Bustle

Bustle (pronounced buhs-uhl)

(1) To move or act with a great show of energy (often followed by about).

(2) To abound or teem with something; display an abundance of something (often used as “bustling with” or bustled with”).

(3) Thriving or energetic or noisy activity; stir; ferment.

(4) In dressmaking, the fullness around or below the waist of a dress, as added by a peplum, bows, ruffles, etc.

(5) In nineteenth century dressmaking, (1) a pad, cushion, worn under the back of a woman's skirt to expand, support, and display the full cut and drape of a dress; (2) a metal or whalebone framework worn by women, typically only protruding from the rear as opposed to the earlier more circular hoops.

(6) In the design of electronic office equipment, a cover to protect and hide the back panel of a computer or other office machine.

(7) In automotive design, latterly as “bustle-back”. a mid-twentieth century coachwork motif which integrated into the rear of the bodywork the previously separately-mounted trunks used to store luggage;  In the UK, the style was used in a tiny number of limousines until 1992 and in the US, there was an unfortunate revival in the 1970s.

(8) In the design of armored vehicles, an additional, external storage space added to the rear of a vehicle (on a tank, at the rear of the turret).

(9) In sailboat design, as bustle stern, a reference to a stern with a blister at the waterline designed to prevent the stern from "squatting" when getting underway.

1570s: The verb was from the Middle English bustlen, bustelen & bostlen (to hurry aimlessly along; bustling, noisy or excited activity) perhaps a frequentative of Middle English bresten (to rush, break), from Old English bersten (rushing about) of uncertain origin but perhaps (1) from the Old Norse busla & bustla (to splash about), (2) from the dialectal word busk from Old Norse būask (to prepare; to make oneself ready), (3), from the obsolete word buskle (energetically to prepare something) or (4), from the verb busk via the sixteenth century frequentative form buskle.  John Milton (1608–1674) in the 1630s used bustle to suggest "activity, stir, fuss, commotion.  In modern English use, the word is often heard in the phrase “hustle & bustle”.  Related forms include the noun bustler, the verbs bustled & bustling, the adjectival form of bustling not noted until 1819.

Profile of the bustle dress: 1885 American example rendered in silk with rhinestones in a metal frame.

The origin of the use of bustle as a noun referring to "padding in the upper back part of a skirt" is of uncertain origin but may be connected with the German Buschel (bunch, pad) or (more speculatively) may be a special adaptation of the verb, a tribute to the "rustling” the fabric of the dresses made while in motion.  Apparently first used in 1788, the bustle was a specifically-shaped frame, stuffed with cotton, feathers etc, worn by women to kill two birds with one stone: affording a greater rotundity to the hips and emphasizing the narrowness of the of the waist-line.  It had the added practical attraction of causing the folds of the skirt to hang more gracefully and prevent the fabric from interfering with the feet when walking.

Fashions change: the bustle in the late nineteenth century.

Bustle dresses obviously pre-dated modern synthetic fabrics which can be engineered to assume and retain a defined shape so were created by using an internal frame, an exoskeleton assembled usually from metal, cane or bone using essentially the same technique as coachbuilders in the twentieth century, the space frame providing support and describing the arc of the desired curves.  The earliest of the breed were less exaggerated that what was to follow, used more to allow the fabric to fan-out and create a train and it was later, in the mid-nineteenth century, that the loops and hoops grew in number and size to allow the multi-gathered layers now most associated with the style.  It was about this time that trains began to retreat and the shape of the bustle adopted the more pronounced humped shape on the back of the skirt immediately below the waist, the voluminous material tending now to fall straight to the floor in a cut designers at the time called the “waterfall effect”.  A wonderfully elegant style in which a lady could waft around a ballroom, taking a seat could be difficult, trips to the loo presumably a matter of gymnastics.

As a piece of fashion, the bustle rose and fell in popularity, its most dramatic flourish in the late 1880s when the most extreme of the bustles were built with proportions even more extraordinary than the originals of the late 1700s.  Absurdity having been achieved, the bigger bustles were banished to the of the wedding dress where it remains to this day, used both to better display a clinched waist and sometimes support a train.  The engineering however endured into the twentieth century, structural support still required for what was were now only slightly exaggerated interpretations of the female form but by 1908 it was noted that but for wedding dresses, the bustle was extinct, supplanted by the long corset.  

Portrait of Maria Carolina of Austria (1752-1814), circa 1767, by Martin van Meytens (1695–1770).

In the late 1700s, the bustle was actually quite modest compared with the earlier pannier which seems to have existed only as court dress and then rarely, reserved for the most formal occasions.  Offering the advantage of rendering the skirt as a large, almost flat, square or rectangular shape in the manner of a painting, it permitted a large surface on which elaborate designs or embroidery could be displayed, transforming the wearer into something of a walking (or at least standing) billboard. 

