The Blounts, the Holidays & the Cranes - dress & exhibiting

The reason why I wrote my previous posts about the birth of the Arts and Crafts movement was because there were some connections that I had not appreciated previously between the Peasant Arts movement and some of the people involved in the Arts and Crafts movement and the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union.  It would appear that the Blounts, Holidays and Cranes all produced some work as joint collaborations of husband and wife, and were all interested in the anti-corset movement.

Honesty plaster frieze by G. J. Frampton,
exhibited at 1896 Arts and Crafts Society Exhibition,
The Studio vol 9, issue 44, November 1896

Godfrey Blount exhibited works at the 1896 and 1899 Arts and Crafts Society Exhibitions (Parry, Linda, Textiles of the Arts and Crafts Movement, Thames & Hudson, 2005).  Unfortunately it is not clear what works these were, but we do know that Godfrey and his wife, Ethel Blount, worked together on tapestries.  Parry noted that the 1899 exhibition contained an increased representation of hand-weaving.  Walter Crane was the President of the Society at the time.  Then in 1904 the Godfrey and Ethel Blount joined the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union committee of which Walter Crane was one of the Vice-Presidents.

The Dress Review, January 1904
President Henry Holiday, Vice-President Walter Crane,
General Committee members Godfrey Blount and Mrs Godfrey Blount

Henry Holiday was the President of the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union, and was an original member of The Fifteen with Walter Crane back in 1886.  Holiday exhibited embroidery in the 1896 Arts and Crafts Society Exhibition. 

Bed cover designed by William Morris,
made by Catherine Holiday c.1876,
Victoria & Albert Museum

Linda Parry (ibid) refers to his wife, Catherine Holiday, as William Morris’ favourite embroideress, the only one ‘whose work is as good as the old’.  She worked for Morris & Co., embroidering Morris and Henry Holiday’s designs.  Her work was “mostly large-scale bedcovers, hangings and portieres which were drawn out in Morris & Co.’s workshops and embroidered in the firm’s silks.  She was a hard-headed businesswoman, and all her work for Morris was done after mutual agreement on colours and materials.  He was often worried that her prices of £100-150 per hanging were too high.  Three panels embroidered by her, one designed by Morris and another by Henry Holiday, were exhibited in 1888 and 1890.” (ibid)

Healthy & Artistic Dress Union leaflet detail

Walter Crane’s wife and daughter also exhibited works at the Arts and Crafts Society Exhibitions.  In the 1888 exhibition “of all the embroideries exhibited, Mrs Walter Crane’s mantel valance worked in white cotton on black wool was singled out for praise by several journals” (Parry, ibid).  Although not appearing as a Committee member on the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union, the July 1906 Dress Review reported Mrs Walter Crane as presiding over a Healthy and Artistic Dress Union meeting "A few highly appreciated words were spoken by Mistress Crane, who emphatically condemned tight-lacing, though she admitted she now liked a little support herself".

Mrs Walter Crane, 1882
by Walter Crane, Musee Orsay

More Peasant Clothing

As a final post on peasant clothing, I intend to 'mop up' the various odd bits of dress information I have picked up along the way.  

Not wearing a corset! Maude Egerton King,
reproduced courtesy of Haslemere Educational Museum

Just to recap, the Peasant Arts literature on dress is sparse, and therefore I have approximated the beliefs of the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union, where Godfrey and Ethel Blount were committee members, with the beliefs of the Peasant Arts movement.  The only paper published on the subject by the Peasant Arts movement itself is 'To Dress Well - An Apology for the Dress-making Branch of the Peasant Arts Society', which is very similar to other Healthy and Artistic Dress Union literature, and was quoted in my previous post The Corset.

Jaeger advert from The Dress Review, July 1904.
Captioned with: "We are very glad to be able to
give an illustration of The Jaeger Bust Girdle
for those who need some support.  It is perfectly hygienic
and comfortable, and may be seen
at any of the Jaeger Depots.  Price about half-a-guinea."

Corselet Skirt illustration from
The Dress Review, April 1906

The Healthy and Artistic Dress Union had confederating with numerous similar movements across Europe.  In September 1903 The Dress Review reported that it had links with the Free Federation for the Improvement of Women’s Clothing, in common with the Dutch and German Dress Societies.

