I'm always so honored to hear from people wanting to know more about the (usually) vintage objects they come across. While the volume of inquiries can be a bit overwhelming sometimes, it's so interesting to see what's out there and I enjoy expanding my knowledge. For this installment of MM Mailbag, I'm looking at a few inquiries that I managed to partially solve. I wish I could have answered with 100% certainty, but at least I found a little information.
First up is a metal clutch containing a multi-use compact. The submitter lives in California and was cleaning out a house of a family member who had passed away when she stumbled across these items. At first glance I thought the compact was physically embedded in the clutch somehow, but they're separate.
The compact was easy to identify. It appears to be one by Mondaine, a compact manufacturer in the 1930s that was better known for their book-shaped compacts. Here's another example of it. (The interior has the same layout and products as the one that was sent to the Museum…I'm just too lazy to add photos.)
(image from worthpoint.com)
The metal clutch, however, was trickier. I couldn't make out the monogram or figure out what the "Mitzah" engraving was, but my best guess is that someone selected a clutch to put the Mondaine compact in, had it engraved and presented it as a gift – maybe for a birthday, or perhaps a wedding anniversary given the June date. Or maybe someone just had an old engraved metal case and decided to put the Mondaine in there to store it. They may be totally unrelated.
So I wasn't able to definitively conclude anything about the metal case. But it's certainly pretty and I wonder what the story was behind it.
Update, 6/4/2021: Some incredibly exciting news! Sarah Jane Downing (yes, THE Sarah Jane Downing who wrote Beauty and Cosmetics, 1550-1950), kindly reached out and provided some information on the mysterious "Mizpah" engraving on the metal clutch. Here's what she had to say:
"During the 19th century the Regency taste for sentimental jewellery developed into an obsession by the Victorian era and there were many pieces (in the UK at least) that bore the inscription 'Mizpah' or 'MIZPAH' which I suspect is the inscription on the clutch. This would substantiate your theory that it was sent as a gift to a loved one. Mizpah was a derivation from a Hebrew word meaning something akin to 'watchtower' which was used in jewellery to mean 'the Lord watch between me and thee', an innocent religious reference used to convey a far greater depth of meaning. This could be used in mourning jewellery to refer to the distance of a loved one sadly departed or as an early form of sweetheart gift for a loved one far away. It was also a wonderfully romantic way to exchange tokens with a secret or forbidden love without fear of accusation or discovery!"
How fascinating is that?! So now I really do wonder whether the clutch was intended as a wedding keepsake. Thank you so much, Sarah, for sharing this amazing bit of history!
Next up is an antique store find. It's a round metal compact featuring a peacock or pheasant perched on a cherry blossom tree. The characters on the front appeared to be Chinese and the submitter seemed to think it was someone's name. The only other marking it had was the word "lovely" (in English) on the powder puff in the compact (no photo of the puff was provided.)
I posted it on Instagram stories because I know a few very supportive Museum friends read and speak Chinese. I must give a huge thanks to Mimi of Makeupwithdrawal and Mina of Citrine's blog for kindly translating the characters for me! As it turns out, the first character means "beautiful" and the second means "peak" or "summit", so they believed the inscription is the name of the company that made the compact. Also, Mimi thought the compact dated to the 1960s or later, as simplified Chinese was standard by the '60s. How the English word "lovely" got on the powder puff I'm not sure, but perhaps it belonged to a different compact.
Unfortunately I don't know of any vintage Chinese compact companies or makeup brands – I'm only familiar with 21st century ones – but it's a pretty design even if we don't know exactly who made it.
Next up we have the opposite problem: the company was identified, but it's a strange find that I'm not entirely convinced is even a cosmetics object. It's made of velvet (unusual for a powder box) and paper (unusual for a compact). After a little digging I learned that it's a box by Tanfani & Bertarelli, who supplied papal jewels and religious accoutrements – basically they were the Vatican's official supplier of decorations starting in 1905. From the few documents I found online (ads and receipts) it appears Tanfani and Bertarelli were at the address listed on the box from at least the 1920s to the early 1960s. The company changed its name in 1967 so we know it dates prior to that. I asked the husband about the font of the company name since he's a graphic designer, but he indicated it's pretty generic so I'm not sure what decade it's from.
I'm questioning if the box was meant to be a compact given that I couldn't locate any examples of this company making cosmetics or toiletries – they seemed to produce papal jewelry/clothing and medals, so I'm wondering if this box held something else. Perhaps it held a gift or souvenir that the public could purchase at their shop. Especially since the writing on the box translates to "objects of devotion memories" whereas other boxes for official papal medals say "sacred objects" – maybe people could go in and buy a souvenir like a rosary or coin or something and this was the gift box. But it's possible it's a compact or was the gift box for a compact since souvenir compacts were popular back then, and the dimensions look similar to a compact, plus it opens the way a standard compact would. I'm not sure if there was an actual powder puff or if what's shown here is just a wad of cotton, or if there was any powder residue. Those details would help identify it as a powder box or compact with more certainty.
