.png)
Literature and Drama Editor Laura Kiely unpacks the long and intricate history of the infamous corset in women’s fashion.
Did you know that we had corsets before we had bras? In fact, the corset predates the bra by centuries. The earliest evidence of a possible corset in vogue can be seen on an ancient Minoan artefact: the Minoan snake goddess. This figurine was excavated in 1903 and dates back to 1000 BC. A more tangible timeline, though, really forms a trajectory that starts in the late Renaissance, reaches a zenith in the mid-Victorian era and finally plunges to its resting place at the inception of 1920s free-flowing flapper fun (they still wore undergarments though…). That’s over 400 years of documented discomfort. A significant observation emerges between these periods of fashion history; that of a more veiled means of female oppression.
That’s over 400 years of documented discomfort. A significant observation emerges between these periods of fashion history; that of a more veiled means of female oppression.
Like most fashionable novelties, corsets were first associated with the aristocracy. Before the Industrial Revolution, corsets were structured from expensive materials such as whalebone and silk and were handmade by skilled seamstresses. For this reason, they were exclusively available to those who possessed expendable income. This is why we see so many wealthy ladies with cone-shaped torsos in their oil-painted portraits. The cone-shaped corset was popular up until the end of the 18th century - Marie Antoinette most likely lost her head sporting one of these. By the Victorian era, corsets were far more accessible as industrialisation pioneered the assembly line manufacturing of products. Factories made all kinds of goods more affordable - and corsets were one of them.
Although existing in vogue long before, the term ‘corset’ didn’t fully materialise until circa. 1840-1850 when it became heavily associated with the practice of tightlacing. Tightlacing was made possible through the introduction of the steel eyelet by Frenchman Jean Werly in 1827, and allowed corset wearers to lace themselves in extremely tightly whilst avoiding ripping the fabric. However, these two garments should not be equated. The corset was around centuries before tightlacing ever transpired in women’s fashion, and not all women would commit to its extremities, even though it reflected the “ideal” beauty standard.
It is the corset which provides the foundation for tightlacing, and it is tightlacing which pulls the waist in at extreme measures. For this reason, the undergarment took on a much more restrictive role and controversial character specifically in the 19th century. Before tightlacing, there were stays, bodices and jumps: all of which handled the waist with a much lighter touch. A corset could be worn without extreme tightlacing and still support the up-to-14-pounds of clothing that was required of women to wear daily. It is tightlacing – not the corset – that characterises this emerging era of women’s fashion: the impossible waist.
However, the fact that women could create this illusion of such scarcity with an undergarment often cost them their health. Historian Suzannah Lipscomb emphasises how by the 1860s tightlacing had become increasingly extreme; it was recommended for women to wear their corset at all times, with some women dangerously achieving a 16-inch waistline. Lipscomb highlights that there is evidence of liver damage obtained from autopsy reports on women who died during the times of extreme tightlacing. Indentations can be observed on the liver from where the rib cage closed in unnaturally. At the same time, a ‘pregnancy corset’ could be purchased and worn to maintain social standing. A tiny waist was a marker of not just beauty, but a woman’s social status as well. Even pregnancy was not enough to render her escape from the whalebone cage.
Lipscomb highlights that there is evidence of liver damage obtained from autopsy reports on women who died during the times of extreme tightlacing. Indentations can be observed on the liver from where the rib cage closed in unnaturally.
It is unfortunate that this pressure on women to reflect the ‘hourglass’ silhouette has not yet fully escaped us. There was a blip in the 1920s with flapper fun when it seemed to recede into the background, yet returned all the same not long after. I should add, though, that there is nothing inherently wrong with an hourglass figure - what is wrong is the constant flux of ideals and expectations forced upon women to physically reflect them. Today, the corset has been somewhat replaced by the waist trainer, which is recommended for use while working out. There is no real difference between the two, both are explicitly touted to sculpt the waistline. The modern day waist trainer has become colossal in women’s gym culture through viral TikTok hashtags like “How to Achieve a Non-Existent Waist”. A woman’s health is constantly up for compromise, where her body is modified to be, essentially, commodified.
I mean, what is the lifespan of a trend? And how can we fit a body into them?