The Dress Review in January 1905 was selling patterns for a djibbeh, two Forma gowns, a simple blouse and a Forma cape.  

New Place, Haslemere designed by C.F.A. Voysey

The Hall at New Place designed by C.F.A. Voysey, from Studio
                         International, vol 21

Norney Grange, near Shackleford, Surrey designed by C. F.A. Voysey from English Heritage

In the same year, amongst the new members of the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union, are Mrs Voysey of the The Orchard, Chorley Wood, Hertfordshire; the wife of Charles Voysey, the Arts and Crafts architect and designer.  Voysey is linked to Haslemere in numerous ways: he designed the house New Place, Farnham Lane, Haslemere in 1897, and Norney Grange in nearby Shackleford, in the same year.

from The Dress Review, July 1905

'Frock smocked at the waist' from
The Dress Review, July 1905

In July 1905 The Dress Review published pictures of “a frock smocked at the waist to the shape of the wearer’s belt, which is the style at present.  Suitable for a girl with a ‘slight frame’ it must be made in light material such as silk or crepe de chine.”

Peasant dress from The Dress Review, July 1906

In July 1906 The Dress Review reported on their May Annual Meeting, presided over by Mrs Walter Crane, where they had an exhibition, the highlight being a peasant’s dress lent by Mrs Rantaniemi of Finland (who had started up a Finnish branch of the Union).  The Dress Review commented on this dress that "it is remarkable that the shape of the dress coincides almost exactly with one of the most approved patterns of dress worn by members of the Union."

Walter Crane and the Peasants

I have found a number of different links between the artist and illustrator Walter Crane and members of the Peasant Arts movement.  Following on from the recent posts, let us start with the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union connection. 

Walter Crane, self portrait, 1885, The Whitworth Art Gallery

Godfrey and Ethel Blount were on the General Committee of the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union from 1904 until at least the end of 1906.  At the same time, Walter Crane was a Vice President of the Union, one of ten Vice Presidents in position at any one time!  The Dress Review cover and promotional leaflets (see my earlier post The Corset) were designed by Crane.  Mrs G.F. Watts, wife of the painter and sculptor, from Compton, a few miles away from Haslemere, was another Vice President.   Mrs Walter Crane was also involved in the Union.

According to the Victoria & Albert Museum, Crane designed some gowns for ‘aesthetic dress’ in Aglaia the journal of the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union, preceding The Dress Review.  However the only writing I have come across that demonstrates what the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union meant to Walter Crane, is the reproduction of his letter in The Dress Review in October 1905.  Unable to attend a Union committee meeting at the studio of Mr Frank S. Ogilvie, the painter, who was on the Executive Committee of the Union, Crane sent a letter saying:

Wychombe Studios, London, where painter Frank S. Ogilvie had a studio in 1905,
site of the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union meeting

“As I am not able to attend the gathering of the members of the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union at your studio and I am invited to write a line on the objects of the society, may I say that of course I sympathise with the movement towards a better ideal of beauty and health in costume.  At the same time the subject is full of difficulties.  I feel that dress is, as it always has been, the result of slow evolution, and is dependent upon the form and system of society under which it takes shape.  There is a great variety in modern dress, and the tendency seems to be to specialize it more and more in adapting garments to every kind of employment and sport.  Now I think that such specialised costumes must always have a certain character of their own, though they may be by no means always beautiful.  Convenience and utility seem to be the principal objects with their makers and wearer…while we have many convenient costumes carefully adapted to various pursuits, both for men and women, they are shorn of romance and, though not altogether without their picturesque aspects, they are prosaic, as a rule.

detail from the cover of The Dress Review, 1904, illustration by Walter Crane

The present mode in ladies’ dress often attains great elegance, and there are abundant beautiful materials, charming in colour and texture, to be had, needing only taste to utilize them with delightful effect.  Whether it is part of the great modern movement for freedom on the part of women that they should have now so much more liberty in the matter of dress than men, I won’t ventute to say, but  certainly a lady of taste  seems to have far more range in the matter of costume, choice of material, change and variety than a man at the present day, and men seem much more slaves to convention—at least in formal and commercial life.