Let's take a quick break from compacts with an old lipstick. The submitter had the brand's name on the tip of his tongue but couldn't remember, so he asked me to take a crack at it. The silhouette of the case is rather common and used by a lot of brands so that's not much help, but there's an L on the cap and the fleur de lis motif would suggest a French brand. Based on other vintage lipsticks and ads, I eliminated Luxor, Luzier, Lucien Lelong, Lancome, Louis Phillipe and Lady Esther. I thought L'Oreal was a possibility based on this blush compact as it incorporates the fleur de lis, but the photos of the lipstick indicate it's a metal case, which means it most likely dates to before 1960. To my knowledge L'Oreal did not sell cosmetics (only haircare) in the U.S. until the late '60s.
My best guess is Lentheric, based on this mascara case which has a similar logo of an L and 3 fleur de lis symbols. This logo dates to the early '50s.
Lentheric appeared to have undergone a lot of packaging changes, so it's unclear when the lipstick in question was made. The company had an interesting fold-out case in the late 20s/early 30s, then a black case with a gold ribbon encircling it, then during the war they shifted to plastic. This one could be a variation from the mid 1930s to early 40s…that is, again, if it's actually Lentheric. I also asked the extremely knowledgeable expert at Cosmetics and Skin to take a peek and he thought it could be Lentheric as well. So that's what I came up with but I don't know for sure. Maybe the letter is actually a T and not an L, but that didn't align with any of the brands of the time (Tangee, Tattoo, Tussy, etc.)
Getting back to compacts, here's one someone dug up at an old bottle dump in Western Montana. This was another that at first glimpse I wasn't sure if it was a compact. The shape and depth seemed to indicate that it could be a snuff box.
The submitter thought the EA on the monogram might stand for Elizabeth Arden, but it didn't look like any of the ones from Elizabeth Arden, and as far as I know the company was never referred to as Elizabeth Arden Co. or E.A. Co. After poking around a bit I have come to believe it's the mark of the E.A. Bliss Co., which eventually became Napier Jewelry.
This particular mark, with a bee at the top, was used from about the 1890s through 1917, according to a listing at Ruby Lane. (Other listings indicate the mark was phased out in 1915…either way, this piece is much older than I originally thought!)
As they were a jewelry company that made tons of accessories – everything from hairpins to belt buckles – knowing the brand and the approximate dates didn't really help determine for sure whether it's a powder compact or snuff container. My hunch is that given the depth, relatively plain design and the lack of a mirror is that it is a snuff box. Ladies' powder containers tended to have more decorative details. For comparison's sake, here's a powder compact by the company from the same era. It is fairly plain, but it has a mirror and it's not as deep.
I really can't say for sure what it is, but we know it's over a century old, so it's a true antique. I'm also not certain about the materials. E.A. Bliss was essentially a fashion jewelry company (i.e., not high-end like Tiffany's) so there were a lot of gilt and silverplate accessories. So this one could be all brass or gold-plated brass. While I couldn't completely unravel the mystery of this object, I was pleased at figuring out who made it and the approximate dates. There's a whole book on the history of Napier too, so maybe there are photos or ads of snuff boxes and powder compacts.
The last one for today is one that I think is 99.9% solved. A very nice Museum supporter in Australia emailed to say that sometime in the late '90s she spotted a Stila compact in David Jones, a department store down under. As with my memory of a Stila mermaid, she thought maybe it was a figment of her imagination. "It was circular, with the rounded lid and relief design, and it was obviously for bronzer since it was a copper colour. This is the part that is driving me crazy: I swear it had a Stila girl on the lid! She closely resembled the girl on the Sun Gel tube (with the sun behind her) but the girl on the compact had a loose braid falling on her left shoulder instead of loose hair, and freckles. I have never seen this compact anywhere since. The only bronzer rounded relief compacts I've seen have the sun's rays or the little scattered stars. Did I imagine it?? I would so appreciate if you could please tell me if this compact exists!"
Fortunately I had good news for her. I'm not sure whether the compact in question was available in the U.S., but something nearly identical was sold in Asia and obviously in Australia where she spotted it. This one is very close to what she described, but the design does not appear to be in relief, just printed on the lid. So perhaps there was a slightly different product with the same Stila girl image but with a relief lid.
There were a couple of Stila compact designs with stars and one was relief and one was flat, so it's entirely possible the same thing happened with this design. As we know, just because an image can't be located online doesn't mean an object didn't exist. But the submitter replied to my findings and after thanking me profusely (always appreciated!) she confirmed that this was in fact the compact she had seen – she was quite certain that she was getting it slightly confused with the others that had a relief design.
And that wraps up today's edition of MM Mailbag. I have so many more inquiries to share…recently I tried to organize all of them into several email folders and noticed that the Museum has received over 320 inquiries since 2009! No wonder I feel like I can't keep up. But your queries are always welcome, so if you have an object or topic you'd like to know more about just send it my way. 🙂 And if anyone can help fully solve the makeup mysteries outlined in today's Mailbag, I'm all ears!
