In 1897 fashion magazines were suggesting that skirts of bathing dresses looked best when the front breadth was shaped narrower toward the belt, while by 1902 the skirts were fitted over the hips in order to delineate the figure. In 1905 pleated skirts again became fashionable, although flared skirts were still acceptable.

Dark blue and black were the popular colors, although white, red, gray, and green were also used. Flannel was no longer recommended for bathing dress; serge and "mohair"--a fabric with a cotton warp and a mohair or alpaca weft--were widely used. The impractical bathing dress of silk fabric was worn by those who could afford this extravagance; thus, the conspicuous consumption of the "leisure cla.s.s" was even found at the beaches.

Bathing hats were still being worn but it was considered more fashionable to wear a rubber or oil silk cap covered with a bright silk turban when there was a surf. For the bather who seldom ventured very far into the water the most fashionable practice was to have no covering at all.

Throughout the 19th century bathing costume followed an impelling course toward becoming more functional. As the popularity of recreational bathing and then swimming for women increased, the number of yards of fabric required to make a bathing dress decreased. Nevertheless, by the 1900s, many women knew how to swim, but the majority were still bathers.

Thus bathing suits continued in use through the first quarter of the 20th century.

Swimming Costume

Bathing costume did not evolve gracefully into the swim suit, nor was there an abrupt replacement of one garment for the other. Instead, a garb designed for swimming emerged in the 19th century as tentatively and as poorly received as had the suggestion that women should be active in the water. The growing popularity of swimming and the changing status of women eventually made it possible for the swimming suit to replace the bathing suit in the 1920s. By the 1930s, however, this trend was accelerated by a growing advertising and ready-to-wear clothing industry. Thus a history of the swimming costume tends to divide itself into two sections: early swimming suits and the influence of the swim suit industry.

EARLY SWIMMING SUITS

The earliest reference to swimming costume I have found was in 1869. At this date swimming in the United States was considered a masculine skill, exercise, and recreation; only men were provided with a real opportunity to swim at popular watering places. As described previously, _Harper's Bazar_ reported that American women in general rejected the European bathing suit made with long trousers and a skirtless waist.

Nevertheless, this costume was "... worn by expert swimmers, who do not wish to be enc.u.mbered with bulky clothing."[48]

[48] "New York Fashions," _Harper's Bazar_ (July 10, 1869), vol. 2, no. 28, p. 435.

In the 1870s the rare descriptions of this more functional garment--called "swimming suit" even at this early date--were limited to a sentence or two buried within long columns of fine print describing popular bathing apparel. One mentions a "... single knitted worsted garment, fitting the figure, with waist and trousers in one."[49]

Another was made without sleeves as "one garment, the blouse and trousers being cut all in one, like the sleeping garments worn by small children."[50] These more practical bifurcated garments probably derived from the European suit of the 1860s that had been rejected by the majority of American women. For example, an English source reported that in 1866 the following garment was worn: "... Swimming Costume, a body and trousers cut in one, secures perfect liberty of action and does not expose the figure."[51]

[49] Ibid. (July 13, 1872), vol. 5, no. 28, p. 459.

[50] Ibid. (July 25, 1874), vol. 7, no. 30, p. 475.

[51] As quoted in C. WILLETT CUNNINGTON, _English Women's Clothing in the 19th Century_ (New York: Thomas Yoseloff, 1958), p. 225.

The descriptions of American swimming suits, however brief, offered evidence that the pastime was growing in popularity with women.

Generally speaking, 19th century women's magazines were mere disseminators of fine and decorous ideas and practices for well-mannered ladies; their editors were not innovators. With such an editorial policy it is understandable that these magazines would not, as a rule, publicize trends of popular origin until they were fairly well established. The skirtless swimming suit of the 1870s was no doubt more common in the United States than its meager description in _Harper's Bazar_ would seem to indicate.

As long as feminine swimming was not generally accepted, however, efforts to develop practical swimming suits remained isolated owing to the lack of communication between manufacturer and consumer and to traditional att.i.tudes. Feminine interest in swimming and physical activities threatened belief in the "weaker-s.e.x" that contributed to maintaining the traditional masculine and feminine roles; efforts to develop functional swimming dress also attacked established standards of feminine modesty. These challenges to the status quo were met with the weapon of the complacent majority--silence. Consequently, from the third quarter of the 19th century, when we find the first reference to a specialized garment for swimming in the United States, writings on swimming costume appeared infrequently until the 1920s.