Summer by Walter Crane 1895

In underclothing a great pitch of excellence has been undoubtedly reached and much science and invention devoted to its manufacture, but few, I fear, would venture to follow the suggestion of Du Maurier, who once in Punch represented an evening party attired in these beautifully fitting garments, chiefly, if I remember rightly, as a substitute for the modern evening dress of gentlemen.

Climate comes in as an important factor in deciding a form of dress, and social habits and custom also.

Tea gown made by Liberty's c. 1894, similar to
Walter Crane's designs,
at The Victoria and Albert Museum 

Conscious efforts towards beauty are not always successful, and any sudden reversion to past types is apt to have a theatrical suggestion about it, so that, in the main, dress reformers have a rather narrow field to move in, and it becomes a question often of simplification, or small changes, or grafts upon existing types rather than any frank departure on new lines.  Until great social and economic changes take place in the constitution of society, therefore, I do not think we can expect any very general adoption of new types of dress except special adaptations to practical purposes of new inventions, such as the motor, which has brought in quite a distinct type of costume, both for men and women, not without a certain weird picturesqueness sometimes (the linen coats of the chauffeurs are quite a good feature).

When again in a community of workers, people are proud of their employments, and consider it an honourable distinction to wear the distinctive dress appropriate to their work, we might again have great variety and beauty, bringing character and colour into common life.

Yours very truly

                      Walter Crane"

Mrs Walter Crane (Mary Frances), c.1886 wearing a high waisted, uncorseted dress from The Victoria & Albert Museum

In July 1906 The Dress Review has a quite amusing recount of a Healthy and Artistic Dress Union meeting, “presided over by Mistress Walter Crane, who wore a charming costume of olive-brown velvet…A few highly appreciated words were spoken by Mistress Crane, who emphatically condemned tight-lacing, though she admitted she now liked a little support herself.”

Less Hat, More (H)Air

Another theme in the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union's journal, The Dress Review, around the time that the Blounts were on the General Committee (1903 onwards) is hats.

Walking Dress designed by Frau Emy Friling, from The Studio, Vol.28, 1903 and reproduced in The Dress Review, September 1903

In April 1903, The Dress Review reported “we hail with joy the new Hatless League, started by the Manchester Physical Health Culture Society, “Less Hat, more (H)Air,” ….for adornment what can be prettier than a wreath of leaves or flowers?  For warmth what is more effectual than a hood?  We must not pass the subject of hats without reference to articles on “the Cemetery Hat,” “Murderous Millinery,” and others.  The number of hats smothered with dead birds seen lately has made some of us shudder and wonder if it can be so long before the prophecy of a “birdless world” will be realized…..the sonnet by Canon Rawnlsey on “My Feathered Lady,” from Aglaia No.1 …

“But now wher’ere my lady goes,

No human heart can rest,

The very stones beneath her feet

Cry Murder!  Murder! down the street,”

Dress designed by Frau Emy Friling, from The Studio, Vol.28, 1903 and reproduced in The Dress Review, September 1903

In October 1905 The Dress Review reported that “As a matter of hygiene, as well as in the interests of real beauty, I should unreservedly condemn the bonnet.  It represents no principle of use, being perched on precisely the part of the head where pressure is injurious (viz., the crown), and completely avoiding and leaving exposed the very parts where protection from the cold is most needed.  In place thereof I would advocate a return to the old fashioned hood for winter out-door wear.  A simple capuchon shape, such as is now commonly worn by ladies over evening dress, recommends itself naturally; and it is difficult to see why that which is considered suitable in the evening should not also be good in the day time”

G.K.Chesterton

In the same issue there is an extract from the Daily News ‘What kind of Hat?’, by G.K. Chesterton.   In the 1925 9th Annual Report of the Peasant Arts Guild, G.K. Chesterton is listed as a patron.  In the extract printed in the 1905 journal Chesterton goes through the history of the hat, “The dandies and tailors of the Regency had a sort of inspired genius for ugliness, an aggressive ugliness, a creative ugliness, and ugliness defiant and almost divine.  You can see it in the Pavilion at Brighton. ….Every sane human being would naturally have a hat that gets smaller towards the top, they gave us, therefore a hat that gets larges towards the top.  This top-heavy and incredible structure they did actually erect upon their heads.  But now can anyone give me the explanation of a great mystery?  This huge and heavy cylinder of a hat was a fobbery: it was high in a fashion; it might always be called a joke.  In its natural right to have lasted about a month.  Why has it lasted a hundred years?”

