i ‘ . (5/, 3‘. 5&60163 4' LFEB mi ' o 55; ' um‘f‘mst 7 OVERDUE FINES: 25¢ per on per its RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS: Phce in book return to remove charge from circulafion records 0‘ N09 I(12972ant 5%me I I ”5290] E 262004 uwéw‘ ,(71‘41-804 oci 8812008 . 1‘ <‘. r .I’I infilut" ’. E j I: f’tf viii I'll-III! ill-Ill .I‘I FASHIONS IN PREGNANCY: AN ANALYSIS OF SELECTED CULTURAL INFLUENCES, 1850~1980 By Rebecca Lou Bailey A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Arts and Letters 1981 Ms \. x y I I :3 \\ ABSTRACT FASHIONS IN PREGNANCY: AN ANALYSIS or SELECTED CULTURAL INFLUENCES, 1850,1980 By Rebecca Lou Bailey Medical and fashion advice for pregnant women pub- lished in popular literature from 1850 to 1980 are seen as interdependent cultural influences reflecting actual behavior. during that time. Conservative and restrictive recommen- dations in both areas are seen as a legacy of pre-scientific beliefs that permeated all aspects of Victorian culture; of particular significance are those relating the Women's Sphere, which delineated a narrow social role for women, to the even more constricted role assigned women during preg- nancy because of superstitions and prudishness. The gradual lifting of such restrictions are traced through the type of clothing available for pregnancy and an analysis of what the clothing tried to accomplish socially for its wearers. Concurrently, advances in medical knowledge slowly changed the body of advice given gravida from information based almost entirely on stereotypic views of women to more object- ive information empirically gained. However, stereotypes Rebecca Lou Bailey and cliches still exist in both the world of fashion and medical advice for pregnancy, and undoubtedly will always persist in some form. Advice given is indicative of culture-wide attitudes which frequently are more solidly rooted in social practice and morality than in science. © Copyright by Rebecca Lou Bailey 1981 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Robert Anderson, Director of Interdisciplinary Doctoral Programs in the College of Arts and Letters, and my committee members, Professor Gretel Geisg Dr. Gerhard Magnus, Dr. Farley Richmond, and Dr. Ann Slocum, for their guidance and friendship during the course of my doctoral work. I would also like to thank Dr. Joanne B. Eicher for her encouragement and support in beginning my studies. Thanks also go to my typist, Mrs. Chris Cunningham, who was unfailingly cheerful and accurate while typing from nearly indecipherable scribbles, and to Mr. Greg Ingram who printed the plates that accompany the text. A Special thank you goes to my parents, Dr. William and Dr. Beverly Young for being such loving, admirable role models, and to my grandfather, Mr. G. F. Garner,for his generous financial support. And finally, I want to thank my husband, Jack Bailey, for helping me in so many ways. iii FOREWORD "Of course, Carol, you know Madeline is--expecting." There will be no speculation in Carol's mind as to what Madeline is expecting; no errant thoughts of overnight guests, an inheritance from a distant relative, or battered bundles via parcel post clutter her mind. Madeline obviously is in, well, a delicate condition. How else could our friend deliver the news and be perfectly understood? Madeline could be pregnant. Definition number five, Webster's Dictionaryl, defines pregnant as "exhibiting fertility: teeming." Perhaps that image is a little too sexually active for our friend's social sensibilities. Hence, more oblique references. Madeline could be "P.G.," which reduces the teeming within her body to an acceptable, "Gidgety" level. Madeline could be with child, to be Biblical. As was perfectly appropriate in context when used by Matthew and Luke, this directs attention toward the end product, the long-awaited child, and away from the current state of affairs for Mary, or Madeline. Carol might be told that Madeline is going to have a baby. Carol would know that this did not mean in five years or ten years, but, rather, within nine months. If Carol and friend were of a Clinical bent, then iv Madeline might be parturient, gravid or gestating. However, while parturient remains a possibility, gravid soundsterminaland gestating brings to mind rotund, cud-chewing spotted cows. If Carol and friend were male, then Madeline might be knocked-up; a phrase that chauvinistically removes the attention from Madeline to some libidinous male. Or, as an elderly gentleman from Lewis County, Kentucky, used to remarkz, no doubt after long observation of pregnant women's discomfiture under public scrutiny, "She's carrying the pocketbook." Picture Madeline, pocketbook firmly in front oftflmemidsection as a shield or as camouflage, it's hard to say which. Because, as Madeline will discover, even if her friends are oh-so-genteel in conveying the news of her blessed event to each other, nine-tenths of them will stare at her abdomen before they say "hello" the next time they see her. It is as if, during a very public lapse of taste, instead of a diamond, Madeline had inserted a large magnet in her navel and everyone else's eyes were steel worry balls. The remaining tenth will in no way acknowledge the pregnancy, even if she delivers quintuplets on their doorstep. If Madeline herself makes it a topic for conversation, they will appear uneasy. But Madeline through history in the United States has had great difficulty in discussing her condition. \I Social scientists, historians and feminists, those whom you would expect to have an interest, have been likewise reticent. This work has been done in part to correct that situation as well as understand why it exists. vi REFERENCES 1Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, (Springfield, Massachusetts: G. and C. Merriam Company, 1969), p. 670. 2A personal communication for which I am indebted to Dr. Ann Slocum. vii CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......................,.. ...... . ...... iii FOREWORD..... ........................................ iv LIST OF PLATES... ........... . ..... . .................. x LIST OF TABLES................................. ...... xiii Chapter 1: ‘ Introduction of the Problem ................... 1 Review of Literature ........... . .............. 4 References... ............................... 20 Chapter 2: The Beginning, 1850: Stereotypes, Catalysts and Mavericks........... ...... ..... ......... 22 References .................................. 40 Chapter 3: Medical Skill, 1850-1875: The Dark Ages ..... 44 References ................................ 81 Chapter 4: Medical Advice, 1870-1980: The Renaissance?. 84 References ................................ 126 Chapter 5: Reasons for Reform: Amelia Bloomer; Searching for Comfort and Dignity ................... 134 References ................................ 153 Chapter 6: Reasons for Reform: Rational Dress; Searching for Better Health ......................... 154 References ................................ 170 viii Page Chapter 6: Reasons for Reform: PrELRaphaelite Brothers and Others; Searching for Individuality ......... 172 References ...................................... 219 Chapter 8: An Overview of Maternity Dress: From Overcoat to Overblouse......... ................. . ........ 223 References ...... . ............................... 240 Chapter 9: Pregnancy in the POpular Press: Dressing for the 20th Century...... ...................... 242 References.... ..... . ............................ 313 CONCLUSION ............... . ............ . .................. 318 APPENDIX A........ ........... . ........................... 321 APPENDIX B.............. ................................. 323 References..... ....... . ................................ 333 APPENDIX C. .......... ........ ............................ 334 References ....... .......... ............................ 340 ix LIST OF PLATES Plate 1. Lane Bryant's Tea Gown and the Bloomer Costume........................ .................. 2. Cycling Bloomers, circa 1890 ............ . ........ 3. The Neo-Victorian Woman of the 19505: ‘Marilyn Monroe, circa 1956.... ................... 4. One of the First Maternity Swimsuits, 1939 ....... 5. Fifteenth Century Dress .......................... 6, The Trapeze and Sack, circa 1957, 1958 ........... 7. A Pre—Raphaelite Beauty .......................... 8. The Woman's Sphere ............................... 9. Fashionable Dress, September, 1851 ............... 10. Menswear for Women: The Tailored Costume, 1882... 11. Elizabeth Blackwell... ........................... 12. Assorted Wraps, November, 1843 ................... 13. Wraps, October, 1861 ............................. l4. Cloak and Walking Dress, October, 1878 ........... 15. Walking Costume for Ladies, April, 1882 .......... 16. Redingote, September, 1882....................... 17. How Corsets Cause Prolapses ...................... 18. Thin Flappers Have More Fun ...................... 19. Depicting Pregnancy: 1939 versus 1978 ............ 20. What Man Hath Overwrought: Fashions for October, 1861 .................................... Page 10 13 325 332 24 27 35 38 48 61 6 65 68 70 73 84 104 138 Plate Page 21. Greek Drapery ................................... 140 22. Menswear, circa 1895...................... ...... 143 23. Amelia Bloomer ........ . ......................... 146 24. Variations on the Bloomer Costume ............... 149 25. Rational Dress .................................. 158 26. The Perils of Tightlacing ....................... 163 27. Artistic House Gowns, circa 1894 ................ 175 28. Medieval Wrapper and Elizabethan Breakfast Sacque, October, 1878 ........................... 177 29. The Countess Somers ............................. 188 30. Aesthetic Dress in America, 1892 ................ 197 31. Aesthetic Dress in America, 1892 ................ 198 32. Aesthetic Dress in America, 1892 ................ 200 33. Aesthetic Dress in America, 1892 ................ 202 34. Aesthetic Dress in America, 1892 ................ 204 35. Aesthetic Dress in America, 1892 ................ 206 36. Burne-Jones' The Golden Stairs .................. 210 37. A No-Nonsense Alternative to Fashion and Aesthetic Dress: Proposed Business Suit for Women, 1894............... ...................... 213 38. An Aesthetic Evening Gown, 1903.... ............. 215 39. An Art Nouveau House Dress, 1903 .......... . ..... 217 40. A Medieval Gown, A Sacque-Fronted Watteau Gown and an Empire Gown .............................. 225 41. Fashions for September, 1843 .................... 229 42. Fashions for October, 1878 ...................... 233 xi Plate 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. SS. 56. 57. 58. 59. Bathing Costumes for Ladies, 1890, and for Pregnant and Non-Pregnant Ladies, 1979 ............ A Tea Gown and an Artistic House Gown Modeled on a Dutch Costume, l894................... ....... Gowns for Stout Ladies, 1894 ...................... A Lady's Wrapper, September, 1890 ................. A Matinee and An Empire House Gown, 1900 .......... Lane Bryant's Streetwear for Pregnant Women, circa 1915 ........................................ Sports Clothes for Women at the Turn of the Century.... ....................................... An Artistic Costume for Pregnancy, 1919...... ..... An Art Deco Pregnancy, 1926; Fitting the Form, 1935; Distracting Attention, 1936 ................. A Trendsetting Maternity Pantsuit and yet Another Tea Gown, 1942 ............................ The 1948 Version of the Famous Page Boy Two- Piece Costume with the Kangaroo Skirt, circa 1939 ........................................ Heidi Becomes Pregnant ............................ Pinafores forPregnancy: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, 1943-1944 ............................... Dior's "New Look," circa 1947, and the "Tent" for Pregnancy, 1952 ............................... Maternity Dressing in the 19705: Swinging Clothes, Business Pantsuits, Non~Maternity Baggy Fashions.. 1980: Clothes for Everywhere ..................... Bad Form, Ms. Jones ............................... All drawings by the author. xii Page 238 239 251 255 256 258 262 265 266 269 295 278 281 285 289 294 303 304 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Renaissance Dress Descriptions in History of Costume Books ........... . ........................ 328 xiii CHAPTER]. Introduction In a recent paper giving an overview of social science attitudes toward women workers, Dorothy Wertz wrote: Current research seems to be avoiding problems pertaining only or mainly to women, namely maternity leave and child care, partly because attention to these issues reinforces the differences between men and women and also highlights a major stumbling block in most women's wage—earning careers. In order to work for equal opportunity for women it has perhaps seemed necessary to turn away from any topic that could bring up the objection that women's place is in the home. Wertz'comments, published in 1978, underscore the polarization of traditionalists and feminists in the issue of where women belong. They should either be home, which implies caretaking responsibilities for husband and children, or in a career, with no mention made of familial ties or encumbrances. Clearly, this overlooks what may well constitute the majority of working women in America today; those who both work and have families. However, as Wertz notes above, tunnel vision regarding this situation does not begin after the arrival of the child or children, but, rather, before, centering on issues like maternity leave. Indeed, the whole subject of pregnancy and socially approved activities for the gravida is one that has been uniformly ignored by researchers in all disciplines. While this situation may currently stem from the perception that the issues would undermine efforts to achieve equal employment status for women, the roots of the problem lie much deeper. Throughout the Nineteenth Century and the Twentieth in America, no aspect of women's life cycle has been treated with such evasiveness, embarrassment, indirect- ness and outright silence than this entirely normal biological function. There are few synonyms that Americans can use to say "pregnant." The lack of vocabulary is significant. It is a topic that through our history has been discussed either in a clinical manner or through veiled allusions and euphemisms. The phrase "expectant mother," perhaps more than any of the other phrases, implies that this condition has been viewed in our society, like in so many others, as a transitional time period, a sometimes dangerous, life-threaten- ing rite of passage, that must be completed to pass from maiden- hood to womanhood.2 Frequently this stage involves special treatment for the pregnant individual. Mead and Newton write that no known culture ignores or is totally indifferent to pregnancy.3 Reactions include a sense of responsibility for fetal growth, heightened solicitude toward the pregnant woman, pregnancy as evidence of sexual adequacy, and that pregnancy is a time of vulnerability and debility, shame and 4 reticence. Primitive non-Western cultures frequently have a unique dress for the pregnant woman, usually invested with magical, protective properites to keep the woman and baby from harm.5 Western society may also have had such dress at a much earlier time, but if so, it seems its heritage was not passed down orally or in writing. That is not to say that Westerners don't have and practice various superstitions regarding pregnancy; they do, clothing just isn't one of them. Many superstitions are medical and of rather recent origin.6 Today maternity dress in the United States can be defined as clothing designed to be worn by the pregnant woman. Styles are determined by physiological character- istics as well as tradition.7 It probably will have more fullness through the abdomen and bust than a non-maternity garment of the same garment sizing. It may also incorporate expandable features to accomodate the increasing size of the midsection. Maternity clothing is sold in specialty shops or in a separate department within a larger depart- ment store carrying ladies' ready-to-wear. The invention of separate dress for maternity wear is generally credited to Lena "Lane" Bryant in 1903. However, what is available in ready-to-wear for pregnant women, or, at times,the lack of clothing for many activities, has been an efficient regulator of the level of participation in society, especially when coupled with medical advice frequently culturally motivated rather than empirically supported, that decrees many actions harmful to the mother and fetus. This study will review the changing fashions in pregnancy for women in the United States from 1850 to 1980. That oft-examined group, middle, uppermiddle class American women, as a people vitally interested in being "in fashion," will once more be under observation in an attempt to fill in a portion of their recorded life- cycles that has been overlooked. This study will identify and interpret the origin and intent of selected culturally-approved practices during pregnancy, in part revealed through the clothing available for the gravida. The year 1850 has been chosen as the beginning point. Many forces eventually affecting the lives of pregnant women were put into motion near that date; these will be introduced in the next chapter. Review of Literature A review of a number of history of costume books on the topic of maternity clothes revealed unexpected evidence. History of costume books are, in fact, nearly barren of any mention of maternity clothing. There was no attempt to randomly select books for study since it became ‘very quickly evident that other sources would have to be LJsed to collect the desired information. Of the 22 books surveyed,8 none listed pregnancy in the index. When you consider that fashion historians writing of the 18005 forward are most concerned with women's dress, this seems curious. Only one had maternity dress as an entry, a reference to a sacque-fronted Watteau-type gown cited in Payne's History of Costume.9 The omission before 1903 is somewhat understandable since pregnancy did not involve the use of a distinctive fashion 10 However, most costume historians prior to that time. make at least brief comment on how the social customs and fashion of an age interact. In the case of the late 18005, custom and fashion coincided to agree that a whole segment of the female population should be sequestered. Much more trivial and quickly passing quirks of fashion and convention are chronicled. After designer Lane Bryant's invention of 1903, the omission of maternity dress is even more noticeable in costume books. Drawing a parallel between maternity dress and the Bloomer reform costume11 underscores this point (Plate 1). Fashion books routinely reserve space for the Bloomer costume of the 18505: it came, caused much comment, and disappeared from the fashion picture. The maternity dress came, caused comment (newspapers refused to carry ads for the unseemly garment), and has become an accepted fashion necessity. The two costumes, Bloomer and maternity, have even more in common: both were invented to make women more comfortable; both served as symbols, to a certain extent, of the Plate 1. Lane Bryant's Tea Gown and the Bloomer Costume. Tea gown redrawn from an illustration (photograph, The Lane Bryant Company); Bloomer redrawn from an illustration in the Illustrated London News (photograph, Culver Pictures). liberation of women from restrictive social roles; both were originated by middle class women—--an unusual place for fashion to begin; both were modifications of existing fashions (the Bloomer modelled after the dresses worn by women recovering from over-tight lacing and also men's suits; the maternity dress after tea gowns); both garments were perfectly respectable when worn in private as originally intended, and hence, were considered outrageous when worn in public. In both cases, 40 years after the introduction of the garment, variations were used as sport clothing by women. While the latter, at first, may seem a coincidental point, closer examination suggests otherwise. Between 1850 and 1890, woman's role in society evolved sufficiently to allow her to be somewhat athletic. One reflection of this was the vogue for cycling bloomers just before the turn of the century (Plate 2). In a very similar way, from 1900 to 1940, the role of the pregnant woman evolved from one of seclusion and relative immobility to a point where she, too, could be somewhat athletic.12 The qualifier "somewhat" is telling. In 1900 the lady cyclist still did not look one bit athletic with her "well-developed bust” and upholstered hips. By the 1940s the public liked broad-shouldered, well-muscled beauties like Dorothy Lamour, Lana Turner, and Rita Hayworth. And with only a lapse in the 19505 when a universally reaction— ary mood returned the Victorian—cushioned woman to favor, Plate 2. Cycling Bloomers, circa 1890, Madame du Gast. Drawn from a photograph (photograph, Radio Times Hulton Picture Library). 11 slim athletic figures have maintained their popularity as a fashion ideal (Plate 3). However, in 1940, the pregnant golfer or swimmer did not look athletic; here more an illusion created by the enveloping bulk of her clothing than actual figure characteristics (Plate 4). In the case of both the Vic- torian cyclist and the pregnant sports participant of a few decades ago, the public accepted the activity, but the inevitable consequence of such participation, a look of physical fitness, had not yet been integrated into the role itself or the fashion silhouette. And indeed, in the case of pregnant women, it would not be until well into the 19705. Drawing attention to the inherent similarities of bloomers and maternity garments emphasizes the disparity of treatment at the hands of costume historians. A lingering taint of Victorian reticence regarding mention of pregnancy must exist even among those whose occupation is supposed to be objective description of dress through time. Socially and culturally indoctrinated attitudes seem to have greatly affected emotional detachment on this issue. (See Appendix B for further exploration of possible bias by costume historians against a pregnant appearance.) Therefore, it became imperative to identify where, when, and how repressive proscriptions on the subject of pregnancy and proper behavior for pregnant women might have originated. 12 Plate 3. The Neo-Victorian woman of the 19505: Marilyn Monroe, circa 1956. Drawn from a photograph (photograph, Radio Times Hulton Picture Library). 14 Plate 4. One of the first maternity swimsuits, 1939. Redrawn from an illustration in "For Mothers of To-morrow," Vogue Vol. 93 (June 15, 1939), p. 78. 16 Two separate sources of information have been identified which document this from 1850 forward. P0pular books and articles written by doctors and by self-credentialled experts about prenatal care reflect what is apt to be practiced by expectant mothers at a given time. Study of proscriptions on diet, exercise, and dress directs a mirror toward changing society and the quality of life of the pregnant woman. The history of maternity fashions, also derived from books and articles, gives perhaps the clearest view of what the expectant mother was doing, or allowed to do, at any specific time. Clothing functions as a visual symbol of both beliefs and practices. The addition of play and work clothes to the pregnant woman's wardrobe is a vital indicator of great changes in role. Articles from the late Nineteenth and the Twentieth Centuries were located by searching The Cumulative Index to Periodicals, 1896-1899 and The Reader's Guide to Periodic Literature, 1900-1980. Key terms such as pregnancy, prenatal care, reform dress, maternity clothes, etc., were used. The precise terms usedfor a specific year varied due to fashion, mores, and cataloguer; ”Motherhood," meaning pregnant, was an important early word, but later lost all relevance. "Maternity Clothes" as a separate listing first appeared in the 1947 Reader's Guide. Articles and books from the mid-Nineteenth Century were discovered through 17 subject searches on such topicsas prenatal care, etiquette, and dress. Both medical and fashion advice are found in women's magazines, a primary source for this study. Phyllis Tortora wrote of the importance of women's magazines. Geared as they are to a large pOpulation of middle- income women, these magazines reflect and shape the attitudes of middle-class women toward their place in society. Indeed, women's magazines have been a major source of information for and about American women and their roles since the magazines first came into being in the early Nineteenth Century.13 Very few scholarly studies have been completed on maternity dress and its implications. (See Appendix C for a summary of this research.) None done in the United States has explored the changes it can document in prOper conduct for pregnant women and changing attitudes toward the morality or immorality of revealing a pregnant form for all to see. History of maternity dress has been treated incorrectly and as incidental to major premises. It has been perceived as a stable factor, when actually, as this study will show, the motivation or intent of styles available in this century have varied tremendously in an attempt to reinforce or maintain the widely-held stereotypic views of proper conduct during pregnancy of a given time. Three researchers have independently reported information that has relevance to this study. 