The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-10-15
Mystery of the Fashions.

Season after season, year in and year
out. "the fashions" present themselves
in an endless succession of changes.
Where do they come from and how do
they come? Who invents them? It
seems a mysterious business. and there
is, in fact, a good deal of uncertainty
and caprice about 1t. but no mystery.
1t Is a regular process conducted on
definite and Ineligible principles,
which are at the bottom just the same
old business principles that govern
other things. The fashions are bust
ness and, only different from other
business in the fact thai thei- essential
quality Is changed; they are clothes IL
Illuminated by c--ange. The same quail
ity enters into some other things, too;
but not nearly to the same extent, for
very simple and sufficient reasons.
There is more demand and q the same
time more scope for change In dress
than in other things, such as furniture,
houses, meals. or modes of shaking
hands. Change is novelty and desired
mainly because it attracts attention
and confers distinction. and these OBJ
jects are more Immediately and eff
fectively attained in proportion to the
prominence of the personal element.
Nothing is SO close to the person
as clothes; nothing so effectually at
tracts attention to the person. At the
same time they are more perishable
than furniture or houses; they need
constant :-enewals, and the possible
ties of variation are unlimited. Con-
sequently dress offers a field for fashion
or novelty so superior to any other
that it has annexed the world and
1.-THE fashions have come to mean
novelty in dress-and especially wo-
mems dreSs-for the same reasons;
because it is more important for wo-
men to attract personal attention than
for men. There are fashions in mems
dress, but they represent very trihing
changes, and the men who attach i'm
portance to them are of no account.
These observations give the clew to
the process of producing the fashions.
There are three persons who have com
mon interest in constant change of
dress; they are the manufacturer, the
dresmaker, and the wearer. The first
two need no explanation; they want
to sell the commodities they produce,
and frequent changes of style insure
a perpetually renewal demand. With
out such changes people would go on
wearing their old things much longer
and since there would be no induce
ment to buy new ones so long as the
old served their purpose economy
would suggest the use of the most
business would shrink accordingly.
The fashions, which compel customers
to get new things, keep it going.
How, then. about the third party
concerned, the Wedr0r whose interest
is not to be always obliged to buy
new thirs&s? It looks as If the fashions
were devised for the benefit of the
manufacturer and the dressmaker,
who conspire against the wearer. The
answer to that is that there are wear
ers and wearers, those who set the
fashion and those who follow it. The
latter would really gain If there were
no changes, but to the former novelty
is essential and their interest is iden-
teal with that of the manufacturer
in the business. Who are they?
Women who for some reason or
another desire toattract attention and
be conspicuous They include ladies
occupying prominent positions in the
social world, ladies occupying equally
or more prominent positions on the
stage beauties in society. and beauties
out Of it. All these require to be con-
spicuous, and an indispensable means
to most of them is novelty in dress,
which attracts attention and distin-
cuisines them from the crowd. They
are partners with the trade; they 'tset
the fashion" Other women follow
perforce, and here comes in a curious
bit of psychology. The leaders of
fashion lead in order to be con;
spicuous; their example is gradually
followed until the fashion is establish
ed, when every woman has to adopt
1t for the opposite reason in order not
to be conspicuous, and then the process
begins all over again.-London Times.