In 1886 two "ladies' bathing jerseys" and two bathing suits of the traditional type appeared in the _First Ill.u.s.trated Catalogue of Knitted Bathing Suits_ of J. J. Pfister Company in San Francisco. The captions over the ill.u.s.trations leave no question that the briefer bathing jerseys were intended for swimming while the others were for bathing.

These jerseys--form-fitting tunics that were mid-thigh in length--were made with high necks and cap sleeves. Underneath this garment women wore trunks that extended to the knee and stockings; there was also the alternate choice of tights, a combination of trunks and stockings. To complete the outfit the feminine reader was encouraged to buy a knitted skull cap.

Apparently these bathing jerseys were successful; three, instead of two, jerseys appeared in the same catalog in 1890. It is obvious from this later catalog, however, that there was a greater demand for bathing dresses since twelve designs of the skirted costume were featured as opposed to the two dresses in the first issue.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Figure 14.--THE RECOMMENDED COSTUME FOR SWIMMING from J.

Parmly Paret, _The Woman's Book of Sports_, 1901. (Smithsonian photo 58436.)]

Even by the early 20th century it is difficult to find specific references to a swimming suit in women's magazines; only occasionally does a concern with swimming obtrude into the traditional descriptions of bathing dress. In _The Woman's Book of Sports_, however, J. Parmly Paret was specific about the requirements for a suitable swimming costume in 1901.

It is particularly important that nothing tight should be worn while swimming, no matter how fashionable a dress may be for bathing. The exercise requires the greatest freedom, and a swimming costume should never include corsets, tight sleeves, or a skirt below the knees. The freedom of the shoulders is the most important of all, but anything tight around the body interferes with the breathing and the muscles of the back, while a long skirt--even one a few inches below the knees--binds the legs constantly in making their strokes.[52]

[52] J. PARMLY PARET, _The Woman's Book of Sports_ (New York: D.

Appleton & Co., 1901), p. 74.

Although this costume (fig. 14) more closely resembles the traditional bathing dress than the jersey described previously, this discussion ill.u.s.trates the growing dichotomy between bathing dress and swimming dress and between fashionable styles and functional styles.

Photographs of East coast beach scenes in 1903 show a few women wearing costumes different from the black or navy blue bathing dress worn by the majority. These independent spirits seem to be wearing close-fitting knitted trunks that cover the knees or, when with stockings, come within an inch or two above the knee. Above these trunks they appear to be wearing knitted one-piece tunics or belted blouses that cover the hips.

This costume, sleeveless or short-sleeved, and with a simplified neckline, must have been the functional suit of its day.

An important impetus was given to the development of the swimming suit with the entrance of women into swimming as a compet.i.tive sport. On September 5, 1909, Adeline Trapp wore a one-piece knitted swimming suit when she became the first woman to swim across the East River in New York, through the treacherous waters of h.e.l.l Gate. Both the swimming suit and the swim were part of a campaign devised by Wilbert Longfellow--of the U.S. Volunteer Life Saving Corps--to encourage women to learn to swim.

Adeline Trapp was a summer employee of the Life Saving Corps in 1909.

Mr. Longfellow saw in the 20-year-old Brooklyn school teacher a respectable young woman who could be a source of publicity. He ordered her to get a one-piece swimming suit for the swim. As early as 1899 in England, a woman partic.i.p.ating in compet.i.tions organized by the Amateur Swimming a.s.sociation could have worn a one-piece, skirtless, knitted costume with a shaped sleeve at least three inches long, a slightly scooped neck, and legs that extended to within three inches of the knee.

Mr. Longfellow may have had this English suit in mind. He might have known of similar suits in the United States or he might have simply wanted to free Adeline of yards of fabric to make her more compet.i.tive with male swimmers. Nevertheless, Adeline Trapp did not know that the English suits existed, nor did she know where she could find one. She spent many hours going from one American manufacturer to another trying on men's knitted suits. She found that they were all cut too low at the neck and armholes and did not cover enough of the legs to preclude criticism. At this point a friend who worked for a stocking manufacturer offered to get her a suitable costume from England. This costume, a knitted, gray cotton suit--whether originally for a man or woman in England is not known--was the one Adeline wore when she swam h.e.l.l Gate.

Although more than thirty men attempted the swim, the fact that a woman accomplished the feat made newspaper headlines. Following this event, Miss Trapp received a terse letter from the Brooklyn School Board stating that they thought it improper for an educator of Brooklyn children to appear in public so scantily dressed in a one-piece swimming costume. For her future swims Adeline Trapp was careful to have someone carry a blanket to throw over her as she emerged from the water.[53]

[53] Telephone interview with Adeline Trapp Mulhenberg, May 1966.

