50% Backstitch Completion!

-
I've finally done all the channels on one side of my stays.  Of course, now it's second-sock syndrome and doing the other seems like a kind of torture, but still - halfway there.


I originally cut the front too high - or the rest of it too low (but I'm short-waisted so it worked out all right for me).  Not sure how it happened.  But it was an easy fix!  These don't have a lot of boning, unlike the stays most people make, but these are a reproduction of a pair at Cherry Hill, so I'm pretty sure it's period.  The curved channels ought to straighten out and overlap with the addition of boning, but I might need to take out the stitching and make the curve more gradual.

The construction method's a bit different and I'm going to do a post on it later.  I think it works pretty well!

Comments

  1. RowennaFebruary 21, 2012 at 9:07 AM

    Looking great! I've definitely seen several extant pieces with "half" boning or other arrangements of fewer bones, so I think you're right--it's period. Can't wait to see your construction method! I'm on my third pair of stays with third construction method, so I'm always excited to learn more!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CassidyFebruary 21, 2012 at 7:45 PM

      I'll feel so silly if it's one you already know! I've never come across it online, probably because it works best with only two layers and no fashion fabric and most people want moderately attractive stays.

      Delete
  2. The DreamstressFebruary 22, 2012 at 3:52 PM

    Exciting! I know the feeling about a second half of a project though. So bleh!

    And what Rowenna said about half-boned stays - totally accurate, lots and lots of examples of it, especially in the later half of the 18th century.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CassidyFebruary 22, 2012 at 9:02 PM

      The ones I've seen have been a lot more fashionable, though, and usually have that more rounded shape and a different boning pattern. TBH, though, I suspect that it's because the ones in the big museums tend to be nicer in general, and if I tried more house museums I might find more working stays with this configuration.

      Delete
  3. Sanna KFebruary 24, 2012 at 12:08 AM

    Good luck with the other side! I know how the second half is always the more painful...

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pride and Prejudice 1995: The Little Things

-
Image
I did threaten to write about the Ehle/Firth Pride and Prejudice , and since I'm in a writing mood without a topic I decided to make good. Regency adaptations tend to go for an overall accurate look, interpreting age and income within the confines of realistic silhouettes and colors, and so they avoid the scrutiny and reputation that a more obviously artistic and unrealistic production garners. But just as this version of P&P  is not entirely faithful in every respect (e.g. the added Darcy-perspective scenes, the actors nearly all being significantly older than their characters - perhaps the most egregious example being Julia Sawalha in her late twenties playing teenage Lydia), Dinah Hill's costuming is not entirely accurate - mainly in ways that make the period more appealing to modern tastes. The exact date when the story is set is never given; generally, the movie's taken to be set in 1813, when the book was published. I'm not going to go into the full story of...
Read more

A Difficult History: Corsetry and Feminism, Part One

-
Image
Recently, I began following a couple of Tumblr blogs focusing on waist training and daily corset wear. Daily wear is not for me, waist training even less so, but I find it an interesting practice. It is also a controversial one. For example, a recent Huffington Post article, " Corset Queen Penny Brown Loves Getting 'Waisted' ," drew comments which were nearly all extremely negative, as do most articles that bring the practice to mainstream attention. Usually, the mental states of the women who waist-train are called into question, and there are numerous references to feminism as incompatible with corsets. The general idea is that the first wave feminists of the late 19th and early 20th century would be horrified by women today wearing them, and that their assumed reaction is an objective statement on the practice. My feeling is that the subject is complex, and cannot be simply declared feminist or unfeminist. There are far more factors than the average internet comm...
Read more

Pattern Time: 1860s Chemise

-
Image
For my 150th post ( \o/ ), a quick little pattern someone might find useful. When I was working my way through a box a few weeks ago, I came across a chemise that didn't quite want to lay flat.  I took a closer look at it to figure out why, and noticed that it had a unique construction with the sleeves cut in one with the body and gussets inserted in the neckline.  I did a really quick sketch of the cutting layout and measured the important bits, so that when I got home I could draw it up in proportion on graph paper. (nb. I messed up. I've been noticing it for a while, but didn't want to point it out from shame, but I accidentally gave the neckline length as it is when gathered - the horizontal cut should be much longer, to within about four inches of the side seam. Please correct for this when making your own version.)
Read more