Draped and layered 1910s dresses just aren’t doing it for you are they? First the blue chiffon and lace frock was compared to curtains and kids dress-ups, and then last week’s pale paisley 1910s frock was given the exact same criticism (only this time you said tablecloths) by some. And quite a few of you thought it was nice but meh. But some of you thought it was fabulous, so it did score enough 10/10 to bring it up to a respectable 8.2 out of 10 – which is pretty much exactly what I’d give the dress!.
I’ve been doing a bit of research into 1860s fashions as a potential project for my HSF Heirlooms & Heritage challenge (not exactly a hint, because I’ve also discovered that thanks to some amazing family genealogy work I can trace a direct line of ancestors all the way back to Baldwin of Flanders in the 9th c (and, through Judith, all the way back to Charlemagne) so maybe I’ll get excited and do something early Medieval – or anywhere in between, because a lot is known about all the Sirs and Esquires that happened before you finally get a younger son who emigrates to America 800 years later), and I can across this dress.
And I think it’s fascinating:
The fabric is apparently a warp-printed moire silk taffeta, and the dress is a perfect example of the transition from the full crinoline silhouette, to the back-emphasis bustle silhouette.
Transitional styles are quite interesting: they can either be incredibly successful, combining elements of the more classic periods to create something unusual and unexpected, or they can be an awkward melding of disparate aesthetics.
How do you feel about this transitional gown?
Rate the Dress on a Scale of 1 to 10