18 Daniels (1965)14 and Wilson (1968)15 both reported that pregnant women would stay home rather than attend an event dressed unattractively or inappropriately. Daniels presented this to her subjects as a hypothetical situation. Wilson asked respondents to recall any such events during their pregnancies. Dowdeswell (1972)16 and Daniels both found comfort to be the most important factor influencing selection of maternity garments. Attractiveness of garments was valued highly. Daniels found this particularly so for first pregnancies. Dowdeswell's subjects ranked a defi- nitionally-related quality, psychic comfort, next to physical comfort during the third trimester; as pregnancy nears term, clothes are apt to fit poorly, thus making "well being of mind through clothing" more difficult to achieve and at the same time more desirable. Costume, the Journal of the British Costume Society, has published two articles on maternity dress in the Nineteenth Century. Both articles are documentary in nature and attempt to place specific garments within a value system, a socio- economic context, for the time they were worn.17 There has been no work done linking prenantal medical custom and advice to the clothing worn in a given year by gravida. Yet, the clothing commercially available is an overt symbol of culturally—approved activities. The following chapters will trace what practices health experts recommended for pregnant women, what the 19 women wore as they went about their activities, and when the clothing originated that allowed them increasing freedom, the same freedom long allowed other women. To do this, what at first may seem like an incredible array of miscellaneous threads have to be gathered together into one skein. The goal of this study, then, is to recognize those linked threads and make them available for further scrutiny. 20 REFERENCES Chapter 1 1Dorothy C. Wertz, "Social Science Attitudes Toward Women Workers, 1870-1970," (American Sociological Association Sociological Abstracts Reproduction Services, 1978), p. 14. 2Arnold Van Gennep, Rites of Passage, translation by Monika B. Vizedom and Gabrielle L. Caffee (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1960), pp. 41-48. 3Miles Newton, "Pregnancy, Childbirth and Outcome: A Review of Patterns of Culture and Future Research Needs," In Margaret Mead and Miles Newton, "Cultural Patterning of PErinatal Behavior," pp. 142-244, In Steven A. Richardson and Allen F. Guttmacher, Childbearifig - Its Social and Psyghological Aspects (Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Campany, 1967), pp.—I47-224. 4 Ibid., pp. 165-168. 5Ernest Crawley, "Wedding Garments," In Mary Ellen Roach and Joanne Bubolz Eicher (eds.) Dress, Adornment, and the Social Order (New York: John Wiley andTSons, Inc., 1965), pp. 55-56. Mead and Newton, op. cit., p. 67. 6Refer to Chapters 3 and 4. 7See Chapter 9 for a review of the lasting nature shown by maternity wear styles. 8The books used were limited to those that presented the information in chronological order. The books also had to present fashion as a continuum, rather than selecting isolated fashions from each century or period. Only one book by each author was included. In the cases where an author had written more than one history of costume, the most comprehensive one in terms of time span was used. Refer to Appendix A for a listing of books used. 21 9Blanche Payne, History of Costume (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1968), p. 416. 10See Chapters 8 and 9 for a reView of the history of maternity clothing. 11See Chapter 5 for a discussion of the Bloomer costume and its historical and spiritual link to maternity dress. 12Refer to Chapters 3 and 4 for a chronological treatment of this subject. 13Phyllis Tortora, "Fashion Magazines Mirror Changing Role of Women," Journal of Home Economics, Vol. 65, (March, 1973), pp. 19-23, 19. 14Ann Crew Daniels, "Certain Factors Influencing the Selection of Maternity Clothing," (unpublished MS. thesis, The University of Tennessee, 1965). 15Susan M. Wilson, "Attitudes Toward Maternity Wear," (unpublished MS. thesis, Colorado State University, 1968). 16Violet Elizabeth Dowdeswell, "Inferred Values of Clothing Among Pregnant Women," (unpublished MS. thesis, Utah State University, 1972). 17The references below are cited in Chapter 4: Zuzanna Schonfield, "The Expectant Victorian," Costume, number 6, (1972), pp. 36-42. Naomi E. Tarrant, "A Maternity Dress of About 1845-50," Costume, number 14,(l980), pp. 117-120. 22 CHAPTER 2 The Beginning, 1850: Stereotypes, Catalysts and Mavericks In the year 1851, Amelia Bloomer, a modest and frail-looking young woman put aside her weighty petticoats and long skirts, donned turkish trousers and a tunic carefully sewn by her dressmaker, and went about her daily business as if nothing extraordinary were happening. Passersby in her small New York town were bewildered and intrigued by the sight. The same year seven young English artists were signing their works with the letters "PRB," the Pre- Raphaelite Brotherhood. Some of their paintings depicted young women in loosely-flowing gowns; a dramatic contrast to the corsetted silhouette of the time. W. Holman Hunt, co-founder of the group,1 stated their mission: to illustrate themes "connected with the pathetic, the honest, the laudable, the sublime interests of humanity,” exemplifying the principle that ”Art is Love"2 (Plate 7). Meanwhile, French author Theophile Gautier pro- pounded a counter philosophy, "Art for Art's Sake,“3 based on the "aesthetics" of ancient Greece. As interpreted from Plato and Aristotle, art should not serve as a vehicle for morality; art should be art. What freedom, and yet, 23 Plate 7. A Pre-Raphaelite Beauty. Drawn from a photograph of Jane Burden by Gabriel Dante Rosetti, July, 1865. 25 what onerous responsibility for self-discovery this placed on the artist. "Art is Love" and "Art for Art's Sake" echoed the point-counterpoint lives of women at mid-19th Century. Women as Love embodied the idealized woman of the time; a creature of fragility, a faithful and forgiving wife, a gentle spiritual mother, nurse to the sick, selfless, satisfied with the woman's sphere4 (Plate 8). Editor Sarah Hale wrote in the July, 1850, issue of Godey's Ladies Magazine, ”we hold the doctrines that women's duties are of a higher and holier nature than man's, inasmuch as to her is consigned the moral power of the world."5 Far from this ideal were the women for women's sake. They felt a woman should not be a vehicle for morality alone. A woman should question, explore, learn. Nineteenth Century reformers find a niche here, whether supporters of dress reform, education, or suffrage. Neither role, mother or reformer, was an easy one. Both set very high, though divergent standards. Indeed, at mid-century the same dichotomy of prescribed roles versus individualism existed to a degree for all Victorians. "Typological thinking" was the accepted mode. According to it, there are a limited number of fixed unchangeable 'ideas' underlying the observed variability, with the eidos [idea] being the only thing that is fixed and—7331 while the observed variability has no more reality than the shadows on the wall...as it is stated in Plato's allegory. For the typologist, the type (eidos) is real and 26 Plate 8. The Woman's Sphere. Godey's Lady's Book Vol. LX (January 1860), title page (photograph, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). 28 the variation an illusion.6 Placed within this frame of reference, casually-mouthed phrases take on greater significance. A "typical woman" becomes more than a patronizing statement; it delineates a cultural expectation of behavior from which there can be little variation. It is in this spirit of absolute conformity that the leading American ladies' periodical printed with relief and complacency, "Queen Victoria is a good queen, and what is still better, a good wife and mother."7 Surely queening was something she did after the children were tucked in bed for the night, and then at the expense of reading her favoriate magazine. The perceived order and plan of nature in Nineteenth Century America was in apparent harmony with the social system. Yet, within the decade, in 1859, Charles Darwin was to publish On the Origin of Species. His first edition sold out on the day of publication.8 The public was clearly eager to hear a different explanation. Darwin's proposed pOpulation thinking challenged typology. He declared everything organic unique. A contemporary author, Ernst Mayr, summarizes this concept. "Averages are merely statistical abstractions, only the individuals of which the population are composed have reality."9 To all Victorians anxious to make one's way in life Darwin's theories proferred a sweet benediction. The previously impenetrable barriers of social class crumbled 29 into insignificant, archaic, typological heaps as they read. The implication p0pulation thinking had for freedom of personal behavior was even more profound. Perhaps women who wanted less restrictive dress, an education equal to a man's; who wanted employment outside the house; who wanted to be less literally prisoners of any and all social conventions were not deviants after all. Perhaps they were just exercising their birthright to be unique. The application of population thinking to personal behavior compelled Mary Coolidge to write in 1912, "In other words, sex tradition rather than innate sex character have produced what is called 'feminine' as distinguished from womanly behavior."10 However, social acceptance of difference roles for women was in part dependent upon how much doctors knew---or accepted-—-about the functioning of women's bodies. At the end of the 19th Century, many of the most prominent physicians in the United States11 believed that higher education for women would deve10p the nervous system by diverting needed nourish— ment from the reproductive organs. Educated females would be "unsexed" as a result fo their studies. Such women, if they could have children, would produce sickly, inferior ones.12 Another popular view averred that "high cultivation of the intellect implies a corresponding deficiency of the affections."13 An extension of this thinking made it imperative 30 that prospective mothers exercise utmost caution and restrict 14 Proponents of sexual restraint their activities severely. thought nervous excitement in parturient women could cause poor deve10pment of the fetus by diverting needed energies. The body was perceived as possessing a certain capacity for living which could not be increased or tampered with without deleterious effect. Such typological attitudes remained in the public mind long after educated people accepted Darwin's theories of evolution. More moderate voices on the functioning of female physiology were, of course, raised. Dr. George Napheys was perhaps the first American physician to write an in- formative book for women about their bodies.15 In 1869 his book was greeted with enthusiasm comparable to that meeting Darwin's publication. Napheys noted, "That the fifth edition and the tenth thousandth oftmistmok should be called for within three months from its first appearance can astonish no one so much as it does the Author."16 Here again, the public demonstrated overwhelming eagerness to hear a different explanation. At the same time, physicians and lay reformers began to exhort women to have active bodies. Sheer joy in exertion was seldom discussed. Moral obligation was a far more cogent argument. The Protestant Work Ethic decreed women sinful and slothful who, husband's wealth permitting, allowed servants to perform every task. In 31 this vein, Catherine Beecher and Harriet Beecher Stowe earnestly implored readers in 1869. Young girls can seldom be made to realize the value of health and the need of exercise to secure it, so as to feel much interest in walking abroad, when they have no other object. But, if they are brought up to minister to the comfort and enjoyment of themselves and others. by performing domestic duties, they will con- stantly be interested and cheered in their exercise by the feeling of usefulness and the consciousness of having performed their duty. 17 A second recurring explanation for exercise was to improve the capacity for maternal function. Thomas Nichols wrote "The Curse Removed" in 1850. He felt women were condemned to poor reproductive health by stubborn adherence to sedentary ways in an attempt to be fashionable. Nichols offered a restorative proscription. Exercise full, and varied, and abundant, is a condition of health. Do our women get it? Not one in a hundred. Imprisoned in school rooms, drilled into proprieties, taught to dawdle in drawing rooms---made to knit, and sew, and embroider, when they should run about the fields, or work in gardens. They exercise in rocking chairs and get fatigued with a shopping excursion.18 Mr. Nichols' polemic was among the most socially disruptive. A woman could clean her house and tend her family and be a shining example within the woman's sphere. A woman could perform these tasks with the expectation that, by doing so, she would have healthier, brighter children and still be comfortable within the sphere. But the woman who casts aside knitting and sewing to romp through fields and work (not tend, or minister, or nurture) in the garden is not to 32 be trusted! Reform dress, artistic dress, population thinking and proper roles for women in society, the conventional wisdom of the medical profession, and exercise for women seem an unrelated listing. Yet, these disparate fragments from the mid-19th Century coalesced to tremendously affect life for pregnant women in the United States. During the last half of the 19th Century and into the 20th Century, whenever freedoms were gained by women in general, pregnant women did not receive those same freedoms fer a period of 25 to 50 years after. Whether freedom meant reform in clothing, expansion of the acceptable working role for women, or activity and exercise permitted by physicians, the lag phase is consistent. Identification of pregnant women with the stereotype of the woman's sphere is a partial answer why. Gregory Stone defines appearance in terms of its effect on social transactions. He feels that it is a more powerful determinant than discourse in delimiting the potentials for an exchange.19 Pregnant women have been automatically assigned to a role sidcarded for most other women, that women's sole reason for being is nurturing, because of appearance alone and lingering related stereo— types about the condition of pregnancy itself. A few examples make this readily apparent. Depiction of women as emotional, prime to hysterical outbursts, and as pe0ple who must be guarded from physical 33 and emotional stress was a common characterization for all women one hundred years ago. At the same time, it is an easily recognizable, contemporary folk-portrait of traits in expectant mothers. Few would still argue against women's right to work. However, the United States government did not declare punitive employment restrictions for pregnant employees 7.20 Again, a continuation of the discriminatory until 197 woman's sphere into the 20th Century. A frequent argument against pregnant females working was their fragility, lack of stamina, and need for frequent rest periods (another echo of the fair flowers of yesteryear). Yet, a recent study by Erkkola found that the capacity of pregnant women at term for physical labor equal to that of her non—pregnant sisters.21 From a fashion standpoint, women, in part, accomplished their escape from the woman's sphere by adOpting derivatives of male dress. Obviously, the hoop-skirted gown of the 18505 underwent a more thorough transformation than the gentleman's black frock coat in becoming the ubiquitous he-she business suits of today (Plate 9). A study by Wood published in 1966 notes that low status groups who wish to rise up the occupational hierarchy may adopt occupational dress similar to the profession to 22 which they aspire. Many recent studies have reaffirmed the contribution dress makes to projecting a professional 34 Plate 9. Fashionable dress, September, 1851. "Cherry Ripe," Godey's Lady's Book Vol. XLIII (September, 18Sl)(photograph, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). 36 23 Victorian women, it would seem, had a good image. comprehension of this strategy, and used it to get out of the house. As a quotation published on the title page of an 1892 guide for the well-dressed woman said: Strive as you will to elevate woman, nevertheless the disability and degradation of her dress, together with that large group of false views of the uses of her being and of her relations to man, symbolized and perpetuated by her dress, will make her striving vain. 4’25 For the busy lady in the 18905, the tailor-made suit was a solution to the dress problem. It simultaneously conveyed the impression of neatness, an active life, and social status, because of its high cost26 (Plate 10). Holiness of the women's sphere notwithstanding there is a common misconception today of the status Victorians attributed to housekeeping; it was viewed with little regard by both men and women. Although motherhood was placed on a pedestal, the more mundane aspects of house and child care certainly were not. The Beecher sisters, who were displeased with the prevailing attitude, wrote: To be a nurse of young children, a cook, or a housemaid is regarded as the lowest and last resort of poverty, and one which no woman of culture and position can assume without loss of caste and respectability. Even women who enjoyed the view from the pedestal were anxious to free their time for more ”important" things like shopping, travel, or church activities. Heavy dresses and layers of petticoats did not accomodate the quickening 37 Plate 10. Menswear for women: The tailored costume, 1882. Three-piece woolen costume consisting of skirt, jacket and vest. Godey's Lady's Book Vol. CV (December 1882), p. 499, fig. 8 (photograph, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). 39 tempo of their lives anymore than it did those bold women who voluntarily chose to join the workforce. However, the pregnant woman could not so easily slip into a tailor-made at the end of the 19th Century and out of the woman's sphere. In an era when concealment of pregnancy was a primary objective, slim-tailored clothing was physiologically precluded.Z8 One of the acknolwedged keys to freedom for women, "professional" clothing, was denied to a segment of the population. Thus, the woman's sphere clung like an all- encompassing shawl, shielding the world from the unsightliness of the pregnant form, and its wearer from the shame of public exposure. However, rebellious alternatives to the fitted silhouette in fashion in the 19th Century—--the Bloomer Costume, Rational Dress, Pre-Raphaelite dress---have been present since the 18505. They are the direct ancestors of the maternity clothing of the 20th Century. Yet, maternity clothing might never have existed if medical doctors had not simultaneously condemned tight-fitting clothing, the socially—correct garments, while urging the pregnant woman out of doors, into the public eye, for exercise. Clearly, (attitudes and dress had to change to resolve this conflict. Chapters 3 and 4 will trace the evolution of medical opinion on how to conduct a proper pregnancy. The remaining chapters will follow developments in dress that made both appearing in public and engaging in medically-promoted activities part of a fashionable pregnancy. 40 REFERENCES 1The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood was formed in 1848 after correspondence between John Millais and W. Holman Hunt. See Chapter 7. 2W. Holman Hunt, Pre-Raphaelitism and the Pre- Raphaelite Brotherhood (London:’MacMillan 8 Co., 1905), pp. 456, 465. 3Circa 1849-1850. 4For antecedents see Marlene LeGates, "The Cult of Womanhood on Eighteenth Century Thought," Eighteenth Century Studies, Vol. 10 (Fall, 1976), pp. 21-39. In Che 19th Century a clear picture of this ideal can be gleaned from Code '5. Code '5 was progressive in supporting higher education or women, but to the end of better enabling women to fulfill their "God-given role." 5Godey's Magazine and Ladies Book, Vol. VI (July, 1850), "Editor's Table," p. 58. 6Ernst Mayr, Evolution and Anthropology (Washington: Anthropological Society of Washington, 1959), p. 2. 7Anonymous, "The Queen's Visit to the French Embassy," Godeyjs Magazine and Ladies Book, Vol. 10 (August, 1854), pp. 158-161. 8Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1964), p. vii (First edition 1859). 9Mayr, loc. cit. 10Mary Robert Coolidge, Why Women Are So (New York: Henry Holt and Co.), p. j (reprintediby New York: Arno Press, 1972). 11Carroll Smith-Rosenberg and Charles Rosenberg, "The Female Animal, Medical and Biology Views of Woman and her Role in Nineteenth Century America,” Journal of American History, Vol. 60, No. 2 (September, 1973), pp. 332-356. The Rosenbergs state that Emmett, J. Marion Sims, T. Gaillard Thomas, Charles B. Meigs, William Goodell and Mitchell shared the belief that education could be harmful. Eli Van de Warker 41 and George Engelman, successive presidents of the American Gynecological Society in 1900 and 1901, respectively, concurred. 12For a lengthy discussion of the evolution of this thinking see Vern Bullough and Martha Voght, "Women, Menstruation and Nineteenth Century Medicine," Bulletin of the History_of Medicine, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Jan7Feb, 1973), pp. 66-82. 13Pauline Forsyth, "A Bloomer Among Us," Godey's, Vol. 10 (May, 1854), pp. 396-401. Forsyth, in line with Godey's editorial position, thought this a fallacy. 14Charles E. Rosenburg, "Sexuality, Class and Role in Nineteenth Century America," American Quarterly, Vol. 25 (May, 1973), pp. 131-153. 15A letter taken from the Nashville Journal of Medicine and Surgery, November, 1869, and published in the testimonial section of Naphey's book states, "This may be regarded as the first attempt of the kind in this country." George H. Napheys, The Physical Life of Women (Philadelphia: George Maclean, 1872, 6th edition), p. 9. 16 Napheys, op. cit., p. 5. 17Catherine E. Beecher and Harriet Beecher Stowe, The American Woman's Home (New York: J. B. Ford and Co., 1869), pp. 117-118. 18Thomas Nichols, "The Curse Removedf'The Water Cure Journal, Vol. 10 (November, 1850), pp. 167-173} 19Gregory Stone, "Appearance and the Self," In Mary Ellen Roach and Joanne B. Eicher (eds.)Dress, Adornment and fh—e Social Order (New York: John Wiley 8 Sons, 1965), pp. 216-245. 20Senate bill S995 and House companion bills HR5055 and HR6075. 21Risto Erkkola, Physical Work Capacity and Pregnancy, Turku: Turum Yliopisto (Turun Yliopiston Julkaisuja: Sarja D: Medica - Odontological: 5, 1976), p. 37. 228. M. Wood, "Uniform: Its Significance as a Factor in Role Relationships," Sociological Review (New Series), Vol. 14 (1966), pp. 139—151. 42 23A large body of formal and informal studies exists on this topic. The most well-known popular work is John T. Malloy, The Woman's Dress for Success (New York: Warner Books Edifion, 1977). An early and still important scholarly study is W. H. Form and G. P. Stone, "The Social Significance of Clothing in Occupational Life," (Michigan State College Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 247, June, 1955). A more recent study having direct relevance is Susan Jones "Hiring Agents' Perceptions of Appearance Norms Used by Their Organizations to Judge Female Employees in White Collar Positions During the Interview and Daily Work Situations" (unpublished Ms. thesis, Auburn University, 1972). See also: Evelyn Good and Eleanor Kelley "The Role Clothing Plays in the Occupational World," Journal of Home Economics Vol. 63 No. 5 (May, 1971), pp. 332-336. Nonmfl Glenn, "The Contribution of White Collars to Occupational Prestige," Sociological Quarterly Vol. 16 (Spring, 1975), pp. 184-189. 24Quotation attributed to Gerrit Smith. Gerrit Smith, an abolitionist and strong supporter of women's rights, was the father of Elizabeth Smith Miller, first wearer of the Bloomer costume. Helen Gilbert Ecob, The Well-Dressed Woman (New York: Fowler and Wells Co., 1892)? 25For a speculative look at the controlling function of women's clothing in the mid-18005, see Helene E. Roberts "The Exquisite Slave: The Role of Clothes in the Making of the Victorian Woman," Si ns Vol. 2 (Spring, 1977), pp. 555-569. A partial rebuttal of Rogerts: David KunZle, "Dress Reform as Antifeminism: a response to H. Roberts," Signs Vol. 2 (Spring, 1977), pp. 571-579. Kunzle addresses only the motivation of tightlacers and not other design features of dress that were equally imprisoning. 