A Killer Green Gown
 |
| These represent green shades popular in fashion. They are not toxic pigments |
This is the second excerpt from Alison Matthews Davis” book, Fashion Victims. The first excerpt, 5/28/16, recounted the
health risks posed by the long skirts worn by fashionable women. The skirts
dragged on the ground, through the filthy streets of large cities and, of
course, were then worn within the household, bringing with them all manner of
pathogenic ( or at least, undesirable ) elements.
 |
| Fashion Vistims - The Dangers of Dress Past and Present, Aloson Matthes David, Bloomsbury Publishing, 2015 |
The topic I present now is of a pigment popular in the
1800’s which, while perceived as very attractive, was also very, very
toxic. The first dyes were made from
natural materials: madder root, cochineal exoskeletons, mollusk shells. While many colors could be produced from
recipes using natural elements, there were some that were less than satisfactory. One of these colors was green. Green was produced as a compound color, that
is the combination of two colors, yellow and blue. Perhaps you have seen old textiles where the blue component has
faded and the “green” has become a
poor example of its former self. Chemists were constantly trying to introduce new hues for the new
technology of aniline dye production. Better Living Through Chemistry as one
future chemical company would motto a century later.
In 1778 Carl Wilhelm Scheele published his work on a green
pigment he created by mixing potassium and white arsenic with a solution of
copper vitriol (a sulfate of copper).
Yes, you read correctly..arsenic. In 1814 a more saturated
green hue was synthesized from copper acetarsenite and called by various
titles. It was widely used for fabrics,
children’s toys and even candies. It
was also produced as a pigment in oil paints.
Women were tired of the dull-colored clothing that was
commonly worn and the introduction of
fresh green hues was most welcome.
The dye was used not only in fabric production but also in accessories
such as shoes, and most widely in artificial floral wreaths of fruits and
foliage worn as hair adornments and
large broaches.
It had been noted for some time that workers who produced
the artificial foliage suffered from debilitating ulcerations on their faces
arms and legs. Rashes appeared along
the necklines of women wearing green gowns and there were reports of children dying from eating ( or
trying to eat) artificial fruits which appeared in baskets set upon tables in
Victorian parlors.
Efforts were made to assuage the fears that soon were voiced
by consumers. Apparently, “this is not
arsenical green” became a disclaimer, but was it, or was it not? Eventually by the 1870’s, other green
pigments replaced the copper arsenic compounds.
Why would anyone purchase, much less wear, something that
was so very dangerous? It was well
known that arsenic was used as a pesticide and that it was toxic if
ingested. Although there were many
fallacious theories concerning disease
and cures, surely, there should have been some heed paid to those physicians
and chemists who warned of the danger.
Thinking of today’s times, there are still those who ignore
the warnings that appear on tobacco products.
The question would be, is it worth being stylish?
No comments:
Post a Comment