1920s Women: The Flapper, and the Ephemerality of Youth

“I don’t want to be famous and feted — all I want is to be young always and very irresponsible and to feel that my life is my own.” - Zelda Fitzerald

Peeling off her swan-bill corset and stretching her limbs, she sighed a breath of relief — she can finally walk again. The Flapper was the utter repudiation of the Gibson Girl, instead of being maternal and wifely, she was boyish and single; instead of longing for stability, the flapper, having been kept in stasis for so long, craved motion — she became the embodiment of perpetual movement.[1] She was the ‘good little bad girl’, dazzlingly feminine even though she appeared to be constructed like a boy; possessing a childlike naivety while also being sexually desirable to men.[2] This ambivalent state of being epitomises the 20s obsession with the abstract and the unattainable. The elusive ‘It’ factor reshaped what it means to be a Modern Woman. After the involvement of women in the First World War, there was an obvious shift in social structure. Young women felt an increased sense of self-reliance and independence. They were not only able to carve out a place in society for themselves, but with the popularisation of automobiles and the bustling urban life, they were able to navigate this space with newfound freedom and curiosity, giving rise to the ‘hyperkinetic’ flapper and a consumer ‘revolution’. At the time, flapperdom very much felt like a ‘last hurrah’, like a last-ditch attempt to lose yourself in your final moments of youth before dying out and returning to the horrors of real life. There was this expectation that, after this outburst of freedom, all women must eventually surrender to motherhood and succumb to the ‘moral teachings’ of the previous generation.[3] Modern femininity and modern youth both emphasise movement and mobility, which was conveyed through the fashion of the time. This also meant that the Modern Woman’s body quickly became a ‘spectacular object for visual consumption.[4] Their identity became increasing tied with their appearance and consumer choices.[5] The Flapper was boyish yet distinctly feminine, she flipped gender roles while collapsing the space between private and public spheres. During the 20s, there was a sharpened sense of the present against the past, framed by inter-generational conflict. There was something new that was brewing in the air. The inevitabilities of life, no matter how desperately struggled against, served as a backdrop to this ephemeral outburst of youthfulness and unbridled desire for freedom and autonomy.

The flapper was a powerful female figure, an image of fantasy and desire — and above all, she was an image of youth.[6] Zelda Fitzgerald, the quintessential flapper, wrote in her letters, ‘I don’t want to be famous and feted — all I want is to be young always and very irresponsible and to feel that my life is my own — to live and be happy and die in my own way.’[7] This change in young women's outward behaviour was mainly caused by the onslaught of death, devastation, and war. The heaviness of death was everywhere. The Spanish Flu pandemic which struck in 1918, killed between 20–40 million people (killing more people in one year than the bubonic plague did between 1347 and 1351) and the First World War took the lives of countless young men.[8] This evoked in young people a feeling that life is short and fleeting, and thus they desired to enjoy their youth to the fullest. There was also a doubled ‘coming-of-age’. The ones who were unable to ‘come-of-age’ during wartime could finally do so now, as though they were re-experiencing something that they did not get to experience the first time around. This put a stop in the natural progression of coming-of-age and increased the harrowing and hurried sense of ephemerality. The Modern Woman also found something approaching equality with men. Women were mobilised on an unprecedented scale during the war, and were expected to assume traditionally male-dominated roles as part of the war effort, dipping their toes into fields like engineering, medicine, transportation, and even espionage.[9] They frequently found themselves in close proximity with danger. They nursed soldiers, drove ambulances, and travelled on their own.[10] Once the war ended, they asserted themselves into society with a newfound self-assurance and ‘breezy independence’[11] The Modern Woman was ‘ready to raise a little hell before she settled down to married life.’[12]