26"...an excellent costume of three pieces---skirt, waistcoat and coat---lined throughout with silk and of exquisite fit and finish ought to be obtained for seventy- five dollars," Anonymous, The Woman's Book (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1894), p. 211. 27Catherine E. Beecher and Harriet Beecher Stowe, The American Woman's Home (New York: J. B. Ford and Co., 1869), p. 13. 43 28Of course, tightlacing was a possibility, but popular literature of the late 18005 is so uniform in condemnation of its dire consequences for expectant mothers for too many of them to have persevered. And besides, to quote Harper's Bazar of September 8, 1900, "Tight lacing is out of favor for the present" (Vol. 33 No. 36), p. 1163. 44 CHAPTER 3 Medical Skill, 1850-1875: The Dark Ages My Experience in Babies, Sir! Oh, you, light-hearted, beauteous maid Whose greatest care's to curl and braid, Far from life's lesson have you strayed, If you ne'er think of babies! For this alone was woman made, After her sovereign lord‘s EBeyed, To nurse and tend the babies. And Man, thou noblest work of God! Thou, who canst never see the load Thy wife sustains through life's rough road, With thee and with her babies, Go kneel upon they mother's grave And think---that every life she gave Made her Death's victim or Life's slave; Then love your wife---and babies! ---Mary Neal, 18541 This chapter reviews the level of medical skill in the period 1850 to 1875 relating to pregnancy and childbirth. To state that there was practically no prenatal care in 1850 would be true, but then it must also be stated that there was really no preventive medicine of any sort. Before physician-directed prenatal care could become a desired :procedure, it had to hold out some promises of reward. The reward had to be powerful enough to make deeply modest ‘Victorian American women believe that physical examination by an unknown male was not "medical treatment at once 45 useless, torturing to the mind, and involving great liability to immoralities,"2 but rather a necessity. Two carrots and one whip were extended to women. They were found to be so effective, they have been extended ever since. The largest carrot was, "if you'll do this, you'll have a better pregnancy and labor"; the second, "if you'll do this, you'll be yourself after pregnancy"--- (no humps, bumps, sags, or bags). The whip was, "if you don't do this, your baby will suffer." The same system of bribe and threat has been used equally effectively to pro- mote complete anesthesia during childbirth and childbirth without anesthesia. This situation is by no means unique to the United States. Anthropologist Arnold Van Gennep wrote the following in 1908. Pregnancy ceremonies, like those of childbirth, include a great many rites---sympathetic or contagious, direct or indirect, dynamistic or animistic---whose purpose is to facilitate delivery and to protect mother and child...against evil forces which may be impersonal or personified. These have been studied repeatedly. What is unusual in the United States is the insistence that all practices, past and present, have had sound, scientific basis, and the denial that some might more truth- fully be classified as rites of protection, with all the inagical connotations that phrase implies. Chapters 3 and 4 ‘wi11.analyze medical advice from 1850 to 1980 to show that inuch of the advice given has been no less a "fashion" than the Clothing the women wore. 46 Dr. Alexander Skene, looking back in the year 1900 said: The conception of modern gynecology began about 75 years ago, when obstetricians discovered that woman was more than a mechanism for reproduction, and surgeons became fully aware that they had much to learn regarding her diseases and their treatment.4 As 1850 began, not all obstetricians were so enlightened, but as 1875 drew to a close most physicians were in possession of enough necessary skill to make their management of pregnancy seem desirable to women. The first medical school in America was the University of Pennsylvania Medical Department, founded in Philadelphia in 1765. Its purpose, like that of the other schools that were soon to open, was to offer short courses on specific t0pics to supplement the medical student's apprenticeship. The idea of a year-round program of study was over a hundred years away. Nonetheless, a diploma from a medical school carried great prestige. As 1850 began, the medical profession was exclusively male. Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell was the one exception (Plate 11). She had received her degree the previous year. The professional interest in women's healthcare was slight in the early 18005, partly because the perception was that not much could be done. Circa 1852, Dr. Marion Sims became the first American doctor to specialize solely in the treatment of women. At that time, self-trained midwives assisted in childbirth. Many influential women thought midwives as a 47 Plate 11. Elizabeth Blackwell. Rephotographed from The Woman's Book (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1894), p. 45 (photograph, Jack Bailey). 49 group both negligent and ignorant, and male practitioners a gross impropriety. They lobbied for female practitioners. Most medical schools refused to admit women. Reasons for refusal were primarily based on cultural values. The impossibility of women studying a frank subject like medicine in the presence of men was cited by both sexes. The Female Medical College of Philadelphia was incorporated in 1849; other medical schools operated exclusively for women shortly thereafter. Separate institutions partially solved the problem of proprieties, but absence of women capable of teaching medicine left the dilemma of the male professor. Another argument against women's study was that the women who studied medicine were merely triflers. This attitude was expressed by Hugo Munsterberg at the close of the 19th Century when he wrote sarcastically: ...the woman who studies medicine or natural science, music or paintings, perhaps even law or divinity, can we affront her with the suggestion, which would be an insult to the man, that all her work is so superficial that she will not care for its continuation as soon as she undertakes the duties of a married woman? Or ought we to imply that she is so conceited as to believe that she is able to do what no man would dare hope for himself; that is, to combine the professional duties of the man with the not less complex duties of the woman: She knows that the intensity of her special interest must suffer, and that her work must become a superficial side interest. With such bias prevalent, women in medicine remained a small minority, and their effect on prenatal care was negligible. Thus, society itself slowed the progress of medical science. Rigid rules of social conduct hampered 50 both the male doctor's quest for basic knowledge of repro- duction and female physiology, and the potential female doctor's entry into the profession itself. William Cobbett, an Englishman who had lived in America for an extended period of time, exemplifies the extreme posture taken by society. In 1829 he addressed such matters in an etiquette book directed to young men in the "upper ranks of life." After having had a "male Operator" attend his beloved wife during her last confinement---much against her own wishes-~— he laments: ...safety to life is not all. The preservation of life is not to be preferred to ever thin ...Surely, then, the mere chance, the possibility o it [death], ought not to outweigh the mighty considerations on the other side; ought not to overcome that inborn modesty, that sacred reserve as to their persons, which, as I said 2efore, is the charm of c arms of the female sex... Cobbett wanted to stress the seriousness of the situation so that other well-meaning husbands would not be swept aside by the credentials of medical men as opposed to the prepriety of a midwife. He concluded that the decrease in real refinement and delicacy in women, to that point that some would willingly seek out the services of a male attendant, was instigated by the doctor. The result of this compromising conduct was a rise in prostitution and illegitimate children.7 When J. B. White, Buffalo physicians, conducted an obstetrics class in 1850 in which a live birth was observed 51 by his students, there was outraged protest from his colleaguesznulfrom the public. In the other branches of medicine observation had been accepted medical training practice from the beginning of the 17th Century.8 As a consequence, by 1876 all branches of medicine except gynecology were taught through clinical teaching. With a surfeit of healthy female bodies for study, the male doctor's knowledge of the range of normality, the initial stages of disease and that basic female function, pregnancy, was slight. It is a constant shock to discover how little doctors knew in the mid-18005. Physicians of the time claimed that medicine had been a valid science since the late 17005, but, in reality, the lauded scientific method appears rooted in superstition and a hope for discovering miracle cures by random chance. Medical papers frequently seem an odd mingling of sincere desire to improve the patient's health and detached curiosity and lack of personal responsibility for the outcome of medical experimentation. One example that typifies this dichotomy appears in an ovariotomy case9 reported by Gaillard Thomas in 1876, "in which four days after the operation eight and a half ounces of milk were transfused into the patient's veins with good results."10 When another doctor tried the milk cure on both dogs and people, his subjects died. Thomas concluded that the method needed more study; something that by our present 52 standards should have occurred prior to Thomas' initial transfusion. Yet, Dr. Thomas was not a sadistic and irresponsible practitioner. As professor of obstetrics in the College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, he was a respected staff member of the second oldest medical school in the United States. The mortality rate for abdominal cases, whether cesarean deliveries or surgery for other causes, was from 30: to so: in 1875.11 Since this is five years after Joseph Lister promulgated antiseptic practice, even this alarming percentage is probably lower than it had been previously. The doctor was usually called upon only when all hOpe, except for divine intervention, had been abandoned. Public lack of confidence forced doctors to deal almost exclusively with mortal illnesses. The general debility of patients when they came under the knife must have been a contributing factor in the high death rate. Evaluation of medical procedures and innovations was a guess at best with these confounding difficulties. A major medical tenet during this time period was that inflammation of the body was caused by the presence of excess fluids within the body. If this could be properly released, the patient would recover. All of the following cures were employed to this end.12 Bloodletting, or venesection, was accepted medical Iirocedure. Bleedings ranged from small ones of six to 53 eight ounces up to 30 or 40 ounces at a time. The amount of blood to be taken was based on customary volumes or by monitoring the patient's degree of pallor while keeping a strong light on the patient's face. Leechings were also standard prescription. They were thought, by some, to be less efficacious than vene- section because they could not be placed at the site of internal infection. Their application was judged to cause the patient greater pain than bloodletting. One rationale for removing blood was that if the amount of blood within the body was decreased, there would be less blood rushing 1x) inflame an injured area. No doubt many physicians agreed with Dr. Charles D. Meigs when he said, "It is, I think, a great mistake to say that the loss of blood, even enormous loss, is in any degree injurious to the constitution of the individual."13 Many doctors believed that to provoke a state of ptyalism, or massive salivation, would have a similar effect. The use of sudorific medicnes to make the patient sweat also had support. Closely aligned with this is the Hot Regimen, where the invalid was sandwiched in featherbeds to encourage the flow of perspiration. A general philosophy of medicine was that the body had a regular rhythm. Severe illness was an indication the rhythm had gone awry. Some doctors felt that only adrninistration of a tremendous shock to the body could 54 jolt it back onto its proper course; the more serious the illness, the more drastic the treatment. How the shock should be delivered and by what method varied with disease and doctor. All of the above were used. Other doctors agreed with Dr. Alonzo Clark who felt an unhealthy body was in turmoil enough. Calming the system was the solution. If a sedate state reigned, the natural rhythm of the body would reassert itself. Thus, Opium was prescribed in incredibly massive, often lethal, doses. Opium was also given in conjunction with other medicines or treamtents as a painkiller. The process of reproduction was not understood. There were three principal theories in the middle 18005, all controversial. l. The fetus was somehow a mixture of particles, or molecules, from both father and mother. Since a process whereby such a combination could be accomplished was hard to fathom, the remaining theories were made more credible. 2. The Theory of Animalcules---the child comes from the father. The mother is just an incubator. Leuwenhoek, the man who developed the microscope into a practical tool and the first person to observe sperm, endorsed this explanation. 3. The Ova Theory---the mother is totally responsible for the creation of the child after some unexplainable chain CDf events triggers the pregnancy. Dr. William Harvey, the 55 great English physician, believed this to be true. However, this summary may overly simplify the picture of true confusion that existed. Robert Dale Owen wrote in 1859: I shall not inquire whether the future human being owes its first existence, as Hippocrates and Galen assert, and Buffon very ingeniously supports, to the union of two life-giving fluids, each a sort of extract of the body of the parent, and composed of organic particles similar to the future offsprings; or whether, as Harvey and Haller teach, the embryo reposes in the ovum until vivified by the seminal fluid, or perhaps only by the aura seminalis; or whether, according to the theories offiLeuwenHOeEk and Boerhaave, the future man first exists as a spermatic animalcule, for which the ovum becomes merely the nourishing receptable; or whether, as the ingenious Andry imagines, a vivifying worm be the more correct hypothesis; or whether, finally, as Perault will have it, the embryo beings (too wonderfully organized to be supposed the production of any mere physical phenomenon) must be imagined to come directly from the hands of the Creator, who has filled the universe with these little germs, too minute, indeed, to exercise all the animal functions, but still self-existent, and awaiting only the insinuation of some subtile essence into their microscopic pores, to come forth as human beings. Still less am I inclined to follow Hippocrates and Tertullian in their inquiries whether the soul is merely introduced into the foetus, or pre-exists in the semen, and becomes, as it were, the architect of its future residence, the body; or to attempt a refutation of the hypothesis of the meta- physical naturalist who asserts, (and adduces the infinite indivisibility of matter in support of the assertion) that the actual germs of the whole human race, and of all that are yet to be born, existed in the ovaria of our first mother, Eve. The most significant factor, in terms of the state of medicine, is that Hippocrates' theories are given as much credence as those deve10ped centuries later. At least two prominent doctors cite the necessity for orgasm if conception is to occur. It is unclear when 56 Dr. Meigs writes in 183815 if this is essential for both partners. Since Meigs didn't commit himself to any of the theories of reproduction noted earlier, this was probably his belief. In 1870, Dr. George Napheys advises readers that "conception is more assured when the two individuals who co-Operate in it participate at the same time in the transports of which it is the fruit."16 Physicians cautiously did not attempt to predict the condition of pregnancy until they could see or hear the baby move. Menstruation and fertility were also topics for conjecture, speculation and confusion. Dr. Charles Meigs pondered the mysteries of menstruation in 1838: There is a very prevalent opinion even among our own peOple, that the presence of a woman with the catamenia [menstruation] is sufficient to cause the putrefaction of meats, the coagulation or souring of milk, and the failure of sauses [sic], etc. While I suppose that such opinions are pure superstitions...17 But, superstitions havingfarther-reaching consequences than the threat of curdled sauces urged discretion on the part of young women in this condition. As late as 1894, Dr. J. West Roosevelt counseled: ...it is simply wicked to allow a young girl to continue to study or play when unwell [Victorian euphemism] as when well. The whole of her future happiness may be determined by her care at this time. Let the sacrifice be what it may, her education, her amusements, and her exercise must be directed by the timetable which nature has adOpted for her. Never forget that any othgr schedule of time may result in ruined health. 57 ...and the inability to bear children. Today, the rationale behind this is most frequently attributed to Dr. Edward Hammond Clarke's Sex in Education, published in 1874. Clarke propounded that higher education would have harmful effects on young women's capacity for reproduction. However, his views were simply another application of the then common, popular belief that to overuse any single portion of the body would not only exhaust that portion in time, but lead to deterioration of the whole. Strangely, the female reproductive organs' stress from innumerable pregnancies seem to have been exempt from this litany. However, prior to pregnancy, overdevelopment of either mind or body in women might hamper the ability to conceive. Dr. Ely Van de Warker supported this stance in 1903, when he wrote: ...the woman student is a product of the schools all through her life, and has developed the intellec- tual at the expense of the physical side of her organization. She has in that degree increased the zone that is responsive to physical suffering and is without the hardened fiber of nerve and muscle that enables her to endure. and a few pages later... It is the educated young mothers that show the sad havoc made by maternity; the class that has deve10ped the cerebral faculties at the expense of this supreme hour of a woman's life. It is among this class, that we find the failure of physiological function that results iggsterility, in anaemia, in neurasthenia, and hysteria. Dr. Clelia Duel Mosher disparagingly cited an instance of this belief in the early 20th Century: An English school mistress stated that athletic 58 women bear only girl children or if they do have sons that they are inferior...Nor would such a statement be worth even passing notice if it had not received uch wide publicity both in England and America.28 Given the doctors' rather rudimentary medical knowledge in 1850 and for several decades after, there appears little reason why women would choose them over "ignorant" midwives. But that is to overlook the first promise made to women by doctors that midwives could not counter---a guaranteed less painful labor. Ether was discovered in October, 1846. Three independent researchers claimed to be the sole originator: Dr. Horace Wells, Dr. Charles Jackson, and Dr. William Morton. Eventually, Dr. Morton's claim was upheld. Sulphuric ether was first used at Massachusetts General Hospital in 1846. Surprisingly, there were many decent people vehemently opposed to its use. Major arguments against it, all "moral," were as follows:21 1. Dr. Morton was a dentist. Innuendo wondered what might transpire with female patients unconscious in their dentists' chairs. 2. Orator and reformed drunkard, John Gough, force- fully articulated the idea that ether produced a state of insensibility akin to drunkeness. Hence, in the eyes of the avid supporters of the temperance movement which was sweeping the country, ether was morally reprehensible. 3. Christian ministers claimed that ether violated 59 the Bible's word. An analogy was drawn with the afflictions of Job; peOple shouldn't deprive themselves of the opportunity to prove their loyalty to God by enduring santifying pain. Using ether for childbirth was singled out as disobeying Genesis 3:16. Woman was intended to "bring forth children in sorrow." Ether was first used for childbirth in January, 1847, in Edinburgh, Scotland; in April of the same year in Boston. The argument over its use raged on for over six more years. Then in 1853, the irreproachable Queen Victoria used ether for the birth of her eighth child. The critics were silenced. Thus, a woman might choose to go to a trained physician for the promise of ether alone, but other promises were also made. Most of these were centered around the idea of fewer problems in pregnancy and labor. At this time period, there really was no prenatal advice for "early pregnancy" as far as doctors were concerned, because they had no means of detecting it. Therefore, all advice on pregnancy can be taken as directed toward the last half of the second trimester and the third trimester. Gentle exercise, such as walking, and fresh air were promoted by some practitioners to secure an easy labor. Yet, social conven- tion precluded this for the visibly pregnant woman. Unless weather conspired with her to justify the wearing of concealing wraps, she was an inmate in her own house (Plates 12, 13, 14, 60 Plate 12. Assorted wraps, November, 1843. Godey's Lady's Book Vol. XXVII (November, 1843), Fashion plate (photograph, the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). In Plates 12 through 16, note the steadily slimmer silhouette for outer garments, ending in 1882 with one that would have been unwearable during pregnancy. 62 Plate 13. Wraps, October, 1861. "Novelties for October," Godey's Lady's Book Vol. LXIII (October 1861), p. 332] figs. 1 and 2 (photograph, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). "Pig. 1. Walking dress and jacket for the approaching cool weather; the jacket is of a woolen stuff ribbed in diamonds; the trimming astrakan plush." "Fig. 2. Light walking cloak or mantle of brown cloth, with stripes of velvet, and edged by a fringe." ./ .. f . . wu/I .. ' ,TA 2).... sis“: ifs. . 419M .9 H, J. .. , .. .541. 5.1.5111 A» .. a? H . . \I 1.. . .o. . ... . a a; {3:25.30 :3: 2.294171. 7. 64 Plate 14. Cloak and walking dress, October, 1878. Godey's Lady's Book Vol. XCVII (October, 1878), p. 283, fig. 3 (photograph, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). 66 15 and 16). Napheys felt that sexual relations could be continued in moderation throughout the pregnancy. Other authorities opposed intercourse during gestation. They feared that nervous excitation would direct needed energy away from the fetus.22 As the pregnancy neared its term, doctors urged practices that seem bizarre today. The theory behind their prophylactics was that if the woman began labor in a somewhat weakened condition, her body would be less resistant; labor would be faster and easier. Meigs emphatically stated: No woman, who has a little common sense, would be willing to march up to such a conflict with the fullest and most brilliant health. She would prefer to be rather delicate than strong, for there is never to be dreaded any lack of power23 but only excess of re51stance 15 to be feared. Toward that goal, Meigs recommended several well- timed venesections between the seventh and ninth months. Pregnant women at that stage should also have enemas, since the bowels might be inactive. Diet should be properly regulated. If the woman was agreeable to the doctor's advice, she would eat no meat for the last 30 days of her pregnancy. If she liked meat too much for that sacrifice, she should be convinced to eat it only every other day. TTiis diet would reduce her to a nicely weakened state by tile time labor was to begin. Further, the blood of the meat ‘wars ritualistically felt to add to the potential for 67 Plate 15. Walking costumes for ladies, April, 1882. Godey's Lady's Book Vol. CIV (April 1882), p. 305, figs. 1, 2 (photograph, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). "Fig. 1. The cloak...fitting the figure closely to below the waist in the back...; the front is straight." "Fig. 2. Basque bodice fitting very tightly..." p. 372. "Mantles are principally of two shapes, those which display the figure and the demifitting." Godey's Lady's Book Vol. CIV (May, 1882), p. 469. .