All posts filed under: Rate the dress

Evening Dress, French, c. 1817, silk and wool gauze with silk satin, iron floral pailettes, silk embroidery, silk-wrapped paper, cording of silk around metal core, and glass beads, Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1958-74-1

Rate the Dress: Puffed sleeves & pailettes

Post an ‘interesting’ dress, get an ‘interesting’ set of responses!  This week’s puffed sleeves & pailette embellished Rate the Dress pick is a little more subtly interesting: possibly somewhere between last week and the week before.  Let’s see what you make of it! Last week: late bustle-era velvet, beading, and patterns Not surprisingly, there was a wide range of reactions to last weeks late 1880s bustle dress.  Ratings ranged from 3 to 10.  It was not a dress that was compromising, or trying to please.  It was a dress with a definite viewpoint, and a definite opinion. The Total: 8 I strongly suspect that the wearer of the dress wouldn’t have cared a fig what we rated it, and whether we liked it or not.  She liked it, and that was the only opinion that mattered! And that fact rather makes me like it even more. This week: a late Regency era evening dress This week I’ve gone simple and classic, but with hopefully enough interesting details to keep it from being boring, with a …

http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/159169

Rate the Dress: Late Victorian totally un-neutral

Last week’s dress was deemed quietly elegant and almost offensively in-offensive.  Beautiful (excepting, perhaps the sleeve bows), but too retiring and neutral to inspire much passion on either end (excepting, perhaps, once again, when it came to the bows).  So this week I’ve chosen a dress, that while in (technically) neutral shades of browns & blacks, and sleek in silhouette, is determinedly un-neutral in every other respect.  You might, in the end, decide it is also elegant, but not for reasons of quietude! Last week: early Victorian neutrals Things I took away from your responses: You thought the dress was pretty but ultimately a little boring. You don’t like brown. You really, really didn’t like those sleeve bows. But even if you don’t like brown and bows you recognise and reward good construction. The Total: 8.4 Exactly the rating that a dress that would be supremely appropriate at any event without ever drawing attention to itself would be expected to get.  And I learned a lot about early Victorian trims that kind of look like …

Ball gown, 1839-1840, maker unknown. Gift of Mrs Whitehead, 1966. CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Te Papa PC001362

Rate the Dress: Early Victorian neutrals

I’m very excited about this week’s Rate the Dress choice, because it’s a dress I’ve actually examined* in person.  It’s not often that I get to show one of those!  I may love it because I’ve seen it, but will you love it for what it looks like? Last week: a late 1910s Lucile dress Well, Lady Luck doesn’t wear green as far as Lucile is concerned, because a lot of you DID NOT like the dress – though the vivid green colour was one of the few elements that was almost universally popular. There were a few people who did like the dress for the overall impression it created, but for most of you, it just wasn’t working. The Total: 5.8 out of 10 Ouch.  Anything below a 6 is pretty unusually bad! This week: Last week’s Lucile dress may have been a little too heavy on the quirkiest details of 1910s fashions (though you may be surprised to find how many examples of dangling-bust-trim were made in the 1910s), so this week’s pick is …