This post has been in the making for literally years. I finally conceded that I couldn't find a complete history of either Benefit's Glamourette compact, released in 2002, or the vintage compact it was based on, House of Platé's Trio-ette (ca. 1944-1947). But I did turn up a few nuggets of information, so figured I'd share the little bit that was readily available.
The House of Platé company was established in 1944 by Robert T. Plate in Detroit. From what I was able to piece together from various archives, it seems Plate was born in 1897 in Lima, Ohio and received a Bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan in 1923. Specializing in automobile design, his first job was draftsman for the Willys-Overland Company in Toledo. Beginning in 1932 Plate worked for General Motors, and in 1938 he was doing business as the Plate Manufacturing Company. In 1945 he trademarked the Trio-ette compact under Curly Lox Products. The biggest mystery for me is why Plate decided to market cosmetics. I'm assuming it was a side hustle to earn a little extra cash, or maybe he thought he could become the next Max Factor. (As a side note, Plate moved quite frequently throughout his life, bouncing around from Ohio to Michigan to New York to LA…if it's the same Robert T. Plate, I'm not sure whether he was trying to help his business take off across the country or moving for engineering jobs.)
The design of the compact was based on a "quaint Victorian rose cameo hand mirror" according to one ad. This one is reproduced in Roselyn Gerson's book Vintage and Vogue Ladies' Compacts (2nd edition).
It's really fascinating to see how a mechanical engineer who designed cars approached makeup. Compacts with powder, rouge and lipstick had existed for years, but few had the novelty and charm of the Trio-ette's design. (However, one can definitely tell an engineer also thought of the rather unimaginative House of Platé name. I guess Plate thought adding an accent over the "e" would make it sound vaguely French and therefore instantly appealing.) I'm so disappointed that I wasn't able to find patent drawings despite having the serial number. But maybe the trademark is different than patenting the actual design.
The name on the handle is such a sweet little detail.
(image from archive.org)
As the Trio-ette was conceived and launched during WWII, it was made of plastic, specifically tenite, instead of metal. Tenite apparently is the trade name for a cellulosic plastic created by Eastman Chemicals in 1929. (I wish I knew the difference between tenite, bakelite, and celluloid. Alas, I have no clue.) The Trio-ette was also refillable. This snippet from Drug and Cosmetic Industry shows the refill kit, but the really interesting thing about this blurb is that the journal was not falling for the Trio-ette's hype, claiming it was nothing more than a "gadget" and citing the more "streamlined" designs from established big-name brands. It's true: companies had been making triple compacts for a good 20 years by that point.
(image from archive.org)
Whether it was a novelty or a truly handy compact to carry, the Trio-ette seemed popular, or at least, it was readily available across the entire country in department stores as well as drugstores. Plate, though not a businessman by trade, understood the importance of advertising. In late 1945 he hired NY-based firm Norman D. Waters and Associates to oversee a national campaign they would launch early the following year. The Trio-ette allegedly reduced "bag fumbling" and "makeup fatigue".
As with lipstick mirrors, it was considered a social faux pas to be digging through one's purse to look for your makeup, mostly because it was a potential inconvenience for men. Ladies, with the Trio-ette he won't mind waiting for you to touch up since it won't take long at all – all your makeup is in one place so you won't waste his time searching for it. *eyeroll* These ads certainly paint a picture of gender norms, don't they?
There were other products from House of Platé, including a double-ended lipstick called the Duo-ette and the Vista, a lipstick with a built-in mirror (again, you can see my post on those.)
The Trio-ette came in a variety of colors as well as black ones with a pink rose or a rhinestone border. According to collector's guides, the most valuable colors are blue, pink and green. Personally, while I love all the shades, my most-wanted would be the rhinestone version followed by the green and mock tortoiseshell.
(image from pinterest)
(image from etsy.com)
The Trio-ette was quite short-lived. I'm not sure why exactly; it could be that Plate had run into a trademark issue with Curly Lox, or maybe after the war a return to metal compacts was all the rage and plastic fell out of favor. Or it could also be that a copycat was released around the same time. In the UK, a company named Jason released a nearly identical compact in late 1947. The only difference I can see besides the name is that the front of the compact is plain instead of bearing a sculpted rose.
(image from antiquesatlas.com)
According to the British Compact Collectors Society, the Jason Trio-ette was also known as a "three-in-one" and available in blue, green, ivory, black and tortoiseshell and could be ordered by mail from Targett Tools Ltd., London. It's not clear what, or even if, there was a relationship between House of Platé and Jason.
What's undeniable is the impact the Trio-ette had on future compact designs for the bigger brands. Volupté launched a compact with powder, lipstick handle and outer mirror in 1951 within its Demitasse line, and by 1953 it was advertised as the "Lollipop".
(images from etsyc.com)
Around 1952 Coty launched its Parisienne vanity, similar to the Volupté Lollipop, but with no mirror on the outside of the compact.
