, and durability. The quote from the Bali representative is delightful: "Some women are resigned to the fact that their feet hurt. But in bras, they still demand comfort." Those darn women! Wanting to have clothing that doesn't impede their ability to run, stretch, lift, reach, work, and breathe! As the authors put it, in the 1960s there was "a clear break with the past, when women accepted restraint and moderate discomfort in order to achieve the fashionably polished look."

So, I wish the book had included more ads, because they do such a good job of allowing us to examine those developments. There is a great example from an earlier era in Liz Smith's marvelous The Mother Book. It is a 1937 LeGant lingerie ad from Vogue showing a mother and daughter in bras and girdles. The caption has the daughter saying: "Why Mother! You slim young thing! I thought you were one of the girls!" The mother replies: "Indeed miss! And since when has LeGant been restricted to your generation?" As Smith notes, "Did mothers and daughters ever talk like this?"

The "I dreamed I won the election" ad you mentioned was my very favorite part of the book. I was amazed to read that it ran in 1952, when the idea of a woman running for office was almost as controversial as a woman going out in her underwear. That Maidenform "I dreamed" series is worth a book of its own. My friend Bobbie was a lingerie model from the late 1950s through the early '70s, and she posed for a number of them, including "I dreamed I went to the circus …" She told me that the challenge when she first got into the business was the notion that nice girls didn't pose for pictures in their underwear. For that reason, many of the early ads were sketches rather than photographs. There was even a period that had models wearing long-sleeved leotards and tights under the lingerie in photos, to preserve their modesty.

Advertisers decided that if they wanted to have photos of real women wearing lingerie without leotards, they would have to look less like pin-ups. So they switched from more buxom models to those like Bobbie, with figures so impeccably elegant that they made walking around in their underwear look positively chic. Bobbie says that for a while they even draped the lingerie models with pearls and furs, as though they were wearing very high-fashion clothes that just happened to be invisible. But finally the world got used to the idea of models in their underwear, at least in magazines. It would be a few more years before they would be shown on television. In 2001, a more dubious breakthrough was the first network television broadcast of a lingerie fashion show. The Victoria's Secret program got high ratings for ABC, but it also triggered an indecency investigation from the FCC.

The current issue of People magazine has an ad for Lane Bryant that shows a beautiful woman wearing jeans with "sexy" on her belt buckle and a bright pink bra. A good-looking guy without a shirt leans back behind her. The woman looks confident and, um, satisfied. What caught my attention was that the model in this ad is not the usual toothpick, but a real woman with a real figure. I'd like to see that as the frontispiece for a book 100 years from now about the second century of bras.

Yours,
Nell

Leotards, Pearls, a Guy Without a Shirt, and Other Bra Accessories

Posted Tuesday, Jan. 29, 2002, at 4:12 PM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
Jodi Kantor is Slate's New York editor. Nell Minow is the editor of the Corporate Library, which covers corporate governance and performance, and writer of Movie Mom, reviews of films and videos.
To the 500-plus Slate readers who entered "The Book Club" contest: We're reading as fast as we can. Results soon, we promise, and thanks for being patient.
COMMENTS

Notes From The Fray Editor:

Bill Lax writes that his mother Leona was one of the great bra designers, and that it was she who alphabetized cup sizes. Dan Golub speaks out for toothpicks here. Chas Valentine looks at fake bra history. Joan has the excellent theory that "Bra names also relected the mood of the times… The no nonsense, hard driven, 'get out of my way,' workaholic woman of the '80s was offered support and comfort from the 'Eighteen Hour Bra.'" Kathleen Ely says she is, like Emma Goldman, "politically uncorseted," but she still likes the comfort and "joys of a great fitting bra." We also liked Kate Powers' detailed personal account below—we'd hoped for more posts like this, but apparently only women called Kate and Kathleen wanted to share. There were many posts of a kind that we expected but didn't particularly want to read. And Mike Oxbigg is back with his breast nicknames. This feature was first spotted a year ago following this article on Mardi Gras, and as we said then, at least he's on-topic.

Special note: The authors of Uplift, Colleen Gau and Jane Farrell-Beck, are looking for Slate readers who know about bras. They are "very much hoping to hear from readers directly who may have additional information, corrections, and personal experience or connections with the bra industry that could add to the story." Read Gau's post here: it includes an email address.


Reader Comments From The Fray:

So goes the nation….can't help but imagine the parallel of the dot com boom of the nineties and the rise in popularity of the pushup, air pump, and water padded bras. Under the bountiful exhibit of substance that meets the eye lies... well, nothing.

--Jackie

(To find or answer this post, click here.)


I wonder if the bra helped to promote the breast as the most attractive part of the woman. It accentuated the shape of the breast far better than the petticoat, which flattered the waist, ever could. Women's fashion, because of technology or morality, tried to create big, false forms of feminity; the bra simply did what it could with what was there.

--BML

(To find or answer this post, click here.)


The combination of breast and bra is, along with lips and mouth, the most obvious sexual feature of a woman that may be observed in daily life, at the office, a cafe or club, and no wonder the care, thought, expense and effort that goes into presentation is substantial--it is a powerful cue and one that every woman I've been close to is intensely conscious of. I would say that the bra is the most important clothing item used because so many mannerisms and implications flow from it…

--Gregory M. Patchen

(To find or answer this post, click here.)


I'd like to skim Uplift to discover whether the authors have noticed how bra manufacturers have begun to focus on fabric and neglect actual design. This is, naturally, a matter that concerns the well-endowed more than other consumers, but I have to say that the recent switch to heavily lycra-filled fabrics (since, say, the early '90s) strikes me as an attempt at planned obsolescence. Although, yes, much more comfortable than less stretchy fabrics, when bras made largely of spandex wear out, they wear out so completely as to be entirely pointless. On the other hand, a less stretchy bra (these days likely to be much more expensive and made by a European company like La Perla) will still deliver a few years of weekend and emergency service long after it has lost its initial vim and vigor.

It also hasn't escaped my notice that these stretch fabrics have the added virtue of not requiring careful tailoring techniques. A really great (read: supportive, well-shaped and comfortable) bra will typically have a seam that runs right over the nipple; placing this seam and making it low-profile enough not to draw attention under clothing or chafe is no easy feat and must consume many manhours, both in the design and manufacturing stages. (Here I'm speaking with some experience, since I just had a dress made with just such a seam and the dressmaker, though gifted, struggled with it for quite a while before getting it right.) How much easier to give women a couple triangles of spandex and call it a day? And too bad for chesty individuals who would like to have discrete, organic-looking geometric forms under their clothes, rather than oddly-shaped bags of flesh. It is their misfortune to have been born with the genes for a womanly figure but neither the inclination for surgery nor the funds. Thus does the ill-clothed heavy set figure become a symbol of belonging to a low-income or low-status demographic, while the wealthy can afford trim, well-tailored forms. Not that I'm bitter.:-)

--Kate Powers

(To find or answer this post, click here.)

(1/30)

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
TODAY'S PICTURES
TODAY'S CARTOONS
TODAY'S DOONESBURY
TODAY'S VIDEO
Very superstitious.90/091113_TP.jpg
Cartoonists' take on unemployment.50/091113_TC.jpg
Follow the leaper.1/122939/2183724/DoonesburyPlaceholder.jpg