Corset Discourse and Enola Holmes

Alternative Title: Yes, I'm going to write a whole essay about a series of Tweets that annoyed me and I'm sorry that I'm like this

You know that feeling when one book that you adored but that you were convinced nobody else knew about finally gets some attention? That’s how I felt watching the adaptation of Enola Holmes. The movie follows Enola, Sherlock’s precocious younger sister, who goes on the run after her mother disappears and her older brother Mycroft tries to send her to a finishing school. It’s a whimsical, fun adventure that’s beautifully shot and has more than a few scenes that are perfect cottagecore fuel, including a training montage with Helena Bonham Carter.

Imagine my surprise when I checked the Internet and saw that people were mad at this movie because of one throwaway line that Millie Bobby Brown’s character says: “The corset: a symbol of repression to those who are forced to wear it.” “When will this ‘feminist’ writing trope go away…” one Twitter user complained, although I also saw similar complaints on Instagram and 4chan.

Wait, What Is Corset Discourse?

So what is this much-hated “feminist writing trope”? In many period pieces, a historical female character’s hatred of her underwear is used as shorthand to show that she is a liberated feminist unlike other women of her time. A lot of actresses contribute to this by making a point to complain about how uncomfortable a corset was during filming (Keira Knightley famously said corsets made women seem less intelligent than they were).

This trope is a fairly lazy way of showing that a woman is “liberated” instead of taking the time to actually develop a feminist character. The way it’s usually implemented also gives no thought to historical accuracy. While some women did hate corsets, most just saw them as natural parts of their wardrobe, the same way today some women hate bras while others don’t mind wearing them. Writers and directors will also write characters complaining about corsets in time periods when they weren’t even worn (for future reference, any character complaining about corsets in an 18th century film is a time traveler, because shapewear at the time were called stays).

So why has this trope been so popular? Lazy writing is one piece, superiority is another. As historical costumer Karolina Zebrowska puts it in her Youtube video, “because we love feeling superior over previous eras.” Inserting a line about a character hating corsets is a tongue-in-cheek way for writers to point out how far we’ve come in our treatment of women and abandonment of dangerous beauty standards.

The backlash to this trope probably peaked in 2017 when Emma Watson famously refused to wear a corset for Beauty & the Beast, citing its “impossible idea of female beauty.” Scholars of historical costuming (and anyone with eyes) pointed out that this was a big reason why the dress from that movie looked so bad. Corsets were a necessary undergarment and piece of shapewear at the time, especially for a formal event. Just like I wouldn’t be caught dead wearing a fancy cocktail dress without a bra and Spanx, no woman of the time period Beauty & the Beast was supposed to represent would be caught dead at a formal ball without a corset.

That film helped amplify a conversation started by scholars of fashion history dispelling the myths around corsets. Everyone from theatre actresses to historical costumers talked about the ways free movement is still possible with a corset. Logically, this makes sense considering that working class women were wearing corsets as well and still were able to perform hard labor (tightlacing was only done by extremely wealthy women because they were the only ones who could afford to be permanently short of breath). Others pointed out that even today, some people wear corsets because they are medically necessary for treating conditions including scoliosis. Finally, scholars pointed out that many critiques of corsets as silly and restrictive started from men. Male cartoonists and writers opined about the dangers of corsets and started rumors that women would remove ribs for the sake of smaller waists and corset sizes in order to make women look frivolous and illogical.

In certain Internet circles, the pendulum has swung so far that any criticism of corsets, whether from fictional characters or real people, is immediately dismissed as silly or tired. “You’re just parroting the lines of Victorian-era neckbeards,” some may say.

Dismissing any critique of corsets as inherently misogynistic ignores that however long there were corsets, there were some women that resented wearing them. Otherwise, there would not have been MULTIPLE movements against stays and corsets. One directly referenced in the movie is the Victorian Dress Reform movement, which was a movement by middle-class feminists advocating for a more natural silhouette by replacing corsets and hoop skirts with garments such as emancipation waists. This is the movement that brought us bloomers, by the way. Of course, these women were just a minority at the time and widely ridiculed by men and other women. But, it’s ridiculous to say “when you criticize corsets you’re letting the men win” when feminists at the time criticized corsets as well!

Where Does Enola Holmes Stand on Corsets, After All?

But where does the movie Enola Holmes fall on the spectrum of corset discourse? Is Enola an ahistorically feminist character that hates corsets for no reason? Were the writers so lazy that they only way they could show that she’s feminist was by having her hate corsets like every character in a period piece ever?