‘ve' ‘ '45 -f'\——,a,-_~( - a . m a, 69 Plate 16. Redingote, September, 1882. Code '5 Lad '5 Book Vol. CV (September, 1882) p. 215, figs. 26, 27 (photograph, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. "Front and back view of Paris redingote made of dark bottle green cloth with a vest of cream-color 5atin.....This as present is thought will be the most popular outdoor garment for autumn and winter." p. 277. 71 deve10ping abdominal infection.24 A further reason for restricting diet was printed as a helpful hint in the November, 1850, Water Cure Journal. Many midwives and experienced matrons admit that not to indulge in eating and drinking more than is barely necessary retards the growth of the fetus, and Egis contributes to the safety of childbirth. There was little discussion of complicating physical conditions during pregnancy in the texts of the 18005. This may have been due to the doctor's lack of involvement in prenatal care and inability to diagnose danger signs.26 Many medical men endorsed the dress reformers' fear that corsetting had deleterious effects on fertility; pressure around the waist pushed all of the organs down on top of the uterus (Plate 17). Persistence in wearing the fashionable dress of the day was mentioned as contributing to miscarriages and general poor health in the mother. Dr. James Jackson offered a rather unique condem- nation of the mania for wearing quantities of false hair. He says in a book published in 1870: From the congested condition [of the cerebellum] arises, in a great many instances, diseases of the organs or nutrition and excretion; and when a woman becomes pregnant, it either induces or directly tends to induce modifications of the structural or organic conformation of the offspring. It is one of the laws of nature that where habits or methods of life of the female are such as to induce functional disease on herself when she is not in a childbearing state, such habits, when she is in such state, directly tend to produce organic or constitutional disease in the 72 Plate 17. How corsets cause prolapses. Helen Ecob, The Well-Dressed Woman (New York: Fowler and Wells Co., 1892), p. 9, fig. 9 (photograph, Jack Bailey). 74 offspring. Wearing the hair done up on the back of the head, therefore, has made American women give birth to a great many malformedzas well as a great many feebly-organized children. A more common affliction of pregnancy than congested cerebellum was crural phlebitis, or milk leg. Physicians were uncertain whether milk stayed in the mammaries or traveled throughout the body. The inflammation of the legs in the later stages of pregnancy was known as milk leg because it appeared about the same time as colostrum in the breasts. Some doctors thought that perhaps it was an overflow into the legs. Milk leg, since it was an inflammation, was feared to lead into childbed fever if not treated. The common cure was to bleed and leech the legs, then blister the skin with a caustic. The final step was for the patient to sit in bed with the legs elevated. If the woman should develop "late fevers of pregnancy" just prior to labor, she was directed to lie in bed, diet rigorously, have an emetic solution or opium and a venesection to discourage inflammation.28 Delivery practices are generally outside the scope of this study. However, in an era when medical texts scrupulously avoided mention of contraceptive techniques and abortionsvmnwzreferred to in scathing terms, the painful reality of childbirth must have been ever present, coloring feelings toward pregnancy itself. A bleak vista of repeated pregnancies presented itself to the primagravida. It was 75 not uncommon for a couple to have children every year, or every other year. Queen Victoria, the model for all middle'class Victorians, herself had nine children in 20 years. Within this social context, information on delivery is very pertinent to prenatal mental health of the mother. After all, avoidance of pain was what drew many women to doctors initially. Before too long, doctors could provide far more assistance than ether alone, and far more advice. Delivery, even with the aid of ether, was a horrific event which cultivated women were supposed to endure in stoic silence. Episiotomies were unknown, and damage to the perineum was apparently common. Suturing of the torn muscles and flesh was first attempted in 1870 by Dr. Thomas Emmett. Emmett also pioneered in vaginal reconstruction by plastic surgery. Prior to his work, nature took its course. Forcep deliveries were common, but not used reck- lessly or indiscriminately by reputable practitioners. The impression from medical texts is that these deliveries often killed or brain-damaged the infant and were attempted to save the mother's life. The cesarean operation was known, but almost never jperformed before the advent of antiseptic technique. The simple reason was that it assured death for the mother. Two options were available to physicians for women whose pelvic conformation precluded normal delivery. The better of the two was to induce labor prematurely around the seventh 76 month. The patient would probably survive, although h0pes for the infant were practically nil. However, this procedure would necessitate prenatal care on the part of the doctor. Such care would have been atypical. Therefore, the doctor was left with a tragic alternative: cephalotomy. This entailed fragmentation and removal of the fetus' skull to allow expulsion of the softer and smaller body. The justification offered for this harrowing procedure was that if it were not done, both mother and child would die in agony. The child was seen as an imperfect being, and the lesser sacrifice in this situation. The terrors of delivery were minor when compared to the hopes of surviving the infections, childbed fevers, so frequently contracted in the process of giving birth. Childbed fever is a common name for puerperal fever, septicemia, or peritonitis. It is a serious abdominal infection contracted at the time of delivery due to unsani- tary conditions. It was often caused by streptococcus. Cleanliness wastnrno means an established way of life, even among doctors,in 1850. Well-bred pe0p1e were encouraged by publications such as Godey's to bathe once a week. liut the Saturday Night Bath was far from becoming a cliche. (lther than for social nicety, neither physicians nor midwives iuad reason to wash their hands before attending a delivery. Infection might occur in a number of ways, and the doctor 01‘ midwife was unwittingly responsible for most of them. 77 Physicians had no knowledge of the existence of microbes. The germ theories of Pasteur and Koch were not advanced until the mid-18705. Thus, doctors would go from a case of 29 to childbirth without ever washing their erysipelas hands or changing their clothes. Although retention of the placenta was not felt to be a dire event, doctors preferred that it be removed. The practice was to reach in and take it out if it did not deliver spontaneously. Infection was rampant. Dr. Meigs writes of its grave importance in those days of high birth rates: The very name of childbed fever is a word of fear; to that degree that smallpox, or yellow fever, when they attack an individual, or break out in a community, excite by the announcement of their onset scarcely greater apprehensiveness for the safety of the patient, or of society, than are aroused by the dreadful name just mentioned.30 Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes, in an article published in 1843, was among the first to suggest that contagion transmitted by the physician might be a cause of infection. His paper received criticism; it could be construed as discrediting the effectiveness of the male practitioner. The cures for puerperal peritonitis were, without exception, based on rank superstition. The previously described philosophies of reducing inflammation by eliminating body fluids (blood, saliva, sweat), and shocking the system jprevailed. A sampling of procedures follows. Mercury was placed in the mouth or rubbed into the atodomen to induce ptyalism. It was hoped that salivation 78 would reduce the amount of liquid available to swell the belly. Because it was considered the nature of newly- delivered women to bleed, large bleedings were considered in harmony with the body's own scheme. In 1851, Dr. Alonzo Clark advocated completed rest for the intestines. "Locking up the bowels" was accomplished by administering massive quantities of opium. Dr. John Brennan invented "Brennan's Method" in 1814. This consisted of giving the patient a couple of tablespoons of turpentine orally, and rubbing more into the skin of the abdomen. Blistering the belly was thought to draw harmful fluids away from the site of infection and onto the surface. Induction or nausea in cases of childbed fever was desired. To quote Dr. Meigs: ...because the state of the nervous sytem, under nausea, is one to favor a milder or gentler systole of the heart...[which] lessens the force of the vascular injection and so powerfully favors an tendency to resolution of the inflamed areas.3¥ Considering the other treatments given, the patient's nausea probably required little, if any, additional effort. It is testimony to the hardiness of our maternal ancestors that they survived such ministrations. Acceptance of the discoveries of Lister, Pasteur, and.Koch after the mid-18705 quickly brought this era of m<3dicine to a close. Dramatic drops in mortality made 79 it possible for Dr. Alexander Skene to state confidently in 1900 that the present methods of cleanliness in surgery have all been brought up to such a high place of perfection that the only question remaining now is shall the subject be handled with or without gloves'fl"2 So at the end of the period, more promises could be made to the expectant mother who placed herself under a doctor's care. The "big carrot, " an easier labor, could be guaranteed by the use of ether. The second "carrot," to be as good as ever after pregnancy, was present in the most basic form. With sterile technique she might survive the delivery. With episiotomy and vaginal reconstruction she might survive in recognizable form. But accompanying these promises had come the whip: clothing restrictions; nostrums on exercise, sexual intercourse, diet and even hair styles had to be obeyed to reap the benefits. Dr. George Napheys expressed the attitude well for himself and most gynecologists for the next hundred years when he said: We shall therefore point out those laws which cannot be infringed with impunity, and indicate the diet, exercise, dress and, in general, the conduct most favorable to the mother and child during this critical period, in which the wife occupies, as it were, an gatermediate state between health and sickness. A new era in prenatal care was beginning, but it was not necessarily more scientifically sound in many respects than the one that had passed. In accepting the 80 promises of doctors, women gave up a good deal of personal freedom. 81 REFERENCES 1Mary Neal, "My Experience in Babies, Sir!" Godey's Magazine and Lady's Book (January, 1854, pp. 63-64. 2Catherine E. Beecher and Harriet Beecher Stowe, The American Woman's Home (New York: J. B. Ford and Co., 1869), p. 163. 3Arnold Van Gennep, Rites of Passa e, translated by Monika B. Vizedom and Gabrielle L. Caffee Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1960), p. 41. 4Alexander J. C. Skene, M. D., "The Status of Gynecology in 1876 and 1900," TransactionscHFthe American Gynecological Society Vol. 25,—1900, pp. 425-438. SEly Van De Warker, M. D., Woman's Unfitness for Higher Education (New York: The Grifton Press, 1903), pp. 47-48. Van De Warker is quoting from Professor Hugo Munsterberg's book American Traits. Van de Warker was president of the American Gynecological Society, 1900-1901. 6William Cobbett, Advice to Young Men, and (Incidentally) to Young Women in the Middle and Highest Rinks of Life (London: Mills, Jowett and Mills, 1829), p. 203. 7Cobbett, op. cit., pp. 203-205. 8Skene, op. cit., p. 476. 9Ovariotomy, or the removal of the ovaries, was to the gynecologist of the 18705 much like the masterpiece of the Medieval craftsman: evidence of virtuosity. Therefore, the ovariotomies seem often to have been performed more to enhance the reputation of the surgeon than because of patient nee . 10Edward Hammond,Henry J. Bigelow, Samuel D. Gross, T. Gaillard Thomas, and J. S. Billings, A Centuyy of American Medicine, 1776-1876 (Philadelphia: Henry C. Lea, 1876), p. 283. 1George J. Engelmann, M.D., "The President's Address," Transactions of the American Gynecological Society, Vol. 25, 1900, p.347, 8. 82 12The writings of Dr. Charles Delucena Meigs were a major source of information. Dr. Meigs was on the staff of Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia. His books on midwifery and diseases of childbirth were two out of the total of approximately 300 books written on gynecology by 1876 (Skene, p. 426). Thus, they represent a significant contribution. Meigs also wrote popular articles occasionally for Code '5. Louis Godey, the publisher, had a reputation for hiring only the most noted writers in the United States. 13Charles Delucena Meigs, On the Naturey Signs and Treatment of Childbed Fevers (Philadelphia: Blanchard and L63, 1854), p. 233. 14Robert Dale Owen, Moral Physiology (London: Holyoake and Co., 1859), in David J.‘Rofhman and Sheila M. Rothman (eds.) Birth Control and Morality in 19th Century America: Two Discussions (New York: Arno Press and The New York Times, 1972), p. 35. 15Charles Delucena Meigs, The Philadelphia Practice of Midwifery (Philadelphia: James Kay, Jr. and Brother, 1838). 16George H. Napheys, The Physical Life of Woman: Advice to the Maiden, Wife andCMofher (PhiladElphia: George M§c1ean, 1872, 6th edition), p. 74-75. 17Meigs, 1838, 0p. cit., p. 45. 18J. West Roosevelt, M. D. "Hygiene in the Home," pp. 263-316, The Woman's Book (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1894), p. 290. 19 Van De Warker, 0p. cit., p. 88, p. 95. 20Clelia Duel Mosher, M. D.,Woman's Physical Freedom (New York: The Woman's Press, 1923):)pp. 86-87. 21Ruth B. Finley, The Lady of Godey's (Philadelphia and London: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1931), pp. 107-109. 22Charles E. Rosenberg, "Sexuality, Class and Role in 19th Century America," American anrterly Vol. 25, #2, May, 1973, pp. 131-153; p. 136. 23 Meigs, 1854, op. cit., pp. 227—228. 24Ibid. 9 83 25Attributed to The Water Cure Library in Thomas Low Nichols, The Water Cure Journal Vol. X, No. V, November '1850, p. 173. 26Information from Robert C. Goodlin, Care of the Fetus (New York: Masson Publishing USA, Inc., 1979), p. 27. Goodlin states that the indirect method of blood pressure measurement was popularized in 1875, the end of the period under consideration; however, it was not until 1897 that Vasquez and Nolecourt described eclamptic hyper- tension. There was still no cure for toxemia in 1980. . Z7James Cobb Jackson, M.D., American Womanhood: Its Peculiarities and Necessities (DansviIle, N.Y.: Austin, JECkson and Co.{)New)York: Barber, Pratt and Co., 1870, 3rd edition, reprinted by Louisville: Lost Cause Press, 1976), pp. 32-33. 28Meigs, 1854, op. cit., pp. 227-275. 29 . . . . The female disease, puerperal septicemia, was being connected by some doctors with erysipelas, a disease that struck down all sexes and ages, In time, erysipelas was also known to be an acute strep infection. 3“Meigs, 1854, op. cit., p. 35. 31Meigs, 1854, op. cit., p. 323. 32Skene, op. cit., p. 436. 33Napheys, op. cit., p. 173. 84 CHAPTER 4 Medical Advice, 1870-1980: The Renaissance? "Dear Miss Manners: Help! I've been pregnant for less than a month, and already I can't handle things. The problem is who to tell when..." "Gentle Reader: The proper time is one week before everyone would know without being told. One compelling reason is to shorten the period in which you will be offered patronizing advice...." ---"Miss Manners" by Judith Martin, 19801 The topics occurring consistently in the p0pular advice literature written for pregnant women from 1870 forward are diet, weight gain, exercise, sexual intercourse, and dress. Dress will be discussed separately in Chapters 8 and 9 because doctors have not been the originators of dress. They have only tended to support the more conservative styles present for maternity wear. The remaining subjects together combine to create a truly ironic picture. While consistently professing the normalcy of pregnancy, the advice given diverges so far from common practice for non-pregnant women the primigravida must have feared her condition truly pathological. That some women would construe pregnancy as a time of illness is inevitable. If Dr. C. D. Meigs comments about it being 85 an intermediate state between health and sickness were put to music and chanted, dirgelike, at regular intervals throughout this chapter, the appropriate mood would be set. To be pregnant is to be sick, or at least semi-sick. Therefore, it is impossible for women in this condition to do the same things non-pregnant women do. At least, that is what much of the advice that follows seems to be saying. Talcott Parsons identifies an exemption from normal social role responsibilities as an important aspect of the sick role. A doctor serves as the legitimizing agent, making avoidance of duties not only a right, but an obli- 2 In the case of pregnancy the sick gation of the patient. role has been performed with a variation. Instead of avoiding duties altogether, the gravida exchanges her old set of responsibilities for a new set. Thus, working outside the home might be forbidden, but gaining no more than two pounds per month during the course of a pregnancy would be a goal enforced with threats of hospitalization.3 From the mid-19th Century forward, proper roles, activities, and morality for women in the United States were evolving. Enforcement and acceptance of the sick role during pregnancy was a regressive tendency, reinforcing a submissive role for women. This becomes more obvious as the scope 01 things women may do with propriety broadens during the 20th Century. It is here that we first note the lag period in allowed behavior for pregnant and non—pregnant women which was 86 apparently non-existent prior to the mid-19th Century. The one exception, of course, was being "seen" pregnant, which didn't pretend to have any medical basis. However, as soon as prenatal care was identified as a prOper arena for medical guidance and intervention, an abundance of advice on behavior materialized. A summary of the conduct proposed by Dr. George Napheys in 1869 suggests that excess in eating and drinking are to be avoided; after the sixth month more food is required. Walking is the best exercise. Running, dan— cing, and carrying heavy weights should be avoided. At the end of pregnancy, the woman should not stand or kneel for long periods, "nor sing in either of these postures."4 Journeys should not be taken while pregnant, especially train travel where the rolling of the train might lead to premature labor. As far as bathing goes, "those who have not been accustomed to bathing should not begin this practice during pregnancy."5 Naphey's at- tidue toward sex for pregnant women was relaxed for his time. It was acceptable in moderation, except when menses would normally occur. In addition to these cautions, Napheys spends 11 pages6 Iecmmujng "documented" cases of maternal impressions marking chil— dren physically and mentally. (The disfigurements, he states, were communicated to the child through the medium of the mother's blood.) The conclusion is, of course, to live with caution, avoid unpleasant sights and vexing situations. The program outlined by Napheys is to predominate, with only minor variations, for the next 40 years. It may 87 be redundant to state that this parallels a peak in feminist activity in the United States. Women's roles, particularly in terms of active participation in society beyond the hearth, drastically changed during this period. Therefore, the lag phase in permissible activities for pregnant women had its origin about the time Napheys was writing. While socially acceptable behavior for women became more diverse, socially and medically acceptable actions for pregnant women changed relatively little; hence, a 40 year lag. Moving forward about 20 years in time, another doctor, John M. Keating, wrote a very influential book on pregnancy, Maternity, Infancy and Childhood.7 Dr. Keating, whose advice differs marginally from Dr. Napheys, open with the usual claim that pregnancy is not a disease. He then urges an enema at least once a week after the fourth month.8 In his opinion, dancing, the use of the sewing machine, swimming, and horseback riding should be avoided. His argument against these activities, all recent vogues for young women, is an ingenious one aimed at class consciousness and snobbery. ...and yet a good strong healthy woman may work over a washtub doing the hardest kind of laboring work until her term is up. The answer to this is that if the young mother who reads this book is as strong as this woman who has been brought up to hardships, she probably could do the same thing. (Instead, he urges] a brisk walk, especially in the evening before retiring; it will enable her to get a good night's rest, and at the same time she will feel a certain amount of freedom in going out at this hour withoug the restraints of wearing close- fitting clothes. 88 Keating also subscribes to the theory of maternal impressions. "A woman," he says, "should avoid all emotions, should lead a life as placid as the most devout follower of Buddha."10 During the 18905 articles on prenatal care began appearing in popular journals. (They had appeared earlier in sectarian journals such as the Water Cure Journal.) Articles on prenatal marking and maternal impressions are prevalent with a new twist. After chronicle after chronicle of deformed limb because "she saw a hideous beggar,” there emerges an emphasis on positive marking. With the Western world in the throes of passion for Greek antiquities, not too surprisingly women are encouraged to look at beautiful works of art, listen to lovely music and study those disciplines in which they would like their unborn child to have an aptitude.11 An unwittingly amusing documentation of the effectiveness of this regimen is cited by Stinson Jarvis 12 when he exclaims over all of the "Madonna faces" in 1895 and "Christ faces" that one sees on the common people of Italy, just like in the great Italian paintings that the pregnant women there worship! Unless the artists imported their models from abroad, the real reason for cause and effect are not terribly obscure. Along with the credence given to prenatal predisposi- tions there was general belief in hereditary madness and alcoholism. Possession of a crazy in the family should prevent any man or woman of good conscience from marrying 89 and producing a family. Harriott Wicken, daughter of a drunkard and the sensual fictional heroine of a turn of the century novel, is depicted flouting this rule of society with the following predictable result. She gave him a slow mournful smile...'It is a hopeless idiot, just because it is my child. Aunt Megan told me too late. I will never speak to Aunt Megan again. A woman such as I am---with such terrible possibilities in her love---shou1d not marry.