Marks and Spencer
Dating Marks and Spencer Girdles
Memories of the Marks and Spencer Girdle
A tribute to the Satin-elastic Girdle can be found in the 'Best Foundations' section
In 1884, Michael Marks started a 'penny bazaar' in Leeds, England. Ten years later, he went into partnership with Thomas Spencer (no relation to Spencer corsetry). Ten years after that in 1904, they opened their first shop and the rest is history. The brand name St. Michael, was created in 1928 under the auspices of Simon Marks. The name referred partly to Simon's father Michael and to the brand name St. Margaret that had a reputation for quality and was sold under licence by Marks & Spencer.
I just love the caption above 'ST. MICHAEL CORSETRY SATIN of delicious texture'.
|
Early Days
Marks and Spencer's first girdles were sold under the "St. Michael" brand name in the 1930's (above). The hook side version shown below comes from the 1950s and is made of corset quality tea-rose satin, and has the unusual feature of an additional waist strap, presumably to achieve the waist required for the 1950's fashions. This girdle (which for many would be called a corset) is exquisitely detailed; notice the apron front and the old-fashioned suspenders. |
|
|
|
|
To be honest, this beautifully constructed foundation (far left) quite escapes my memory. Both my husband and I well remember the satin elastic girdles and the rows of boxes in the high street branches of Marks and Spencer, but neither of us remembers this. It is from the 1950's. We were amazingly lucky to find one in such excellent and unworn condition. If I could find a friend with a 25" waist, I'm sure the girdle would be eminently wearable and long-lasting. The elastic is of a gauge not used in foundation garments any longer (probably rubber, rather than lycra based.. Recently observed is an even older model (middle). This must surely go back to the beginnings of Marks & Spencer as it has the CC41 utility mark. |
Another early, rare M&S girdle. |
|
|
It only came to our attention recently that Marks & Spencer also sold corsets. That so few survive suggests that they were not well made (unlikely) or that they simply were not popular. The only one in our collection comes from the late 1950s / early 1960s when corsets were definitely on the way out.
Note the 'invisible' front-lacing. It appears that this was not a corset for the regular wearer, but a device more akin to a laced girdle that might be worn just for those special occasions.
The busk front/ back-laced corset below is definitely a 1950s item as confirmed by the label style. |
|
The Satin Elastic Girdle
|
In 1967, this charming lady of my acquaintance displays what the perfect middle class lady in her early 60's would wear to a wedding. Silk twin-set and pearls, hat, gloves, long-line bra and zippered high-waisted girdle from Marks and Spencer.
So I wrote in the chapter on Weddings. Millions of women wore Marks and Spencer, and many, who could well have afforded Spirella or even Rigby and Peller, filled their drawers with the favourite brand of the British High Street, and for good reason, as is described below.
|
We are rather lucky to have eleven satin elastic girdles in our collection. They
are the popular sizes of 26–32”
waist and three are unworn. Three have
been worn a bit and the other two, I imagine,
must have been the regular foundation for a
middle-aged women in the 1960's.
They
could well have belonged to our friend from the wedding (They didn't
incidentally; one was purchased from a charity shop in 1974 and another in
1981).
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
a lifetime. |
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’.
For those of you that have a fascination with numbers, we possess four different styles of this classic foundation:-
Models 8000/714 (red label), 8028/1903 (blue label), 8054/956B (black label) and 8054/953 (black label)
In Britain, the girdles of Marks and Spencer occupy a prominent niche in the foundation garment history of the nation. From the mid-1900's to the present day, M&S, as we shall call the company, provided support to millions of women. During the 1950's to 1980's they provided girdles that were unmatched for strength, durability and style. However much I might praise the made-to-measure foundation retailers, M&S captured a huge proportion of the market during those years. The advertisements above start in the 1960s (left) through the 1970s and into the early 1980s. The style and fabrics became more and more mundane although their strength and durability remained as robust as ever. Whether Mademoiselle or more likely, Madam, could be persuaded into one of these 'Gaine Corset maintien extra fort avec glissière côté' is doubtful.
