Marks and Spencer

 

For connoisseurs of the brand, they are (clockwise from top right), model 956B, waist 28, hips 40-41 (well worn), model 1903, 29/39-41 slightly worn, model 956B (new), 30/42-43 and model 714 (NIB), 32/44-45. The oldest and most worn is a strong and as supple as the new models although a patina of yellowing has suffused the garment. My husband worked on the image for a while and, for artistic reasons, increased the contrast beyond reality, however, the silver and gold appearance of these superb foundations justified this ‘poetic licence’.

We are rather lucky to have six satin elastic girdles in our collection. They are the popular sizes of 28 – 30” waist and two are unworn. Three have been worn a bit and the other, I imagine was the regular girdle for a middle-aged women in 1970. All are as tight and as strong as the day they were manufactured. I sometimes feel that those girdles, even if worn on a daily basis, would last my lifetime. The 714 is perhaps my favourite. It is unique in having the inner facing of the bone casings in satin rather than cotton. The attention to detail on, what after all was just a high street brand, is simply amazing. How often do we pay for a named brand and come away the envy of our peers, but actually disappointed inside. In all honesty, I’ve never seen a Spirella or Spencer as well made as these garments.

Classic Girdles

The fabulous satin elastic M&S girdle from the 1960's. These seriously strong garments, finished totally in satin elastic, were some of the greatest foundation garments ever manufactured for the masses.

The evolution of the traditional M&S girdle. (Bottom right, there is neither satin, nor even shiny nylon, nevertheless, this girdle is as strong, as long-lasting and as powerful as her sisters.)

Each year M&S subtly changed the panelling, but the entire construction in satin elastic was a feature of the first of these foundations (top left). A later model incorporates some nylon flanking the central front panel, but the majority is satin elastic (middle right). Hook-front was an option instead of the metal zipper on this exquisitely panelled girdle (top right). In the 1970's, heavy elastic replaced the satin at the sides and the front was faced in fancy nylon (bottom left). The serious boning over the tummy is obvious. The boned 'roll-on' without zip or other entry was the last incarnation (bottom right). For many British women, this girdle was the final 'open bottom garment' that they would wear before changing to tights and the panty-girdle. All these examples come from the 1960's and 1970's, and are as wearable today as when they were new.

Something that is often forgotten, is that all these girdles were available in black as well as white. Flesh, and skin-tone, were not fashionable in the 1960's and 70's.

Memories of a Marks and Spencer Husband

I have seen it questioned why a woman with a 24-inch waist would need a girdle. In 2004 I'm sure she wouldn't, but back in the time when girdles were worn by just about all women, waists were generally smaller anyway, and manufacturers made and sold girdles in small sizes. Two of the three steady girlfriends I had in my teens had waists of 22 inches, the other one was 24. At that time, Marks & Spencer's light, medium and firm control girdles were sold in sizes starting at waist 23/24, hip 34/36. That was the size bought by the two slimmer girls when they started wearing girdles. (The third girl wore only a deep suspender belt at the time I knew her).

That episode would have been in 1966. Only a few years later, she had begun wearing pantie-girdles with tights, and found that the M&S firm ones were not nearly as controlling as the girdles had been and, in particular, lacked the down-stretch back panel that flattened her bottom so well. She felt more rounded in the pantie-girdles. The pantie-girdles were also shorter, barely reaching her natural waist and certainly not covering her thighs. Her waist was still only 23 inches, so the girdle was really only for hip and tummy control. By then, M&S produced only the brief pantie style in size 23/24, obviously assuming that women wanting more coverage would be larger. My wife, as she then had become, was still concerned about big hips, and tried a couple of short-leg firm control pantie-girdles from M&S , that had to be in size 25/26. I remember these well because they came with a little packet of attachable suspenders which my wife threw away immediately, seeing no possible reason for wearing stockings with a pantie girdle. The new girdles also came higher at the top but were understandably quite loose on her slim waist. Nevertheless, she liked the smooth waist to thigh fit and wore those girdles quite a bit, though she found the legs a bit uncomfortable especially when they sometimes rode up. The old ritual of tugging down the hem of a risen girdle was replaced by the occasional pulling down of pantie-girdle legs.

Pregnancy then intervened and, after the birth, my wife returned to her regular pantie-girdles. Unsurprisingly, she was not as svelte as before her pregnancy, her waist now being 25 inches. She was more worried, though, about her hips and tummy and complained that her old brief firm control (size 23/24) pantie-girdles were not very good. The short-leg ones were better, but starting to wear out. Having for years bought all her foundations in M&S, she was surprised to find in (I think) British Home Stores (but might have been Littlewoods) a new range of firm pantie-girdles which had a non-stretch front panel, a satin down-stretch back panel and were available in size 23/24. She bought one, found it much firmer and liked especially the effect on her bottom and tummy. Her waist once again gained a "spare tyre" from the tight girdle and within a few weeks we had returned to the shop to buy another identical girdle. She saw that there was a longer style in the same range, described as a cuff-waist girdle and available in 23/24 waist. She bought one of those, too. For some reason she found that one distinctly tighter and on one or two occasions, having worn it under a dress to go out, took it off as soon as she got home and put on a regular length one instead. By the time she became pregnant again, my wife's waist was back to an ungirdled 24 inches.

After the second child was born, my wife found the panelled girdles too uncomfortable, and reverted to the standard M&S brief, firm control styles, still always buying 23/24 waist. This time, again finding a distinct spare tyre above her girdle around her waist, and realising that it could be seen when wearing dresses fitted to the waist, she bought a high-waist firm control girdle from M&S. It was in size 25/26 waist (smallest available in that style), which again made it slightly loose in that area, and had six bones;  long ones at the sides, shorter ones at the front and back. She disliked the bones, especially the side ones which didn't follow her curves closely enough. The girdle was also a coloured one, pale blues and lilacs, so she liked that. It gave her a good smooth shape but she said it was no good under straighter skirts because it was not strong enough on her tummy or rear.

This is a charming account from a gentleman, whose wife, although as slim as many of us would dream about, still suffers from those feminine traits of self-doubt. The history of M&S from the 1960's to the 1980's is very accurately recounted.