Utility and CC41

PLEASE NOTE: THE INFORMATION REGARDING DOUBLE ELEVENS IN THIS POST IS INCORRECT- SEE LATER BLOG POST HERE:

 

https://advantageinvintage.co.uk/2016/02/02/demystifying-utility-the-double-elevens-mark/

 

This is a bit of a rambling blog post about Rationing, one of my many (odd) passions and obsessions.
During World war two many basic goods had to be rationed so that there was enough of everyday goods to go around, this included clothing. Rationing of clothing began in 1942 and lasted until 1952.
For many rationing meant doing what they did anyway. Repairing garments, cutting them down to fit children or relatives or giving them new uses such as  using them for household textiles.
Although, for those who had a larger budget pre-war the rationing limited the meant of clothing they could buy. An important point to note here is that a more expensive garment did not necessarily cost more coupons. At the begging of the war one could have 66 coupons per year which cold buy only a limited number of garments. By 1945 the number of coupons per person had fallen to 36, for a year this would have probably only allowed you to buy one or two outfits!
Of course despite rationing some people still found a way to buy new clothes, this included a black market (around 70,00 books were stolen in the early part of the scheme), or purchasing second hand garments which were coupon free.
This is the only example of utility I own, a pair of shoes featuring the typical utility stamp.
Some clothing during the 1940s contained a CC41 label. This label Rather than demonstrating a rationed product CC41 was a guarantee of quality. It allowed poorer people to buy decent clothing. The scheme was designed so that all clothes met a certain high standard set out by the government, which included austerity, profit, distribution and tax regulations. This included dresses made of rayon that wouldn’t shrink, dyes that wouldn’t run and high percentage woollen blends.
Two types of utility label are seen in clothing. One label features  a stylised double c followed by the number 41.  This denotes a standard cc41 garment. Reginald Shipp, a commercial designer for the company Hargreaves, designed this label.
The two black dresses in the picture above are both from the Hampshire Museums service collection and are both Utility dresses (the little printed one is not) both feature the typical double c label, and the label for the long sleeved dress is also pictured.
The other label found in cc41 garments features two lines either side of a circle which denotes the more luxury cc41 products. This label is known as the double elevens label, or colloquially the “dinner plate” label. It is thought this label was bought in post 1945 due to the negative connotations associated with the double cc logo. After the new look, which came into fashion in 1947, began to take over fashion the cc41 label suffered and came to represent the dull and detail free wartime restricted fashion.
Unfortunately I don’t have any photographs of dresses with the luxury label in it. Here is a small picture of one of the labels take from the Vintage Fashion Guild website. I know there are some wonderful examples in Jonathan Wolford’s book Forties fashion.  Reading this book was one of my main reasons for writing this blog post in the first place! (I can not recommend this book HIGHLY enough, it is one of my all time favourite fashion history publications, I really do urge anyone interested in the 40’s to purchase a copy)
Visit his website here: http://www.fashionhistorymuseum.com/
It is important to note that all new clothing wether marked cc41 or not had to adhere to austerity restrictions applied by the government. Austerity measures included thing such as the number of buttons used, the size of the hem allowed and the use of embroidery. After the war finished , rationing continued, but many of the austerity measures were loosened. This is why post 1945 you see garments with more detailing
Rationing had to continue after the war finished in order to keep the economy steady. If rationing had not continued it is likely that there would have been high rates of inflation, like those in America. It is interesting to note that post war Britain had a large enough stock pile of wool to last 2 years, even though rationing of clothing continued.
CC41 was of benefit to manufacturers as well as consumers. The companies who were producing CC41 items could have a larger workforce than those not adhering to CC41, and attain a larger amount of cloth, meaning they could make a larger profit overall. This is why around 80% of clothing produced between 1942 and 1945 were CC41.
So there you go, only a very very brief overview of Utility and austerity. It is one of my absolute favourite topics and something I could literally go on and on about!

 

 

 

 

 

 

The three examples above are all again from Hampshire Museum service

Vintage obsessions: Rhona Roy





Surprisingly (some may say) beyond Horrockses there are a few other labels I am really interested in, and that I get very excited over when I come across.

I am going to try and do an individual blog post about each of my “big labels” T o show off some of the fantastic examples I have found here there and everywhere!

Rhona Roy

A label I have managed to find very little information on, but the brand did produce a lot of beautiful cotton dresses in a similar vein to Horrockses, right through the 50’s. I have seen the Rhona Roy label appear as late as the 1970s. There was a main line labelled simply “Rhona Roy” and a line for the younger teenage girl called young ideas by Rhona Roy.

This example comes from the Hampshire museum service collection and is truly a head turner (one of those rarities that has its original bolero too!) The minty colour is so perfectly summery too. Mmmmm making me think about pistachio ice cream. It dates from c1955-59
HMCMS:C2003.75

The company was also one of the numerous labels that Pattie Boyd modelled for.

Extreme vintage fair dissapointment


Oh dear. Yesterday i went to the first Judys affordable vintage fair held in Southampton and all i can say is that i was EXTREMELY dissapointed.
I don’t like to rant in blog posts, but i really am going to rant here. So, whilst i understand that 80s and 90s clothing is now seen as vintage ( i own some pieces myself) i hate to go to a vintage fair and see nothing but clothes from this period. Not only that, but poor quality 80s and 90s clothes. I don’t think i have ever seen so much scratchy nylon abd static polyester in my life! I really do wonder a why people would want to buy this stuff. It really was like going to a very bad charity shop!

Not only that, but it was peoples attitudes to the *ahem* proper vintage on offer. There were a few nice 50s cocktail dresses prices between £60 and £100 which are perfectly fair prices, yet people were turning their noses up at them, claiming they were too expensive.

This is the problem with vintage fairs selling cheap 80s and 90s rubbish. They just feul our addiction to fast fashion even further, yes by buying this rubbish again you are keeping garments off the landfill BUT it encourages the fashion industry to produce yet more cheap synthetic rubbish to replicate the “style”!

I actually felt a little upset that i had even bothered to wear my nice 50s dress.

To be honest i came away feeling like my sunday would have been better spent hunting out bargains at a bootfair, rather than crammed in a stuffy hall with a lot of pretentious idiots!