|
Consider the all-satin / satin-elastic girdle of the 1960's. It was a classic of its time, and the fact that so many still exist in the drawers of the elderly and fashion-conscious implies a change in fashion rather than the wearing out of the actual foundations themselves.
|
|
These girdles were generically referred to as the '8000 series' and came in various styles and hip-springs between 10 and 13" to suit the majority of Britain's women. The 8000/714 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 name 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: Marks & Spencer 'Firm Control'
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. All the girdles photographed above are over 40 years old, yet could could be worn today and would probably give a decade's service to their wearer.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The evolution of the traditional M&S girdle. (From top left: satin elastic; satin front panel zipped; satin front panel hooked; pull-on; nylon front panel and finally 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, although
available, were not
fashionable in the 1960's and 70's.
|
|
|
In the 1960s, it was quite possible that granny, mother and daughter could all be wearing the same foundation garments!
A pull-on girdle for the younger figure, but look at that waist measurement - 23-24 inches!
The Dawn of the Panty-girdle
|
The panty-girdle became mainstream in the USA in the early 1960s. This can be seen in the film 'It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World' (1963), where Ethel Merman reveals her underwear on several occasions. Although the British produced girdles at least as good and strong as their American counterparts, they never quite produced the same quality of panty-girdle although Marks & Spencer came closest. Almost a decade later than America, at the beginning of the 1970's, even with such beautiful girdles on offer, the majority of Britain's women suddenly realised that a social revolution had occurred. The Beatles, Carnaby Street, Christine Keeler and the Swinging Sixties had moulded their daughters' attitudes, and mature women decided that the panty-girdle would mould theirs. The girdles and the corsets of their mothers were discarded within a few years and Britain changed forever as mothers followed their daughters into the panty-girdle and very rapidly into no lower foundation garment at all or perhaps something best described as elastic underpants. Where American women spent one or two decades in the panty-girdle, the British were late adopting it and early to discard it. Figures have never been the same since.
|
|
The Panty-girdle
The models on the left come from 1977, 1973 and 1974 and, like the model on the right possess the (artificial) satin panels that were the hallmark of its American cousin. Even the vestigial bow is present at the waist. All had bones at the side and shorter bones, two at the front and two at the back.
It would take another decade before boning at the waist would be eliminated but by then, few women were wearing them any more. In the evolution of the panty-girdle, the suspender attachments have vanished, however, that weird and uncomfortable 'gripper band' is present at the bottom of the legs. Who on earth would trust the security of their stockings to such a fallible system?
In a desperate attempt to boost declining sales, women were subjected to a colourful revolution of modern fabrics, and, for better or worse, their underwear took part in this spectral fantasia. In practice, however, pretty and feminine these garments might have been, they showed through light clothing and advertised one's reliance on old-fashioned support. They died out quite quickly.
|
Marks and Spencer produced so many patterns during this period that find a match bra and girdle set is quite hard. |
|
Flower power was neatly represented on many of these panty-girdles from the 1970's. High-waisted, long-legged (but oddly never together), they came in all styles, even with a matching brassiere.
|
As the 1970's progressed, so the flowers vanished to be replaced by a purple hue, surely one of the worst colours for underwear! Some of these pantie-girdles represent the nadir of this collection. They look like the knickers a seven-year-old might wear.
Thanks to the excellent labelling by Marks and Spencer, we can date these girdles (above).
Pages from a M&S catalogue of 1970.
|
For a company that could produce the satin elastic girdle, the hideous corselette above has plumbed the depths. Shapeless torso with hemispherical padded cups. 1974 |
Women had become liberated and, when they chose to, could dress as men. Unisex was the theme, and women started to wear underpants, albeit perhaps with a slightly higher elastic content their husbands'! This page brought forward two recollections from my husband. Firstly, when he was studying at Oxford, he remembers that all the students had to dress in regulation white shirt, black trousers, white bow tie, academic gown and mortar board for the exams (I'm not joking)! Girls were allowed a modification of this dress code, being white blouse and black skirt, but coloured underwear (brassieres in particular) was prohibited*. It was deemed unsettling for the boys to see the colours of the brassieres through the thin blouses.
|
It wasn't just Marks and Spencer who flirted with colour; nearly every other manufacturer got in on the act, and several were severely taken to task for portraying National flags ! |
* Caledonian Airways prohibited their stewardesses from wearing coloured brassieres under their uniform white blouse.