(images from etsy.com)
Perhaps another reason for the Trio-ette's brevity was simply that Plate couldn't compete with the more well-known brands, who in addition to name recognition, also had a far bigger advantage in terms of marketing savvy. Coty's Parisienne, for example, was somewhat misleadingly advertised as a "4-in-1" even though it actually only contained two products – the mirror and puff were considered the 3rd and 4th items. While some ads describe the design as a miniature hand mirror just like the Trio-ette, some others claim the Parisienne to be a "replica of a Cartier-designed original," which sounds way fancier than a Victorian hand mirror. Maybe if Plate had hired an agency with sneakier copy writers to advertise the compact differently, it might have had some longevity. As I noted earlier, he was educated as a mechanical engineer and not a businessman, so navigating the world of ad agencies and cosmetics marketing was a tricky prospect.
Anyway, House of Platé dropped the accent over the "e" and inexplicably shifted to making plastic toys by mid-1948, which continued through 1951.
(image from archive.org)
Unfortunately Plate was no longer running a legitimate business at that point. According to a 1951 FTC ruling, essentially the House of Plate was mailing people products they did not order and then demanding payment. It's a common scam that persists today in the form of "free trials" of various products. (A few years ago my own mother was the victim of one of these schemes in the form of a trying out a "free" face cream she was sent.) In 1951 the company was officially dissolved. Plate passed away on December 10, 1966 in Athens, Greece.
Now let's investigate Benefit's Glamourette. First, a little background. Founded as a San Francisco boutique called The Face Place by twin sisters Jane and Jean Ford in 1976, the company was renamed to Benefit in 1990 and launched at Henri Bendel in 1991. The cheeky names and retro vibe quickly made their products best-sellers across the country. In 1997 Benefit made its international debut and was acquired by LMVH in 1999. Using vintage mannequins as their mascots and creating packaging inspired by everything from '20s face powders to '70s lip glosses, Benefit was widely recognized as a fun brand that lightheartedly saluted beauty products of yesteryear.
(images from archive.vogue.com)
The company had firmly established its playful kitschy take on cosmetics by the early 2000s, but why they decided to draw on the Trio-ette specifically is unclear. None of their other products seemed to be literal remakes of a particular piece of makeup from earlier times. As with the Trio-ette, I wish I could hunt down the patent drawings for their version of the compact. I also wish I could find anyone who worked for Benefit during that time and see if they have any inside information as to what inspired the company to update the Trio-ette. We know that the Ford sisters were vintage collectors, so maybe one of them came across a Trio-ette and thought it was the perfect compact to use in their line, but why?
Let's compare the Glamourette with the Trio-ette. I would have done a smackdown because they are nearly identical but pitting a spry 20-year-old against a 70+ relic didn't seem like a fair fight. Obviously the formulas for the makeup itself were updated with newer ingredients.
The lace pattern on the inside of the lid is a nice nod to the pink floral pattern that appears on the insert included with the Trio-ette.
Instead of a rose on the lid Benefit used an abstract squiggle design. Also, I don't think the Glamourette was offered in other colors; to my knowledge, only black plastic was available.
The lipstick mechanism appears to be the same between the two compacts, but Divine's rosy brown hue is unmistakably '90s/early 2000s. Instead of the company's name on the cap there's a sticker saying "lipstick". I would have strongly preferred Benefit's name rather than a totally unnecessary sticker. I know people are dumb but it's pretty obvious it's lipstick…no need for a sticker.
Interestingly, the powder and blush are reversed from the Trio-ette, i.e. the blush is on the inner part of the compact and the powder is on the outer side. You could also swap out the powder for Fancy Lady cream highlighter.
The shade range for the face products had not improved since the 1940s. In fact, I suspect the Glamourette's was even worse. I'm not 100% sure, but it's my understanding from reviews that Fancy Lady didn't come in any other shades besides a pale ivory/champagne. And while I can't make out this tiny photo, it looks like Fascinating Finish powder, appallingly, also only came in one very light shade.* I know it was 2002, but I was pretty into makeup by then and I distinctly remember just about every line having at least 3 options for face powders and tinted moisturizers by then: light, medium and dark. It's absolutely inexcusable that Benefit didn't offer the bare minimum for face powder shades in the Glamourette compact.
(image from amazon)
Getting back to comparing the two, unlike the Trio-ette, the Glamourette came with a wristlet that could be used as a storage pouch. It's a very sheer piece of organza that I don't think would have been too helpful in terms of preventing wear and tear, but interesting to note.
Obviously the advertising for the Glamourette was similar to its 1940s counterpart. Both touted ease of use, refillable products and chic, vintage-inspired packaging. Bag fumbling was still presented as a tedious time waster for the new millennium's busy modern woman. Perhaps as a sort of snooty counterpoint to the golden age of trashy reality TV and super glossy, frosty makeup finishes that appealed more to teens than adults, the Glamourette was also described as "discreet" and something a "real lady" would carry, whatever that means.
