The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-04-09
ORIGIN or FASHION.
Some Clews to the Habitat of the Despot-
ism Of Dress.

There is great need at the present mo-
ment OF some patient and industrious
philosopher who will make II his business
to trace 10 their source the varying fash
ions Of female dress. and TO inform a long
suffering race Of the secret origin OF a
despotism whose oppressive mandates
they seem quite unable to Withstand. No
man who happily wears the same kind
of clothes to-day that ne did some thirty
years ago can nave the least concep-
ton OF the weary tyranny exercised over
the other sex by fashion. Year after year
he goes - his tailor and orders a suit Of
clothes "to be made as usual" with a
cheerful disregard II the almost imper-
cepuble changes which may have taken
place in the dress Of his more fashionable
contemporaries. But with n woman the
case is far different she must conform 10
the law Of change, and the changes in her
dress are as strongly marked as they are
frequent.
During the last two or three weeks we
nav been treated 10 a striking i%llustra-
ton Of the utter helplessness of woman
kind in the matter Of fashion. A rumor
was recently started 10 the effect that an
attempt would shortly be made TO rein
troduce the crinoline. II would appear,
from the letters that appeared in all the
newspapers, that the wearers of petit
coats were unanimous in their cOndemna-
ton Of the hateful contrivance. and one
might reasonably have expected that they
would have been contented with that eX-
preston Of their feelings. and have as
sured themselves that their milliners and
dressmakers would speedily renounce an
idea which was so evidently distasteful
10 their customers.
The comfortable assurance, however,
was very far from their thoughts. They
have not the slightest confidence I'm the
weight Of their wishes, and firmly believe
that. whether they desire il or not. they
will have 10 wear a crinoline-if only
fashion bids them. Who is Fashion?
What Is she that all women should obey
her? They frankly confess that they do
not know. When one considers how
blindly and implicitly they have oheyed
her every within for y~ears-nay, for cen
turies-surely the confession should be a
mortifying one.
We have always heard n great deal
about the leaders OF fashion; now we
learn that those powerful -personages are
more or less mythical. Through the
mouth OF Sir Henry PonsOnby we hear
that her gracious Majesty does not con-
slider tina fashion IS a subject upon which
she can give an opinion. and a like an
swer has been received from the Princess
OF Wales. Evidently, therefore, the lead
ers Of fashion are not TO be found In the
precincts Of the court. or. we may also
suppose. among the great ladies OF So
ciety. Common report assigns some or
the most startling changes in woman's
attire TO Paris. In the days OF the Second
Empire there was. without doubt. a good
deal Of reason for imagining that our
fashions came from our neighbOrs across
the channel. and that the French stage,
controlled 10 a certain extent by the
court of the Tuilleries. was responsible
for each fresh innovation.
To-day we do not fancy that our French
neighbors are more disposed 10 lead us
than 10 follow us: at any rate, they them
selves no longer possess a supreme arbiter
Of fashion. and. as far as one can judge,
are every whit as much at the mercy or
some unknown inventor as we are our
selves. Who is 1t. then. who Is response
BILE for the constantly varying modes or
women's fTOcks? Some one must invent
them; and It must also be some one who
has power 10 enforce the adoption or MS
invention. for, whether It be ugly or not,
the world Of womankind meekly submits
10 his dictatiOn.
one is almost disposed 10 believe in the
fanciful theory put forward by the lady
who has been most eloquent on the side or
the mo Crin0line League" Woman's
fashions. she says, are not due 10 the IN
vention Of woman; they emanate from "A
small clique of men, an Inscriptions
council composed partly Of manufacturer
and partly Of d-ressmakers, who play into
each others hands; in which case, or
course. the introduction Of the crinoline
is easily explained. Surprising that a
ladv's skirt contains so many yards. the
use of crinoline would swell il TO three
times it's size. The manufacturers would
sell three times the amount OF material
and the dressmaker would, OF course
profit equally with the manufacturer.
Our own explanation Of the mystery Is
a more simple. though. we must confess
a less satisfactory one. In the first place,
we believe there is no ruling mind, no sys-
TEN Of deliberate invention or choice al
all. The leading dressmakers Of London
and Paris find their advantages In vary
ing their designs as frequently as pos
sible: wherever a novelty achieves any
success. whether II be in London or In
Paris. II is Immediately copied by other
~dressmakers. and its general adoption Is
as rapid as that of a slang word. Equally
rapid is its course toward exaggeratlon'
it's salient features are further and fur-
Their enlarged, until the exaggeration pc
comes grotesque. the reaction sets In. ana
fashion swings back 10 the other extreme
London Spectator.