We finish this section with a collage of coloured girdles:-
To be honest, they do actually look quite good on a young model like Victoria who thought they were fantastic, just like modern (2014) swimsuits!
Things aren't what they used to be!
| On the left we have the 1960's. The girdles are the famous Marks and Spencer satin-elastic, firm-control girdles that are as strong now as they were 50 years ago. You could buy them from the big store in the nearby town where, on a Saturday morning, you could park on the High Street. The chest of drawers is made from walnut with beautiful marquetry; it would make an auctioneer drool these days, but back then it was quite normal. | Then there was a social revolution and flower power, in a misguided attempt to persuade younger women into foundation garments, appeared on some sad elastic underpants in the 1970's. The chest of drawers is made from compressed fragments of what might once have been a forest, but now has a veneer of what nearly passes for wood. I visited the town some weeks ago, but having queued for 40 minutes to reach a car park that was unrelentingly full, I turned around and went home. They don't sell proper foundation garments these days anyway! |
Dating Marks and Spencer Girdles
These apparently identical girdles can be accurately dated from their labels. The white girdle is from March 1973 and is a model 911B/1909. The very rare black model 8009/1906 comes from either 1968 or 1969. They are the same size, 34 waist & 44/46 hips but the black one is a good inch shorter. This was a bit of a problem for our model who not only is tall, but has a long back. If you look closely, there are very subtle details in the stitching patterns but to a casual observer, they are identical other than the colour. I wonder if these girdles were sold in different lengths? Certainly in the 1960s, their panty-girdles could be ordered in three different leg lengths.
Memories of the Marks and Spencer Girdle
|
|
Memories of a Marks and Spencer Teenage Girl I was born in 1945 and as a teenager, I went through the usual sequence of suspender belts to a girdle. I think I had a suspender belt from about 12 for best wear at the same time as my first brassiere. From about age 14, I had a ‘roll-on’ for best wear. The visit to M&S for firm control was at 16 for my first adult dance, rather than youth clubs and 78 records! My mother managed my expectations about ‘only for when you want to look your best’, so I was not surprised at my reactions on trying on the zip-up, boned girdle and strong hooks and eyes on the long-line bra. I was very pleased with the results, I was grown up at last! But “oooh”, they pinched. I remember that I could not curl up on the sofa to read a book. They were tight and I could not bend as I wanted. Mother suggested I wear them for an hour a day to get used to them. I think they were so strong that I had to get used to them, because they were not going to change their shape for me! Most of my friends wore the same for best wear, so we accepted it. I am sure16 year olds today would not put up with it. One of my school-friends had an elder sister (I was 16 and she was 19.) I remember being very impressed that she had three girdles. She had a two-way stretch one, a boned zipped one, and one she called “the beast” for her evening dress. She also recounts:- "Bending was not much of an option when well 'shoe-horned' into the M&S firm control girdle and long line bra that I had in the 1960s for best wear!"
Of course as the years passed by (1960's - left to the 2000's - right, 'firm control' would have seemed to be 'no control at all' for the teenage girl! |
|
Memories of a Marks and Spencer Husband #1
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).
|
The girl who eventually became my wife was proud of her small waist (and even now it is only 24 inches) but was annoyed at having only a small (32) bust and what she thought of as disproportionately large hips (35). She therefore bought bras with slightly padded cups and wore a girdle to try to get her hips in proportion to her waist and bust. For several years she bought a standard M&S medium control (open-bottom) girdle, having tried a light control one, and immediately taken it back as "useless, even to hold stockings". She appeared to me to have a good figure, emphasised by the narrow waist, but she always thought her bottom was too big, and would certainly not have gone without her girdle for that reason. When she passed her 20th birthday she pointed to a very slight bulge on her tummy and said her girdle was getting worn out. She bought a new one but, on trying it on at her home, decided that it was not strong enough to flatten her tummy and hold in her bottom. A return trip was made to M&S and the medium control belt was exchanged for a firm one, still in size 23/24 inch waist. When I first saw her wearing it, there was no doubt about it; her perfectly flat tummy and tightly held bottom were very apparent. She still had no need of any help at the waist but from then on she quickly bought more firm girdles so that she could wear one all the time to help keep her figure in proportion as she saw it.
