Fashion media's role in the debate on millinery and bird protection in the United States in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries Public Deposited

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/zw12z874d

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract or Summary
  • The purpose of this study was to explore the possible relationship among fashion media, the social responsibility agenda of the Audubon Society, and the use of birds in millinery in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Both the content analysis method and the historic method were used to gain an increased understanding of the debate on bird protection and fashionable millinery. Through content analysis, the fashion magazine, Harper's Bazar was used to discover what type of birds and feathers were presented in fashionable millinery styles aiding in an increased understanding of how the millinery trimmings changed. Using the historic method, and examination of a variety of sources that included Audubon Society records, fashion and women's magazines, and additional periodicals were studied to understand how the social responsibility agenda of the Audubon Society affected the use of birds and feathers in fashionable millinery. Additionally, fashion and women's magazines were examined to understand the editorial position of fashion media on the plumage debate. The Audubon Society can be credited with the decline in the use of birds and feathers in millinery as well as a change in the type of bird mentioned in fashionable millinery in Harper's Bazar in the first few years of the twentieth century. Members of the Audubon Society assisted in the passing of legislation to protect birds affecting the materials that were available to be used in fashionable millinery. This achievement was reached by conducting a successful grassroots campaign from parlor lectures and petitions to letters to local and state political representatives in support of bird protection. Harper's Bazar, Vogue, Ladies' Home Journal, and Godey's Lady's Book provided general fashion commentary that included the presentation of fashionable millinery that used birds and feathers throughout the years studied, 1886 to 1923. The editors of Vogue and Godey's Lady's Book did not provide socially responsible commentary on the bird debate. Editors of both Ladies' Home Journal and Harper's Bazar provided commentary on the bird issue that can be considered socially responsible. Comments from the editorial staff in the Ladies' Home Journal were proactive in the discussion of bird protection and provided alternatives to donning real birds. Harper's Bazar contained editorial information that sympathized with the bird debate, but the editors also presented the latest fashions even when they were contradictory to the editorial content. In Harper Bazar's defense, it was discovered through a content analysis that most of the birds and feathers presented in Harper's Bazar were not illegal to use in millinery. Harper's Bazar still maintained its commitment to present fashionable styles while also changing the type of bird and plumage trimmings presented that often reflected changes in bird legislation in the United States.
Resource Type
Date Available
Date Copyright
Date Issued
Degree Level
Degree Name
Degree Field
Degree Grantor
Commencement Year
Advisor
Committee Member
Academic Affiliation
Non-Academic Affiliation
Keyword
Subject
Rights Statement
Language
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2009-07-22T23:27:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Scarborough_Dissertation.pdf: 8846681 bytes, checksum: 81ebc31365be957859ba1de9c27eb246 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Julie Kurtz(julie.kurtz@oregonstate.edu) on 2009-07-10T15:50:36Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Scarborough_Dissertation.pdf: 8846681 bytes, checksum: 81ebc31365be957859ba1de9c27eb246 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Laura Wilson(laura.wilson@oregonstate.edu) on 2009-07-22T23:27:49Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Scarborough_Dissertation.pdf: 8846681 bytes, checksum: 81ebc31365be957859ba1de9c27eb246 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Amy Scarborough (scarboam@onid.orst.edu) on 2009-07-02T18:12:08Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Scarborough_Dissertation.pdf: 8846681 bytes, checksum: 81ebc31365be957859ba1de9c27eb246 (MD5)

Relationships

In Administrative Set:
Last modified: 08/18/2017

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Citations:

EndNote | Zotero | Mendeley

Items