All posts tagged: 1950s

Rate the Dress: Pierre Balmain does ostrich feathers

Last week most of you loved the 1840s gown remade from 1740s fabric – the colour, the frugality, and the nod to 18th century details all struck a chord with you, and the dress came in an impressive 8.9 out of 10.  Personally, while I thought the fabric and colour divine, and the silhouette lovely, the white detailing was too stark and cartoon like for my taste, and my score wouldn’t have been nearly so high, but that’s alright: different opinions are what make the world interesting! I couldn’t find another UFO garment to show you for this week’s Rate the Dress, so instead I’m showing you a UFRTD – I started this Rate the Dress, back when I was making Carolyn’s wedding dress and had ostrich feathers on the mind.  Somehow it was never the right time to post it, and so it lingered as a draft.  Time to have one less draft! Feathered frocks have had mixed reviews in the past.  Victorian marabou was popular in white, not so much in teal.  Feather …

Rate the Dress: ’50s stripes & draping

Last week’s late 18th century robe a la anglaise sparked lots of discussion on how original or altered the dress was.  Was it 18th century at all?  18th century with extensive later alterations?  18th century but just really badly displayed?  I suspect the last is mainly to blame.  Most of you liked the general aesthetic of the dress, whether it was really accurately 18th century or not, and it came in at a 7.7 out of 10. When I had trouble picking a dress last week Claire put in a request for something from the mid-20th century.  I think this 1950s dress is rather striking.  You’d certainly make a sensation wearing it, but sometimes people are sensations for all the WRONG reasons. What do you think?  Would the wearer of this dress be the last word in chic sophistication, or just a bit too gauche and showy? Rate the Dress on a Scale of 1 to 10

Simplicity 2733: a pattern mystery

I found Simplicity 2733 at an op-shop a few days ago, and it has turned out to be quite a fascinating piece. On the surface, it looks simple: a basic late ’50s blouse pattern: The pattern wasn’t a lot, and I was in a hurry, so I didn’t inspect it at the op shop.  When I came home and opened it up, I was surprised for two reasons. First, I got a bonus!  It also included most of the pieces (all but the longer sleeve view) and the instructions for Simplicity 1735.  Sweet! The second surprise?  Simplicity 2733 is late 1950s, but the pattern is a non-printed, pre-cut perforated pattern, of the type that you rarely see in post mid-1940s patterns.  I have never before seen a 1950s pattern of this type. What a conundrum.  Why is this particular pattern so old-fashioned?  Are all copies of 2733 like this?  Or was this pattern produced in NZ, using older technology, meaning that the NZ version of the pattern is different than the usual international version? Any …