The Photo-Play Journal (Jul 1919-Feb 1921)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

July, igig PHOTO-PLAY JOURNAL 15 a m Iryant Washbiuini ©i [©noes Paramount Star Discusses Fashions — Past, Present and Future sr start N the West — and for the matter of that, almost everywhere — the discussion of masculine and feminine attire is engrossing much time and attention. The war brought into the matter of clothing the ideas of economy to such an extent that had the conflict lasted a year or so longer the probability is that Adam and Eve would have had nothing on us. Happily the worst of the troubles are over, but even yet, if one consult the tailors or modistes, it will be found that the good old days of "befo' the war" are still a mere memory. We can now get pretty near any kind of clothing we want if we are willing to pay the price. So that, after all, the great middle-class is still more or less in a quandary. I happened to meet Bryant Washburn, Paramount star, the other day. As he is always immaculately attired, it occurred to me that he might have some good ideas to impart on the subject of clothes. Mr. Washburn smiled at me quizzically : "You know," he observed, "in most of my pictures I play roles that demand my wearing suits that are distinctly hand-me-down in appearance ; so why pick on me as an arbiter of fashions?" "Well, that's only on the scree n," I explained. "On the street you are one of our best little dressers." "I might be able to give you a few thoughts on men's clothes," he admitted, "but as to the feminine fashions — why not seek discourse with some of the fair maidens who decorate our screens so successfully ? "I wanted the masculine point of view, for one thing. As an example — up in Frisco they are having a great deal of controversy over the subject. 'Do modern girls dress indecently.' Why isn't that a good line of thought ?" "Now, you're trying to get me into trouble, I can see that. Do you suppose I want to have an encounter with those representatives of the fair sex with whom I must associate in my pictures? Or my wife? What mere man should attempt to decide on a question of such delicate import ?" "Well, look at it this way : Here is a man writing to a San Francisco paper. He says. T remember when the opposite sex were loaded down with as much clothing per capita as an army mule . ,. . now presto, all is changed and to my mind for the better.' How do you feel about that?" "Oh, if you put it that way," smiled the star, "I may say that I agree with the writer. What could be more hideous than the half dozen overskirts, the crinolines, the — the bustles — and similar contrivances of our grandparents' days. Yet, if they were the style I suppose it was all right — then. Surely one prefers that the ladies should dress in a common-sense way. One thing I do notice, however, is that it is often the least attractive woman who wears the most conspicuously scant attire. .That I object to. Do you remember the days of the bicycle ? I recall them, as a boy. The girls started wearing what they called 'rationals' — in other words, bifurcated skirts or bloomers. Some of them looked pretty well — others were monstrosities. I remember a story I read about a judge who was deciding on a case when a woman — one of the first to dare the new idea — was arrested for wearing the bloomers on the public streets. The judge looked her over and said: 'If the lady in question weighed two hundred pounds, if she were so homely as to frighten horses ; if she had one foot in the grave — I should say she ought to be fined. As it is — ' he paused for an admiring glance at the fair and trembling culprit — 'as it is, she shall go free with my blessing.' That's my idea. If it looks well — all right." "But suppose it looks too well?" "You mean if it makes other people look too well, don't you? Well, of course there's a limit — or should be. Modestly is a becoming quality. Still, I think our views are broader nowadays and often it is a case of honi soit qui mal y pense " "Meaning?" "Evil be to him who evil thinks. Don't you remember the story of King Edward III {Continued on Page 54)