The Glamourette was generally well-received. There are a few reviews on Makeupalley gushing over its cuteness and convenience while acknowledging it was a gimmick. One reviewer mentioned she would pass it on to her 11 year-old daughter in a few years, so Benefit helped rekindle the notion of makeup as a keepsake. While most MUA'ers felt the amount of product was a bit stingy for the price point, overall they loved the style and found the compact practical for a night out. Several reviews also pointed out the similarity to the black plastic packaging of Anna Sui's line.
Speaking of product amounts, I don't have the exact numbers for the Trio-ette, but if they were the same as the Glamourette, the latter was actually a better deal. The Trio-ette retailed for $5.50 in 1946, and according to an inflation calculator it would have cost about $51 in 2002 when the Glamourette was being sold. Glamourette's retail was $38 ($55 CAD and £32.50 in the UK). I also find it amusing that the reviews commented on how streamlined and tiny the compact was when Glamourette is actually a smidge larger than the Trio-ette, which was described as "bulky" in the Drug and Cosmetic Industry article. As we know, makeup packaging gradually got bigger over the years, so the Glamourette demonstrates how both design and consumer expectations changed.
Despite the amount of press and good reviews, the Glamourette was a limited edition item that did not return to the market after its brief two-year stint. Even against the backdrop of '90s/early aughts' nostalgia for mid-century styles (see also Too-Faced's Quickie Chronicles) maybe the Glamourette was too retro for most customers. I know when I laid eyes on it I thought it was cute but overly vintage-looking for my taste. It could also have been the type of products included. While there absolutely was and will always be a demand among those sticking to simple polished looks and makeup classics in neutral tones, in the early 2000s traditional lipstick, face powder and blush weren't the most wanted product categories among the younger crowd. Says one Makeupalley reviewer, "It has powder and blush which I never use to touch-up, so I'd never carry this with me. And it also has lipstick, and I'm not a fan of lipstick. If they replaced it with concealer, bronzer, and lipgloss, I'd sell my soul for it!!" Perhaps a tiny sifter of body glitter may also have been more palatable for a Y2k audience. Finally, the lack of shades for anyone whose skin was deeper than mayonnaise obviously eliminated a good portion of the market.
I still can't wrap my head around why Benefit chose this exact compact. I'm just spitballing here, but maybe it's precisely because House of Platé wasn't a well-known brand that's still sold today. Perhaps Benefit didn't want to risk running into copyright issues that may have occurred if they chose to release an updated version of, say, Revlon's Futurama cases. The patents for those designs may have expired, but the companies are still around and significantly larger than Benefit was – although it was owned by LMVH by that point, Benefit's rivals had the potential to take legal action if the company tried to update an iconic product from their archives.
Even though there's a 55 year age gap between the Trio-ette and the Glamourette, their advertising and reception were remarkably similar. So much had changed between 1947 and 2002, yet the design appealed to totally different audiences. As Drug and Cosmetic Industry noted with the Trio-ette, people love a novelty product even if the underlying concept – in this instance, having three makeup products in one attention-getting case – has been done before. It got me thinking about how a third iteration of the compact would be marketed and received today. The small sizes and refills would be attractive to today's makeup consumers, but the compact would have to be made out of sustainable packaging; plastic won't play well. Maybe the products could be even smaller to make space for brushes rather than puffs. There would probably have to be some kind of emphasis on "wellness" and "self-care" or at the very least, "clean" (sigh), vegan and ethically-sourced ingredients. Most importantly, the shades would need to accommodate all skintones. One parting thought: I'd also be curious to see what would happen if a company released it not today but 55 years after the Glamourette. I wonder how makeup customers in 2057 would react.
What do you think of the designs of these compacts? Do you have a preference for one or the other? And do you like having your makeup all in one place? I could see using something like this for touch-ups, but it would still fall short. Until a product is developed that combines concealer, powder, blotting sheets and lip color all in one, I'm destined to dig around in my bag.
*There was an article in Global Cosmetic Industry from 2002 that lists the following colors for Glamourette blush and lipstick refills. It doesn't make any mention of multiple shades being available for the highlighter and powder. "Rouges in Divine, Fickle and Coy, Fascinating Finish Translucent Powder and Fancy Lady Highlighting Creme are priced at $11.00 each. The line offers Lip shades priced at $9.00 each in Keen (champagne pearl), Vain (vibrant red), Divine (rich plum), Swell (dusty rose), Prim (pink-cocoa pearl), and Coy (mocha apricot) varieties." I cannot for the life of me locate the article now but I know it existed!
I am forever grateful for those who approach me with makeup they no longer want or that they feel belongs in the Museum. While 2020 was another hellish year for me personally and the Museum, as well as basically the whole world, I believe a record number of donations were received. Here's a brief overview of what was graciously bestowed upon the Museum this year.
First up is a mint condition Max Factor gift set. A very nice woman in Canada donated it, noting that it was a birthday present from her father to her mother one year. According to newspaper ads it dates to about 1948. I love the suggested use for the box lids as "party trays"!
Next up is a slew of awesome ads and postcards from the '80s and '90s, donated by an Instagram buddy from Argentina. Such a sweet note too!
