I’m deep, deep in 1780s stay madness at the moment, so it’s probably not a huge surprise that I’ve picked something on-theme. And I’m always in favour of yellow, so yellow it is.
After the silence of the week before, there were so many comments on the pinafore dress. I must admit, I was quite surprised at how popular it was. I guess the pinafore look is in historically as well!
The Total: 8.7 out of 10
And many, many thanks to Cynthia Amneus of the Cincinnati Art Museum, who weighed in with additional information on the dress in the comments.
This week: a yellow silk 1780s redingote
This 1780s redingote is a wonderful example of the variation in garments seen in the last quarter of the 18th century.
It features a fitted bodice, front fastening, with slim, curved 3/4 sleeves, a wide double collar with decorative reverse-scalloped edging, and a cutaway front (the so-called zone-front). The photographs are not clear enough to see if the back bodice is cut in one with the skirt, or separate. Either is possible, but the latter is more likely. There is some sort of fringed decoration at the bottom of the bodice front – possibly a type of fly fringing.
The flat, single-colour fabric is a definite departure from the brocaded floral silks popular in earlier decades, and anticipates the lighter fabrics of the centuries end. The overall effect, with pastel hue and trained skirt, is decidedly of a garment for someone who wasn’t worried about stains.
What do you think?
(I have restrained myself mightily and am not availing myself of all the puns that ‘redingote’ so readily suggests (well, mostly).
Rate the Dress on a Scale of 1 to 10
A reminder about rating – feel free to be critical if you don’t like a thing, but make sure that your comments aren’t actually insulting to those who do like a garment. Phrase criticism as your opinion, rather than a flat fact. Our different tastes are what make Rate the Dress so interesting. It’s no fun when a comment implies that anyone who doesn’t agree with it, or who would wear a garment, is totally lacking in taste.
(as usual, nothing more complicated than a .5. I also hugely appreciate it if you only do one rating, and set it on a line at the very end of your comment, so I can find it! And 0 is not on a scale of 1 to 10. Thanks in advance!)