The flapper adamantly rejected the stringent moral rules of Victorian suppression and sought to overturn these oppressive morals and gender roles. The First World War weakened old orthodoxies and authorities. The government, church, school or family no longer held as much authoritarian power, causing a profound change in manners and morals, which made a freer and less restrained society.[13] Women were no longer as vulnerable to the tyranny of society as they had been before. Old-fashioned rules about ‘lady-like’ behaviour no longer held much weight, and taboos around unaccompanied appearances in public, the use of alcohol or tobacco, or even pre-marital sexual interactions had lost their potency.[14] This was a drastic social change. Women began to question and protest against their previous lives of constricting corsets and suffocating social structures.[15] Hugely famous flapper actress Colleen Moore identified with these sentiments, saying, ‘I shared their restlessness, understood their determination to free themselves of the Victorian shackles of the pre–World War I era and find out for themselves what life was all about.’[16] In Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, we learn of the rich and famous Henry Spoffard whom Lorelei tries to get her hands on, his sister apparently ‘has never been the same since the war, because she never had on a man’s collar and a necktie until she drove an ambulance in the war, and now they cannot get her to take them off’ and that her brother Henry’s brains are ‘not so viril.’[17] The song "Oh Say! Can I See You Tonight?" by Ruth Gillettes also describes the new behaviour of women in that era. Before the 1920s, it would have been challenging for a woman to call a man and ask him out on a date. In contrast, many girls in the 1920s seemed to take the initiative in romantic relationships, making overt advances or even paying visits to boys' homes, challenging stringent gender roles.[18]

The image of the flapper was often juxtaposed with images of older women, usually their disapproving Victorian mothers. The girl’s mother was oftentimes dismissed as incredibly old-fashioned and out-of-date.[19] As of the late 1880s, young women were taught that swinging their arms while walking was socially unacceptable — too vulgar, too unbecoming. They wore long skirts and sleeves, petticoats and corsets, which basically functioned to restrict movement, and was meant to convey a more delicate ‘inner spiritual beauty’[20] By the 1920s, this tradition was turned on its head, women’s arms and legs were exposed to an unprecedented degree, accentuating the mobility of the whole entire body rather than solely the garments. This accommodated the new hyperkinetic aesthetic by the Modern Woman who entered the urban landscape with great exuberance and vitality.[21] Young women were given the ‘absolute freedom of movement which modern life required.[22] In the previous generation, sensuality and sexuality were expressed through stasis. Edward Sapir characterised woman as traditionally understood as ‘the one who pleases by being what she is and looking as she does rather than by doing what she does.’ As the ‘kept partner in marriage’, she used fashion to emphasise perpetually her desirability. She was a status symbol, an ‘expensive luxury’, the Gibson Girl.[23] In the 20s, Women, once believed to glide, were finally seen to walk.

The Modern Woman did not only appear ‘modern’, but she also actively performed it through their intrinsic connection with commercial products, such as clothing and cosmetics. The flapper’s ‘re-engagement with all the novelties’ of urban life ‘served as a codifier to modernity, a visual representation of everything that the modern age had to offer.’[24] There was a rise in consumerism to satisfy the needs of the ‘Modern Women’, producing a body that was identifiable as female and modern.[25] This was also the result of wider shifts in class and gender that took place in the late nineteenth century, where woman, mainly young working women, could afford to be consumers because they were also an integral part of the workforce as wage earners.[26] Although the dominant look of the Modern Woman was ‘young and white’, her exact class and social standing remained more amorphous and ambivalent. This is due to the fact that consumption also involved adopting specific beliefs regarding the importance of changes, which transcends class, race, and gender disparities.[27] Beauty was universalised and naturalised, and can be imitated cheaply with synthetic fabrics, creating ready-to-wear clothing that flattened the look of class.[28] To some, this was worrying. It was unsettling to not be able to differentiate race and class in a culture with rigid ideas of racial and class hierarchy. Charles Young, a McGill sociologist, observed that ‘on summer Saturday nights the streets thronged with the beautiful bright-eyed Ukrainian girls who, in dress and deportment, could not be distinguished from our most typical Anglo-Saxon.’[29] The increase of diversification and diffusion of fashion broke down the outward manifestations of class — ‘only a connoisseur can distinguish Miss Astorbilt on Fifth Avenue from her father's stenographer or secretary.’[30] There was little distinction between the shop girl and the debutante.[31] Being a flapper was simply a matter of knowing how to dress, being able to understand the lingo and the dances, and eagerly pursuing whatever was new.[32] The Modern Woman, or the flapper, should not be dismissed to be ‘too frivolous, body-conscious and self-absorbed.’, however.[33] This revolution in both fashion and consumer culture tells us a lot about refashioning the body in accordance with contemporary discourses of gender, race, and class. However, it is important to note that there was great tension about who gets to occupy these spaces, which are often taken over by white middle-class audience. Marginalised people often had to work to be in that space. For example, Josephine Baker, who was most definitely an “It” girl, had to perform and painstakingly stake her claim, while for upper and middle-class people, being privileged was enough.[34]

