Chapter Two
The Rise of the Shopping Experience 1920-1939
Introduction
This chapter explains the rise of the shopping experience in Liverpool from 1920 to 1939. The conclusion drawn from this chapter will help to better understand the changes made to the retail sector in Liverpool and how such activity brought about a period of regeneration. The scholarship used for this chapter varied, with Charlotte Wildman’s book Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939 offering analysis into the changes that Liverpool as a city made in achieving the improvements made in retailing. Despite this, there are gaps in the academic literature in areas such as using Liverpool’s manufacturing to explain the rise in mass production that benefitted consumerism in the city. The debates put forward by Todd examine how more women joined the workforce and acquired economic autonomy to spend their money on items that were once considered luxuries. However, with this increase in consumer spending, Ayers provides statistics to support the argument that consumerism impacted the home dressmaker’s decline.
Scholarly debate from Richards show that the rise of Hollywood glamour experienced in cinemas was influential in shoppers’ consumer purchases in the interwar era. Primary sources from newspapers help to support the argument that retail executives were using clever marketing techniques to draw customers to their stores. With department stores used as leisure sites by showcasing new fashions through parades, a view supported by Todd, and shows that stores were not just used as shopping areas but as places of leisure where potential customers did not necessarily have to make a purchase. However, although the rise of consumerism appears glamorous on the surface Gittus and Houlbrook argued that women felt that they had no choice but to keep up with consumer culture. Although the rise of the shopping experience can be seen as a positive step that boosted the economy and employment, according to Benjamin it impacted negatively on street traders with Liverpool Council wanting to portray the city centre positively and remove those traders who made the city centre look run down. The discussions put forward in this chapter examine the positives and negatives associated with the rise of the shopping experience in interwar Liverpool and how such changes impacted the consumer.
Improvements to the retail trade post World War I
In the interwar period, Liverpool found alternative ways to bring stability to the city. One way of achieving this was through consumerism. Scott and Walker state that consumerism achieved on a large scale benefitted society as a whole, regardless of class.[1] Through mass production, the luxuries that only the middle and upper classes could afford would become accessible to every shopper, including the working classes. The financial havoc of World War I is a primary reason why there was a transformation in retail marketing. However, the benefits of the technological advancements that were made in manufacturing products saw factories increase their production like never before. The reason for such improvements can be found in the Industrial Revolution which helped to enhance the manufacturing process through improvements in areas such as machinery, allowing garments to be made quicker. This cost-cutting exercise lowered the costs for retail stores, which could then be passed down to the consumer, making garments inexpensive and available to a broad consumer base. As a result of the higher standards in production retailers were able to focus their marketing strategies on the working-class shopper by providing cheaper items in larger quantities.[2] With the increase in production methods it was a golden opportunity for department stores to capitalise on the societal changes that were taking place in Liverpool after World War I.
Societal and Cultural Changes within the Shopping Experience 1920-1939
Transformations in consumer attitudes took place after World War I, with the working class seeking to replicate the lifestyles of the wealthy. The use of advertising and the media was also a factor in promoting the theory that purchasing luxury items was indicative of wealth and status.[3] The outcome of this change in attitudes towards retailing amongst the working class allowed department stores to offer an increase in products that would provide for the increase in demand. The empowerment of women and the increase of some equal opportunities within society were also important in the increased demand for luxury products.
Within Todd’s research, it is evident that some women were able to gain financial independence by entering the workforce. By finding employment, they could then afford goods that were deemed only for the wealthy.[4] Gurney agrees with Todd’s analysis and suggests that the changes in societal norms and the aspirations of some women impacted the rise of the purchasing of luxury goods regardless of class.[5] Department stores played an important role here as they were able to offer a variety of products under one roof. The appeal of stores capable of offering a range of goods enticed shoppers from all socioeconomic backgrounds. The diversity of the products available to the consumer characterised modernity within the consumer experience and led to the current retail practices that we see today.
Advances in Manufacturing and the Decline of the Home Dressmaker 1914-1938
The transformations in manufacturing could only be achieved through private business investment. Those businesses with the funds to finance their manufacturing businesses were able to bring new developments in equipment and train their workforce to use new machinery. Also, with transportation links in place, increases in productivity could be achieved. A sound transport system meant that the hauling of raw materials and finished products would ensure that products were successfully transferred to stores.[6] Cheaper clothing was now available in substantial quantities because factories were able to produce a large number of standardised garments, and this made clothing inexpensive to the working-class customer. According to Briggs, if tailoring was only available in smaller specialised outlets or a home dressmaker, then the amount of clothing could never have become available to the masses.[7] The increase of factory-made clothing changed the standard of clothing that was available to the working class and brought about a rise in accessible garments.