‘ Harriott's terrible possibilities lead her inexorably deeper into deceit and degradation, and to the eventual murder of her child and suicide. Meanwhile, in the German scientific community, three studies were completed that affected the diets of American women as unceasingly in the 20th Century as did the evil power within Harriott Wicken's blood. The first was by the German obstetrician Prochownick. In 1889 he studied malnourished pregnant rats. His motivation was to deve10p a diet that could be prescribed to assure smaller newborns for women with dietarily and genetically contracted pelves. He recommended fluid restriction, low caloric intake and high protein for the third trimester. He did not intend his study to have blanket application to all pregnant women. Yet, American physicians did just that; they generalized, applied it to all pregnancies and added the conjecture that such a diet reduced toxemia. Even as late as 1945, a multi-editioned classic textbook authored by the professor of obstetrics at Johns HOpkins University 90 recommended severe dietary restrictions based on Prochownick's work 56 years earlier.14 The second study, published in 1903 by Zangemeister, showed that excess salt intake during pregnancy lead to increased fluid accumulation. Doctors feared that retained fluid would cause edema and possibly hypertension. Their remedy was reduced salt intake.15 The third study, published by Warnekros and Gessner was based on data gathered in Germany during and after World War I. They reported a significant decrease of eclampsia during the war when presumably all gravida were malnourished, and an increase after the war when all were conversely presumed to be well-fed. The Journal of the American Medical Association concluded, in an editorial 16 in 1917, that restriction of fat and meat reduced toxemia in gravida. At the turn of the century and into the first couple of decades, the rationale behind diet restrictions published in popular literature became a thorough blend of pre-scientific and scientific views. Limited meat intake might be urged by an elderly doctor who had studied Meigs in medical school to weaken the mother and produce an easy labor. Meat restriction might be prescribed by a more up-to-date physician because he had read it might reduce the risk of toxemia and therefore secure an easy pregnancy. And then some doctors, represented here by Homer N. Oliphant, cautioned, ”The 91 expectant mother is breathing for two, eating for two, eliminating for two---in short, she is living for two.d] Oliphant encouraged "a generous and wholesome diet."18 Dr. Oliphant's other advice for parturient females was an echo of both Napheys' and Keating's. Women should walk, avoid lifting, the sewing machine and tennis.19 The latter two, incidentally, are evidence of the latest crazes for young women. "Marital intercourse" was thought to be most harmful during the first and last weeks of pregnancy. Oliphant assumes it will be distasteful to most women anyway.20 In 1910, many doctors still adhered to the belief that intellectual vigor in women was obtained at the expense of mothering capacity. Without challenging the validity of the perception, one independent lady writer snapped, "So what?" Margaretta Tuttle told the readers of Collier's that the child would be better off---or have more opportuni— ties, as she termed it---with artificial lactation and an interesting mother.21 Ms. Tuttle was probably not still living in 1972 when two studies supported her. Broverman, et. al. found that daughters of educated working women saw their mothers as more competent persons that did daughters of traditional non-working mothers.22 Tangri found that the professional working woman was a role model for her daughter?3 However, a number of decades had to pass and a score of medical views had to change before this was a tolerable 92 conclusion. An article by Dr. John L. Murkin of the Cornell University Medical College appeared in Good Housekegping Magazine in 1911. He tried to prorate the number of calories a pregnant woman should consume based on the proportion of the mother's body to the child's body.24 The calorie approach is the one that predominates for the rest of the 20th Century. In popular literature, calorie- counting and pounds gained became all-important, usually divorced from explanation other than vague references to toxemia. A second reason for weight control also made its appearance. The pregnant woman is assured that if she will eat only "x" number of calories and gain "x" number of pounds she will be as youthful and shapely as before her pregnancy. Frequently this is the sole promise made in exchange for compliance. If counting calories could keep one from matronliness and all the stiff black satin that that implied, well, so be it. One would not have to be very vain to give calorie-counting a try. This, of course, implies a negative societal prejudice against the matronly form. It did exist after the first World War (Plate 18). The fashion implications of this attitude will be discussed in Chapter 8. Support for marking children 1p 353:9 continued into 1912. In that year, Ladies Home Journal published 25 two articles on the tOpic. 93 Plate 18. Thin flappers have more fun. Drawn from a photograph by Clarence Bull in Clarence Bull and Raymond Lee,The Faces of Hollywood (New York: A. S. Barnes and Company, 1968), p. 184. 95 Sarah Mott's writing shows ideas absolutely unchanged from George Napheys' views of 1869. A woman can physically and emotionally mark her child. Ms. Mott declares it imperative during the last few months of pregnancy that women arrange their lives so there is no possibility for injury to the child. The importance of this article is that it presentsznialternative reason for the continued cloistering of pregnant women, although no less a Victorian one than the usual explanation of shame. The other article, by Dr. William Howard, is more progressive. In all probability it resulted from a reading acquaintanceship with psychoanalytic theories. Howard speaks of the "inner self" and "outer self," and of the mother transmitting "psychic poison" to the fetus in times of suppressed rage. This marked the entry of psychoanalysis into the popular literature on prenatal care. It was to attain a great deal of prominence by the 19405. The paradox in this is that by the 19405 conventional medical doctors proposed a fairly unrestricted life style for pregnant women, only to be countered by the more restrictive one of the psychia- trists. Once more the woman's sphere advanced. However, moving back to the second decade of the 20th Century, medical doctors had another great discovery. In 1915 McCollom and Davis were able to formulate a theory of adequate diet based on recently acquired knowledge of those 96 26 This information gave mysterious substances, vitamins. physicians something else to worry about for their patients' sakes. The pregnant woman must receive the proper amount of vitamins in her diet. A year later, in 1916, Zangemeister published data emphasizing the association between edema, weight gain and preeclampsia. The association suggested to physicians that weight should be restricted. "As late as 1933 obstetricians were recommending antenatal purges with Epsom salts three times weekly."27 A review of prenatal care during the late 'Teens of this century is in order. Roughly 50 years have passed since the publication of Napheys' Physical Life of Woman. At the beginning of the 19205, most middle and upper middle class women had male physicians attend them during pregnancy. The advice they received from their practitioners was guaranteed to make their pregnancies and ensuing labors "better"; even the products, the babies, would be more satisfactory specimens if: they restricted salt intake, restricted calorie intake, reduced meat and fat consumption, and took supplementary vitamins; or alternately, they might eat for two (depending on their doctor's predisposition); they should walk, walk, walk, but not engage in any of the newly popular coed sports such as swimming or tennis; they should see no evil lest they mark their children; and refrain from anger, even sublimation of anger, for fear the unborn would arrive with 97 beastly tempers; they were purged weekly or thrice weekly to keep weight down and fluids from accumulation; they might have sex with caution, but would probably have no interest in it anyway; and above all, their pregnant condition was normal. Amidst all this punishing advice, what Dr. Woods Hutchinson told his readers of Good Housekeeping in 1914 sounds very contemporary: depart as little as possible from your usual life as long as you feel comfortable, eating whatever you want within the boundaries of good nutrition and, ...while, naturally, the kinds and scope of exercises which can be taken are limited by the physical changes, fears of risk of producing a mishap of any sort by such exertions have really very little to rest upon.28 In the same year another progressive writer, Sarah Comstock, told readers that prepared childbirth was intelligent childbirth; knowing what was going to happen removed most (1.29 But the attitudes of Hutchinson and of the drea Comstock were atypical of what was written, at least for popular consumption, at the time. Advice through the 19205 was similar to that of previous years. On the negative side, women were told that they shouldn't eat for two until the last half of pregnancy, and shouldn't run up and down stairs too frequently.30 Proscriptions on sex became more stringent. It was suggested that intercourse be dispensed with the last six weeks to 98 two months of pregnancy.31 This was an effort on the part of the doctors to prevent infection. The hospitals of the time were having an increase in the number of childbed fevers. Since sexual intercourse was seen as an action that might implant the dreaded microbes, forbidding sex was one possible way of controlling contagion. In the problems-solved category, food cravings were diagnosed as a psychosis in response to the unnatural times by a Freudian admirer.32 Another doctor resonantly announced that science had disproved "marking" of babies.33 Significantly, the emphasis at this time was still on getting the mother through the delivery. It will be a few more years before too much copy is directed toward the physical condition of the woman post partum. And, in p0pular literature today the condition of the infant prior to and following birth has yet to receive a fraction of the attention directed toward the mother. The following quotation gives an inkling of both the variability and motives for dietary advice given in the Twenties: Attempts have been made by restricting the mother's diet along certain lines to keep the size of the baby below the average in the hope of making the birth easier, but the results have not proved satis- factory. Nor is it a feasible scheme to try, as many have done, to make the baby's bones soft by reducing the amount of mineral water in the mother's diet; such tieggment may lay the foundation of rickets in the c 1 . Efforts to control the sex of the unborn child by34 regulating the mother's diet are, of course, futile. With strictures on nearly every aspect of their 99 lives, some expectant mothers apparently tried to make the sick role work to their own advantage. At least something of that sort must have prompted Dr. Lobenstine to write the following: "Many mothers feel that housework should be given up or reduced during pregnancy. This is not true."35 Although a woman's place was still primarily in the home, the little woman didn't necessarily find housework any more pleasing than her Victorian grandmother. At the beginning of the Thirties, two doctors' works were published that were to change pregnancy for countless women. Both men have familiar names, but the philosophical connection between the two of them is rarely acknowledged. The first, Sigmund Freud, father of psychoanalysis, wrote that females prefer the passive forms of sexuality. To become women, their zone of sexuality has to be transferred from clitoris to vagina. The woman who pursues intellec- tual and professional goals has denied her femininity, and, in her neurotic behavior, identifies herself as a male.36 The philosophical tie between Freud and Clarke's Sex in Education is quite evident. A new generation of unsexed "agenes" had just been recognized and labeled. The second man, Grantly Dick Read, wrote a book titled Natural Childbirth; then quickly followed it with several others. Read blamed society for the pain women felt in childbirth.37 No normal physiological function 100 should be accompanied by discomfort. This could hardly be termed a new idea. Thomas Nichols, proselytizer for the water cure, had said the same thing 80 years earlier. To thwart civilization, Read continued, a pregnant woman must be prepared for what is to happen. Again, not a revolutionary concept. At least one writer for a ladies' magazine had scooped him by almost 20 years. Read's beliefs quickly became and remained popular to the present. But what didn't survive until 1980 was why Read, humanitarian motives aside, was so anxious for women to view childbirth as a painless occasion. Read's philOSOphy was both Freudian and Victorian. Contraceptives and keeping up appearances were responsible for the family "so-called" of two children, Read declared. A paltry family of two does not allow the woman to come to full feminine maturity. Only through the birth of many children (and immutable transfer of the zone of sexuality to the vagina) would true women in the style of the grand old ladies of yesteryear develop. As a consequence of limiting conception, the world was losing its greatest force for goodness, true womanhood. The remedy was the return of the seven and eight child family.38 According to Shorter, the plunge in marital fertility in Europe after the 18505 had two roots: the growing sense of personal autonomy in women and the diffusion of contraceptive 39 techniques. In view of this, both. the Austrian Freud and the Englishman Read come across as dreadfully antifeminist 101 guardians of True Womanhood; reactionaries anxious to maintain the woman's sphere. Thus, women who were influenced by Read and, indirectly, Freud, sought the latest promise for a better pregnancy and labor. This time it was pre- paredness and psychoprophylaxis instead of anesthesia. Although the method was a break with the scientific routine, the women who were totally convinced by Read may have been the most traditionally role-oriented. Betty Friedan makes a convincing argument in The Feminine Mystique that during the 19505 and 19605 in America this was the case.40 An advice book on pregnancy published in 1933 does an effective job of summarizing popular standards of prenatal care. Dr. Findley notes that there had been a White House Conference on the topic which resolved that no woman should gain more than 25 pounds, all should eat a well-balanced diet with meat intake restricted, none should have sex the first three months or last month of pregnancy, and tub baths should not be taken in the last month for fear of infection. Dr. Findley castigates educated women who in wishing a career sacrifice having children "to the altar of ambition." Poor working women are exempted because their poverty, not idle desire, forces them to work.41 In all probability, they had more children, too, which made the interpretation possible that motherhood would be their only calling if circumstances were different. The passage of the Social Security Act in 1935 102 brought prenatal care to a larger number of women. Thirty- eight states set up prenatal clinics as part of their maternal and child health care programs. The value of care received must have been frequently suspect. As a consultant for the Children's Bureau commented in 1939, the Significance of blood pressure was not appreciated by many physicians who 42 The doctor's largest contribution cared for pregnant women. in prenatal care was probably in recognizing pelvic mal- formations early enough to plan for restricted diet or cesarean delivery. An article published midway through 1939 was devoted 43 It represented exclusively to exercises for prenant women. the wave of the future. It is an indictment of the self- centeredness of the 19705 that when exercise articles appeared in that decade the writers somewhat militantly 4 The difference in the assumed they invented the leg lift.4 times comes through mainly in the illustrations. The 1939 article shows a drawing of a "pin-up girl" in halter t0p and culottes briskly exercising on a mat. The 19705 articles use drawings or photographs of women 10 months pregnant (Plate 19). The next year, the emphasis on fitness continued. In an article entitled "Saving Your Figure,”45 women are assured that nobody need sacrifice their figure for their child. The price paid for youthfulness is standing straight and gaining 15 to 20 pounds during pregnancy---a 10-pound 103 Plate 19. Depicting pregnancy: 1939 versus 1978. Redrawn from illustrations in Miriam T. Sweeney, "Your Daily Dozen," H eia Vol. 17 (September 1939), pp. 795-798, 796; and in Judi Thompson, "Expecting--- The Yoga Way," Family Health Vol. 10 (March 1978), pp. 44-46, 45. BBAHEY 0/5/8' 105 drop in the desired gain from the previous decade. Readers are assured that if they take care, they, too, will survive looking just like Mrs. Joseph P. Kennedy or the Duchess of Kent. The allusion to glamorous role models was a peculiarly 19405 fad which was expressed more fully in articles on maternity clothing. There was an implicit vicariousness in this, but generally it can be seen as a positive step forward in public attitude. After all those years of saying that pregnancy was normal, some women whose charisma quotient was high enough were perceived as capable of enjoying attractive pregnancies. In keeping with the more healthy perception of the pregnant condition, some sports made it off the "no" list. Golf, dancing and gardening became acceptable,46 47 "mild swimming." along with During the Forties, the medical profession changed its mind about meat. Suddenly protein from meat became very important. Women were told that too little protein might lead to edema, toxemia, less disease resistance, anemia, insufficient mother's milk, miscarriages and still- births.48 To complete the reversal in position, women were assured that overwork would not cause miscarriage.49 This neatly complemented the national need for war workers. Prepared parenthood had taken several steps forward. Regular classes for expectant mothers and fathers were being held in cities throughout the country. However, they were 106 a little more uptight than those today. In Flint, Michigan, separate classes with very similar content were given for mothers and fathers. A representative of the Flint organi- zation explained that they tried to meet together once, but the presence of members of the opposite sex was just too 50 This is a social indication of two things. inhibiting. First, prepared parenthood was now widely considered to be one way of securing a better pregnancy and delivery. However, preparedness was no longer limited to overcoming fear in the prospective mother; the father was also included. This is the first hint of the vast wave of togetherness that will sweep the country in the Seventies. Second, the two sexes were still not very comfortable when directly confronted with biological functions. A little residue remained of the type of Victorianism that made it improper for male and female medical students to hear lectures together. A new genre of prenatal advice literature, Old Wive's Tales, made its debut in the 19505. Perhaps it would have been impossible for a whole article on this topic to have been written earlier; doctors had not yet consigned enough of their former "scientific truths" to the province of the old wives. Articles of this type usually follow a question/ answer format, e.g., "Is is true that ?" "No, that's just an old wive's tale. The truth is ." While writing of this sort dispenses some useful information, 107 it also tends to perpetuate erroneous ideas that might otherwise have been completely forgottenfn' Diet and weight gain continued in importance in the 19505. Reader's Digest and Ladies Home Journal popularized the mistaken idea that rapid weight gain caused prematurity. Tompkins, et. al. found that the reverse was true. Insuffi- cient weight gain was apt to cause prematurity; a too rapid increase predisposed to toxemia.52 About the same time, Wishick urged more flexible parameters for weight gain to avoid placing unnecessary emotional stress on the pregnant woman. He cautioned against weight loss because of possible inadequacies of nutrition.53 However, the popular journals disregarded or were oblivious to such advice. Instead, Ladies Home Journal offered readers "I Dieted During My Second Pregnancy."54 Significantly, the author of the article was the Journal's beauty editor, not a famous ob- stetrician like it would have been a few years earlier. The real-life heroine of the story endured an 800 calorie per day diet while she was pregnant because she didn't have enough will power to lose weight on her own before she became pregnant. With her doctor's help she achieved her goal. The same lady and doctor in the 19605 probably would have relied on amphetamines. The account of the undoubtedly fictional "pretty, young Mrs. Porter” published in 1963 55 in the Journal is both disgusting and disquieting. Mrs. Porter's patronizing doctor tells her that a weight gain 108 of 15-17 pounds is "normal," when average weight gain is actually much higher. He tells her obese mothers tend to have toxemia, but neglects to tell her that such toxemias aneusually benign unless aggravated by an additional exces- sive increase in weight. Besides, in "Mrs. Porter's" case it is irrelevant. She is 5 feet 2 inches tall and weighs 105 pounds. Since she smokes over half a pack of cigarettes a day she is concerned about having to quit. Her physician informs her that if she limits her smokes to 10 a day, everything will be fine, blatantly ignoring the well-publicized relationship between number of cigarettes smoked and high prematurity rate.56 If she has any trouble limiting her smoking, the doctor will give her amphetamines. Likewise, if restricting weight gain to 15 pounds is too difficult, amphetamines, again, will do the trick. He would prefer that she do it on her own, but if that is too difficult.... The doctor's only reservation about the pills is that Mrs. Porter might feel so "peppy" that she might inadvertently "overdo." It is impossible to know how many Mrs. Porters existed or how many doctors like hers. The attitudes expressed mark the most extreme medical intervention in the course of a normal pregnancy since Dr. Meigs' recommended small bleedings. The trend documented in the preceding articles is frightening: weight gain has been trivialized and almost completely divorced from medical reason, at least as far as how it is presented. 109 Weight gain is a beauty problem. Any woman who is so weak that she can't deny herself calories while pregnant deserves any amount of fat she retains because she has disobeyed her doctor. The fetus' health does not enter into this type of doctor-patient relationship. The doctor's role, as it appeared in journal articles of this sort, is to make sure his patient will be willowy at the termination of the pregnancy; the patient's role is unquestioning obedience. The most recent article reviewed which suggested pregnancy as a good time to diet was published in 1967.57 The element of irrationality present in all articles supporting this extreme posture is revealed at the beginning of this article when the authors total the increase in body weight during pregnancy due to fluid, increased size of body organs and the fetus, arrive at the figure of 20 pounds and then conclude that the ideal weight gain is 16 to 18 pounds. The implicit encouragement for assumption of the sick role and complete deference to the doctor's directives, even those harsh and unsupported by simple arithmetic like the example above, shows a reactionary trend and a regression in the role assigned to pregnant women during this time period. In some respects a woman pregnant in the 19505 and 19605 had far less control over herself and her life than women pregnant 100 years earlier. A perception emerges from these articles of the pregnant female as self-centered and devoid of reasoning 110 ability and will power. This view is further underscored by an article written in 1966 by Virginia Apgar.58 Apgar is originator of the Apgar Test for neonate well-being and is known for her lifelong devotion to promoting better fetal health. In this article, however, her approach is rather indirect in meeting that goal. Although Apgar sharply cautioned against the use of appetite suppressants because of possible harm to the baby, she approached weight control from a beauty standpoint. After a few general remarks on the lasting effects of poor diet on the newborn child, she alluded vaguely to "complicationS'resulting from overweight. Without further explication, Apgar concluded that it is easier to regain your figure if you don't overeat. The remainder of the text offers hints on weight control. The article is typical. Vanity is clearly seen as a more effective tool in controlling behavior than informing readers what medical science thinks will happen if cautions are ignored. In contrast to the advice published in the Ladies Home Journal and Redbook, a Newsweek article from the mid—19605 summarizes the more moderate, contemporary view also present. The pregnant woman is urged to avoid drugs, even aspirin. Physical activity is encouraged from the sensible vieWpoint of continuing what you're used to rather than blanket proscriptions and endorsements. Sex is allowed until the ninth month, when it is feared that it might cause premature rupture of the membranes, infection, and premature labor. 