The style began somewhere in Europe in the early 1700s, historians of fashion in several countries laying claim although whether that's as a proud boast or admission of guilt isn’t clear.  The term seems to have been applied retrospectively as a point of differentiation from the bustle, “pannier dresses” not described as such until 1869.  In their most imposing iterations, the panniers could extend the skirt by almost a metre (39 inches) either side so there may be a comeback for what would presumably be a practical garment in the #metoo era.  The word pannier dates from circa 1300, from the Old French panier & paniere (basket), from the Latin pānārium (breadbasket), the construct being pānis (bread) + ārium (place for).  As originally used in French, panniers were the wicker baskets slung either side of a beast of burden, the name still used to describe the side-mounted containers available as accessories for bicycles and motor-bikes.

Un dimanche après-midi à l'Île de la Grande Jatte (A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte) (1884-1886) by Georges Seurat (1859-1891).

Seurat’s most famous painting is an indication of the state of the bustle art in the 1880s but is best remembered as an exemplar of the technique of divisionism (sometimes called chromoluminarism), most associated with Neo-Impressionist painting and defined by the colors being separated into individual dots or daubs, the optical result created in the brain of the viewer.  The eye is an outgrowth of the brain and, having “learned” the nature of color, what the eye sees, the brain intuitively blends and mixes, seeing the painting not as an agglomeration of dots but as an image.  The final processing is not by the painter but the viewer, an early example of a deconstruction of the the reader constructing the text, a direction of thought which would come to intrigue many theorists, some of whom unfortunately pursued the concept a little too long and much too often.

Playboy magazine, May 1976.

In what was presumably intended as a post-modern touch, Playboy magazine superimposed an image of a slightly bustled Nancy Cameron (January 1974 Playmate of the Month) on the painting for their May 1976 cover, the bunny logo hidden among the dots.  It’s not known how many of Playboy's readers were sufficiently taken with divisionism to devote much time to rabbit hunting.

1928 Mercedes-Benz Nürburg 460 K Pullman Limousine (W08).

The origin of the bustle-back style on motor cars was organic, a evolution from the luggage trunks which, borrowing from the practice used with horse-drawn carriages of many types, were attached to the rear, a practical arrangement which afforded easy access and didn’t impinge on passenger space.  Sometimes the trunks were provided by the manufacturer or coachbuilder but often, especially on lower-prices vehicles, were from third-party suppliers and not always specifically designed for the purpose, being made variously from steel, timber or leather and even woven with wicker.

1936 Studebaker Dictator 4-door sedan.

As all-metal bodies gradually replaced the mixture of steel, wood and fabric which had typified construction in the early days of the industry, the function of the once separate trunk was retained but integrated into the coachwork.  Ascetically, some were more successful than others but the trend did coincide with the move towards more sloping rear coachwork, replacing the upright designs which had been a direct inheritance from the horse-drawn stage coaches and this would have an important influence on what came to be known as the bustle-back motif.

1939 Lincoln Zephyr V12 Coupe (left) and 1937 Mercedes-Benz 540K (W29) Special Roadster (originally delivered to King Mohammed Zahir Shah of Afghanistan, right).

The sweep of the fastback line did present an obvious stylistic challenge.  To augment one with the bustled trunk would defeat the purpose but the functional advantages of the added storage had come to be appreciated so the solution was complete integration, the once discernibly separate trunk now wholly encapsulated.  The price to be paid for that was the elongation of the rear body but, in the era of streamlining, the market took well to this latest incarnation of modernism and the style turned into a profitable niche for Detroit, the two-door “business coupe” long a favorite of travelling salesmen who were happy with the sacrifice of the back seat to provide an even more commodious trunk (boot) with which to secure samples of wares.

1953 Ford Zodiac (Mark 1) & 1959 Mercedes-Benz 220 SE (W180).

By the early 1950s, a “three-box” form had evolved and it would become for several generations the standard for the mainstream sedan.  Typified by the Ford Zephyr & Zodiac (1951-1956) and the Mercedes-Benz “pontoons” (W105 / W120 / W121 /W128 / W180) (1951-1962), the style was described as “one loaf of bread atop another”.  Although many couldn’t resist embellishing the simplicity with fins and other unnecessary stuff, the basic outline endured for decades although it did tend to the "longer, lower and wider".

1954 Bentley Mark IV (left), 1963 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud III (centre) & 1968 Daimler DS420 (right).

Not all however saw the need to advance beyond the bustle which, by an accident of economics, had come to define the traditional English limousine.  While mass-market vehicles evolved quickly with model cycles as little as 3-4 years, the low-volume and substantially hand-made limousines typically remained in production for sometimes a decade or more, reflecting the time it took to amortize the capital investment.  In the post-war years, Austin, Armstrong Siddeley, Bentley, Daimler, Rolls-Royce & Vanden Plas all persisted although production levels, never high, dwindled increasingly as the bustle-back came to be seen as an antiquated relic and by 1965, even Rolls-Royce had all but abandoned the bustle, only the low-volume Phantom V still maintaining the link to the pre-war style.