The number of dressmakers registered in Liverpool changed dramatically during the interwar period. According to statistics, 149 dressmakers worked in outer Liverpool in 1922; this number had decreased to 38 by 1938. Within the city centre, there was also a fall in dressmakers from 158 to 106 between the same period.[8] The data shows that the economic recession of the 1930s may have brought about a decrease in custom for dressmaking with a decline in how many people could afford a professional seamstress. The mass production of garments did not help the industry as products were now available at a cheaper price, and it was cheaper to pay for mass-produced fashions rather than repair an item of clothing. In this respect, the demise of the skilled dressmaker can be discovered in the growth of modern shopping experiences in the interwar period.
The Decline of the Smaller Retailer Outside of the City Centre 1922-1938
The number of retailers that sold hosiers and gloves in Liverpool city centre remained stable at twenty-one in 1922 and twenty in 1938. This shows that Liverpool city centre became a hub for commercialisation with the success of the hosier and glove industries benefitting from an increase in trade. Between 1922 and 1938 there was a change in the number of clothes shops in Liverpool. The city centre occupied thirty-five per cent of the share of shops, but by 1938 the number of shops was sixty per cent. The statistics are very different for the urban areas of Liverpool with the number of shops falling from sixty-four per cent to forty per cent. Similar data can be found when looking at clothing shops. For those registered in urban areas there were 1,109 shops in 1922 and 2,025 shops within the boundaries of the city centre. Within Wildman’s data there was a decline in clothing stores in Liverpool as a whole and by 1938, 830 shops were registered in urban areas with 1209 listed within the city centre. These statistics show that by the end of the interwar period clothing shops were more prevalent in Liverpool’s city centre.[9] Analysing the data we can see that the fall in shops within the city centre shows that with department stores operating a one-stop shopping experience for the consumer they were able to eliminate the competition from smaller independent shops. The city of Liverpool was now at the centre of consumerism brought about by the advances in the manufacturing industry. The clothing industry attracted customers to department stores, which helped to bring further growth prospects.
Lewis’s Department Store in Liverpool city centre expanded in size during the 1920s and 1930s. Because of passing trade, it made more sense from a business point of view to have the department stores in the commercial district of the city centre. The complex financial circumstances that the Great Depression brought meant that enticing potential customers to businesses was essential. In order to do this, Liverpool Corporation invested in the city centre by improving transportation links so customers could travel into the city’s commercial heart.[10] The department store was crucial for the success of the city centre, with stores such as Owen Owen and Lewis’s expanding in size in terms of the consumer products that were available to customers. The improvements to transport links allowed customers from the urban areas to access these stores, which helped to reinforce the city centre as a commercial hub.
The Recreation of Hollywood Glamour through Retailing 1930-1940
The demand for inexpensive, well-fitted clothing increased because the working class increased in numbers and purchasing power. Small tailoring businesses or home dressmakers would not have been able to maintain the demand size. Another cause was the expense involved. Specialised shops and home dressmakers usually charged higher prices for their services owing to the time and effort required for custom dressmaking. Mass production lowered costs and made clothing more reasonably priced for the working class.[11] Mass-produced clothing required less time and effort to create than individually designed garments. Workers could concentrate on other responsibilities instead of spending hours creating or altering their clothing.
According to Schweitzer, when it came to mass-produced clothing, the early twentieth century saw people wanting clothing styles that were inspired by the fashion trends seen in Hollywood at the time.[12] Hollywood actresses such as Katherine Hepburn, Joan Crawford, and Ginger Rogers were respected for their class, style, and impeccable elegance. Their desirable looks on screen, categorised by lustrous hairstyles, modern clothing, and flawless makeup, became what women wanted to achieve in this era. The working classes were also motivated by these Hollywood images, as they sought to recreate the glamourous looks of these on-screen stars. However, according to Meaney and O’Dowd et al., women from all walks of life acquired ways to mimic the designs promoted by Hollywood. They often adjusted their garments and makeup choices to suit their individual circumstances and resources. Retailers were influenced by glamourous actresses and used this marketing ploy to bring consumers to their stores. This allowed managers to market their shops as places of style. Richard’s analyse indicates, that in the mid-1930s just over 900 million people were actively attending the cinema and these figures continued to increase to over a million by 1940.[13] The Hollywood glamour of the 1930s extended beyond the silver screen. It directly influenced consumer culture in Liverpool, with department stores notably reflecting this trend.