111 a 20-pound weight gain is seen as ideal.60 Dr. Samuel Meaker's views complete the picture of prenatal care in the late 19505 and early 19605. Dr. Meaker, as a young doctor, wrote a book on prenatal care in 1927. In 1965, by this time professor emeritus, Dr. Meaker published a second book on the t0pic. His essential conservatism is obvious, but he has moderated his beliefs on what might be done. His most interesting comments in both books concern sports and travel. In 1965 Meaker writes that tennis, golf, and dancing are acceptable, but bowling, horseback riding, skiing, and swimming are not. Train and plane travel are not injurious; however, automobile trips longer than 100 miles are apt to be so fatiguing as to effect miscarriage. No pregnant woman should be behind the wheel of a car after the seventh month.61 In contrast, Dr. Meaker's 1927 book outlawed virtually all travel except in case of emergency, said no pregnant woman should drive a car, and found tennis, golf, and dancing all "inadvisable."62 Apparently, he either felt pregnant women were less fragile in 1965 than he did 40 years earlier or that sports an travel were not as strenuous. In either case, it neatly highlights the lag period in accepting activities for women and then, after lengthy passage of time, their acceptance for pregnant women. Concurrent with the advice in popular journal articles 112 which encouraged assumption of the sick role, sbme doctors with an interest in the psychological aspects of pregnancy began promoting it as a period of increased susceptibility to crisis, stress, and anxiety.63 The harmless "mood swings" and flighty emotionalism that past generations had expected in pregnant women suddenly took on a much more sinister aura. Studies cited that defective children were more common after emotionally stressful pregnancies. Women with more anxiety during pregnancies had more compli- cations in childbirth.65 Many psychiatrists felt that symptoms such as vomiting during pregnancy had a psycho- somatic origin. Neurosis was the instigator of poor health, not the end product. Coupled with the Freudian concept that career women had failed to accept their femininity, the prescription for a better pregnancy became dependent behavior and retreat into the woman's sphere to reduce anxiety. Articles such as the one written by Reva Rubin in 1967 are doubly devastating.66 Rubin detailed at great length how the "career girl" must be obliterated to attain the maternal role. First, it brings to mind the stereotype of the "girl" who works until she has something better to do. Second, it intimates that working and motherhood are mutually exclusive occupations. The spectre rises once more of those much-castigated professional women of the late 18005 whom Edward Clarke termed unsexed females, because their interests betrayed the fact that they were not real women. The pernicious 113 vigor and longevity of this "old husband's tale" is remarkable. But regardless of what some of the scientific community 'believed, there were women by the 19605 who thought they should be able to work because they wanted to, even during pregnancy. Forcing such women to quit their jobs might well prove more anxiety-provoking than allowing them to continue. However, the time for that thought had not come. Protection from employment for pregnant women, still unsupported by empirical study, would continue in full force for another decade. Participation in sports and exercise comes to the forefront in an article published in 1967.67 The authors suggest that such activity will contribute to better effi- ciency in labor and birth and effect a shorter recovery. No studies are cited to SUpport this premise, but that is not unusual in p0pular literature. This idea, however, still unsupported by controlled study, is one that captures the attention of the publishers and presumably the readers in the decade that follows. Countless articles on exercise to achieve a "better" pregnancy will appear in the sweaty, fitness-conscious Seventies. With a new solution to the pregnancy problem, using diet alone to achieve weight control became passe, for the whole idea of stringent weight control was under attack. In fact, doctors who wrote for the popular press were showing much less unanimity in defining the ideal gain. A brief article that reviewed current practice in 1969 found 114 different doctors espousing everything from 18 to 30 pounds as the "absolute" limit for weight increase. In 1970, the National Academy of Science's National Research Committee on Maternal Nutrition recommended 24 pounds, bringing the officially sanctioned ideal back to the figure set in the 19205. The committee's report suggested a link between high infant mortality and weight gains restricted to 10 to 14 pounds. It also stated that there was no evidence that weight gain alone caused toxemia or that dietary restrictions would in any way reduce its risk.68 The effect of the Maternal Nutrition Committee's recommendations was seen quickly in the women's press. McCall's published "Pregnancy: No Time to Diet" in 1971.69 The text directly contradicts everything said in the diet articles of the 19505 and 19605; you should not diet if pregnant and overweight; vitamins do not substitute for food; weight gain without high blood pressure is not a sign of toxemia. However, just how normal a condition pregnancy was considered is still questionable. An article published in 1973 written by Alan Guttmacher, then president of Planned Parenthood, echoes the findings of the Maternal Nutrition Committee. Yet, Dr. Guttmacher can't refrain from passing along a dictatorial edict or two for his readers' edification. The most trivial example, and therefore the most exasperating, was his statement that if weight gain was within acceptable limits, the pregnant woman might allow herself two pats of 115 butter or fortified margarine a day.70 The type of physician who wouldtnjrto control his patient's lives to the extent that he counts their butter pats betrays two niggling suspicions: (1) pregnancy is rather abnormal; and (2) pregnant women are incapable of overseeing even small details of daily living. These presumptions have been virtual constants throughout the whole period studied for a major segment of advice-givers, male and female. There are four major trends to guarantee a success- ful pregnancy in evidenceikn'the remainder of the 19705. First is a general relaxation by medical doctors of rules and restrictions during pregnancy. Second, exercise is perceived by editors as a topic of paramount importance to readers. Third, a new tone of intimate, chatty frankness about pregnancy appears in the popular press. Fourth, a whole category of back-to-the-earth ideas surface, including a resurgent interest in midwifery as the way to conclude a better pregnancy. Each of the above will receive attention in the following pages. General recommendations focus on diet, weight gain, drugs, and sex. Travel is no longer considered threatening; hence, it is rarely mentioned. Problems resulting from inadequate weight gain and nutrition receive far more coverage than those related to excessive increase. The link between malnutrition and mental retardation, low birth weight, fetal abnormalities, and decreased infant resistance 116 to infections are all stressed.71 Optimal weight gain is usually stated as between 20 and 30 pounds. Recent evidence is cited in one article linking maximal gain to prior weight. Briefly, underweight women should gain a minimum of 30 pounds, overweight women about 16 pounds, and those of normal weight between 20 and 26 pounds.72 The shift in beliefs was irrefutably documented when "the less weight gained the better" was classified as a myth in an Old Wives Tales article printed in 1973.73 On a more scholarly level, an article published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology in 1974 concludes that each woman's built-in servo-control mechanism should set the correct amount to gain.74 Use of unnecessary drugs received uniform disapproval. Aspirin, coffee, and alcohol should all be avoided. Diet pills were declared bad for the baby.75 Salt was finally allowed back on food "to taste" after being banished for nearly 80 years. It was suggested that low sodium intake might actually invite problems. Whether or not sex should be permitted for the entire pregnancy remained an unanswered question. In the light of Sparse and conflicting evidence, most writers said, "well, why not?"76 Other authors expanded the sentence to "well, why not---enjoy it!" And in so doing acknowledged that pregnant women might, indeed, have an appreciation for . 77 . . . . intercourse. A final piece of adVIce was a sen51b1e, 117 updated version of a major Victorian concern. Victorians urged bedrest every month for adolescent girls to safeguard their reproductive organs. While the advice was over- cautious, it was evidence of well-intentioned planning years before pregnancy would occur. Fredelle Maynard began a 1979 article by asserting that the very best preg- nancies are those that are managed long before conception through good nutrition and intelligent living.78 It is a shame it took the idea of pre-pregnancy planning so long to reappear. It may have had to overcome a sense of egotism in the relatively new gynecological profession that most problems could be resolved during pregnancy in the hands of the right doctor. Or the responsibility may rest with those women who expected their physicans to take complete control of the course of the pregnancy, and so had little sense of personal investment. Writing on exercise can be divided into two some- times overlapping categories; exercise undertaken to assume a svelte post-pregnancy figure, and exercise undertaken to make labor and delivery easier. The attitude that allowed the gravida greater latitude in activities was cogently stated by D. H. Stott, who said the goal, after all, in an undisturbed pregnancy was avoidance of interpersonal tension, not absence of physical activity.79 Controlled study has not resolved whether exercise is potentially beneficial or detri- mental for the fetus. Goodlin cites several recent studies 118 80 Pomerance, Gluck, and Lynch with conflicting results. found none of the following significantly related to maternal physical fitness: length of gestation, pregnancy compli- cations, length of labor in primigravidas, one-minute Apgar scores, infant weight, length or head circumference.81 In a study of Olympic and first class athletes, Zaharieva found that while the first stage of delivery was prolonged in sportswomen due to rigidity of the uterus and birth canal, the expulsive stage was shorter. Both effects are attributed to exceptional muscle tone. Leading athletes also were found to have more frequent disturbances of the perineum during delivery.82 However, very little of the professional controversy and data leaked into the p0pu1ar press. Instead, how strenuous the suggested exercise could be was directly related to how pro-feminist the magazine was. Thus, conservative American Home told its pregnant readers to do from 3 to 5 rolls from side to side to tone the abdominal muscles.83 More energy would probably be expended getting down to and back up from the carpet than in the exercise itself. Meanwhile, M§;_challenged its readers: "Who says athletes can't be pregnant? You can---and should---swim, run, jog, row, exercise, cycle, skate, and play tennis, squash, volleyball, soccer, softball, basketball, field "84 hockey... The article gives examples of athletes who have competed while pregnant and the opinions of several 119 sports doctors that athletic women have an easier time from start to finish in pregnancy. McCall's, meanwhile, walked briskly down the middle of the road wearing sensible shoes. A 1979 article suggested that each woman should do what feels comfortable, but that contact sports, competitive play with accompanying stress, and activities in which you can't be totally in control, such as horseback riding and skin diving,should be avoided.85 The new intimacy with which details of pregnancy are discussed in the p0pu1ar press can be seen as indicative of many things. The characteristic focus for such articles is sex and togetherness. The writing definitely reflects less restrictive medical beliefs and practice. It also coincides with a culture-wide relaxation of sexual prohibitions. Ironically, articles of this genre make the same basic promises of a better pregnancy as all previous solutions. "Expecting--- n86 the Yoga Way concludes with perineal exercises and the italicized message "This is the most important exercise a woman can do before, duripg, and afterpregnancy." The author says that not only will these exercises tone up the female sex organs, but they will benefit the nerves and organs of the entire reproductive system, and prevent hemorrhoids and constipation (and, no doubt, dr0psy and dyspepsia, as well). Another identifiable accompanying aspect of this kind of thinking is a sort of narcissistic, voyeuristic journalistic style. A 1977 article published in Redbook 120 entitled "Sex During Pregnancy: Being in Love With Your "87 chronicled "case" Husband, Your Body, Your Baby to Come studies spoken to the reader by the women involved. The anecdotes had little in common except that most concluded with an orgasm. The baby mentioned in the title receives attention mostly as the cause of the rounded belly that the husbands found such a "turn-on." The term "belly" seems to function much like "buttocks" in porn literature; the word itself is supposed to excite the reader. The bulge is a newly-discovered erogenous zone; it even moves, like some incredible, inflatable, motorized marital aid. Conclusions reached by Frank Trippett in a 1980 11mg essay88 seem particularly apprOpriate in eXplaining the motivation behind articles like the one above. Trippett suggests that the current insatiable market for such revelations are a form of desperate sharing initiated by lonely people craving acceptance. Mass media exposure of such intimate details is leading to a trivialization of personal values. His conclusions are substantiated when a book can n89 begin, absurdly, "...when we become pregnant... and continue with drivel like this: [In prescribing the proper psychological state for the third trimester] Many will feel an almost mystical identification with a primitive feminine principle within them and a closeness with the reproductive, generative elements of the species, and, indeed, of all living organisms. OT. 121 Men will see her as a full, rich vessel. Some may say that their image of the most beautiful scene in the world is that of a woman eight and a half months pregnant running across an Open field.91 Some may say that, but it is a select few who have had the opportunity to view this feat of genetic engineering--- the Venus of Willendorf crossed with the Queen Elizabeth II sailing at 40 knots through the field daisies. The very real danger present in this self-indulgence is the danger of bearing children for the parents rather than for themselves. Margaret Mead wrote: When children are turned into instruments of their parents' well-being, the adults' capacity to devise and maintain a society in which the well-being of all children is protected seems to be diminished.92 In this context the current trend toward salaciousness and self-indulgence may be the most serious and far-reaching one for society. The final trend noted was conceived through the odd coupling of the 19605 back-to-the-good-earth movement with radical feminism. Suzanne Arms' writing, in her entirely, soddenly serious book about pregnancy and childbirth, shows what happens when the two are joined. Early in the book Arms asserts, "There is no doubt that the history of child- birth can be viewed as a gradual attempt by man to extricate the process of birth from woman and call it his own," and that hospitals are "solely designed for the treatment of disease and disorders."9‘l5 Near the end of the text Arms present her version of the better pregnancy. 122 The young woman is glad she has taken a year's maternity leave from work after Christmas. It has given her time to think, to be alone, to get back into baking bread; time to make baby beds out of wicker baskets and to embroider receiving blankets. She has been able to garden every day.94 Such attitudes are patently overloaded with stereo- types and cliches. To assume that doctors had taken control of pregnancy without active encouragement from women is historically absurd; however, it agrees with the male conspiracy theories prevalent in radical feminist literature. Hospitals, as the province of male doctors, are therefore contemptible. They are also impersonal institutions, which conflicts with the second aspect of this trend, earthiness. So the last prescription for the best pregnancy is to leave your exciting, fulfilling job for one year; a period long enough to investigate the joys or motherhood and make wicker baby baskets for an army of infants. The baby should be delivered at home with a midwife or sympathetic female doctor in attendance; standard practice for the educated female radicals of the 18505. Arms' book ends before She charts what should be done with the baby, the bread, and the vegetable garden after the leave of absence is over. Bathing in rustic motherhood for exactly one calendar year is surely more of an indulgence for the mother than real accomodation and adjustment for the child. That in itself is rather disquieting. Margaret Mead's thoughts on adult self-absorption at the expense of children's well-being 123 seem equally apprOpriate here. A summary of prenatal advice for the period of 1850 to 1980 can be divided into four distinct phases. From 1850 to 1870 practices were really pre-scientific. Prenatal care was unusual. Not much was known about the course of pregnancy. Most advice was based on superstition or an individual's undocumented hunch. Treatments were directed toward making the delivery easier for the mother. To that end the gravida might be kept from eating meat to make the fetus smaller with "softer" bones. Between 1870 and 1930 scientific progress targeted areas of concern during pregnancy. Advice on proper diet was based on newly-acquired knowledge of vitamins. However, broad application of narrowly-directed studies on prenatal nutrition resulted in continued dietary restrictions. Recognition of a connection between edema and toxemia led to further dietary restrictions and limits on weight gain. Exercise was valued for pregnant women. Walking was typically prescribed. Other sports were allowed about 30 or 40 years after their initial acceptance for other women. Thus, swimming, 3 turn-of-the-century vogue, became acceptable for pregnant women in the 19405. Golf, tennis, automobile, train and airplane travel all showed a similar pattern. Most restrictions on activity during this period were based on a perception that it might be injurious. Rarely was activity a matter for objective study. The emergence of Freudian 124 theories on women and sex roles promoted passivity and submissiveness in women. Parturient women, as quintessential females, should therefore be most passive and most submissive of all. Prepared childbirth was introduced at the close of this period. The third phase of care, from 1930 to 1970 is basically characterized by refinement of ideas introduced previously. Sometimes this was a result of new evidence that suggested modification of practices. Mostly, however, this period is best viewed as a typical fashion cycle where things changed because that is the nature of fashion. There is no more sense in recommendations on weight gain going from 25 pounds to 20 pounds to 15, and finally 10 pounds with the aid of amphetamines than for hemlines going from below the knee to the crotch in the same time period. The final period, 1970 to 1980, is as yet transitional. There is a trend to uncomplicate pregnancy; it is probably seen as less a medical crisis period now than at any other time in this century. However, it must be noted that the type of laissez faire pregnancy currently identified as the general, modern way of doing things has been an alternative, although perhaps not a well-supported one, throughout the time studied, from 1850 forward. Today most restrictions on diet, exercise and activity have been eliminated. Yet, even now the amount of data collected on pregnancy is relatively small. The present course of action is not yet irrefutably 125 the best course of action. Anthropologist Ashley Montagu wrote the following passage in 1949. Every people of whom we have any knowledge practices both magic and science as activities parallel with the many others which are clearly recognized as belonging to their proper places in either religious or secular life. Sometimes the borderland between magical and scientific activities is somewhat 95 blurred, just as it sometimes is among ourselves...P Management of pregnancy is a vast "borderland" that has always occupied that hazy, twilight zone between magic and science in our society. While it is impossible to predict exactly what form the prescription for a better pregnancy will take in the future, it is at the same time predictable that actual practices will always reflect their borderland origins. Nineteenth Century dress reformers were leaders in eliminating the first restriction placed on pregnant women, that they shouldn't appear in public, by providing less constrictive clothing; clothing that could accomodate the contours of pregnancy. The next three chapters will examine dress reform movements, leading to the eventual development of maternity clothing at the turn of the century. 126 REFERENCES 1Judith Martin, "Miss Manners, " The News and Observer (Raleigh, North Carolina, November 30,1980, Section III),p . 18. 2Talcott Parsons, The Social System (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1953), pp. 436-7. 3A personal communication from Barbara Hawkins regarding advice during her first pregnancy, 1957. Mrs. Hawkins related that she did not gain any weight during the first three months of her pregnancy, and so could not gain more than 12 pounds for the remainder of the pregnancy. Her doctor, whom Hawkins felt was both progressive and know- ledgeable, said he would hospitalize her if she gained more than two pounds in any month. 4George H. Napheys, The Physical Life of Woman: AAdvice to the Maiden, Wife and Mother (Philadelphia: George Maclean, 1872, 6th edition), pp. 173-180. 51bid., p. 177. 6Ibid., pp. 149—160. 7John M. Keating, M.D., Maternity, Infancy and Childhood (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott COmpany, 1891, 7nd edition, c0pyright 1887), pp. 2-37. 8 Ibid., p. 25. 9Ibid., pp. 28-29. Keating is very opposed to tight- fitting clothes. Therefore, the inescapable conclusion is that pregnant women should just go out under cover of darkness. 101bid., pp. 33-34. 11See Sydney Barrington Elliott, "Prenatal Influence," The Arena Vol. 9 #52 (March 1894), pp. 417-426. Sydney Barrington Elliott, "Prenatal Influence,” The Arena Vol. 10 #59 (October 1894), pp. 668-676. Sydney Barrington Elliott, "Prenatal Influence," The Arena Vol. 10 #57 (August 1894), pp. 306-316. 127 M. Louise Mason, "Prenatal Influence," The Arena Vol. 10 #58 (September 1894), pp. 545-46. 12Stinson Jarvis, "How Evolution Evolves," The Arena Vol. 14 #70 (September 1895), pp. 67-76, 74. 13Mrs. (Alice) Henry Dudeney, The Maternity of Harriott Wicken (New York andlonmnn The Macmillan Company, 1899), p. 14Robert C. Goodlin, Care of the Fetus (New York: Masson Publishing USA, Inc., 1979), pp. 14-15. 15In contrast, recent research has shown that in hot climates pregnant women on salt restricted diets may even go into hypotensive shock because of salt deficiency and reduced blood volumes. Ibid., pp. 15rl6. 16"Editorial," Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 68 (1917), p. 732. 17Homer N. Oliphant, M.D., Maternity and the Care of the Babe (Frankford, Indiana: H. N. Oliphant, 1923)(first editlon in 1909), p. 20. 181bid., p. 17. 19Ibid., pp. 16-17. 201bid., pp. 28, 29. 21Margaretta Muhlenberg Tuttle, ”Maternity and the Woman Intellectual,"(b11kn”s Vol. 44 (January 29, 1910), pp. 18-19. 22 Inge K. Broverman, Susan Raymond Vogl, Donald M. Broverman, Frank E. Clarkson. Paul S. Rosenkrantz, "Sex Role Stereotypes: A Current Appraisal," Journal of Social Issues Vol. 28 #2 (1972), pp. 59-77. ssandra Schwartz Tangri, "Determinants of Occupation Role Innovation Among College Women," Journal of Social Issues Vol. 28 #2 (1972), pp. l77-199. 24John R. Murkin, "V. Food Requirements of the Mother and Child," Good Housekeeping Vol. 52 (May 1911), pp. 609-612. 25 . ' Sarah Curtis Mott, "The Child That Is To Be," The Ladies Home Journal Vol. 29 (January 1912), pp. 6-F. 128 William Lee Howard, M.D., The Child That Is To Be: What Mental Attitudes Can Do to the Unborn Child," The Ladies Home Journal Vol. 29 (October 1912), p. 32. 26Morris Fishbein, Pads and Quackery in Healing (New York: Blue Ribbon Books, Inc., 1932), p. 257. Z7Goodlin, op. cit., p. 26. Mary E. Bayles, R.N. provides the interesting statement that 95 percent of mothers use laxatives of some sort. "The New Baby Deserves a Healthy Parentages, " Delineator Vol. 97 (September 1921), pp. 30-F, 30. 28Woods Hutchinson, "Before the Stork Comes," Good ngsekeeping Vol. 58 #6 (June 1914), pp. 813-817, 816. 29Sarah Comstock, "Mothercraft: A New Profession for Women," Good Housekeeping Vol. 54 #6 (December 1914), pp. 672-678. 