“Never, perhaps, at least within the period of my life – and I have lived in the world nearly seventy-five years – never, I say, within the period of my life and experience have I seen such obscene, uncleanly, impure, and suggestive fashions of women’s dress as I see today. Some of them are abominable. I lift my voice against these audacious practices and these infamous fashions, and I pray that you who have daughters in Zion will save them, if you can, from following these obscene fashions, that if followed, will destroy the last vestige of true womanly modesty and reduce them to the level of the courtesans on the streets of Paris, from whence these debasing fashions come. They are the lowest and most degraded specimens of womankind, who have yielded their bodies to crime and their souls to death, if not to perdition, and are devoid of modesty and the sense of shame. We cannot afford to let our women follow such as these or to adopt the cursed fashions they set.
“I need not dwell on this matter, but will say that while crossing the street the other day, I saw a woman dressed to the height of this ridiculous fashion, and she was trotting along with little short steps. She couldn’t go any other way, hurrying across the street to catch the car. She got hold of the rail of the car and tried to lift herself up, but her foot would not go up to the step. By this time there was a crowd of men looking on. All of a sudden she stooped down, caught the bottom of her dress and raised it high enough to climb up. What an exhibition that was to the public eye! Would you like your daughters to expose themselves in such a manner? To do so they must of necessity part with their sense of womanly modesty, if not with all other womanly virtues. God have mercy on our girls, and help them to dress decently!
– Joseph F. Smith, October Conference, 1913; illustrations from the fashion pages of Ladies’ Home Journal, 1913
I’m sure if President Smith looked through the clouds above he really be surprised. Even the Garment styles have changed.
If I didn’t know better, I’d think this was parody, right up there with “Trouble in River City.” Hobble skirts, a few (necessarily tiny) steps away from prostitution and perdition? You’d think the events of his nearly seventy-five years would have given him some sense of perspective.
I am so disappointed to see pictures like this posted on a website that I thought was safe. My heart is racing and my mind full of thoughts. I hope you’re happy.
I doubt he meant Paris, Idaho. On his 1860-63 mission to England he had a short assignment to France. Is that when he became acquainted with “courtesans on the streets of Paris”? Fashions had likely changed between 1863 and 1913 — Just idly wondering about the source of his 1913 knowledge of French courtesans as the source of fashion.
Hobble skirts were usually decried for being downright dangerous, but not usually for these particular reasons.
You’ve got tot admire his restraint, though. He was a lot more outspoken in his 30s and 40s.
image.glamourdaze.com/2013/09/1915-Callot-Soeurs.jpg
image.glamourdaze.com/2013/09/1915-Callot-Soeurs.jpg
Wikipedia’s entry on the hobble skirt fasion from 1908 to 1914 is interesting: “The hobble skirt may have been inspired by one of the first women to fly in an airplane. At a 1908 Wright Brothers demonstration in Le Mans, France, Mrs. (Edith) Hart O. Berg asked for a ride and became the first American woman to fly as a passenger in an airplane, soaring for two minutes and seven seconds. She tied a rope securely around her skirt at her ankles to keep it from blowing in the wind during the flight. According to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum, a French fashion designer was inspired by the way Mrs. Berg walked away from the aircraft with her skirt still tied and created the hobble skirt based on her ingenuity.” The rest matches up on many points with Joseph F. Smith’s description, but wouldn’t you know it, by the time the style hit Utah it was already over elsewhere.
I messed up the second image URL, should have been:
image.glamourdaze.com/2013/09/hobble-skirt-1910.jpg
He said something interesting a year later in Conference,
“I don’t want it to be understood that I am finding fault, I am only telling a solemn truth, and I am sorry that I have it to say, but I want it to be distinctly understood. We see some of our good sisters coming here to the Temple occasionally decorated in the latest and most ridiculous fashions that ever disgraced the human form divine. They do not seem to realize that they are coming to the house of God, and we have to forbid them entrance, or find fault with them, and they go away grieved and say sometimes, we don’t want to go there any more.” Why? Because they come unprepared, like the man who was found at the feast without the wedding garment, who also had to be turned out (Matthew 22:1-14). We have to turn them out occasionally, because they will not hearken to the counsel that has been given to them.”
I am gobsmacked as to what fashions women then would wear that were so bad they had to be turned away at the Temple!
Clutching my pearls, lest I swoon.
More prophet mocking than I’m used to at Keepa.
At least we’re not making fun of his bald head.
There is and has been no “prophet mocking” in this thread or in any other. It is, rather, another entry in a very strong theme at Keepa that “things change, but principles do not.” In this case, fashions have changed, duh, and noting that does not discredit or disrespect anyone’s prophetic role or standing. No one, and I mean no one, has suggested that Pres. Smith was wrong about clothing’s power to influence people’s thoughts and behavior, sometimes for ill, or that some styles, even in their day of popularity are inappropriate. We have noted with amusement —not condemnation —the colorfulness of his language, which we seldom hear from the pulpit today, and if he was this displeased with 1913 styles, we can chuckle — that is not bashing —over what he might say today.
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
I hope my comment wasn’t taken the wrong way. I read about 90% of his journals and letters a few years ago, and came to a much greater appreciation of JFS. But there is no doubt that he progressed from an angry young man to a lovable old curmudgeon over his lifetime, and he never lost the gift for clearly and articulately expressing his displeasure over things he disagreed with. No mocking here, just immediate recognition of a master at his craft.
I repeat, there has been no “prophet mocking” on this post. It would be a shame if the light-hearted fun as we look at what has changed “from then to now” were to be overshadowed by unvirtuous scrupulosity. Carry on, kevinf — you always say the right thing.
@14-I am looking for an entry from Pres. Smith’s 1893 journal, do you know if kept one? Thank you!
Cameron, he kept one, but if it still exists, 1893 is not currently available. His journals are pretty consistent and mostly complete through about 1883, with only a few items available after that. Occasionally, something will surface from time to time from that period, but I am afraid that you are unlikely to find what you are looking for.