The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1919-07-20
By Otto B. ShuIhOf.
president. of the Associated Dress Indus
tries of America, Member Paris and
London Chambers of Commerce,


London Chambers of Commerce,
ETC., etc.
-HE true aim of fashion is three-fold:
To make any woman look prettier,
1 more charming, daintier and more
alluring than she is; to maintain a really
pretty woman's percentage Of prettiness
up to its reality; to set of properly the
beauty
And three other factors go hand in hand
with these: To give the woman the
confidence in herself that only a per-
fectly designed and adapted gown can give
it was the great English philosopher
Herbert Spencer who quotes the lady who
told him that "a wellftting dress gave her
the peace beyond understanding that not
even religion could" to arouse the admi-
ration of the male; to arouse the envy Of
the female
Now, to do all this is no small task-yet
It is what the fashion creators have been
trying to do and doing more or less sue
cessfully for centuries. Further, there en-
tiers the great complication-the incessant
necessity for change in fashions.
The prophets of efficiency always in
weigh against the changing of fashions.
They ascribe it to the lust for wealth Of
the fabric manufacturers, who see to it
that designs are shifted so they can get rid
Of material faster, or the covetOusness Of
the dressmakers, who by shifting Of the
styles prevent a dress from being worn
more than one season. They are wrong.
II you could once standardize a dress that
would accomplish fashions three aims
there would be none more pleased than
manufacturers and dressmakers. for what
they might lose in decreased sales they
would more than make up in reduction OF
production expense.
No-the real reason is that the mind
demands change beauty who is beheld
always by those who know her in exactly
the same dress soon ceases to seem
beauty. There is nothing more wonderful
than the stars-yet how few there are
who appreciate them. We get used to
them. But if the stars could change color
every night, surround themselves with this
and that changing halo of luminosity, the
fireworks business would go out of the
market!
Woman has to keep calling attention to
herself all the time She can't say: Here,
look how pretty ! am" Her dresses have
to say that for her And the same old
dress soon loses its voice.
This brings me to the bare back and its
whyfore.
The painter has whole world and the
world Of his imagination besides to draw
from; the musician has an infinite combi-
ration of sounds
But the dress creator has only so many
square inches Of human skin to work Uponi
Nor does the difference between the thin
nest woman and the plumpest add much
nrfa IN hor nd
this skin, small as it is in comparison to
the fields Of painter and musician, has
bow can put Unrestricted areas.
For decades We have been in a time Of
cover-up clothes II started early in
Victorias reign. Before that there was
never such time Of undress as followed
the French Revolution. And before that,
in Puritan England, was another period of
covering up. Preceding that was an era of
semi-nudity, and before that Queen Eliza
beth's ladies hid all except the smallest
point at the neck with gigantic ruffs And
so on, ever alternating, back, no doubt. ten
thousand years.
The Victorian prejudices were hard to
overcome. They lasted longer in America
than they did in England. curiousIv
enough. Up to comparatively a few wears
ago the ball dresses and evening dresses
showed little below the neck. nothing
above the instep. Then fashion. seeing the
world becoming bored, shortened the
dresses, did 'away with the long sleeves
cut out the hoops, brought the dress closer
and closer to the lines of the body, finally
cut out the sleeves and compromised on
long gloves.
After that they daringly showed the arm.
Then the front of the dress began to Green
down-and it crept and it crept and it
crept.
About three years ago it crept as far as
1t could, keeping in mind that which have