30Carolyn Conant Van Blarcom, "Prenatal Days, and Cheerful, Too," Delineator Vol. 97 (September 1920), pp. 34-F, 34. 31Samuel Raynor Meaker, M.D. Mother and Unborn Child (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins Company, 1927), p. 87. Joseph B. DeLee, "Before the Baby Comes," Delineator Vol. 109 (October 1926), pp. 35-F, 35. 32Ralph Lobenstine, M.D., "Saving Life by Prenatal Care," Delineator Vol. 100 (July 1922), pp. 17-F, 17. 33Harvey w. Wiley, M.D., "Getting Ready for Baby," Good Housekeeping Vol. 74 (April 1922), pp. 59-F, 59. 34Meaker, op. cit., pp. 73-74. 35Lobenstine, loc. cit. 36Sigmund Freud, Three Contributions to the Theory of Sex (A. A. Brill, trans.)(New York: Neurosis and Mental Disease Monographs, 1948, 4th edition)(first published, 1930). 37 . . . Grantley Dick Read, Childbirth Without Fear (New York and London: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1944). 38In direct rebuttal to this idea, Alice Rossi quotes Niles Newton to the effect that the reason most often given by primitive peOple for abortion is to avoid the pain of childbirth. Alice S. Rossi, "Maternalism, Sexuality and the New Feminism," In Joseph Zubin and John Morey (eds.) Contemporary Sexual Behavior (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973), p. 28. The same quotation is also used by Elizabeth Fisher, Woman's Creation (Garden City: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1979), p. 204. 39Edward Shorter, "Female Emancipation, Birth Control and Fertility in European History,” American Historical Review Vol. 78 #3 (June 1973), pp. 605-644. 40Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1963). 41Palmer Findley, The Story of Childbirth (Garden City: Doubleday, Doran andfiCompany, 1933). 42Maude M. Gerdes, M.D., "New Concepts and Procedures of Maternal Care," American Journal of Public Health Vol. 29 (September 1939), pp. 1029-1033. 43Miriam T. Sweeney, "Your 'Daily Dozen' During Pregnancy," Hygiea Vol. 17 (September 1939), pp. 795-798. 44A good example of this stereotypic view is Jill Kelley, "Who Says Athletes Can't Be Pregnant?" Ms. Vol. 7 #1 (July 1978), pp. 47-F. 4SCharlotte R. Welsh, "Saving Your Figure," Hygiea Vol. 18 (March 1940), pp. 209-211. 46Beaulah France, "Are You Participating in the Baby Boom?" American Home Vol. 28 (August 1942), pp. 44-45. 47Amy Porter, "You'd Never Know," Collier's Vol. 113 (January 29, 1944), p. 17-F. 48Herman N. Bundeson, "Diet During and After Pregnancy," Ladies Home Journal Vol. 54 (November 1942), pp. lSZ-F. 49Ann DeHuff Peters, M.D., Prenatal Care, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Social Security Administration, Children's Bureau Publication #4 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949). 50Ragna B. Esku, "Maternal Death Rate," Hygiea Vol. 24 #12 (December 1946), p. 900-F. — 130 51Alan F. Guttmacher and Mary Scott Welch, "How True are those Old Wives' Tales About Pregnancy," Collier's Vol. 129 (June 21, 1952), pp. 18-F. 52Winslow T. Tompkins, Robert McN. Mitchell, and Dorothy E. Wiehl, "Maternal Studies II: Prematurity and Maternal Nutrition," In The Promotion of Maternal and Newborn Health, papers from the 1954 annual conference of the Milbank Memorial Fund (New York: Milbank Memorial Fund, 1955). , "Maternal Studies III: Toxemia and Maternal Nutrition," Ibid., pp. 62-90. 53Anonymous, "End Routine Diet Control for Pregnant Women," Science Newsletter Vol. 74 (October 25, 1958), p. 265. S4Dawn Crowell Normal, "1 Dieted During My Second Pregnancy...and What a Difference," Ladies Home Journal Vol. 70 (November 1953), pp. 66-F. 55Goodrich C. Shauffler, "Will My Baby Cost Me My Figure," Ladies Home Journal Vol. 80 (May 1963), p. 40-F. S6An unusually well-written and informative popular article on the hazards of smoking appeared early in 1958. Ann Usher, "Research Indicates Mother's Smoking Can Harm an Unborn Baby," Better Homes and Gardens Vol. 36 (January 1958), p. 24-F. 57Roy G. Holly and Dona Z. Meilach, "How Much Weight Should You Gain During Pregnancy?" Redbook Vol. 128 (February 1967), pp. 31-F. 58Virginia Apgar, "Eating for Two," Today's Health Vol. 44 (February 1966), pp. lZ-F. 59Anonymous, "Having the First Baby: The Way It Is Today," Newsweek Vol. 66 (October 25, 1965), p. 70. 60It is enlightening that after several decades of diet restrictions, sometimes quite stringent ones, for gravida, Raymond Illsley can comment in 1967 that there have actually been few studies on human nutrition and pregnancy and that the body of knowledge comes mainly from indirect inferential data and a small number of dietary surveys. Raymond Illsley, "The Sociological Study of Reproduction," In Stephen A. Richardson and Alan F. Guttmacher (eds.) Chlldbearing--- Its Social and Psychologica1 Aspects (Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Company, 1967), p. 122. 131 61Samuel R. Meaker, Preparing for Motherhood (Chicago: Yearbook Medical Publishers, 2nd—edition, 1965), pp. 66-67. 62 Meaker, Mother and Child, op. cit., pp. 76-78. 63Gerald Caplan, "Psychological Aspects of Maternity Care," Journal of Public Health Vol. 47 #1 (1957), pp. 25-31. 64A. Davids, S. Devault, M. Talmadge, "Anxiety, Pregnancy and Childbirth Abnormalities," Journal of Consulting Psychology Vol. 25 #1 (1961), pp. 74-77. 65Anthony Davids and S. Davault, "Maternal Anxiety During Pregnancy and Childbirth Abnormalities," Psychosomatic Medicine Vol. 24 (1962), pp. 464-469. 66Reva Rubin, "Attainment of the Maternal Role, Part 1: Processes," Nursing Research Vol. 16 (Summer 1967), pp. 237-245. 67Margaret Lilley and Beth Day, "A Doctor's Guide to a Healthy Pregnancy," Parent's Magazine Vol. 42 (April 1967), pp. 46-47F. 8Anonymous, ”Pregnant? Gain 24 Pounds," Science Digest Vol. 68 (December 1970), pp. 65-66. Anonymous, "Pleasingly Pregnant," Newsweek Vol. 76 (August 10, 1970), p. 66. Anonymous, "Weight Gains in Pregnancy: Care With Diet Still Required," Science News Vol. 100 (October 16, 1977), p. 262. 69Doris Calloway, "Pregnancy: No Time to Diet," McCall's Vol. 98 (May 1971), pp. 54-F. 70Alan F. Guttmacher, "The Truth About Eating for Two; Vital New Facts on Prenatal Nutrition," Parent's Magazine Vol. 48 (October 1973), pp. 44-45F. 71Joan Arehart-Treichel, "Mother's Diet and Child's Health,” Science News Vol. 106, (August 17, 1974), p. 108. Charlotte Maregolin and Ruth Holcomb, "Vital Food Facts Every Expectant Mother Should Know," Parent's Magazine Vol. 50 (March 1975), pp. 35-36F. 2Lawrence Galton, "Here's News in Medicine," Family Circle (July 15, 1980), p. 54. 132 73Anonymous, "Don't Be Fooled by These Maternity Myths," Good Housekeeping Vol. 177 (September 1973), p. 185. 74Jeffrey Pomerance, Louis Gluck and Vincent Lynch, "Physical Fitness in Pregnancy: Its Effect on Pregnancy Outcome," American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Vol. 119 (August 1, 1974), pp. 367-876, 875. 7SRonald Gots, Barbara Gots, Alan E. Nourse, Joyce Brothers, and Marge Allertson, "Having a Baby---1978," Good Housekegping Vol. 186 (January 1978), pp. 68F. 76Anonymous, "Pregnant Sex," Time Vol. 114 (December 10, 1979), pa. 920 77Michael Newton, "Meeting Sexual and Emotional Needs During Pregnancy," Family Health Vol. 9 (July 1977), pp. 15F. 78Fredelle Maynard, "How You Affect Your Unborn Child," Woman's Day, (October 11, 1979), pp. 40F. 79D. H. Stott, New Society, Vol. 19 (1977), p. 329, quoted in Goodlin, op. cit., p. 10. 80Goodlin, op. cit., pp. 45-47. 81Pomerance, Gluck and Lynch, loc. cit. 82Ekaterina Zaharieva, "Olympic Participation by Women; Effects in Pregnancy and Childbirth," Journal of the American Medical Association Vol. 221 (August 28, 1972), pp. 992-995. 3Anonymous, ”Pre-Baby Figure Trimmers," American Home Vol. 75 (January 1972), pp. 16F. 84Kelley, op. cit., p. 47-F. 8SAnonymous, "Fitness for Mothers-To-Be," McCall's Vol. 106 (July 1979), p. 53. 86Judi Thompson, ”Expecting---The Yoga Way," Family Health Vol. 10 (March 1976), pp. 44-46. 87Elizabeth Bing and Libby Colman, "Sex During Pregnancy: Being in Love With Your Husband, Your Body, Your Baby to Come," Redbook Vol. 150 (November 1977), pp. 89-90F. 88Frank Tippett, "The Bull Market in Personal Secrets," Time Vol. 47 (July 14, 1980), p. 76. 133 89Arthur D. Colman and Libby Lee Colman, Pregnancy: The Psycholggical Experience (New York: The Seabury Press, 1971fi p. 5. 90Ibid., p. 51. 91Ibid., p. 59. 92Margaret Mead, "Childbirth in a Changing World," pp. 42-61 In The Boston Children's Medical Center Pregnancy, Birth and fhe Newborn Baby (Boston: Delacorte Press, 1972), p. 491 93Suzanne Arms, Immaculate Deception (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1975), p. 21, 51. 94ibid., p. 294. 95Ashley Montague, Man in Process (New York: Mentor Books, 1961, rpt. from Ciba Symposium Vol. 10, 1949, pp. 994-1028), p. 234. ' 134 CHAPTER 5 Amelia Bloomer: Searching for Comfort and Dignity Dress reform, we may vaunt ourselves, is the offspring of our own free land and no other. There have been many attempts at revolutionizing established modes of feminine apparel, since long ago Bloomers, the first 'dual garment' was advocated as an initiatory measure of the system that was to give to woman, long impeded with skirts and stays and false educations and legal nullity and the effects of hereditary helplessness, and the rest of it, her health and her rights. ---Eva Wilder McGlasson, 18941 The call for dress reform in the 19th Century came for three reasonszfipolitics, health, and aesthetics. Fre- quently two or more of these reasons were combined. The following discussion will be limited to the reform of women's clothing in the period from 1850 to 1890. Reform dress very consciously and willfully set out to oppose and improve fashion. This was a moralistic, crusading effort where peOple were intellectually enlisted; it is doubtful that anyone has ever said that of fashion itself. Most dress reform movements produced results akin to that of the eight medieval religious crusades to the Holy Lands: fervent followers with little tactical expertise eventually went down in defeat; but, in doing so, new vistas were opened and new experiences gained that affected those 135 who sat safely at home watching. Without the clothing refonncampaigns maternity dress might never have existed in the 20th Century. Politically- inspired reform ultimately led to a society where women were not housebound, pregnant or otherwise. Health reform efforts, even in reticent Victorian times, frequently talked quite ‘frankly-of the harmful effects of restrictive clothing on the expectant mother and fetus. Aesthetic reform provided some of the more pleasing design solutions for costuming the pregnant form. All through this time period reason was the order of the day, and it was felt that no mountain was too high, no problem too complex, for the mind of man. And "man" was not generally used in the wider generic sense of "mankind,” but limited to the biological male. Obviously, independent and thinking women of the time would not agree with this. Hence, the first reason for dress reform---politics. If clothing were more equal for the sexes, more equal in comfort, utility, and function, then, perhaps, politically and socially women could become more equal, too. Reason led to important scientific discoveries. The excitement of these filtered down to the general populace, if not real understanding. Therefore, science, which pervaded all society, was applied to clothing to make it more "healthy." In a somewhat accurate application of current medical know- ledge this became the movement for rational dress (which also 136 had political overtones). Aesthetic dress can be viewed as both a reactionary response in the face of scientific and technological advances and a fully justifiable revolt against the less-than-artful fashions they made possible. Machine-made trim was the fabric frosting that oozed and dripped across overdone concoctions of magenta and mauve, carnival cakes created by the allied technology of the embroidery machine, commer- cially viable by 18342, the sewing machine, invented in 1825 and perfected by Singer in 18513, and aniline dyes, William Perkins'discovery of 1856 (Plate 20). In reaction to the excess of fashion, wearers of aesthetic dress created their own original types of excess, borrowed design inspi- rations from nearly all past epochs, gowns with Classical, Medieval,and Renaissance drapery predominating (Plate 21, refer also to Plate 5). In the year 1850, woman's place was in the home, sheltered from the turmoil of industry by her husband, house, and possessions. This may have been a privileged and pam- pered life style, but it sometimes proved to be a lonely one as well. As one sympathetic author of an etiquette book wrote: Remember that the condition of a young bride is often a very solitary one, and that for your sake she has left her parents' roof, and the companionship of her brothers and sisters. If you are a professional man, your wife may have to live in the neighborhood of a large city, where she scarcely knows anyone and without those agreeable domestic occupations, or)mnnuzassociates, among whom she had grown up. Her garden and poultry- yard are hers no longer, and the day passes without the 137 Plate 20. What man hath overwrought: fashions for October, 1861. 'Godey's Lady's Book Vol. LXIII (October 1861) (photograpthorth Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). Plate 21. 139 Greek drapery. Figure on left: Eva Wilder McGlasson, "The Aesthetics of Dress," The Woman's Book Vol. I (New York: Charles Scribner'slSons, 1894), p. 189; figure on right from the House of the Female Dancers, Thomas Hardy Dyer. p. 351 aeii (London: George Bell and Sons, 1875), otographs, Jack Bailey). 141 light of any smile but yours. You go off, most probably after breakfast, to your business and profession, and do not return till a late dinner, perhaps not even then, if you are much occupied, or have to keep up professional connections. A woman's clothing of the time was as much a barricade separating her from the rest of the world as was her house. Her garments sheltered to the point of immobilization. From the inside out, a well-dressed woman would have worn a chemise or camisole (bust improvers, optional); drawers; 3 kneelength "crinoline" petticoat of a stiff material made of horsehair warp and wool weft; four, five, six, or more petticoats; a corset; vests for warmth; and a pad of wool or horsehair at the small of the back, the old-style bustle, to remedy any tendency to sway-back.S The dress was high at the neck, tight across the shoulders and at the waist, with the sleeves set in well below the shoulders so the arms could not be completely raised. Skirts were full and long. Dresses buttoned down the back with innumerable small buttons. Assistance was required in dressing. In contrast, men's clothing, while somewhat starchy of collar, was relatively comfortable, not easily soiled, and buttoned conventiently down the front (Plate 22). Various ingenious solutions were tried to make the woman's burden a little lighter by eliminating some of the petticoats, but not to change the overall silhouette. For example, in the year 1842 a Lady Aylesbury in England had a down petticoat made to order; it was said to float like a cloud when she 142 Plate 22. Menswear, circa 1895 (photograph, collection of the author). I . V. .‘ f1~ . $19 $2.52 -:|‘ {I 9%. 1' If. \3\. r. 144 moved, but was expensive and not ideal for warm weather.6 This piecemeal approach to improving female dress ended with the creation of the Bloomer costume. In the year 1851 Amelia Janks Bloomer was deputy postmaster of Seneca Falls, New York. She was also the editor and founder of a monthly journal called The Lily, first published two years earlier (Plate 23). The Lily began life as a temperance magazine, but quickly expanded its content to encompass Mrs. Bloomer's wide-ranging reform interests. Women's rights were a major concern of Mrs. Bloomer's, and The Lily gave her a popular platform from which to express her views. Early in 1851 Mrs. Bloomer was skirmishing in print, via The Lily, with the editor of the Seneca County Courier, an opponent of women's rights. Surprisingly, her opponent had written an editorial in support of Turkish pantaloons for women. He saw their present dress as unhealthy and uncomfortable. At this juncture, Mrs. Elizabeth Smith Miller came to Senca Falls to visit her cousin, Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Mrs. Miller, by coincidence, had adopted a trouser- styled costume a few months before and was wearing it when she knocked on the Stanton door. After a few days' lapse--- time for Mrs. Stanton's dressmaker to whip up a trouser costume-—-Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Elizabeth Smith Miller together strolled the streets of Seneca Falls dressed in pantaloons a la Turk. Amelia Bloomer, a good friend of 145 Plate 23. Amelia Bloomer. Drawn from a photograph (photograph, New York Historical Society). 147 Stanton's, had no recourse but to pay a call on her dress- maker with appropriate instructions and tell The Lily readers all about it. Otherwise, the chauvinistic Courier editor could claim himself more liberal than she. Thus, Lily subscribers read: We would have the skirt reaching down to nearly half- way between the knee and the ankle, and not made quite so full as is the present fashion. Underneath this skirt, trousers made moderately full, in fair weather coming down to the ankle (not instep) and there gathered in with an elastic band. The shoes or slippers to suit the occasion. For winter or wet weather the trousers also full, but coming down into a boot, which should rise at least three or four inches above the ankle. This boot should be gracefully sloped at the upper edge and trimmed with fur or fancifully embroidered, according to the taste of the wearer. The material might be cloth, morocco, mooseskin, and so forth, and made waterproof, if desirable7 (Plate 24). At a later date, Mrs. Bloomer let the trousers hang loose at the bottom. Amelia always took great care in selecting beautiful, conservative fabrics for her costumes; black satin was a favorite. After a speaking engagement in 1853, Mrs. Bloomer's costume was described in detail by the New York Tribune. She wore a tunic, knee-length kilt, and pantaloons of dark brown changeable silk. The kilt and pantaloons were trimmed with black velvet. The tunic neckline was open, and Amelia wore a white chemisette decorated with more velvet bands and a diamond stud pin. The sleeves of the gown were full. Underneath were tight undersleeves. Gaiters neatly covered her feet and ankles and black lace mitts her hands. A cherry and black headdress completed the costume.8 148 Plate 24. Variations on the bloomer costume, redrawn, left to right: Theodore Stanton and Harriott Stanton, Elizabeth Cady Stanton (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1922); James Laver, The Concise History of Costume (London: James and Hudson,l1969), p. 182, fig. 199; N. Currier, Lithograph (collection of the author); Gleason's Pictorial (June 14, 1851) rpt. Morris Bishop, "Mrs. Bloomer's Pantaloons a la Turk," New Yorker Vol. 16 (June 29, 1940), pp. 39-45, 39. 1 cs... truly...“ a ‘ / \. ‘I/ a .‘i u VA W. a W. . g 2 m.“ mammaflaxmercv . . -1. ea 150 The initial curiosity the public evinced for the "shorts" quickly turned to hostility. The Bloomer costume created an uproar in press and pulpit. The press tended to mock and denigrate; the pulpit threatened eternal damnation. Deuteronomy XXII:5 was thundered from many lecterns: "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God." Even today, the remembered notoriety of women daring to wear trousers in the 18505 has tended to obscure a major reason the costume was worn. Simply,it eliminated the weight and discomfort of multiple petticoats and voluminous skirts. The infamous bloomers were really a modest solution, literally a stop gap, to what to do with the legs that hung out once the skirt was shortened, Mrs. Bloomer, a rather fragile 5'4" and 100 pounds, liked the costume because of its freedom of movement, ease in dressing (it buttoned down the front), and lighter weight. But the reason she kept wearing it was that it drew crowds to hear her speak about temperance and suffrage. If Mrs. Elizabeth Miller had not come to Seneca Falls dressed as she did, and if Mrs. Dexter C. Bloomer had not perceived its political potential, Bloomer probably would never have worn such a costume. She said so herself.9 Amelia Bloomer continued wearing "shorts" until around 1858 or 1859. She stOpped for several reasons. Most important, the novelty of the costume had turned to notoriety. It was 151 now a distraction rather than an attraction at her serious speaking engagements. The other reasons were more personal. In 1854 the Bloomers moved "West" to Council Bluffs, Iowa. The gusty winds from the bluffs whipped her short skirts over her head; a situation the modest Mrs. Bloomer found acutely embarrassing. In addition, the Bloomers had a moderate income. Maintaining a public and a private wardrobe for Amelia was a strain on their finances. Further, like many women, Amelia liked variety. With the invention of the metal hoop in Paris in 1856, long skirts could be worn without all the weight they previously entailed; Bloomer's primary objection to the dress of the day. Finally, Mrs. Bloomer's personality was basically rather shy and retiring, which makes her busy speaking career even more of an act of bravery. Being the focus of all eyes wherever she went for several years was a trial for her. Amelia was ready to retire as a symbol and pursue realization of her reforms with a little more anonymity. It is historically shortsighted to single out the bloomers of the Bloomer costume as the only, or even the most important contribution made by this dress reform movement of the 1850s. More equal distribution of garment weight, reduction in the number and weight of clothing items, buttons down the front, and general simplication of design that made both dressing and moving easier tasks are the real legacy of this short-lived movement; these will remain the 152 main goals of the next generation of dress reformers who must, in addition, respond to new innovations in extremism in fashion. Dress reformers in the years after the Bloomer debacle carefully "skirted" any suggestion of trousers and had to look elsewhere for design inspiration. 153 REFERENCES 1Eva Wilder McGlasson, "The Aesthetics of Dress," In The Women's Book, Vol. I (New York: Charles Scribner's Sans, 1894), p. l87. zFrancois Boucher, 20,000 Years of Fashion (London: Thames and Hudson, 1967), p. 358. 3Ibid., p. 409, note 13 to Chapter 11. 4Anonymous, Etiquette: Or The Perfect Lady (London: Milton and Sowerby,‘1870), p. l74. SC. Willett Cunnington and Phyllis Cunnington, The History of Underclothes (London: Michael Joseph, 1957), pp. 144-151. 6C. D. Bloomer, Life and Writings of Amelia Bloomer (Boston: Arena Publishing Co., l895, facslmlle edition, New York: Schroeder Books, 1975), pp. 73-74. Mr. Bloomer requotes his wife's writing in The Lily, but does not give the date that this appeared. 7Morris Bishop, "Mrs. Bloomer's Pantaloons a la Turk," New Yorker Vol. l6,(June 29, 1940) pp. 39-45, 42. 8Bloomer, op. cit., pp. 65-68. 9Bloomer, op. cit., pp. 69-73. Mr. Bloomer quoted published articles and personal correspondence of his wife, Amelia Bloomer. 