Beauty before durability: the interwar beginnings of fast fashion

Yet while the mills of Lancashire lay silent, some of the British population were becoming more affluent. The number of salaried workers increased; wages in the South-East rose; and the general cost of living declined. These factors meant that the middle classes and those working-class individuals who were in employment had more money in their pockets. With this increase in wealth, people began to look to improve what they ate, where they lived and, crucially for the textile and retail trade, what they wore.

• Read more | Five outrageous moments in royal fashion history

Forward-looking textile businesses realised that selling to the British market could offset some of the losses resulting from the drop in overseas trade. However, with far fewer potential consumers in their home market, businesses would need to persuade consumers to buy fabrics and clothes in greater quantities – and more frequently. The textile trade would find that both fashion and an insatiable desire for novelties were powerful commercial allies.

Fashionocracy

One exponent of fashion being used for commercial gain was Edward H Symonds. Symonds was the Managing Director and Chairman of the Court dressmaker Reville Ltd, and was also president of the British Fashion and Fabrics Bureau. He argued that times had changed since the end of the war, and that most British women now would “not pay the price for a quality that will outlast several fashion changes”.

He even coined a phrase for his vision of a textile trade based on fast-moving, cheap fashion goods: ‘fashionocracy’. Fashionocracy was based on the idea that technical innovations had increased the rate of production in most businesses, meaning that production could easily outstrip demand, creating a surplus of goods and forcing businesses into bankruptcy. To overcome this, the public simply had to be persuaded to buy more goods: the aim was to create a consumer-based economy.

Fashion and clothing have been inextricably linked for centuries, but it was only in the early 20th century that the two together became accessible to almost everyone. The fashion-consciousness of women in the interwar years increased exponentially. British Vogue had launched in 1916, and after the war it spurred numerous other publishers into producing magazines for women at every level of society. Reams of information about Paris and Hollywood fashions were devoured by readers on a monthly, or even weekly basis, as well as advice about how to be glamourous, well-dressed, and how to live within a budget. These magazines were accessible too: the cheapest cost around 2d per week, while copies of Vogue could be found in public libraries.

• Read more | Victorian corsets: dangerous or misunderstood?

Women were also visiting the cinema more than ever; at 6d per visit it was a luxury available to almost everyone, and films often provided a window into a dream lifestyle, where the main characters were beautiful and stylishly dressed. Assailed with images in the cinema and in the press, women aspired not only to be dressed better, but also more fashionably.

With their extra spending power, they began to shop for fabrics and garments in a new way. Previously, durability and quality had been the key considerations for purchasers: clothing was expensive, and new items were only bought when necessary. Repairing, altering and repurposing were the norm. Unless you were extremely wealthy, fashion simply did not loom large in the mind, when economy and robustness mattered most.

By the 1920s and 30s, fabric manufacturers were having to keep up with the latest trends coming from Paris and Hollywood. Women could see and read about them quickly and easily, and by the mid-1930s an industry panel complained that “the public will not look at any [fabric] which is out of fashion, however good”. At the same time as dress fabrics were becoming more fashionable, large manufacturers began forcing down prices to encourage sales.

For example, the average price for a yard of dressmaking fabric fell from around four shillings a yard in 1930 to three shillings a yard in 1937. The combination of lower prices and greater novelty meant that consumers began to perceive clothing as having a far more limited lifespan. A garment no longer needed to last as long: once a new trend emerged, it could be replaced with another fashionable and cheap item.

Distinct shifts were also taking place in the distribution and sale of fabrics and clothing. Prior to the war, most women had bought fabric and had it made up into clothing by a dressmaker, or they sewed it themselves. However, even by the very early 1920s, “made-to-measure” was beginning to decline, and the amount of “ready-made” clothing in shops was increasing. Making use of economies of scale and their purchasing power, the companies producing ready-made clothing were able to produce garments at a lower cost than a dressmaker could, and offer a reasonably priced alternative to making clothes for oneself at home – something that many women confessed to disliking. By 1935, the Census of Production recorded that there were 140,000 people working across 1,500 wholesale dressmaking and tailoring companies. This was an increase of around 30 per cent from just five years previously.

Side-stepping the wholesaler

Much of this new ready-made clothing would be sold in one of the new chain stores, or multiple retailers, which were appearing across British high streets. Marks & Spencer, British Home Stores, C&A and Burtons all emerged or grew in the interwar years. Multiples took their cues from the department stores of the late 19th century, which had offered a wide variety of goods and an enticing shopping experience for the upper-classes for a number of years. The new chain stores offered a similar range of goods, and a modern environment, but for the less affluent consumer.

They also allowed for “faster” fashion. On the whole, they were able to offer a wider variety of clothing and better prices than privately-operated retailers. Not only were chain stores able to benefit from volume discounts on bulk purchases, but their scale meant they were some of the first businesses to completely side-step the wholesaler and buy directly from the manufacturer. Removing the wholesaler from the distribution chain meant that any intermediary margins and transport costs were eliminated, and, more crucially for the clothing trade, fashionable goods could reach shops faster. For the fashion-hungry consumer with limited means, this new model of distribution had distinct advantages.

The rapid success of chain stores and ready-made clothing is apparent from looking at the some of the numbers involved. Marks & Spencer had only started selling clothing in 1926, but in 1930 they sold one million dresses for less than 5s. This is a number that likely increased as the interwar years progressed and their number of stores grew (M&S opened or expanded 165 stores between 1926 and 1939). At a slightly higher price point, Marley Gowns, who made dresses retailing at around one guinea (21s) each, made 10,000 dresses per week in 1939. C&A specialised in ready-made women’s clothing saying that women should not be “a slave to their sewing machine”: by 1939 it had multiple premises across Britain, including an enormous, five acre flagship store at Marble Arch in London.

The stimulation of extra purchases also came through the sale of “little ticket items”. These smaller, cheaper garments like blouses, cardigans or scarves were often bought on impulse, as they required less consideration than a “big ticket” item like a dress or coat. Marks & Spencer offered blouses which started at 1s 11d, evening bags for 1s 11d and jumpers for 3s 11d. The wholesaler Wilkinson & Riddell supplied a whole variety of rayon blouses which would have retailed at around 3s 9d. With women’s magazines encouraging readers to believe that they should never be seen in the same clothing twice, and that different garments were necessary for all manner of occasions, “low ticket items” helped contribute to the dream of an unlimited wardrobe.

The beginnings of fast fashion

It is impossible to make a direct comparison between the way we buy clothes now and the way women bought them in the interwar period. A single item of clothing would still take up a significant portion of an average income, and purchases were likely to be made just once or twice a year.

But it is possible to see the beginnings of the idea of fast fashion emerging: from Edward Symond’s idea of Fashionocracy; to the emergence of low cost chain stores; to the acceptance and growth of the ready-to-wear industry. The “deliberate incitement to discard goods before they are worn out by providing irresistible substitutes” was becoming increasingly common in the clothing and textile trades and just as today, many shoppers seemingly had an insatiable desire for cheap, fashionable clothing.

Dr Emma Bastin has recently completed her PhD which examined the growth of rayon as a mass-consumer fashion product in interwar Britain. She is currently working on her first book which is based on this research