This next one is super interesting. Normally the Museum does not include hair products, but the donor is a fellow collector and very knowledgeable about Russian culture, having lived in Moscow for several years. This vintage hair dye was made in East Germany and exported to the USSR.
Next up are some lovely Elizabeth Arden objects. These were donated by a woman in California whose mother worked at the Elizabeth Arden counter at a department store. Here we have the Napoleonic compact which was introduced around 1953, Faint Blush, the famous Ardena patter, and some Color Veil (powder blush) refills.
Near as I can figure, the Faint Blush was a sort of foundation primer, but it seems like it could also be worn alone. I love the plastic pink rose packaging, as it's very much of its era (ca. 1963-1973).
I think the patter and the Faint Blush are my favorites from this bunch.
Then, another very kind Instagram friend and fellow collector sent a huge lot of vintage powder boxes and compacts. The Museum did not have any of these…some I hadn't even heard of and some I had only admired them from afar. I just about died when I opened the package! Clockwise from top left: a 1930s eyeshadow by a company called Quinlan, a 1920s Harriet Hubbard Ayer Luxuria face powder, a powder dispenser by Cameo (probably from around the '30s), a '20s Marcelle compact tin, an extremely rare Red Feather Rouge tin (ca. 1919), an unmarked lipstick and floral powder tin, a Princess Pat compact from about 1925, a Yardley English Lavender tin (ca. 1930s) and a Fleur de Glorie face powder compact (ca. 1923-1926). In the middle is an amazing pink plastic 1940s Mountain Heather face powder case, a line manufactured by Daggett and Ramsdell.
I love each and every piece, but my favorites are the eyeshadow compact, and an adorable Mondaine book compact (with the original box!) that was also included. Bookworm that I am, I want a whole "library" of these designs.
Not all of the donations were vintage. I was so happy to have received these two nail polishes from another IG friend. They were the result of a 2016 collaboration between Cirque Colors and the Met in honor of the latter's Manus x Machina exhibition.
I'm sure you remember the kindness of makeup artist Amelia Durazzo-Cintron, who shared her memories of working for Kevyn Aucoin back in July. For some reason she felt the need to thank ME instead, and did so by donating a really cool Black Swan makeup kit. How nice is her note?!
Another Instagram friend and lipstick fanatic has been making lipstick swatch books. These are kind of a new trend and in my opinion, far easier than taking photos of your lipsticks. Once again a sweet note was enclosed.
This lipstick swatch book is particularly lovely for its sprinkling of cosmetics trivia and important dates. (It also reminds me that I never started working on my daily makeup history calendar, sigh.) If you want one of your own you can purchase it here.
And that wraps up MM donations in 2020! I'm so incredibly grateful for these kind souls generously helping to build the collection. And while physical objects are amazing, it's the notes and messages that come with them that mean the most. :) Also, if you have a makeup object you think is historically significant, an object from the Curator's wishlist, or anything else you'd like to give, please check out the Museum's support page. I'm always looking for old fashion/women's magazines too, along with ads and brochures and such…I can never have too much paper memorabilia!
Which one of these is your favorite? What's the best gift you've ever received?
I had the great fortune of getting in touch with Andra Behrendt, curator of the Perfume Passage museum. She's a member of the International Perfume Bottle Association and sends out a quarterly eNews for their Compacts & Vanity Items Specialty group. The eNews focuses on compacts and related vanity items that are a part of the IPBA. She also runs Lady A Antiques, a shop she established in 1993. Andra kindly agreed to an interview, which I am extremely grateful for since not only has it been ages since I've interviewed anyone but more importantly, she has over 35 years worth of beauty history knowledge and experience to share. Enjoy!
Makeup Museum: How long have you been in the antique business?
Andra: I have been an antique dealer since 1993 as Lady A Antiques. As a dealer I specialize in celluloid covered boxes and albums from the 1900s, jewelry from Victorian through Deco, German bathing beauties from the 1920s and ladies accessory items such as compacts, purses, perfumes, hatpins, powders and puffs. I've had a website since 1997 and display at antique shows throughout the Midwest. I admit I don't update the website as often as I used to as I try to save the more unusual items for the shows. I have been a collector since I was a teenager, my aunt collected jewelry and she introduced me to antiques and collecting.
MM: How and why did you end up focusing on perfume and vanity items?
A: I gravitated toward enamel items and starting finding compacts and purses for my inventory. Then as my inventory of these items grew, I started meeting more collectors of these items at the antique shows. Now I specialize in the ladies vanity items!
MM: How did you get involved with the IPBA?
A: In the mid 1990s, before the internet, if you were interested in a special category of collecting, you joined a collectors club! I think at one time I belonged to a collector club for hatpins, combs, jewelry, purses, plastics, compacts and of course perfumes. That's how people met other collectors and shared their knowledge. I love to learn about the items that interest me and collectors are very generous in sharing their knowledge. The International Perfume Bottle Association has always been one of the more professional collectors club with a board of directors, annual convention, newsletters, etc. They believe in educating collectors about the history of the items we love so much. And many perfume collectors also collect related vintage vanity items such as compacts, purses, powders and lipsticks. The IPBA has always included compacts and related vanity items in addition to perfumes.