Commodities created the modern female body and imbricated her into modernity as a self-disciplining subject, a spectacular object for visual consumption, and as a consumer of goods.[35] The quest for beauty was a powerful discourse, and judgment was constant. Women were constantly judged for their ability to meet the standards of beauty.[36] They were, essentially, a spectacle, a performance. As a result, The Modern Women was urged to play both the voyeuristic viewer and the embodied subject simultaneously. According to Mike Featherstone, the body evolved into a means for achieving pleasure and fulfilment as well as a message about how individuals should behave.[37] Marketers purposefully created advertisements to persuade women to picture themselves in a specific consumer scene, “to identify with portrayals of themselves as they aspired to be, rather than as they ‘really were.’”[38] Modern fashion remodelled the body, and rendered most of the upper body flat and geometric, so the legs came into full focus.[39] To have new body parts revealed and exposed to such an extent (particularly the legs) was still undoubtedly a source of concern for the general public because it had previously been limited in the seclusion of bedrooms and dressing rooms. [40] During the silent film, ‘IT’, Betty Lou prepares for an evening at the Ritz, in what could be said the film’s most romantic and magical sequence. She manages to transform her plain black office dress to a dramatic cocktail chemise, posing, laughing, and moving around the flat with confidence. Even though the scene is set in a private space, the setting belies a public quality in that she is getting dressed, fully accessorised, wearing high-heeled shoes and makeup. We have caught her in a moment in-between public and private, right before she steps out for the night.

In the early 1920s, about fifty million Americans, which was half the population at that time, went to the cinema and watched a movie every week.[41] Silent movie actress, Clara Bow, dominated the film industry and personified the roaring 20s. She was described by Times as having ‘enormous saucer eyes, dimpled knees, bee-stung lips and a natural boop-poopa-doop style. She was the cat’s pajamas, the gnat’s knees, and the U.S.’s favourite celluloid love goddess.’[42] Clara Bow was bouncy and full of energy. She had stunning physical confidence in front of the camera, and tactile ease with other characters.[43] But what made her stand out was the rapidity with which she changed her expressions and movement.[44] Her rapid-fire performance style epitomises the youthful naivety and modern femininity of the era. She was ‘so abundantly vital - that she makes the film entertaining in spite of itself’. She enchanted the masses. In flapper movies, the so-called ‘moral ending’ was the most common strategy for shielding films from controversy. The vast majority of flapper films conclude with the flapper explicitly renouncing her escapades with the modern lifestyle then settling down with a conventional man.[45] The plot usually goes something like this: The Big City life entices the protagonist, a naive young woman, who indulges in her newfound freedom by drinking and dancing and flirting. On the verge of defilement, she is then rescued by her suitor. The story concludes with a marriage proposal that her Victorian grandparents would gladly accept. Flapper movies at the time often maintained the moral ‘redemption’ angle through the flapper's eventual rejection of modern practices and eventual reintegration into the family.[46] However, Clara Bow’s animated performance subverts this, her dynamic and animated movements and natural gestures often undermine the narrative’s conservative values. “It” borrows the ending of “Flaming Youth”, but instead of ejecting herself off the yacht in order to escape ‘defilement’, Betty Lou dives headfirst to save her drowning nemesis. She then hoists herself onto the yacht’s hoisted anchor, and haughtily drops a shoe on her ‘prince’s’ head to catch his attention, perched precariously, her wet dress clings seductively to her body. As they kiss, Betty/Bow sweeps her palm and fingers over the side to the back of his head, as though she is staking her claim, and the film slowly fades to black. Critics say that the ending of the film connotes Betty sacrificing her individuality and identity for marriage. However, Bow’s movements in her performance depict a newly emerging morality of passion, effectively rejecting the morality of the Victorian ‘pious and pure womanly woman’.[47] She shines a light on the possibility of heterosexual female desire outside the realm of domesticity between male and female ‘partners’, subverting gender roles and social hierarchy.[48] Bow’s hyperkinetic and sexually captivating performance was a tribute to modern femininity and epitomises the independent modern woman.