from The Dress Review, January 1905: "designed by Forma of Bond Street".  This is electric blue liberty serge with a vest of liberty silk in a lighter shade

In April 1906 The Dress Review comments that “talk of cruelty of wearing dead birds and osprey feathers in millinery (we had hoped that this disgusting fashion had died out, but there seems to be a fresh revival just now)”

Barefooted Aristocracy: The Blounts and the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union

Those of you who have read my previous post 'The Corset' may know that I had found a reported connection between Ethel Blount and the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union, a radical movement of it's time.   I have now confirmed these connections from looking at some original Healthy & Artistic Dress Union documents which are held at the Women's Library.  I was disappointed that I found no articles written by Ethel Blount for the movement, but instead I found that both 'Godfrey Blount, Esq' and 'Mrs Godfrey Blount' were on the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union committee.  They joined the committee and the union around July 1904, and were both still on the committee in October 1906 which is the last copy of The Dress Review I could find.

from The Dress Review, January 1904

The objects of the Union were stated in their literature as "to promote such improvement in dress as shall make it consistent with health, comfort, activity, and graceful appearance, yet shall not involve any obvious departure from recognized conventional modes."  From reading their journal, The Dress Review, it is possible to identify a few key issues that the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union were addressing at the time: promoting the wearing of shorter skirts, sandals and not wearing hats or corsets.

In April 1903, The Dress Review reported "we hail with joy the return of the short skirt for walking.   In Paris, Brighton and even London (always behind in these things), most of the smartest women are to be seen in frocks quite clear of the ground; they (the frocks) are well out and the same length all around.  If the "smart set" wear them, there is hope that such incongruous sights as, for instance, a nurse with a trailing skirt wheeling a baby car across a muddy road, will soon be a thing of the past and a clutched up gown will be quite dowdy."

The Dress Review, cover illustrated by Walter Crane who was a Vice-President of the Healthy & Artistic Dress Union

In September 1903, they reported "the short skirt has evidently come to stay for out-door wear, and what a relief that will be for muddy autumn days.  The emancipation of the foot goes on.  There has been a great increase in the number of sandals worn on bare feet among our young people.  We saw an article in one of the daily papers on "Barefooted Aristocracy in the Park", and we rejoice to notice the spread of this custom, not only among the so-called aristocracy this year or last, but also among those poor little ones who were formerly laced up in boots all made of hard, bad leather, which not infrequently weakened their ankles for life; and among these patient little ones, who suffer so terribly from being in every sense of the word badly dressed...they also are happy in newly found freedom for their toes and ankles.  Perhaps next year we may even  see their elders following this good example.  We hear too that it is the fashion upon suitable occasions for ladies to go hatless (we believe they carry very gorgeous sunshades) and this surely is a step in advance, though a mere man was heard to say that women could not be happy lacking the joy of jabbing long skewers into their hats!  Bareheaded and barefooted sounds delightful."

from The Dress Review, September 1903

In the January 1904 issue, there is a specific parallel with the 'peasant dress' advocated by the Peasant Arts movement as M.A.Biggs urges that "the blouse, this should never be worn tucked inside the skirt, uless that skirt be very light indeed or well supported from the shoulders, so as to avoid an uncomfortable mass of material about the wrist, and an injurious weight resting on the soft viscera of the body.  Can we not again encourage the idea of wearing the blouse in tunic fashion, the lower part descending outside the skirt, so as not to interfere with the supporting lining or bands insider over the shoulders...this style might also be adapted as a kind of support to the bust if needed, resembling the outside stays of various peasant costumes."

Suffragette connections Part 4 - The Corset

Yes there's some more.

Ethel Blount is reported to have been a prominent member of the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union, along with C.R. Ashbee's wife Janet (Cumming and Kaplan, The Arts and Crafts Movement, Thames and Hudson, 1991).