In 1910, Annette Kellerman arrived in the United States from Australia by way of England. For her fancy diving exhibitions she wore sleeveless one-piece knitted swimming tights that covered her from neck to toe--a costume she had probably adopted in England.

The decade from 1910 to 1920 was a crucial period in the history of bathing and swimming costume. Popular att.i.tudes were changing in favor of the woman who swam but, as frequently occurs in social reforms, there was a cultural lag between public opinion and the policies of inst.i.tutions. The Red Cross, which began its excellent water safety program in 1914, taught women to swim but did not admit women as Life Saving Corps members until 1920. Symbolic of the conflict between old and new att.i.tudes were the relative roles of bathing and swimming costume during this period. As Annette Kellerman described them:

There are two kinds ... those that are adapted for use in water, and those that are unfit for use except on dry land. If you are going to swim, wear a water bathingsuit. But if you are merely going to play on the beach, and pose for the camera fiends, you may safely wear the dry land variety.... I am certain that there isn't a single reason under the sun why everybody should not wear lightweight suits. Anyone who persuades you to wear the heavy skirty kind is endangering your life.[54]

[54] ANNETTE KELLERMAN, _How to Swim_ (New York: George H. Doran Company, 1918), p. 47.

Chic women's magazines, however, were still reluctant to admit in their fashion pages that a more utilitarian costume existed. The June 1, 1917 issue of _Vogue_ reported that there were two kinds of bathing suits: a loose straight suit and those on surplice lines, "... which hold their place by virtue of being so very becoming."[55]

[55] _Vogue_ (June 1, 1917), vol. 49, no. 11, p. 85.

The most popular of these, the surplice, was not a novelty of the season but a continuation of 19th century bathing suit styles. Fashion ill.u.s.trations show that the hemline of the skirt was approaching the middle of the knee, with the bloomers remaining hidden. There was also a revival of the style that permitted the bloomers to show several inches below the skirt. In this case the bloomers reached the knee and the skirt was several inches shorter. Both versions were shown with short sleeves or cap sleeves, or sleeveless; "V" necklines with collars and square necklines were widely used. The more fashionable creations were made of silk taffeta or "surf satin," while the majority were made of "mohair," wool jersey, worsted, or closely woven cotton. Black and navy blue were unquestionably the favorite colors.

The loose straight suit, which evidently gained its inspiration from the chemise frock of the period, had no waistline and hung straight from the shoulders (fig. 15); a belt or sash was frequently looped below the natural waistline on the hips. The chemise-type of bathing suit differed from the surplice only in having no fitted waist and requiring less fabric.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Figure 15.--BLACK SILK BATHING DRESS, 1923.

(Smithsonian photo P-65412.)]

In the June 15, 1917 issue, _Vogue_ modified its position of two weeks earlier to acknowledge that there was a third style of costume worn in the water. Again, the descriptions of the surplice and chemise-type bathing suits were accompanied by numerous ill.u.s.trations. No drawings, however, were published to show the knitted jersey suit that was described as "... usually sleeveless, quite short and fairly straight ..." and "... intended for the woman who swims expertly."[56]

[56] Ibid. (June 15, 1917), vol. 49, no. 12, p. 67.

As late as the early 1920s, the fashion pages of _Harper's Bazar_ and _Vogue_ were concentrated on the bathing suits, aiming at readers involved in the social life of the seaside resorts--lounging about the beach with occasional splashing in the water. The growing numbers of women who wanted swimming suits, however, had only to turn to the advertising sections of these same magazines to find that even in 1915 such shops as Bonwit Teller & Co. and B. Altman & Co. were advertising knitted swimming suits.

In June 1916, _Delineator_ solved the dilemma of bathing versus swimming costume in an intriguing article written to sell a pattern for a bathing costume. In description and presentation of ill.u.s.trations, the article emphasized a costume with "all the features essential to a practical swimming-suit."[57] The blouse and bloomers were attached at the waist in this garment which had a square neckline and no skirt or sleeves.

Made up in wool jersey, this would have been a practical swimming costume for the period. But this was not the only style available from this one pattern. The following variations were included: a sailor collar on a "V" neckline; a high-standing collar, long sleeves; and a detachable skirt with the fullness either pleated or gathered into a waistband, to be worn long to the knees or just short enough to show several inches of the bloomer. In this way _Delineator_ succeeded in satisfying nearly every degree of conservatism--an amazing accomplishment.

[57] "For the Modern Mermaid," _Delineator_ (June 1916), vol. 38, no.

6, p. 52.