Tight Corsets

What is it about the term ‘tight corsets’? In Herman Wouk’s book ‘Marjorie Morningstar’, the heroine is cautioned about “those divorcees in their tight corsets”. In another book, the main character falls into a loveless marriage “..mistaking her tight corsets for voluptuous promise”. My aunt was fond of saying “you need tight corsets to catch your man, and tight corsets to hold onto your figure”! In contrast, my Mother, in an uncharacteristically catty moment, referred to an acquaintance, who I thought was rather glamorous, as “Hah! But she wears tight corsets,” as though it were some underhand deception. She regaled me with warnings that tight corsets would give the wearer varicose veins and liver disease. I suspected that the latter was not a direct consequence of the corset, but rather of the social habits that such a wearer would adopt!

I've saved the newspaper cutting on the left for years, I simply love the caption "I scream cones." The comment is quite heart-felt, and by today's standards, these high-waisted girdle would be called corsets by a generation unused to such devices, however, if you really want a small waist, then only a corset will do, and there are some beauties below.

Tight Lacing is a subject that was prevalent in Victorian through to Edwardian times to an extent that became extinct after the World War I. Vestiges of tight lacing continued on stage, in some elderly women and in the darker areas of corsetry, however, never again would it be a mainstream fashion. The remarkable 14 inch waists of late 20th century Ethel Granger, and early 21st century Cathie Jung, are expressions of personal taste and form. Having said this, there are many women who tight-lace today, and perhaps the new century will see this niche-interest develop. Only time will tell.

What we are referring to in this page is the use of the girdle and corset to shape a torso, ever so slightly beyond the comfort zone for those quintessentially feminine traits of allure and vanity. Cautionary Tales of Vanity and Tight-lacing are covered in the Corsetiere's pages, and some beautiful examples from Gilo49, Trishypoo and Cherry-Tomatoe are shown in these pictures.

The corsets shown here form a very distinct set. Consider Spirella's efforts to support and control, we are looking at a different device here. Control is most certainly afforded by these garments, however, their primary function is to nip in the waist, and lead the eye downwards to a perfectly molded derriere. They all have the hallmarks of the very high, shaped back, and the full length skirt that would allow for immaculate draping of a pencil skirt or close-fitting gown.

Of course, tight girdles attempt to perform the same task, however, nothing could ever be quite so successful as these corsets.

Spencer (above) and Gossard (right) show their versatility here by making corsets blatantly designed to minimise the waist. Spirella, on the other hand, put the emphasis strongly on support without constriction, and 95% of their corsets echoed this philosophy. Spencer and Gossard could do likewise, but also made corsets for the ultimate in tight-lacing. Spencer even specialised in fiendishly complex surgical devices that would force the wearer into the shape of a women, despite the afflictions of poor posture, lordosis and even pregnancy.

Note the similarity in the two brands of the offset busk.

Such a corset just had to be owned by an older, fashionable woman. It has the classic six suspenders, full length hooks-and-eyes, and three powerful straps to ensure that the twin rigid back steels and the spine would not part company. Such a corset would be donned by the lady as her second act of the morning. The first would be to put on her stockings, for such an activity would be impossible once ensconced in the corset. The owner would only disembark from its rigid embrace just before retiring to bed.

It was during an inventory check that we came across a piece of quite extraordinary corsetry. We acquired this piece in London from a vendor in Covent Garden. She claimed that her husband originally purchased the garment from Axfords in 1971 when they had their shop near Victoria Station. Ostensibly a present for herself, she was moved to declare that the only person that derived any pleasure from it was her husband. (Isn’t that so often the case in lingerie purchases?) One could, however, hardly describe this piece as lingerie. A huge 28” long, with full length boning and laced front below the busk, and full-length at the back, there is no earthly way for the wearer to sit or even walk properly.  The woman hated the corset but only sold it after her husband passed away. She felt that it was humiliating.