Within the interwar era retailers were able to use shoppers interest in film culture to attract more customers to their stores. Bon Marche department store, located on Church Street in Liverpool city centre was one retailer that liked to use the appeal of the cinema to attract customers. Harry Gordon Selfridge, an American businessman and retail pioneer owned George Henry Lee’s and Bon Marche, which were regarded as opulent department stores. Selfridge helped to create a consumer ideology in 1920s Britain.[14] Frederick Marquis, chairman of Lewis’s, criticised Selfridge for his arrogance and egotism, but they shared a commitment to revitalising consumer culture and improving shopping habits.[15] In Bon Marche customers could buy a ‘Just like Marlene’s’ with fans of the actress Marlene Dietrich being able to purchase a high-street coat that was a replica of the coat that the famous actress wore in her latest film.[16] Events for consumers to attend at department stores was also a clever marketing technique.
For instance, an advertisement in the Liverpool Echo in 1938 invited customers to Bon Marche to view a mannequin parade. Titled ‘A Symphony of Fashion’ were ‘the lovely clothes, the clever grouping, and the graceful movement of the girls, combines to make this a really beautiful performance’.[17] Todd asserts that the parades at department stores became valuable because they allowed women the chance to attend an event without making a purchase. Such occasions helped influence the connection between shopping, culture, and leisure.[18] Popular culture offered females original, fashionable, and aspiring imaginings, which played on make-believe, allowing women to envisage a life without domestic labour and lingering poverty.
Leach suggests that the city became the centre for style, consumerism, and social mobility, letting women express themselves and break away from their customary roles and expectations.[19] Britain followed America in creating beauty. The cinematic heroines were role models for all women. Millions of women were subjected to the vision of femininity, which aided capitalism. In addition to the economic gains made in the film and cosmetics industries, glamour became obtainable on the market. Gittus argues that this covered for the economic anguish that lay beneath the millions of pounds spent as well as the exhaustion and discontent that persisted in the real world outside of the cinemas.[20]Although the increases in inexpensive fashions, allowed working-class women to keep up with the modern styles. They could invest in outfits and accessories that exposed the time’s changing social and cultural customs.
The newfound capability to express themselves through fashion gave women a sense of liberation and assurance. Furthermore, the shopping experience itself was frequently a thrilling social experience. Women would gather with friends or family members to browse, try on clothing, and trade opinions. The department stores were a space where women could socialise, form networks, and foster connections beyond their immediate neighbourhood. This social aspect of shopping further contributed to the transformation of their identities. Houlbrook suggests that interwar Britain signified a distinct change like selfhood, and ‘rather than authentic, stable, and immediately discernible, identity was increasingly presented as something fashioned through a careful engagement with consumer culture’.[21] Lemire argues that mass-produced clothing allowed people to access those designs without the hefty price tag associated with custom tailoring.[22] However, both the accessibility of mass-produced clothing had positive and negative consequences on the universal specification of the quality of garments. Berry states that the democratisation of fashion allowed people to express themselves through their individual style.[23] But the increase in manufactured clothing resulted in a decrease in the overall quality of garments. With the emphasis of quantity, manufacturers focused on reducing production expenses, often compromising the quality materials and craftmanship. This led to the invention of throwaway, poorly assembled garments that would wear out quickly.
The Entertaining Department Stores 1925-1932
Despite the economic insecurities retailers helped to create a shared identity that cut across class boundaries. Nava debates that in the past women shopping within extravagant department stores was limited to the middle classes, but in the 1930s women were able to encounter modernity like never before.[24] This was achieved through Liverpool Corporation in 1925, holding a yearly Civic Week event with department stores such as Lewis’s promoting mannequin parades and store events for their expanding consumer base.[25] By celebrating civic week stores used sponsored parades and performances to entice people to their businesses to purchase goods.