MM: Tell me about your experience as curator at Perfume Passage. What exactly do you do in your curatorial role?
A: I met the founders of Perfume Passage at one of the IPBA conventions about 10 years ago. When the museum started gathering information about compacts and vanity items to eventually display at the museum, I began evaluating the items they accumulated, providing information on their history, etc. When the museum was ready to begin installing displays, I started assisting with the showcases in the galleries and drugstore displays, focusing on the compacts, vintage makeup items and vanity items. I've been documenting the museum's collections as we are developing an online database for public use. I also assist with writing articles for the museum's website and eNews. As we just opened in May 2019, there are a lot of projects in the works!
MM: What are some of your favorite compacts/lipsticks/other makeup items and why?
A: I've always loved enameled items and the Art Deco time period. So my favorite compacts are the detailed enameled compacts from the 1920s and 1930s. I also like the whimsical figural compacts as they tell such an interesting story.
MM: What is your favorite era for makeup and why?
A: I'm drawn to the 1920s as it was an era of growth and change for women. There was a reason for compacts and makeup for women during this time and it was evident in the products that were produced. Looking back at some of the makeup items, it's almost humorous to think that "ladies really used" some of these products!
MM: Why do you think makeup history is important and worthy of preservation and museum display?
A: Compacts, purses, perfumes, powders and all vanity items were significant of their time periods and their manufacture was influenced by cultural and social trends. Just like most items that we collect today, there was a reason for their use and need. And these initial reasons don't always exist today, but are part of our history. With makeup, compacts and perfumes, people still use them and the reasons for using these products are mostly the same, but the products are different. But it's those early products that evolved into what is being used today and I don't think that should be forgotten. And it's a fascinating history if people take the time to learn about it. Perfume Passage and other related museums, such as yours, provide people with the opportunity to learn about this history as well as view wonderful items that didn't start out as collectible, but certainly are now!
MM: Any thoughts on current makeup/beauty culture? The Makeup Museum focuses on contemporary cosmetics, artist collaborations, etc. in addition to vintage objects, so I'd love to have your insight on what makeup and trends are out there now!
A: That's a very interesting question. I admit that I've really never worn makeup, I use just a little blush as my skin is so pale! I don't wear perfumes either. So it is kind of funny that I'm so in love with the history and products that are vanity related. And I honestly don't follow the contemporary cosmetic industry at all, just what I see on TV or read in magazines.
MM: Do you have any tips for compact collectors?
A: As with any item that we collect, buy what interests you. And while condition is usually the top priority for me, I also like the unusual. And before the internet, when many collectibles could only be found at shops, shows or auctions, collectors seem to buy for quantity. The internet has opened a whole new world for collectors, allowing us to see and purchase items that we would often never have a chance to find. So items that were considered "rare" or "one of a kind" can be found online. So I think collectors have more choices on what to collect or perhaps what to focus their collections on. While many compact collectors have a little bit of everything in their collections, you'd be surprised how many collectors focus on just Deco, or enamels, or figurals.
MM: Can you share some of your favorite compacts?
A: Sure! Here's a 1920s F&B sterling floral/scenic enamel tango compact.
A 1930s Evans mesh purse with an ornate beaded/pearl/enamel compact lid:
A 1930s green floral enamel double compact with tango lipstick:
A 1958 Chicago White Sox compact. Back then, Tuesday's was ladies day at the ballpark and the owner of the team had a give-a-way of this compact! The other teams that I know of that had a similar promotion with compacts were the Los Angeles Dodgers, Baltimore Orioles and New York Giants.
Finally, a 1920s celluloid lady compact, the top "dress" slides and there's a mirror and powder puff inside.
(all images provided by Andra Behrendt)
Andra, thank you so much for taking the time to answer the Makeup Museum's questions and for your incredibly valuable insight! I encourage everyone to check out the Perfume Passage website and sign up for their newsletter. If you're in the Chicago area and can visit in person, so much the better. And if you're a collector, be sure to add Lady A Antiques to your shopping list!
I'm still a bit wiped out from the spring exhibition and it's been ages since I've shared some inquiries that made their way in the ol' Makeup Museum Mailbag, so here's a quick review of some questions that have been sent my way.
First up is this lovely compact with a six-pointed star in blue rhinestones – perhaps a Star of David? – and matching lipstick, submitted from a reader in Australia. Her grandmother's brother had brought it back to her grandmother during the second World War. Without any logo or brand markings I can't pinpoint the company that made it, and after looking online and through all my collector's guides I can say I've never seen a vintage compact with this design. Obviously it was made in France, but I'm not quite as familiar with objects across the pond, as it were. It's a beautiful set and I wonder whether it has any wartime or Holocaust significance.
The second inquiry I have to share today was another head-scratcher. Someone had messaged me on Facebook (which I set up earlier this year but rarely use) asking about this little lady. It's a Revlon Couturine lipstick, but her identity remains a mystery.
