Mary DeLong West's Wedding Dress, 1896

-
1976.139.2, pattern available on site
As it says at the site, this was "worn by Mary DeLong in 1896 when she married Charles F. West." And you can see it on Mary as well - in the photograph, there's some beaded trim running around the middle of the collar and on the edges of the cuffs, and a large bow on the back of the collar, but that hasn't survived. Personally, I think it looks better without the trim.

 The chiffon overlayer is not included on the pattern, but it's just rectangular blocks with slight curves cut for the neckline and armscye.

 Has anyone made an 1890s outfit with this sort of elastic in the skirt? That's the sort of detail that always makes me want to do a little experimental archaeology.

 There were two wedding dresses from the mid-1890s with provenance, but I went with this one because I love satin - it stays in such good condition. One of the 18th century gowns I patterned for my book is satin, and you'd have thought it was made yesterday. Both dresses are attractive, but this one seemed like it would make a better pattern. And talking about the choice is making me want to pattern the other as well. But I can't right now!

Comments

  1. AuntieNanMay 16, 2014 at 8:13 AM

    Wow, Cassidy, this is fascinating! I wore my grandma's early 1900 cotton lace wedding gown, and it had some of the same features, the puffy lace over the cotton lawn underneath, the skirt that hooked to the bodice. It had modest gigot sleeves. I'm curious, too, about the elastic construction. I guess that pulled the fullness of the skirts to the back, leaving the front panel very flat. Cool! But why do you think they used the velvet band around the hem? Was it to keep the inside of the satin skirt clean?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CassidyMay 16, 2014 at 2:24 PM

      From the wedding portrait, it looks like pulling the fullness to the back is part of it, plus making it hang in those really swoopy folds. I couldn't get an accurate measure of its original length, since it's all degraded and stretched out, but it's definitely meant to be loose enough that there's no noticeable pulled-in spot.

      The velvet's probably a combination of things. Most Victorian skirt hems were bound or faced or backed, because that keeps the fold of the hem from wearing. Since the velvet's heavier than the usual silk or wool tape, it also adds some more body and structure to the skirt to help it hang in those folds (although the skirt's already stiffened with buckram). And then there's the visual element.

      Delete

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