‘Fashions of the mind’: Modernism and British vogue under the editorship of Dorothy Todd

Vogue has no intention of confining its pages to hats and frocks. In literature, the drama, art and architecture, the same spirit of change is seen at work, and to the intelligent observer the interplay of suggestion and influence between all these things is one of the fascinations of the study of the contemporary world. This brief description on the contents page of the Early April 1925 ‘Early Paris Openings and Brides’ issue of British Vogue not only summarises the ideas that would be expressed within the current issue, but indeed within the entire publication under the editorship of Dorothy Todd. The ‘study of the contemporary world’ and the ‘interplay of suggestion and influence’ are accorded the highest emphasis, demonstrating Todd’s intentions for Vogue between 1922 and 1926. The concept of the contemporary was essential to this vision for Vogue and all the more crucial to the early 1920s. Despite the trivialisation of fashion (‘hats and frocks’), the study of the contemporary and fashion are inextricably linked. Though the opening sentence might be viewed as a disparaging account of fashion, the subsequent lines prove a defence of it, demonstrating the similarities between the subject of fashion and the other art forms of literature, drama, art and architecture. This simultaneously legitimises the entire idea of a fashion magazine and the overwhelming presence of what would have been considered ‘high brow’ art forms in a magazine supposedly solely concerned with fashion. However, what is crucial is the interplay between these art forms. This was what defined Dorothy Todd’s Vogue.

Name dc:type.qualificationname

m_ph

Level dc:type.qualificationlevel

m_ph

Grantor dc:publisher.institution

University of Birmingham

Year dc:date.issued

2011

Author dc:creator

• Lachmansingh, Sandhya Kimberley

• HQ The family. Marriage. Woman
• HN Social history and conditions. Social problems. Social reform
• PN0441 Literary History
• PN0080 Criticism