Let’s analyze this line in the context of Enola Holmes’ character! (Mild spoilers ahead.) Enola is raised by her radical feminist mother. How radical? The woman spends her free time making bombs in the name of women’s suffrage and is a member of the aforementioned Dress Reform movement, or at least a sympathizer. She raises her daughter to read Locke, train jiujitsu and run around like a wild animal, so extensive corset-wearing or tight-lacing was not a huge part of Enola’s childhood. We know that Enola doesn’t fit the standards of neat dress of the time because the first thing her brother Mycroft remarks on when he comes back is her disheveled condition. Her first encounter with modern standards of dress happens during a meeting with a finishing school headmistress who slaps her when she complains about “preposterous clothing”. Of course Enola would think corsets are repressive when her primary encounters with them were in abusive, traumatic situations.

However, the movie immediately subverts the idea that corsets are exclusively repressive. Enola’s next line is, “but for me, who chooses to wear it, the bust enhancer and the hip regulators will hide the fortune my mother has given me.” Throughout the whole movie, Enola uses women’s clothing (and male ignorance of it) to achieve her goals. Whether it’s hiding from Mycroft because he doesn’t think to look for an elegant young lady instead of a semi-feral teenager (turns out Enola doesn’t mind dressing up when she is not being forced to do so by an absent, pompous brother) or dressing up in widow’s clothing to get access to a suspect or even stopping a knife attack, Enola’s corset usage eventually plays an important role in the film. She’s also able to fight in the corset, subverting expectations about what a woman can or cannot do in one. Although Enola is always more comfortable in men’s clothing (a running gag is that she keeps offering passersby five pounds if they’ll switch clothing with her), she learns to use stereotypes about women and women’s clothing to her advantage.

Corset Discourse and Reclaiming Femininity: The Hot Take

 I didn’t publish this essay just because I’m mad about a critique of a movie that I like (if that was it, I’d be petty enough to write it but not petty enough to publish it). Instead, my roasting hot take is that corset discourse and these criticisms of Enola Holmes are part of a larger wave of Internet feminism that’s aimed at reclaiming typically feminine things from the derisive dumpster heap they’ve been consigned to. Many feminists are proclaiming that just because men think certain things are stupid (ie. corsets, the Twilight Saga) does not mean they are meaningless to the women who enjoy them or entirely without merit.

I don’t have an issue with this reclamation per se, because it is true that the things women enjoy, especially teenage girls, are often dismissed without cause. However, just because many criticisms of something are done in bad faith, that does not mean that there aren’t some criticisms that have merit, and I’ve noticed online discourse tends to flatten any critique once they decide something is feminist, actually. To continue my Twilight example, after Midnight Sun was announced, tons of people wrote about how Twilight was important and even feminist due to the large role it played in the lives of teenage girls. Of course, we can only consider Twilight a feminist masterpiece if we ignore all of its racist, misogynist, and heteronormative aspects (immortal vampires waiting until the sacrament of marriage to have sex? How Mormon). Women can like things that are not feminist, and that’s okay.

I saw the annoyance with Enola’s initial dismissal of corsets as part of this trend of knee-jerk defending typically feminine things (important note: while I linked to a bunch of costumers earlier in this piece, I haven’t seen them jump on this film, it’s mostly been random Internet people). I’ve also noticed that lately, commentators tend to hate on the tomboy character. “Give me a strong girl that can also be feminine,” goes the common refrain. Why the backlash? Again, lazy writing. Lots of male writers use a female character’s physical strength and masculine attributes (not too masculine to the point that she’s unsexy, of course) to show that she is “strong” because girly stuff equals weakness in lieu of writing an actually well-rounded female character. But, that doesn’t mean tomboy characters aren’t necessary or important. For AFAB people like myself who grew up alienated from typical expectations of femininity, the tomboy characters in books or movies were a godsend. When I read about girls who complained about having to keep their stockings clean or wear dresses, I felt less abnormal for hating the girly stuff I was expected to perform. That’s part of why I’m so defensive of criticisms of Enola that I perceive as unfair—when I first read the books, I found a kindred spirit in her character, someone who chafed against the gender expectations placed on her. It saddens me that a subsection of Internet discourse’s immediate reaction to a person or character’s resentment of the gender roles they are expected to play is blaming them for hating their gender, instead of examining why the gender roles are so narrow that the chafe in the first place.

I don’t want someone to read this and think that I’m trying to say corsets are bad or cancel my favorite costuming YouTubers, because I adore them and I actually enjoyed learning about the actual history behind corsets. I think corset discourse online is a niche topic, but offers an insight into the modern feminist trend of reclaiming femininity. I think it’s valid that a growing number of women are refusing to pick between enjoying feminine things and being considered intelligent and competent, because on no planet should those be mutually exclusive. However, I think it’s worth examining who gets thrown under the bus if our main interpretation of “feminism” is reclaiming femininity, and who gets shut out when this is not allowed to be questioned. I also wonder about the actual subversiveness of “reclaiming” something one was expected to do anyway, but that’s an essay for another day.

As for Enola Holmes and the Case of the Corset-Related Cancellation? I’m hoping that from now on, people will at least make an effort to listen to the very next line before taking to Twitter to cancel a movie character.