Mrs G.F. Watts (Mary Seton Fraser Tytler) by George Frederick Watts, 1887

 In the source documentation so far viewed, I cannot find a reference to the Blounts or Ashbee within the Union, but then not many documents are widely available.  I have not been able to locate any copies of Aglaia, the journal produced by the movement.  It is interesting to note that Henry Holiday, the President of the union and editor of this journal, who also organized promotions for the Union, was an illustrator, his most notable illustrations being in Lewis Carroll's The Hunting of the Snark in 1876 (Carroll being acquainted with Greville MacDonald as discussed in an earlier post).   What appears to have been the Union's subsequent journal, The Dress Review, is held at the Women's Library, London for the dates 1903-1906.

The Healthy and Artistic Union pamphlet below clearly demonstrates that Mrs G.F.Watts of nearby Watts Chapel in Compton, near Godalming, was one of the Vice-Presidents of the Union.  If the link of Ethel to the Union were further confirmed, then this would provide evidence that the artistic community in Compton had links with Haslemere, and there are certainly similarities between the two artistic communities.  At Compton Mrs Watts (otherwise known as Mary Fraser-Tytler) was encouraging the teaching of handicrafts to the lower classes, by designing a chapel that she trained locals to help build and decorate.  The chapel was built between 1896-1898 with reportedly all of the 74 members of the village taking part (wikipedia).  G.F.Watts, her husband was one of the most notable Victorian painters of the time.

Pamphlet written by E.M.D.Wheeler, illustrated by Walter Crane.  Note: last Vice President in the list is Mrs G.F.Watts

For more on Walter Crane and the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union, read my later post.  The members of the Healthy and Artistic Union appeared to be active in the suffrage movement.  For example Laura Elizabeth Morgan-Browne was a member of the committee in 1892 and in 1896 was an  executive in the Central National Society for Women's Suffrage (Crawford, Women's Suffrage Movement, UCL Press, 1999).  The above pamphlet sets to persuade ladies 'to dress without the corset', and wear comfortable, loose-fitting clothing.  The New York Times reported on the 13th May 1894 of the movement "the members of the union will have to do battle with the great Juggernaut fashion, and if they can escape being crushed out of sight...they may hope eventually to educate their sisters up to a right appreciation of what is best for them to wear - but I do not envy their task".

Interior of Watts Chapel, Compton, Surrey by Mrs G.F.Watts 

The Sanitary Record reported in 1890 of a conference taking place in July with the intention of reforming female dress (i.e. to establish the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union) as to "make it thoroughly healthy, comfortable, and graceful".  The conference set out that "1. the compression of the waist...effected by the use of corsets is inconsistent with the maximum health and strength.  The use of the corset, therefore, should be regarded as strictly exceptional, and for growing girls more especially should be altogether discontinued...2. limbs, both arms should have the freest play...by securing well-cut sleeves for the arms and not encumbering the legs with multiplicity of skirts.  3. Clothing should, by it's lightness, and convenient mode of support, make the smallest possible demand on the muscular strength, and thus leave the individual free to employ her physical forces in work more interesting and useful than in simply carrying her clothes".  These three issues were further summarised as 'stiffness, tightness and weight'.  It was reported that many of the attendees spoke out against the wearing of the corset, The Sanitary Record  commented that "it will, however, be a very long time before this article of apparel disappears from human sight".

In an article that may have been written by Ethel Blount, entitled 'To Dress Well - An Apology for the Dress-making Branch of the Peasant Arts Society' it is stated that to dress well "it is essential that the shape be simple, the stuff good, and the maker happy....A fashionable gown is generally complex, and absolutely lawless, and it vulgarises the poor girl who stitches it, the rich one who wears, and the poorer one who longs for it".  They set out that the dress should leave "full play to each limb, throwing all weight on the shoulders, and none on the waist.  The construction should be obvious, and we should do no more try and hide buttons and laces than we do our front-doors and chimney-stacks.  The shape should be achieved with the minimum of shaping..." Whilst the Peasant Arts clothes may have embraced this vision, it was not in line with the current mode of dress, and it is interesting to read a memory of a local girl at the time that she "and her sisters had hand woven frocks and skirts which were hard wearing and pretty but they hated having to wear them as they were different from the other childrens clothes." (Pooley, The Changing Face of Shottermill, Acorn Press, 1987).

Further information on the Watts Gallery and Chapel