The choices in 1968: Vanden Plas Princess 4-litre Limousine (left), NSU Ro80 (centre) & Daimler Majestic Major DR450 (right).

Emblematic of the troubles which beset British industry in the era, the most obviously antique of the English bustle-backs, the Vanden Plas Princess 4-litre Limousine, was still on sale in 1968 by which time that glimpse of the next century, the NSU Ro80, had been in showrooms for over a year.  The Princess, still with a split windscreen, was a (mildly) updated version of the Austin Sheerline, introduced in 1947 when it was a genuinely new design although even then, few would have been surprised had they been told it came from before the war.  The eventual longevity wasn't planned but rather a product of the uncertainty in the future of corporate structure the industry would assume, plans for a successor put on hold, the same fate which befell the only slightly more modern-looking but remarkably rapid Daimler Majestic Major which also enjoyed a stay of execution until 1968.       

However, their new rarity made the bustle-back eventually an attraction, the very exclusivity creating a receptive and surprisingly wide market segment which included undertakers, wedding planners, Lord Mayors and anyone else to whom the sense of lost elegance and whiff of wealth appealed.  Jaguar understood and responded in 1968 with the Daimler DS420 which didn’t encourage any imitators but there was room for one and it enjoyed a long, lucrative life, remaining in production until 1992.  Over five thousand were built.

1966 Mercedes-Benz 600 (W100, left) & 1962 Rolls-Royce Phantom V by Mulliner Park Ward (right).

The traditionalists didn’t however always insist on tradition.  Even before Mercedes-Benz had shown their 600 at the 1963 Frankfurt Motor Show, coachbuilders Mulliner Park Ward had built some of the 832 Rolls-Royce Phantom Vs without the pronounced bustle-back which adorned most.  Nothing of course matched the austerity of line of the 600, the most severe interpretation the “three-box” form ever applied to a limousine and, as an alternative to the bustle-back, MPW offered "de-bustled" variations on the theme until the last of the 374 Phantom VIs was built in 1990. 

1965 Oldsmobile 98 two-door hardtop.

Fins began to shrink from the “three box” US cars in the early 1960s and were gone by mid-decade.  Having to go in some direction, the tails of the full-sized US cars noticeably lengthened, matching the growth at the front.  Aesthetically, the long hoods (bonnets) did have their attraction but were hardly an engineering necessity.  Although the biggest US V8s were wide and heavy, they weren’t, by either historic or even contemporary European standards, especially long yet in some of the full-sized cars of the era, a V16 would have fitted and there were those at Cadillac, recalling the genuine exclusivity the sixteen cylinder engines lent the marquee during the 1930s, who hankered for one and they actually built some V12 prototypes before corporate reality bit.  They contented themselves instead with a gargantuan 500 cubic inch (8.2 litre) V8 although another reality would soon bite that too.

The 1961 Cadillac: The long (left) and slightly less long (right) of it. 

Whether in response to or in anticipation of some owners preferring their Cadillac in a more conveniently sized package, between 1961-1963, a “short-deck” option was made available on certain body styles.  Offered first on the six-window Sedan deVille, an encouraging 3,756 were built so the option was in 1962 offered on the four-window Sixty Two Town Sedan but sales actually dropped to 2600, the decline in interest confirmed the next year when only 1575 of the four-window Park Avenue Sedan deVille were sold.  Using the same 129.5 inch (3289 mm) wheelbase as the regular models but eight inches (200 mm) shorter in overall length (215 vs 223 inches (5461 vs 5664 mm)), space utilization was obviously a little better but the market had spoken.  With fewer than eight-thousand of the short-deck models sold across three seasons while the standard editions shipped in the tens of thousands, the flirtation with (slightly) more efficient packaging was abandoned for 1964; in the course of the following decade, Cadillacs would grow another seven inches (178 mm) and gain over 400 lb (181 kg).

1971 Holden HG Premier (left) & 1968 Holden HK Brougham (right).

In Australia, Holden, General Motors's (GM) local outpost, took the opposite approach, the Brougham (1968-1971) created by extending the tail of the less exalted Premier by 8 inches (200 mm), the strange elongation a hurried and far from successful response to the Ford Fairlane (1967-2007).  The 1967 Fairlane had been crafted by stretching the wheelbase of the Falcon sedan from 111 inches (2819 mm) to 116 (2946 mm) and tarting-up the interior.  Ford had since 1965 been locally assembling the full-sized Galaxies for the executive market but tariffs and the maintenance of the Australian currency peg at US$1.12 meant profitability was marginal, the locally concocted Fairlane, much more lucrative, produced as it was with high local content and a miniscule development cost.  The Fairlane name was chosen because of the success the company had had in selling first the full-sized Fairlanes (nicknamed by locals as the “tank Fairlane”) between 1959-1962 and later the compact version (1962-1965).

