I’ll be perfectly honest with you. I was NOT expecting you, on the whole, to like last week’s Rate the Dress. I thought all of you would be calling curtains and poof and froof and Miss Havisham. I mean, it had puffed sleeves divided by puffs with triple rows of ruffles at the edges, and layers and layers of puffed skirts, all surmounted by a puffed sash. But you loved it! Perhaps all that paleness made the puffiness work, because it came in at a respectable 7.7 out of 10 (not bad for a dress that did, in the end, get compared to curtains & Miss Havisham).
This week I’m sticking with pale, but going outside the date perimeters of the Historical Sew Fortnightly with a 1950s gown (though Massignac was the designer for Paquin from 1945 to 49, so I question the dating slightly).
This dress reminds me of the moonflowers that used to grow wild all along the roads growing up Hawaii. They would bloom at dusk, and fade early in the morning. Massignac may have been using the exact flowers as her inspiration: evoking a fragile night bloom for a delicate evening gown, using a pale colour to glow against the dark of night, and adding rows of diamantes or sequins to further catch the light.
What do you think? Would the wearer of this dress be the blooming belle of the ball, or sad, wilted wallflower?
Rate the Dress on a Scale of 1 to 10
(and, as always, extra bonus points for anyone who can identify what collection this is from. I’ve searched and searched, but all the sites link back to commercial sites that are using other images from collections I recognise, without crediting them, and their links send you to shopping sites).