As I've noted previously, allegedly the Couturines were supposed to be modeled after actresses and other purveyors of style. But this one doesn't seem to match any of the ones that have been identified. The only other actress whose name I've seen mentioned is Shirley MacLaine but it's not her either, according to this photo.
(image from worthpoint.com)
Finally, I received an inquiry from someone asking for proof that suffragettes wore lipstick as a symbol of emancipation. I swiftly directed this person Lucy Jane Santos's excellent article outlining how there really is no solid evidence that the ladies fighting for equality in the early 1900s regularly wore lipstick to rallies, or at least, to the big one in 1912. As she outlines in her article, it appears to be a persistent myth that most likely began circulating in the '90s both in Jessica Pallingston's book and Kate de Castelbajac's The Face of the Century: 100 Years of Makeup and Style (1995). Just for kicks and giggles I took a peek at newspaper archives (I'm finding they're just as fun and informative as magazines) and dug up a couple of interviews with British suffrage leader Emmeline Pankhurst and a profile of her daughter Sylvia. Their views on makeup are positively fascinating! As it turns out, Emmeline had no moral issue with cosmetics, she just didn't find a made-up face aesthetically pleasing: "Don’t think I am actually censoring the young girls nowadays…the very brief skirts and the overdone makeup are by no means an indication of loose morals. They are, in often rather a pitiful way, an indication of groping toward greater freedom and they are still more a groping towards beauty…the impulse to make one's self look as well as possible is a perfectly sound impulse. It has its root in self-respect. It is quite wrong to think that the use of short skirts and rouge are based on any violent desire to attract the opposite sex. The use of these aids [is] based on the legitimate desire to look one’s best. A woman dresses more for other women than for men. But the too-red lips and the extremely short skirt – I must confess that I dislike them. I dislike them because so few girls look well thus arrayed, and because older women, when thus arrayed, usually look rather ridiculous. But let me point out one fine fact behind all this makeup. It is not added with any idea of deception. The woman today who powders and paints does it frankly, often in public without one iota of hypocrisy. And this, I think, is a splendid gain.” (emphasis mine)
Her daughter, Sylvia, on the other hand, did not approve of makeup at all. "I still don't approve of lipstick and makeup. It's horribly ugly, destroys the value of the face. I've never used it, never shall." Her obituary also states that she thought makeup and lipstick were "tomfooleries".
I did also see this 1910 ad from Selfridge's. This is what I believe to be the only reference to suffragettes wearing lipstick. I'm wondering if this is part of how the myth was generated, since even with this ad there doesn't seem to be any concrete proof that suffragettes wore lipstick. Selfridge's advertised and sold it; whether it was widely worn by suffragettes is still up for debate in my very humble opinion.
(image from @selfridges)
If you have any additional information about the things I've shared today, please let me know! Which one do you find most interesting?
Compacts and Cosmetics: Beauty from Victorian Times to the Present Day by Madeleine Marsh provides a brief history of both the U.K. and U.S. beauty industries from the 19th century through today. Sorted roughly by decade, the book features an abundance of photos depicting items from each period. It's an accessible, easy read that both beauty culture newbies and long-time fans alike would enjoy.
While I enjoyed the first chapter on beauty rituals in ancient Egypt and Greece, I thought the immense chronological jump from this period to Chapter Two (covering Victorian times) was a bit awkward. From there, however, the narrative flows nicely. Marsh sprinkles the text with choice anecdotes, noting the beginnings
of such familiar beauty brands such as Pond's, Maybelline and
U.K.-based Boots. She also includes some very helpful guidelines to
buying vintage makeup items in the appendix.
Where the author really shines, however, is in explaining how makeup went from being firmly in the realm of prostitutes/actresses in the 1880s to the huge business we know today. She does this by weaving in the broad cultural and political influences that affected how women used cosmetics as well as the type and packaging of the products themselves. For example, she traces how the rise of the film industry, which made actresses "more socially acceptable", flapper culture, and World War I all contributed to beauty's breakthrough as a regular part of most women's daily routines. By the 1930s, "the question was no longer whether to wear make-up at all, but what to choose from an ever-expanding range of products….women's magazines [started] featuring dedicated beauty columns providing tips and advice, whilst salons were offering an endless variety of services." (p. 88). And with the flurry of products introduced during these decades, packaging came to the fore. The rest of the chapters, each covering a decade from the 1940s through the aughts, similarly place beauty trends and products within a general cultural context, with plenty of pictures along the way. Most of these photos show items from Marsh's personal collection. Here are some of my favorites.
Art Deco compacts:
An Art Deco palette – what struck me about this is the fact that it includes products for lips, cheeks and eyes. I usually associate any vintage cosmetics with powder compacts, but this has a variety of products, similar to today's palettes.
Boots Christmas ad:
Compacts from the '40s and '50s – love the rotary telephone.
Getting psychedelic with Avon lipsticks and Mary Quant crayons from the late '60s. Groovy, man.
Bottom line: this is one of the most satisfying tomes on beauty history available, on par with Kathy Peiss's Hope in a Jar. Definitely one to buy!