Abstract Initially meant to store essentials, the handbag has transformed into an extension of a woman’s silhouette. The phenomenon of a woman’s attachment to her handbag transitioned from a utilitarian piece to a glamorous, exquisite accessory. The outcome of this has subsequently resulted in a ‘look-at-me’ logo and brand invasion. The handbags’ role in social settings and its portrayal as a status symbol is relevant to the psychology behind why women have come to rely on their purse. Therefore, the handbag has a larger implication. A woman finds comfort and personality in her choice of an accessory. With the purpose of self-satisfaction and attention from others, the handbag is a social device and aid in a woman’s routine. Introduction A woman’s handbag is a trove of miscellaneous objects, both necessary and useless. Fashion, an art form itself, “acts as the vehicle for ambivalence; the daring of fashion speaks dread as well as desire; the shell of chic, the aura of glamour, always hide a wound” (Kaiser, 20). The intimacy of the interior of a woman’s handbag opposes the exterior in social confidence and secrecy. Interestingly enough, a woman would prefer to conceal this paraphernalia and personal values and boast the exterior of the handbag (Teunissen, 134). A handbag’s label and design is a statement all its own, altering the perception of the outfit and the woman, signifying who she is and the sensitivity of her own appearance. The diversification of a handbag’s silhouette throughout history has lead to this modern view. The location of the bag, whether it is in the hand or on the shoulder is an important design aspect of the silhouette and material involved. The bag relies on the body as a medium to become more visually appealing. Nevertheless, handbags serve an internal function, containing vital aspects of a woman’s life from her work materials to her social essentials. “But bags are not purely functional either. On the individual level, the bag is a psychologically and aesthetically significant object, an artwork in which we ‘carry our neuroses’” (Pham, 30). The handbag is predominantly used by women and girls, but originated as a man’s accessory (Tortora, 103). Women have only necessitated the handbag as an everyday item over the past century. Consequently, the real questions are how did women form such a powerful attachment to purses and the belongings inside them? Why is a woman’s purse strictly off-limits to others? Fashion writer Farid Chenoune refers to the handbag as the “toolbox of femininity” (Cox, 8). Throughout the history of the handbag, it is vital to take note how this accessory is closely connected to the occurrences in fashion. The popularity of the handbag has grown in direct proportion with a woman’s status and autonomy in relation to men (Cox, 8).

History of the Handbag Women adopted the handbag as a fundamental accessory in the beginning of the 19th century (Tortora, 103). Prior to this stage, women wore skirts with pockets underneath, tied around their waist. Wearing a narrower silhouette, women abandoned the pockets and carried small handbags, known as reticules, usually made of damask, satin, and velvet (Cox, 8). The fashion of exterior pockets was soon designed, establishing a more permanent role for the handbag (Ehrman, 169). Not yet in control of their own expenses, women had few possessions to tote around to the limited social events they attended. The importance of the handbag was changing with the development of the railroad. At this time, women were drifting away from the domestic lifestyle and enjoying more leisurely activities such as travel (Cox, 10). The roaring 1920s marked the era where many women were inspired to be independent, necessitating the handbag as an everyday accessory (Tortora, 105). Flappers were the trendsetters of the time, being bold enough to carry a sleek clutch containing lipstick, face powder, and cigarettes. A notable trend of androgynous handbags contributed to the allure of the Flapper. The glamour of this existence made an impact on Hollywood in the 1930s, glorifying the handbag and high fashion (Cox, 10). During this decade, Elsa Schiaparelli became the first designer to integrate celebrities into the promotion of handbags (Ehrman, 172). The inception of World War II distinguished practical and masculine handbags. The 1940s saw a rise in the utilitarian aspect of the handbag, with the design of the leather shoulder bag. Wanting to appear more feminine, women of the 1950s carried elegant clutches. The handbag truly came to form with the design of Coco Chanel’s black quilted leather bag in 1955. The function of women’s wear and accessories was to be forever changed. For the first time, women had the opportunity to wear a single outfit in a day, similar to men (Teunissen, 14). Chanel was the first designer to convey the accessory as a luxury product for women. Prior to this, women’s accessories lacked modernity and comfort, characteristics important to Chanel’s designs (Teunissen, 15).