One effect though of the heavier girdle was a tendency for some flesh to spill over the top of the belt on to the girl's waist and for a slight bulge on her thighs below the girdle hem. On several occasions thereafter, when buying a new girdle in M&S, she checked the various styles to see if there was a slightly longer one. As I remember it, she did not want a full high-waist girdle because, as she said, she had no need of it. One day she asked an assistant who said that the length increased slightly with the sizes and my girlfriend decided to buy the next size - 25/26 inch waist and 36/38 hip. She tried it on and it was slightly longer but "not as firm as my usual ones", she said. Her next idea was to exchange that girdle for an extra firm one in which the smallest size was 25/26, but she thought the additional strength would compensate for the larger size. However, on examining an extra firm control girdle in M&S, she realised it had six suspenders instead of the usual four and immediately gave up the idea saying she "didn't want to be bothered with more suspenders; four are bad enough". In consequence she bought another of her usual firm girdles and never again tried to get anything different. |
The classic girdle was actually worn by young women but it was their mothers that were the main customers |
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.
 |
Memories of a Marks and Spencer Husband #2 Most of our regular correspondents are elderly women, for it is these ladies that wore the garments to which this site is dedicated. Sometimes, as above, it is the man who provides the recollections. We talked to one such gentleman in his late 80's and he recounted how every morning for decades he watched his wife don her stockings brassiere and girdle. He found the daily ritual fascinating and was happy to provide the money for her forays to Marks and Spencer. Each night her underpinnings would reside on the chair in the bedroom. We recreated the scene with period garments and gave the picture to the old man. He was strangely moved and said "That's just what I meant. I don't suppose anybody would understand any more." He was terribly grateful for the picture.
|
|
90 Years of Lingerie
The brand name St. Michael, was created 90 years ago in 1928 under the auspices of Simon Marks. The name referred partly to Simon's father Michael and to the brand name St. Margaret that had a reputation for quality and was sold under licence by Marks & Spencer. Marks and Spencer dropped the brand name St. Michael in 2000, 72 years after its inception. Marks and Spencer was struggling to cast off an image of middle-aged, middle-class clothing, a struggle that continues to this day.
In the Marks and Spencer archives that celebrate these 90 years of marketing foundation garments are some interesting pages and articles. There is a brief article called 90 Years of M&S Lingerie and a far longer spiel that amazingly fails to mention their classic satin elastic girdles. There is a video as well that, once again, neglects the girdles of the 1960s. Having read and watched these articles we find a number inconsistencies that we would like to share here.
Above are two pages from the M&S Magazine; from 1938 on the left and 1987 on the right. The 1987 page attempts to convince us that 'bodyshapers' can be as effective as the girdles and corsets of yesteryear, in fact the 1930s is not only mentioned but a lady in an ill-fitting girdle models an example that bears no resemblance to the 1930s girdles on the left. It looks far more like a 1960s girdle.
We have cut out some scenes from the video mentioned above:
That looks very much like a post-war, Dior-influenced girdle and I would date it from the 1950s at the earliest. It looks much more like 1960s/70s. It is, however, a charming example of what lies beneath.
Again, these look like girdles from the 1960s and 70s. Still in the 1950s below, the lady dancing in a correct period 'swing' dress is shown adjusting the suspenders on what looks like a panty-girdle that M&S did not introduce until the 1960s (see below).
The 1960s are glossed over with a few generic views and we hurry into the 1970s with the colourful panty-girdle signalling the demise of the lower foundation garment.
So, panty-girdles did come in in the mid-1960s. This agrees with many an British woman's recollections of moving from girdles to panty-girdles in the late 1960s. As for the 1950s girl in a long-line bra, she simply looks charming.
