Ner’s skimpy skirts inspired new generation to break down barriers
go backack to sses. sign oof , hat her ld
ther ny in a key g ing t met as at t mpany y nce to o berets. . d ship p R and d n – and d centre e s most st nies. oviding ng dback, k, rt skirts ts She licensedid hher name pants to pillow cases. ot badge-it-and-cash-in used her design acumen ery area of merchandise woman operating in a male-dominated industry, Mary combined her design genius with first-hand knowledge of what women needed to make these new looks work.
And Heather, who soon became a member of the board, working beside Mary’s husband Alexander Plunkett- Greene, was at the centre of the revolutionary business. She recalled:re “It was Mary who not only encouragede the hemlines to rise but realisedr the importance of obtainingobtai tights that would either matchmatc or contrast with her garments, in the right colours.”
HeatherHe said Mary saw the need for “aan element of modesty”. She added:adde “You could not have worn suspenderssusp and stocking tops with minimin skirts. Tights were crucial. She, if not bullied, then certainly persuadedpers hosiery manufacturers to makem tights.”
PrePr Mary, tights were only worn by dancersd and actors. Heather said:said “She actually made those tightstigh available for everybody.” NextN for the Quant treatment waswa make-up. Her cosmetics line, introducedintr in 1966, was for women whowh didn’t want to wear heavy orangeora base like their mothers. HeatherHe explained: “The concept of the foundfoundation, called Starkers, was to disguisedii blemishesbl without giving the impression of that dreadful pancake.
“She started designing cosmetics because the 60s had moved clothing on to a huge extent but cosmetics and make-up hadn’t really followed.” Unlike the giant American brands, Quant cosmetics were made in Surrey so Mary could keep a watchful eye on everything from the cool packaging, with its distinctive daisy logo, to the quality.
Every licensing deal meant a Quant-versus-the-establishment battle to make the modern products that Mary wanted carrying her name.
Heather observed her boss entering many meeting rooms full of men with comb-overs and bad ties – then getting her own way using a lethal combination of determination and charm.
She recal led: “She pushed the barriers, whether it was cosmetics or deep dyes for home furnishings.
“When we f irst went into interiors, sheets, pillow cases and duvet covers were white, pale primrose or light blue. She wanted brown, navy, dark green and red, to make a completely different, updated look.
“She fought the men in grey suits. They would suck their teeth and say, ‘ We can’t do that, they will bleed in the washing machine’.
She would smile and say, ‘ I know you’ll find a way’. They knew underneath that she was right.”
When she noticed that her former boss was being written out of fashion history, she persuaded the V& A in London to put on a major retrospective of Mary’s work.
It was a huge success, with more than 400,000 people going to see the teensy dresses that scandalised an older generation and liberated a younger one.
The exhibit ion wi l l be coming to the Dundee V& A later this year.
Heather loved seeing all the old frocks, especially as she has no archive of her own.
Over the years, Heather gave away every piece of Quant she owned. Some went to friends, others ended up at village jumble sales. Thankfully, a wiser pal had kept four dresses. One appeared in the exhibition. Heather squeezed into another for the opening night.
Back in the day, she had the run of the sample cupboard and wore nothing else.
She added: “It would not have been tactful not to have worn Mary Quant. There were launches, meetings and, of course, a certain amount of socialisation with that. Several times a year, we launched ranges to media and buyers. I loved all the stuff – we all did.
“I was not quite model size but I could get into the samples. I used to be able to choose what I wanted to wear, although I drew the line at hot pants. I loved mini skirts, with tights underneath of course.
“I loved those colours, the freedom of movement the mini skirt provided – you could run for a bus, you could jump, you could go dancing, then straight off to work. That’s what the clothes represented to me.”