The space race of the 1960s had a monumental impact on design. Plastics, pop-art hues, and youth culture dominated accessories, followed by casual, earthy inspired fashions reinvented by hippies and expressed by the tote bag. Once utilitarian, next glamorous, the handbag was now a symbol of ‘anti-fashion’, coinciding with a time when rebellion and protest were the significant movements for women and minorities (Cox, 13). This uprising continued into the 1970s as the tote bag transformed into the satchel, another silhouette reflecting the feminist movement. Appearance Management and Perception: Luxury versus Social Appeal The 1980s and 1990s were a period of ‘look-at-me’ logos, brands, and designers (Cox, 15). Mass-production of designer merchandise began in the early 1980s, publicizing popular designers as icons and attracting young people with glamorous advertisements on billboards and in magazines. The rise of counterfeit products at this time sufficiently met the demand for these handbags, but weakened the dominance and individuality of the logo (Ehrman, 172). Yet, designer’s underlying intention was to sell a lifestyle (Teunissen, 18). The apparel and accessories were mere objects, whereas the brand was a form of existence. According to philosopher Gilles Lipovetsky, “Luxury has been the dream that embellishes life’s décor” (Teunissen, 16). Designer bags are now attainable to anyone, not just celebrities and the ultra wealthy. A notable adjustment made by many influential design houses has been their advertisements, centered on accessories. The brands promote their accessories over the apparel, the original image of the brand. Handbags are now “the stylistic mascots for designer culture” (Ehrman, 173). Fashion journalist Suzy Menkes commented in the International Herald Tribune that the most memorable aspects of Paris Fashion Week were the accessories, completely disregarding the apparel. Menkes contemplated, “Does this mean that accessories have become more important in fashion than the clothes themselves?” (Teunissen, 11). In terms of designer products, the status and quality of the handbag is the appeal over the functionality. The handbag plays a key performance in a woman’s everyday outfit, acting as a vital role when passersby envy her designer bag. The questions a designer handbag brings are vast and unusual, yet attention-grabbing. The intrinsic response is if a designer handbag is categorized by its value or the brand image.

Fashion Design professor at the ArtEZ Institute of the Arts in The Netherlands José Teunissen explains, “Luxury enables us to enjoy, to experience emotional and physical pleasure as a

necessary counterbalance to the logic and rational thought that permeates our culture” (16-17). Therefore, appearance is not purely an image, but also a routine in terms of emotions and social relationships. Appearance management encompasses all of the behavior involved in purchasing new items, visualizing the apparel or accessories in how they will modify the body (Kaiser, 5). Any attention, decisions, and actions involved in dressing and accessorizing are fulfilled envisioning the way one looks. On the opposite end of the spectrum, appearance perception is a way of structuring our social encounters. People observe others’ physical appearance, applying personal creativity and self-expression to stimulate the judgments against others (Kaiser, 16). Adornment Theory Rarely designed with pockets, women’s clothing lacks the ideal function of carrying small necessities. The rationale of the handbag eliminates this frustration. A positive appeal is that a woman can be any size, race, or age, and a handbag will always fit. The way in which a handbag conforms to a woman’s shape is truly a purposeful extension of the body (Cox, 8). The handbag has never been more important, a symbol of a woman’s mobility and personality. Held in the hand, carried on the arm, or rested on the shoulder, the handbag relies on the body and its movement and posture. It does not dress the body, but is an expansion of the form. Even more than apparel, handbags lack their representative image unless it is positioned on a figure.

The adornment theory describes appearance modification as a decorative process meant to flaunt, attract, and express a person’s identity (Kaiser, 16). The accessory is a survival kit, but also a representation of a woman’s personal style (Cox, 15). The motivation of this theory is supported by Dearborn (1918) when he developed methods in which apparel and accessories assist people psychologically and emotionally. Apparel and accessories protect individuals from “fears, including fear of ridicule, fear of being judged as inefficient, stupid, immodest, poor, lacking good taste or self-respect; fear of being unattractive” (Kaiser, 19). The handbag has transformed into a spectacle, a symbol of anxiety yet style, compulsion yet pleasure. It signifies a complex way to interpret a woman’s relationship with the world (Merkin, 1). This accessory has found its way to the top of the pyramid, leading as a fashion essential. Daphne Merkin highlighted in the New York Times that “women have become so aware of the possible implications [of a new handbag], that they respond counterphobicially by using any old bag.” For this reason, a conceivable prediction lurks in the future. Established as a functional piece, it is suspected that the handbag will reject luxury and restore a do-it-yourself culture (Ehrman, 173).

Conclusion The modern day handbag is associated strictly with women, a purely feminine accessory shielding her from the apprehension of society. The paragon of the fashion industry, the handbag informs society where a woman lives, who she is, and where she wants to be (Merkin, 2). From its sparse beginning to its growth as a basic accessory, the handbag has proliferated as an extension of a women’s silhouette. The handbag displays a woman’s sense of self, a vital map of her personality and characteristics. With the intention of self-satisfaction and awareness from others, the handbag has become a social mechanism and support figure in a woman’s lifestyle.

Works Cited

“About.” Jonathan Adler. Jonathan Adler, n.d. Web. 24 Jun. 2010. Cunningham, Patricia A., and Linda Welters. Twentieth-Century American Fashion. New York: Berg, 2005. Print. Monoky, Anne. “Summing Up the Season.” Harper’s Bazaar. June/July 2010: 93-94. Print. Rollins, Nita. “Greenway-Gaultier: Old Masters, Fashion Slaves.” Cinema Journal. Autumn 1995: 65-80. JSTOR. Web. 15 Jun. 2010. Tucker, Ross. “Seven For All Mankind Launches Adler Collection.” Women’s Wear Daily. Conde Nast Publications, Inc., 22 Apr. 2010. Web. 24 Jun. 2010.