A report in the Liverpool Mercury details the unique selling point organised by the Bon Marche department store, which invited the actress Gracie Fields to their store to work as a shop assistant for the afternoon in August 1932. Because of her popularity, Gracie’s appearance had many women wanting to see the actress in store. Although some women may not have been able to afford to make a purchase upon Gracie’s visit, they still wanted to visit the store and see Gracie for themselves because she symbolised the cinematic femineity of the 1930s. Fashion trends were heightened during the interwar period for all adults and teenagers alike; from this need to remain fashionable came the greater need from the consumer for a range of clothing that kept up with the trends. In Lewis’s women’s department, there was a greater emphasis placed on selling dresses and coats that would suit every occasion rather than clothing, which was seen as sensible and practical. The Central Buying Office at Lewis’s kept abreast of the fashion changes by scrutinising the fashion houses in Paris. In an advertising pamphlet for Lewis’s in 1925 the store advertised their new lines as ‘a spring array of new frocks from Paris fashion houses. In Lewis’s, you will find gowns from Paris and other continental centres, woollens from Bradford, silks from Lyon and Macclesfield – merchandise from wherever it may be bought to supply the fashions of the day for the women of taste and moderate means’.[26] There was the need for department stores to keep up with the fashions that were promoted through cinema.
The magazine Liverpolitan, was instrumental in showing how Liverpool created a contemporary shopping culture in the city. By demonstrating the change of fortune in the Bold Street area of Liverpool, the magazine depicted a vivid analysis of the transformations occurring across the city’s consumer landscape. The article titled The Renaissance of Bold Street offered a detailed look at the street ‘some of the shops, with their novel and artistic frontages, invite you irresistibly to look first and then almost magnetise you to go on. Inside, they are like elegant parlours with an intimate air that makes the purchasing of articles more a matter of friendliness than a blunt commercial transaction’.[27] The depiction by the Liverpolitan magazine gives a welcoming environment to the consumer that heightened the retail experience for the shopper.
Another way store managers attracted customers to their department stores was through striking window displays, with department store windows in the 1920s being used to marketing the products that could be found in stores. Utilising shop windows as a way of selling began in Paris and New York. It resulted in windows being packed with consumer products.[28] Innovations in marketing and visual selling in the 1920s helped to create artistic displays with window dressers making exciting displays that would include the most sought-after products by using topics, colour and theatrical props to attract the customer to their stores. By ensuring that there was an eye-catching display enabled department stores to stand out from shops who did not take part in window dressing. With many stores competing for customer interest, the unique displays brought individuality and the ability to appeal to the consumer, hopefully enhancing sales and profit margins.[29] During the interwar years, the impact of the spectacular window displays influenced the change in retailing. This marketing technique was a fundamental part of the modern consumer culture that everyone could enjoy regardless of class.
Marginalisation of Street Traders 1924
The fantastic shop windows also contributed to the increased marginalisation of the poorest street sellers. Those who traded on the streets had yet to be able to compete with the large department stores; they were seen as unwanted and unenticing to any customers who had to walk past on their way to the inviting department store. Councillor John Nield took his concerns about the deprivation and poverty of street traders to Liverpool City Council in 1924. He stated, ‘the motorcars of the idle rich are permitted to obstruct the busy thoroughfares, also the window displays of the shops causing the sidewalks to be blocked, this Council expresses its disapproval at the officious and despotic treatment inflicted on the hawkers and pedlars by the Police and Magistrates, prevented from selling the goods…they persecute a woman if she happens to stop within view of certain shops with her barrow of goods’.[30] The council instantly declined Nield’s criticisms, there was no place for street traders in Liverpool anymore.[31] With the rising image of the department store as being one that resembled an upper-class place to visit Liverpool Council, no doubt wanted to portray the city positively. Street traders would have brought the elegant aesthetic of the department store down, so to the council, the market traders in the street should be moved on.
With Benjamin’s understanding of the fanciful encounters of the modern city he saw the department store as showy and ostentatious in its approach.[32] These factors combined made it problematic for the smaller street traders to compete, particularly in their ability to stock diverse goods and deliver the same level of shopping luxury and service. Once busy with traders and customers, the streets sellers slowly lost their appeal as consumers moved towards the more convenient and attractive department stores. This transformation laid the groundwork for the retail model we see today.
Advertisement Campaigns from Department Stores 1932-1938
The use of newspaper advertisements helped to boost sales at department stores in the interwar period. Department store managers realised that investing in marketing their products through newspapers could help appeal to prospective customers. The concept around consumerism and remaining loyal to reliable stores originated by placing more importance on the role of advertising from the department stores. Such marketing strategies helped stores survive and flourish in the interwar period. Because of the rise in mass media marketing advertisements from Lewis’s, George Henry Lees and Bon Marche increased rapidly. Sixty-four advertisements were placed in the Liverpool Echo from all stores between January and February 1920 and one hundred in the same months of 1938.[33] An increase of over fifty per cent. The number of advertisements marketed in newspapers that were predominantly read by working-class people helped reinforce department stores as sites for all people to attend, regardless of class.