Zelda Fitzgerald writes that the sole role of these ‘pretty yet respectable young women’ is to ‘amuse and to make growing old a more enjoyable process for some men and staying young an easier one for others.’[49] She thinks that although these young flappers depict themselves as daring individuals, beneath their bravado, they actually cater to male desire and consumer logic.[50] However, the first flappers asserted their right as women to make their own choices and their own mistakes.[51] She swore, she smoked, she used contraceptives, and by disobeying social norms and upsetting her parents, the flapper made headlines. She was a socio-political trailblazer. Judith Mackrell states that ‘it was the flapper’s willingness to assert her own desires that made her key to not only feminism but to the larger spirit of the age.’[52]

Before her wedding day, the eighteen-year-old Zelda wrote, ‘Marriage was created not as a backdrop but to need one. Mine is going to be outstanding. It can’t be, shan’t be the setting — it’s going to be the performance, the live, lovely, glamorous performance, and the world shall be the setting.’[53] The outburst of glamour, hyperkinetic demeanour, and romantic ephemerality of the flapper is timeless. The Modern Girl caused ripples in consumer culture, subverted gender roles, and paved a way for future freedoms for women. Taylor Swift, with her sharp eyes and golden locks, dawned a shimmering flapper-inspired slip dress that gleamed gold under the spotlight. Her slender legs became symbols of confidence as she danced on stage, singing, ‘We are too busy dancing to get knocked off our feet. Baby, we're the new romantics. The best people in life are free.’