154 CHAPTER 6 Rational Dress: Searching for Better Health It is the correct thing to remember that a woman who is pinched in at the waist with tight corsets, throttled around her neck with a tight collar, and cramped as to her feet with tight, hightheeled shoes, will walk about as gracefully as a swan on a turnpike road. tt-Florence Marion Hall, 18881 A woman can no more be trusted with a corset than a drunkard with a glass of whiskey. —-«Helen Gilbert Ecob, 18922 Dress reform as a health measure was approached from many different perspectives in the 18005. The Rational Dress supporters of the 18605, 18705, 18805, and 18905 were primarily against. The list of what they were against is rather lengthy, but theyseem to have been quite united on their issues. They were less unanimous on what form rational dress should take. A variety of suggestions reveals how diverse in politics, aesthetics, and socio- economic background were the peOple involved. Unlike the Bloomer movement, which originated and stayed primarily in the liberal, educated, middle class, except when prescribed by them for underlings SUCh as brewery or dairy maids, the rational dress movement crossed all boundaries. This movement came into being in the wake of the 155 scientific discoveries that were being proclaimed around the world and the widespread public knowledge, though not necessarily acceptance or understanding of them. In 1864 Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation, although many peOple didn't believe it for a long time to come. Dr. Joseph Lister urged antiseptic surgery in 1870, but as discussed in Chapter 3, this also met resistance. In the mid-18705 Pasteur and Koch developed the germ theory and gave microbes to the world. The cultural consequence of these discoveries was fear of contagion and contact with peOple. In fact, the prudishness of the Victorians has been partly attributed to this fear of contracting an incurable and unspeakable social disease.3 Science provided ever new hope, but was largely helpless in the battle against "germs." Penicillin, the first totally effective cure for syphilis and a host of other infections was not discovered until 1943.4 However, science did point helpfully toward cleanli- ness a5 a solution to many problems. This was one scientific directive that melded perfectly on the social level with the changing lifestyles and moral climate of the time. The year 1850 marked the beginning of sanitation in large cities. The upwardly mobile were taking Sarah Hale's advice presented in Godey's Ladies Book and bathing once a week. How many times do you suppose Americans in the late 19th Century said, with real Christian conviction, "cleanliness 156 is next to godliness!" It has a solidly Victorian ring. "Hygiene" became a watchword. Thus, the journal Good Health editorialized in 1884 that: "Every detail of the home life requires the closest vigilance and care; for disease, like sin, is ever creeping in at most unlooked-for times and places."5 Clothing was one aspect of Victorians' lives they could take personal, ever vigilant control of; healthy clothing could protect them from insidious, invisible germs and the sinfulness of Paris fashions. Or, as Dr. Mary Safford-Blake termed it in a rhetorical salvo, "...the styles of dress imposed upon us by the demi-monde fashion-mongers "6 of Paris. With each passing year from the date the Bloomer Costume flopped, fashions became more outrageous, as if daring someone to come along and do something about it. A number of women took up the challenge for Rational Dress. Their goals, as outlined in the book Dress Reform, edited by Abba Woolson and published in 1874, were not that different from those practical suggestions Amelia Bloomer had hoped to introduce 25 years earlier (Plate 25). Greater simplicty overall in dress was desired, with much less trimming used. A convenient length in skirts was also a major goal; a length that would make walking easier, and keep itself out of reach of the muck and mire of city streets. Pants were avoided like the plague by all except 157 Plate 25. Rational dress. Abba Gould Woolson, Dress Reform (Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1874) (photograph, Jack Bailey). 159 the most radical.7 Divided skirts were promoted by some, but not all. In many cases the divided skirt was made so full that it was impossible to tell that it was divided, thereby defeating the purpose of less bulk and greater mobility. Most of the women involved in the Rational Dress movement had no desire for men's clothing. Caroline E. Hastings wrote in 1874, "I believe that about all I envy in man's apparel is the opportunity for pockets which it affords. These I would like,"8 This seems like a rather insignificant and forgivable coveting of male raiment. Most rational dressers felt to be more radical would assure a defeat like that suffered by Mrs. Bloomer. Other demands by the women were for less weight for all clothing and fewer garments. But, at the same time, they desired greater warmth in those articles worn, and more even distribution of garments on the body. As it was, the waist was swathed in multiple layers while the feet might have onlythhlstockings and slippers. Undergarments were not to exceed seven pounds. Clothing should be suspended from the shoulders, This made use of the natural bony framework of the body and avoided compression of any part. Finally, styles should be easier to take care of, as should fabrics. Rational Dress reformers were emphatically against other fashion offenses for medical reasons. Shoeswere felt to be totally inadequate. They were too tight, too thin, and the heels were too high. Heels, which might tower to a 160 height of two inches, stressed the bones of the foot and threw the body organs out of alignment. Trailing trains were justifiably thought very unhygienic because of the street—sweeping function they performed. Veils were reputed to permanently impair vision and lead to eye diseases. The use of make-up was also discouraged. Besides its social identification with prostitutes and actresses, it seemed to make peeple sick; lead was one of the components of face whiteners. Only very old-fashioned respectable women who had not given up the ways of their youth were it---or admitted to it.9 The use of hairpieces, too, was attacked.on hygienic grounds. Peasant women were the source of the "vermin-ridden" tresses. A common delousing pro- 10 After being thus treated, cedure was to bake the hair, the smell emanating from the luxurious strands might easily be confused with singed chicken feathers. However, the strongest rallying point for reformers was undoubtedly their stand against tight clothing and weight from the waist. Both of these were felt to disorder the internal anatomy and push everything down upon the female reproductive organs. Although most reform texts step short of talking about prolapsed uteruses, medical books of the time were full of references to them and assorted "propper-upper" prostheses. Yet, if a Reform Dress tract were to have a single illustration, it would invariably be a cross-section of a female midsection with vital parts hopelessly rearranged 161 by satanic stays (Plate 26). If the torsos were given heads in the illustrations, quite typically the slave of fashion, whose insides were revealed to be in such con- fusion, would sport pounds of imported hair, a petulant, fashionable pout, no doubt made poutier through the arti- fice of the make-up table, and a bold direct stare, like one assumed ladies of ill-repute might employ to zero in on their beaux. Meanwhile, her counterpart, the natural beauty, stood with her heart literally in the right place, her hair dressed with classic Greek calm, lips sweetly parted, and eyes demurely averted: what purported to be a simple medical illustration for the readers' enlightenment was, in fact, a sermon of such weighty moral censure that the fate of the mortal soul depended on interpreting the pictures correctly. To a dedicated reform dresser, tight corsets were a curse that bound their wearers and their unfortunate descendants in an inextricable web of physical decay and degradation. A woman author of the early 18905, Helen Ecob, stated many reformers' medical fears of tight corseting when she wrote the following passage: In the displacement and diseases of the pelvic organs is found the chief cause of woman's ill- health. The average testimony of physicians in general practice is that more than half of their professional business comes from these maladies.... Our insane asylums are largely filled by patients whose mental aberrations have originated in these disorders. Engel states that, 'in every one of 30 autopsies 162 Plate 26. The perils of tightlacing. Ecob, The Well-Dressed Woman (New York: Wells C6}, 1892). Above: p. 44-45, figs. 13, 14. Below: p. 175, figs. 48, 49. (Photographs, Jack Bailey) Helen Gilbert Fowler and 164 in which evidence of tight lacing were found, prolapses was evident in some degree, except where adhesion had prevented it.' The science of gynecology is a monument to the folly of woman. The Operating table and the surgeon's knife are a disgraceful makeshift of the perverse victim. There is but one remedy and it is surgigal--- the knife must be applied to the corset string. Ecob further asserts that "the necessity for the use of forceps in a large number of cases is due to corset wearing," due to atrophy of abdominal muscles theorized at the time to be responsible for expulsion of the fetus. Furthermore, pain in childbirth itself could be overcome through a "...regimen of exercise and rational dress";14 and, if fear for personal welfare were not enough, then what of the next generation? Physicians attribute to the dress of mothers during the antenatal period the fact that many children are deformed from birth. There is not room for the development of the infant body. A puny, diseased physique; a brain of diminished capacity; a fretful, ignoble spirit; these are the gifig of the corseted mother to her helpless posterity. This may lead to the erroneous conclusion that all wearing of corsets was forbidden by reformers. In fact, a majority probably felt that when preperly fitted and the body kept in preper tone, a corset could be medically beneficial. About 1860, the ”hygienic qualities" of corset styles were considered for the first time.16 How tight the tight-lacing ever generally became is also a matter of conjecture. Many horror stories of corset bondage exist in old periodic literature, and they undoubtedly shocked 165 and titillated their avid readers as much then as they do today; a publisher's loo-year triumph. A contemporary Englishwoman, Doris Langley Moore, who has studied 19th Century dresses extensively in this century found the smallest diameter in a gown to be 21 inches, the average 24 inches; a far cry from the 16 or 17 inches that many fashion histories wail about.17 Dr. James Jackson corroborated this in part when he wrote in 1870 that he had examined ...over 8,000 American women resident in our 20 states of the Republic and their average size of waists, dressed, was 24 1/2 inches; their average weight, 110 pgunds; their ages ranging from 19 o 52 years, Jackson, however, allowed a full three inches of this measure- ment for clothing, reducing the real dimension of the corsetted waist to 20 1/2 inches. The same three inches subtracted from Mrs. Langley's 21 inch dress waists would leave 18 inches; surely a diameter pinched enough to excite most reformers. Another interesting side note is the opinion expressed by a medical doctor and requoted as late as 1916. Dr. Sargent was sure that if women would stop corsetting themselves their waists would be proportionately larger than men's. This was in part based on the measurements of Greek statues, partly on the premise that since women's hips were proportionately wider than men's, their waists 19 should he, too But the truly fascinating thing is that 166 women had been corsetted for so long that medical doctors didn't know, at least this one didn't, what would happen to women's bodies when they were raised without corsets. How effective were the Rational Dress reformers in changing fashion, making it more healthful? Anna Noyes, a dedicated but somewhat disheartened reformer, summarized their achievements. At the end of the century the only results we seem to have definitely gained are the final abolition of the hoop skirt, a reduction in the weight of petticoats and a one-piece undergarment next [to] the skin.20 And some might say that fashion had just gone ahead and done those paltry things on its own. Writing from her vantage point in 1907, it was impossible for Mrs. Noyes to know the impact of dress reform demands on maternity clothing. This specialized American innovation had just been intro- duced in New York City three or four years earlier; it was hardly the talk of every street corner. However, the impact of reform dress on maternity clothing in the 20th Century was very direct. The demands of reformers for less weight, warmer clothing, suspension of garments from the shoulders, low heels, and, most important, no tight corsets but perhaps a medically beneficial one, became the virtually engraved- in-stone commandments for pregnant women throughout the current century. The list, with every item intact, every Victorian adjective quoted, appears in nearly all advice columns and books that mention maternity clothing from 1900 to 167 1980.' The advice given by Dr. Samuel Meaker to expectant mothers in 1927 is typical, and more succinct than most. Wear clothing that is simple and warm, and loose enough so that there is no constriction around any part of the body. During the fourth month, get a Special maternity corset. Counsel offered in one of those ubiquitous, anonymously authored pharmaceutical company brochures favored by gynecologists varies little from Meaker, although it was published nearly half a century later. Even the writing style seems vaguely antique. Dresses should be comfortable and as lightweight as the season will permit. You should not risk chills by dressing too lightly nor become overheated by dressing too warmly....You should invest in good, prOperly designed undergarments....If you find the need to wear a girdle, consult your doctor before doing so. Your shoes should fit and be strongly made with sturdy, medium heels. Avoid high heels, worn-out shoes or houseslippers which give little support or security in walking. Picture those stout brogans, fit for Miss Marple on a brisk march across the turf to St. Mary Mead. The alter- natives are sluttish high heels, slatternly runover heels or slovenly houseslippers. Such was the power of the reformers in getting the message across, even after 100 years: fashionable clothing is injurious to the unborn. To be frivolously dressed implied a lack of seriousness and dedication to the incubation. To be drab meant you were immolating the flighty, self-centered,SiZ€ 10, juvenile, fashion-conscious self on the altar of Motherhood, in preparation for the 168 flight from the ashes---after—--as an even drabber size 14 young matron. Maternity clothing became a symbol of requisite renunciation undertaken by the sacred vessel to assure safe passage to woman's annointed sphere of home and family. Of course, this schema periodically breaks down. The romanticism that sporadically cycles into maternity clothing is a product of the lingering spirit of a totally different group of dress reformers. Rational dressers, beware! A more irrational group of fashions than those of the Pre-Raphaelites would be hard to design. But they did it all for Beauty; Beauty and Art; Art and Love. A postscript to the Rational Dress Movement: By the 19205 women's legs, arms, and necks were all considered by fashion as suitable for public display. All the refor- mers' demands had been put into practice. At this juncture, in 1927, an attempt was made to launch a counter-reform movement to cover women back up again. Pope Pius was the author of the effort. He is quoted on the tepic of women's dress, his rhetoric a model of perfect Victorian Reformereze. It is necessary that all who still have a sense of human nobility and dignity, not to mention Christian dignity, should agree and find a means of creating dams against a current so ugly and so ruinous and carrying so many catastrophes with it.23 His reform was to be achieved by enlisting fathers, husbands, and brothers. They were to tell their little women what they should wear. The religious press in the United 169 States gave the idea mixed reviews. The popular press just laughed. 170 REFERENCES 1Florence Marion Hall, The Correct Thing in Good Society (Boston: Estes and Lauriat, 1888), p. 162. 2Helen Gilbert Ecob, The Well-Dressed Woman (New York: Fowler and Wells Company, 1892), p. 122. 3Stephen Kern, Anatomy and Destiny (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1975), pp. 34-44. 4The Wasserman test for detecting syphillis in its early stages was perfected in 1906. There was a partial cure for syphillis by 1909. 'SGood Health: A Journal of Hygiene Vol. 19 No. 6 (June, 1884), p. 199, This quotation appeared in an article reprinted from the Union Siggal, no other citation given. 6Mary J. Safford-Blake, Lecture 1, pp. 1-41 lg Abba Gould Woolson, Dress Reform: a series of lectures delivered in Boston on dress asllt affects the’health of women (Boston: Robert Biofhers,'1874), p. 1. 7For an account of one such radical, see Allison Lockwood, "Pantsuited Pioneer of Women's Lib, Dr. Mary Walker," Smithsonian Vol. 7 (March 1977), pp. 113-119. 8Caroline B. Hastings, Lecture II,-pp. 42-67 19 Woolson, op. cit., p. 64. 9Maggie Angeloglou, A History of Make-Up (London: Studio Vista, 1970), p. 96. 10Allison Gernsheim, Fashion and Reality (London: Faber and Faber, 1963), pp. 61-62. 11 Ecob, op. cit., pp. 81-82. 12Ibid., p. 83. 13Ibid., p. 88-89. 14Ibid., pp. 42-44. 151bid., p. 92. 171 16M. D. C. Crawford and Elizabeth A. Guernsey, The History of Corsets in Pictures (New York: Fairchild Pfiblications,ilnc.,ll951), p. 23. 7Doris Langley Moore, The Woman In Fashion (London: B. T. Batsford, 1949), pp. 167l7. 18James Cobb Jackson, American Womanhood: Its Peculiarities and Necessities (Dansville, New York? Afistin, JaCkson and Company; New York: Baker, Pratt and Company, 1870) third edition (facsimile edition by Louisville: Lost Cause Press, 1976), pp. 14-15. 19Anna M. Galbraith, Personal Hygiene and Physical Training for Women (Philadelphia: W. B. Saufiders Company, l916), p. 273. 20Anna G. Noyes, "A Practical Protest Against Fashion," The lndgpendent Vol. 63 (August 29, 1907), pp. 502-509, 503. 21Samuel Raynor Meaker, Mother and Unborn Child (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins COmpany, 19277, p. 98. 2Anonymous, Instructions for Expectant Mothers (Evansville, Indiana: Mead Johnson and Company, 1975), p. 26, 23Anonymous, "The Pope's Appeal to Men to Reform Women's Dress," Literary Digest Vol. 92 (January 29, 1927), PP. 27-F. 172 CHAPTER 7 The PreRaphaelite Brothers and Others: Searching for Individuality I fancy the Continent takes Pre-Raphaelitism to mean Byrne-Jones and the cult of the Sunflower, Walker Crane's and Kate Greenaway's toy-books, Dresser's designs and Liberty fabrics, Morris wallpapers, and the Arts and Crafts movement, down to the latest Studio artists. w--"The Decadent Poet," 18781 ...the history of aestheticism is not a part of the history of Pre-Raphaelitism, though it was often thought to be so at the time.... «--Timothy Hilton, 19702 Indeed, it was. And not only on the Continent, but in America as well. The philoSOphical basis of the two were divergent: Pre-Raphaelitism supported Art is Love; Aestheticism, Art for Art's Sake. But, the people involved had close ties; their personal histories and lifestyles were inseparably entwined. It is artificial and revisionist to declare they had nothing in common. The public, oblivious to the finer distinctions in art theory, drew the correct conclusion. Decade after decade they saw artists and their friends dressed in the same loose, billowy, new, archaic, anarchistic clothes. In fact, portionsof the art world dressed in this style for so many years that it finally ceased to be a counter-culture fashion. By the end of the 173 century aesthetic dress had gained such widespread famili- arity and acceptance that even middle-class housewives in the United States thought it the proper dress for receiving lady friends (Plates 27, 28). From there it was just a matter of a few years more before those same housewives were artistically gowned, pregnant, and still receiving callers. The purpose of this chapter is to show when, where, how, and through whom the influences on the design of artistic dress originated and were passed on. This will be facilitated by grouping people and events back into those rather conventional niches in which you might normally expect to find them. However, it becomes quickly apparent that most of this unconventional cast of artists and associates do not wish to stay categorized. Artists were not oblivious to the spirit of the age. Science and progress captured their attention at mid-19th Century, too. However, one particularly appealing aspect of the ethic of discovery looked backward in time, instead of forward. People were enthralled by the ongoing excavation of Greco-Roman ruins. To many Victorians, beauty and the Greek Ideal were synonymous. This led to the quantification of ideal proportions of women, a scientific experiment, accompanied by taking the tape to suitable marble relics. Thus, it could be announced with confidence that the classic figure had the following measurements: 174 Plate 27. Artistic housegowns, circa 1894. Anonymous, "Dress from a Practical Standpoint," pp. 206-248 In The Woman's Book Vol. I (New York: Charles Scribfiefls Sons, 18945, p. 215 (photograph, Jack Bailey). #4... .3332. V. .t \ l .............. .1. - . 2er ”(30%4ia‘ .1, .HIAWW‘V‘ . . .st... \ , . x43 43. i . z .14...» \ \ ‘ Adam: "on“ Gowns. 176 Plate 28. Medieval wrapper and Elizabethan breakfast sacque, October, 1878, Godey's Lady's Book Vol. XCVII (October, 1878), p. 286, figs. 10-12 (photograph, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). 178 5'4-3/4" tall 32" bust 24" waist 9" from armpit to waist In addition, the arms and neck should be long. The hands and feet should not be too small. However, if a truly queenly figure is desired, the measurements are these: 5'5" tall so" bust 26-1/2" waist 35" hips 11-1/2" around the full of the arm 6-1/2" wrist3 Such an all-encompassing renaissance might never have occurred, or might have been a mere modest one limited to dusty scholars whose joy in life is translating from dessicated scraps of ancient Greek and Latin. However, nature and chance intervened. Mt. Vesuvius erupted in 79 A.D. The Roman cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii were packed, intact, for long-term storage for 1,631 years in tons of volcanic ash. And from the rediscovery of these ancient cities the past sprang to vivid life for the multitudes. Around 1710 an Italian peasant discovered old marble while deepening a well. Shortly thereafter Prince d'Elloeuf, the Austrian mayor general of Naples who had a gentleman's penchant for archeology, began excavation. Approximately 30 years later Charles, King of the Two Sicilies, continued the excavation; Herculaneum was declared found. In 1763 Pompeii was rediscovered.4 The public was immediately, and expansively, informed 179 about each and every item recovered. As early as the second decade of the 18th Century massive folios were published detailing every aspect of life in antiquity. The ten- volume work of Bernard de Monfaucon, for example, published in 1719, has illustrations taken from all conceivable 5 Monfaucon devotes whole sections archeological evidence. to a single god or goddess shown in all available manifes- tations; symbols associated with each deity are also included. But, mythology constitutes only a small portion of the contents. ‘ Monfaucon attempted to explicate, to recreate, everything for the readers. Volume 3, Part 2 begins with the public baths and the various ladles and jugs used to anoint bathers. From there it moves to marriage customs, showing numerous plates of demure brides and their stalwart spouses. The next major tepic is Theater. Precise drawings show stage settings for "comique, tragique, and satyrique" drama, as well as floor plans, elevations, and architectural ornaments used for the theaters them- selves. Toward the end of the volume plates show women spinning and weaving, and men engaged in agriculture. If early books tried to bring ruins and Romans to the people, it was not long before peopletnxngfln:themselves to the ruins. 1n the 18205 and 18305 Englishmen and women in the Grand Tour visited the digs, among them Queen Victoria. By the 1860s a plethora of guidebooks competed 180 for selection on booksellers' shelves; as the following quotation shows. DIALOGUE (In a bookstore at Naples) A Traveller (entering): Have you any work on Pompeii? The Salesman: Yes; we have several. Here, for instance, is Bulwer's "Last Days of Pompeii." Traveller: Too thoroughly romantic. Salesman: Well, here are the folios of Mazois. Traveller: Too heavy. Salesman: Here's Dumas's "Corricolo." Traveller: Too light. Salesman: How would Nicolini's magnificent work suit you? Traveller: Oh! That's too dear. Salesman: Here's Commander Aloe's "Guide." Traveller: That's too dry. Salesman: Neither dry, nor romantic, nor light, nor heavy! What, then, would you have, sir? Traveller: A small, portable work; accurate, conscien- tious, and within everybody's reach. Salesman: Ah, sir, we have nothing of that kind; besides, it is impossible to get up such a work. The Author (aside): Who knows? 6 The Wonders of Pompeii was written to appeal to the average middle-class tourist. With that avowed aim, to be "within everybody's reach,” it incorporated many attitudes of the time, including typological thinking. A discussion 181 in the text on figures discovered at Pompeii by plaster casting is probably the most striking example of the latter. Behind her had fallen a woman and a young girl; the elder of the two, the mother, perhaps, was of humble birth, to judge by the size of her ears; on her fingers she had only an iron ring; her left leg lifted and contorted, shows that she, too, suffered; not so much, however, as the noble lady: the poor have less to lose in dying. Enthusiasm for archeology began to crescendo in the closing decades of the century. Henry Schliemann found Troy in 1882. With a sure sense for the right and preper he dedicated his book about the discovery to Queen Victoria.8 In the 18905 whole streets and houses were being uncovered at Pompeii and Herculaneum. Private individua15