1977 Ford LTD Silver Monarch (P6).

The massive success of the 1967 car and its successors prompted Ford to cease local assembly of the Galaxie and revert to importing fully built-up cars for the small segment of the market which wanted the bigger vehicles, including the government executive fleets.  Available with both small and big-block V8s, the Galaxies, now badged as Galaxie-LTDs, would remain available until 1973 when Ford Australia created their own LTD (1973-2007), giving the Falcon’s wheelbase a final stretch to 121 inches (3073 mm) and adding the novelty of a 24 hour analogue clock, lashings of real leather and fake timber along with that status symbol of the 1970s: the padded vinyl roof.

Lindsay Lohan photo-shoot by Tom Munro (b 1964) for Bustle, March 2024.

The “malaise era” bustle-backs (1980-1987) by Cadillac, Imperial and Lincoln.

The US cars of the decade between 1973-1983 (some say it lasted a bit longer) were called “malaise era” cars, named after a thoughtful but perhaps unfortunate speech President Jimmy Carter (b 1924; US president 1977-1981) delivered in July 1979.  The president didn't actually utter the word "malaise" but people listen to what politicians mean as much as what they say and the word came to be associated with his unhappy, single-term administration.  Not yet able substantively much to improve the dynamics of the cars, Detroit thought of a distraction: the bustle-back.  It proved a short-lived fad although one better remembered that some of what had gone before and much of what would follow.

The 1980 Cadillac Seville was first, the advertising copy even trying to justify the appearance by claiming the design offered “more usable trunk space”, something which could neither be proved nor disproved which was good, given it offered 14.47 (.409 m³) cubic feet of space whereas last year’s model had 14.9 (.421 m³).  Still, what one got was “more usable”.  Cadillac were explicit about their plagiarism, the Seville’s lines based not on just any bustle-back but one with the most severe lines, the Hooper-bodied Rolls-Royces of the post-war years.  The critics were divided: some not liking it and some hating it, a spread of opinion seemingly shared by buyers, sales never matching those of its more conventional predecessor although there were other factors in the lukewarm response such as the switch to front wheel drive and some reliability issues with the power-train.  Production of the bustle-back Seville ceased in 1985; sales of its successor were higher.

Chrysler always claimed the design of the 1981 Imperial was locked-in long before their designers had laid eyes on the new Seville but it wasn’t until 1981 it was in the showrooms.  Based on the competent J-body Cordoba platform, it was offered only as a two-door coupé with a fuel-injected 318 cubic inch (5.2 litre) V8 and an automatic transmission.  After 1955, Chrysler had run Imperial as a separate division in an attempt to gain the cachet of Cadillac and Lincoln but, despite early success, the experiment failed and the brand was retired in 1975.  The bustle-back Imperial (1981-1983) ostensibly revived the division and the car was well-equipped, including bits and pieces from Cartier although its best-remembered association with celebrity was the “Frank Sinatra Edition”.  Unexpectedly, a brief foray onto the fastest of the NASCAR ovals proved the bustle-back’s aerodynamic efficiency; it achieved an impressive top-speed despite not using the highest-powered engine.  It wasn’t enough to save the brand which was shut down for the last time in 1983 although Chrysler did continue to use “Imperial” on the odd tarted-up model and surprised everyone in 2006 by presenting an Imperial concept car.  Criticized at the time because it was so obviously influenced by the Rolls-Royce Phantom (the retrospective VII) and a pastiche of many clichés, if one didn't mind that sort of thing, it seemed a quite accomplished execution.  

Ford’s retro-take arrived last in 1982 but the Lincoln lingered longest, not replaced until 1987.  The bustle-back Lincoln actually used the most restrained implementation of the idea but, unable to resist the temptation to add lipstick, the designers applied to the trunk the faux spare tyre bump which had been on so many Continentals since the 1955 Mark II first sought to pay tribute to the 1940 original although this was the first time a Lincoln without a Continental badge had been humped. In common with the experience of the other manufacturers, the car attracted fewer buyers than its predecessor or successor and, while Detroit have pursued some other retro-projects with mixed results, none have attempted another reprise of the bustle-back.

Pre and post butt-lift, the 2001 and 2009 BMW 7 Series.

Nor has anyone else.  Although the 2001 BMW 7 Series (E65) is sometimes labelled a bustle-back (or, in more twenty-first century style, a bustle-butt), it really never was although, having allowed a decent interval to elapse so as not to (further) upset the designer, at the first facelift, it was toned down a little.