[1] Yellis, Kenneth A. “Prosperity's Child: Some Thoughts on the Flapper.” American Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 1, 1969, p. 44., doi:10.2307/2710772. [2] Lasser, Michael. “The Flapper and the Jazz Age.” City Songs and American Life, 1900-1950, 2019, pp. 151–197., doi:10.2307/j.ctvb4bw00.10., p. 152 [3] Sagert, Kelly Boyer. Flappers a Guide to an American Subculture. Greenwood Press, 2010. p. 21 [4] Nicholas, Jane. “Making a Modern Girl’s Body: Commodities, Performance, and Discipline.” The Modern Girl, 2015, pp. 23–61., doi:10.3138/9781442616523-005.p. 23 [5] Yellis, p. 45 [6] Lasser, p. 151 [7] itzgerald, F. Scott. Dear Scott, Dearest Zelda: The Love Letters of f. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald. Scribner Book Company, 2019. P. 40 [8] Sagert, p. 10 [9] Atwood, Kathryn J. Women Heroes of World War I 16 Remarkable Resisters, Soldiers, Spies, and Medics. Chicago Review Press, 2016. [10] Lasser, p. 156 [11] Broer, Lawrence R., and John Daniel Walther. Dancing Fools and Weary Blues: The Great Escape of the Twenties. Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1990. [12] Patricia, Erins. “The Flapper: Hollywood’s First Liberated Woman.” Dancing Fools and Weary Blues: The Great Escape of the Twenties, by Lawrence R. Broer and John Daniel Walther, Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1990, p. 134 [13] Craig, Gordon Alexander. The Germans. New York: Meridian, 1991. P. 161 [14] Craig, p. 162 [15] Sagert, p. 13 [16] Liesl, Schillinger. Review of The Beautiful and the Damned, Review of Flapper: A Madcap Story of Sex, Style, Celebrity, and the Women Who Made America Modern New York Times, 16 Apr. 2006. [17] Loos, Anita. Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Boni, 1925.p. 101 [18] Langley, Susan, and John Dowling. Roaring '20s Fashions: DECO. Schiffer Pub., 2006. p. 16 [19] Hirshbein, Laura Davidow. “The Flapper and the FOGY: Representations of Gender and Age in the 1920s.” Journal of Family History, vol. 26, no. 1, 2001, pp. 112–137., doi:10.1177/036319900102600106. P. 112 [20] Willis, Andrew. Film Stars Hollywood and Beyond. Manchester University Press, 2004. P. 9 [21] Willis, p. 9 [22] Willis, p. 9 [23] Sapir, Edward. “Fashion.” Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 1, New York, 1931, p. 142. [24] Gundle, Stephen. Glamour: A History. Oxford University Press, 2009.p, 69 [25] Nicholas, Jane. “Making a Modern Girl’s Body: Commodities, Performance, and Discipline.” The Modern Girl, 2015, pp. 23–61., doi:10.3138/9781442616523-005. p. 24 [26] Nicholas, p. 26 [27] Nichloas, p. 26 [28] Nicholas, p. 47 [29] ENGLAND, ROBERT. “The Ukrainian Canadians: A Study in Assimilation.” Canadian Historical Review, vol. 12, no. 2, 1931, pp. 208–209., doi:10.3138/chr-012-02-br12. [30] Yellis, p. 57 [31] Sagert, p. 122 [32] Lasser, p. 158 [33] Peiss, Kathy. “Girls Lean Back Everywhere.” The Modern Girl Around the World, 2008, pp. 347–353., doi:10.2307/j.ctv11hpjj4.18. [34] Gardner, Bettye J., and Niani Kilkenny. “In Vogue: Josephine Baker and Black Culture and Identity in the Jazz Age.” The Journal of African American History, vol. 93, no. 1, 2008, pp. 88–93., doi:10.1086/jaahv93n1p88. [35] Nicholas, p. 23 [36] Nicholas, p. 23 [37] Featherstone, Mike. “The Body in Consumer Culture.” The Body Social Process and Cultural Theory, by Mike Featherstone et al., SAGE Publications, 1991, pp. 170–196. [38] Marchand. Advertising the American Dream: Making Way for Modernity, 1920-1940. University of California Press, 1985.p. 16 [39] Comiskey, Carolyn. “Cosmetic Surgery in Paris in 1926: The Case of the Amputated Leg.” Journal of Women's History, vol. 16, no. 3, 2004, pp. 30–54., doi:10.1353/jowh.2004.0059.p. 33 [40] Nicholas, p. 52 [41] Kyvig, David E. “Daily Life in the US, 1920–1939.” Daily Life Through History Series, 2002. [42] “The Girl Who Had IT.” Time, 8 Oct. 1965. [43] Willis, p. 11 [44] Ross, Sara. “'Good Little Bad Girls': Controversy and the Flapper Comedienne.” Film History: An International Journal, vol. 13, no. 4, 2001, pp. 409–423., doi:10.2979/fil.2001.13.4.409.p. 418 [45] Ross, p. 411 [46] Ross, p. 409 [47] Willis, p. 18 [48] Willis, p. 19 [49] Pike, Deborah. “‘Masquerading as Herself’: The Flapper and the Modern Girl in the Journalism and Short Fiction of Zelda Fitzgerald.” The F. Scott Fitzgerald Review, vol. 15, no. 1, 2017, pp. 130–148., doi:10.5325/fscotfitzrevi.15.1.0130.p. 134 [50] Pike, p. 134 [51] Pike, p. 135 [52] Mackrell, Judith. Flappers: Six Women of a Dangerous Generation. Sarah Crichton Books, 2015.p. 141 [53] Pike, p. 131