By 1932, advertisements published in the Liverpool Echo from department stores had increased significantly. Lewis’s placed fifty-seven adverts, George Henry Lees published twenty-one, and Bon Marche has slightly more with twenty-four. However, by 1938, the number of advertisements placed in the same newspaper had fallen, with Lewis’s placing thirty-six promotional ads, George Henry Lees had fourteen published, and Bon Marche published twenty ads.[34] This data shows that department stores had cornered the market for the working-class shopper. The decline in advertisements demonstrates that stores no longer had to rely on newspapers to sell their products because consumer confidence in the stores was high.
To appeal to a broader audience stores changed how they marketed their business. The glamour of Hollywood and theme-based events were used to entice more customers to their businesses. Department store managers became forward-thinking when thinking of advertising and marketing approaches.[35] In the later stages of the 1920s, department stores were offering their services to a broader range of customers and were turning their businesses from solely being places where purchasing could take place to spaces where customers could experience social pleasure. By the 1930s, with department stores using mass advertising in local newspapers to promote events such as Civic Week, they were now marketing their stores as leisure and entertainment sites. This slow change from the past elitist attitude surrounding stores is seen in the data from the popularity of restaurants at department stores. In 1933, George Henry Lee had 7,594 customers visiting their restaurant, signifying that stores had become not just places to experience shopping but were also places to relax and enjoy. From this information, it is clear that stores had become places for leisure and socialisation regardless of class.[36] This significant change to stores allowed businesses to market their approach to appeal to all their customers irrespective of class. Mass production and promotional marketing strategies mainly aimed at females encouraged women to seek out these products or copy the fashion trends they saw through such advertisements.
The department store as a place of elegance and luxury was established in the 1930s as managers targeted a broader consumer base. One promotional advertisement from Bon Marche promoted an array of coats, which elevated the sale of fur products in 1938. To appeal to all shoppers, the cost of the coats ranged from seven guineas to four hundred pounds. The advertisement offered a range of products from the ‘Delightful Box Coat’ to the ‘Dashing Swagger’. The use of squirrel was the most inexpensive of furs offered to customers. Such promotion shows that department store executives had considered the financial resources of all their customers.[37] By utilising a range of prices in the range of fur coats that were offered it allowed stores to attract a wide variety of women to their businesses regardless of their socio-economic circumstances. Offering this broad range of clothing presented the customers gave the customers a sense of lavish spending while offering a range of products that could be purchased within various pricing structures.
Fur was linked to ideas of extravagance, and by stores mass-producing cheaper furs, there was the sense that all women could purchase an item that aligned with their budgets. Promotions within newspapers displayed products available in stores and portrayed fur as a fashion statement. Fur being promoted as a status symbol by department stores within their marketing strategies to appeal to all classes of shoppers and establish their businesses as places where the wealthier and budget-conscious shoppers could come together.[38] By using advertising strategies tailored for their individual customers’ needs and by mass producing clothing cheaper than ever before, department stores were able to bring more luxurious products such as fur to consumers who wanted elegant looking clothing but at a price that they could afford.
Conclusion
The stimulation of economic growth in the city of Liverpool was brought to the fore by an increase in commercialism from department stores. Changes in culture saw shoppers wanting to replicate Hollywood glamour and the wealthy. Retailers capitalised on these transformations through mass marketing campaigns that became available through promotional strategies placed within local newspapers. Because department stores were able to mass-produce clothing at a relatively lower price, these cost-cutting savings trickled down to the consumer, allowing stores to sell products cheaper to a broad range of consumers regardless of class structure. The desire from consumers for social mobility transformed how department stores used mass marketing to sell their products. However, such mass-production expansion saw the home dressmakers decline because the mass-production saw department stores offering inexpensive clothing tailored to the working-class consumer at a reduced price. The department store’s ability to offer various products within one store appealed to consumers seeking the latest fashion trends.
Through the appeal of offering products at a cheaper price, stores were able to give the general impression of glamour and lavishness. Offering such products to working-class women allowed some females a sense of individuality and an escape from the domestic sphere and the societal expectations imposed on them. Department stores such as Bon Marche, George Henry Lees and Lewis’s were popular sites for working-class women and brought to the fore modern approaches to shopping that had previously only been available to middle- and upper-class shoppers. Overall, retailing in Liverpool during the interwar period saw an increase in consumerism brought about by modernity and innovative marketing practices that brought consumers to their stores.
[1] Peter Scott and James Walker. ‘Advertising, Promotion, and the Competitive Advantage of Interwar British Department Stores.’ The Economic History Review 4, no. 3 (2010), p. 1112.
[2] Ibid., p. 1111.
[3] Ibid., p. 1105.
[4] Selina Todd, ‘Young Women, Work, and Leisure in Interwar England.’ The Historical Journal 48, no. 3 (2005), p. 791.
[5] Peter Gurney, ‘The Battle of the Consumer in Postwar Britain’, The Journal of Modern History 77, no 4 (2005), pp. 961-983.
[6] Nancy L. Green, Ready to Wear Ready to Work, (London, 1997), p. 19.
[7] Asa Briggs, Friends of the People the Centenary History of Lewis’s, (London, 1956), p. 132.
[8] Pat Ayers, ‘The Hidden Economy of Dockland Families: Liverpool in the 1930s’, in ed. Pat Hudson and W. R. Lee, Women’s Work and the Family Economy in Historical Perspective, (Manchester, 1990), p. 279.
[9] Charlotte Wildman, Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939, (London, 2018), p. 86.
[10] Ibid., p. 86-7.
[11] Geraldine Howell, Wartime Fashion from Haute Couture to Homemade 1939-1945, (London, 2012), p. 19.
[12] Marlis Schweitzer, ‘The Mad Search for Beauty’: Actresses Testimonials, the Cosmetics Industry, and the ‘Democratization of Beauty’, The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 3, no. 3 (2005), p. 270.
[13] Jeffrery Richards, The Age of the Dream Palace: Cinema and Society in Britain 1930-1939, (London, 1984), p. 11.
[14] Lindy Woodhead, Shopping Seduction and Mr Selfridge, (London, 2007), p. 163.
[15] Frederick Marquis, The Memoirs of the Rt Hon. The Earl of Woolton, (London, 1959), p. 104.
[16] Liverpool Echo, Film Stars Coat in a Fashion Parade, Sept 19 1933, Just Line Marlene’s | Liverpool Echo | Tuesday 19 September 1933 | British Newspaper Archive, accessed on (11 September, 2023).
[17] Wildman, Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939, p. 64.
[18] Todd, ‘Young Women Work and Leisure in Interwar England’, p. 791-803.
[19] William R. Leach, ‘Transformations in a Culture of Consumption: Women and Department Stores, 1890-1925’, The Journal of American History 71, no. 2 (1984), pp. 321-336
[20] Elizabeth Gittus, ‘A Study of the Unemployed of Merseyside’, in Merseyside Social and Economic Studies, ed. Richard Lawton and Catherine M. Cunningham, (London, 1970), p. 125.
[21] Matt Houlbrook, ‘A Pin to See the Peepshow: Culture, Fiction and Selfhood in Edith Thompson’s Letters 1921-22’, Past & Present 207, no. 1 (2010), p. 223.
[22] Beverly Lemire, ‘Consumerism in Preindustrial and Early Industrial England: The Trade in Second-hand Clothes’, Journal of British Studies 27, no. 1 (1988), p. 3.
[23] Jess Berry, Fashion Capital: Style Economies, Sites and Cultures, (Oxford, 2012), p. 130.
[24] Mica Nava, ‘Modernity’s Disavowal: Women, the city and the Department Store’, in Modern Times: Reflections on a Century of English Modernity, ed, Mica Nava and Alan O’Shea, (London, 1996), p. 38-76.
[25] Wildman, Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939, p. 62.
[26] Wildman, Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939, p. 186.
[27] Ibid., p. 83.
[28] Ibid., p. 91-2.
[29] Ellis E. Somake, ‘The Design of Shops Today’, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts 106, no. 5020 (1958), pp. 271-274.
[30] Wildman, Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939, p. 62.
[31] Ibid., p. 92.
[32] Walter Benjamin, The Arcades Project, (London, 2002), p. 43.
[33] Wildman, Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939, p. 95.
[34] Ibid., p. 96.
[35] Rachel Bowbly, Carried Away: The Invention of Modern Shopping, (New York, 2001), p. 8.
[36] Wildman, Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939, p. 103.
[37] Ibid., p. 105-6.
[38] Leach, ‘Transformations in a Culture of Consumption: Women and Department Stores, 1890-1925’, p. 327.
louisealacy.wordpress.com 