The Dreamstress

Last week’s Rate the Dress was extremely revealing, and rather incomplete. This week I’ve got in the opposite direction, with a very covered up 1890s dress, that even comes with its original matching hat.

Last week:  a ca. 1908 evening dress covered in metallic embroidery & beading

The vast majority of you adored last weeks dress, and appreciated the way it melded historical references (medieval sideless surcoats & neoclassicism) with an extremely modern feel that wouldn’t be out of place on today’s red carpets.

You correctly noted that the dress was missing a very important feature: an underdress which filled in the neckline, and the sheer gates-of-hell-esque side mesh.

And then, a few of you thought it was terribly tacky…

The Total: 9.2 out of 10

(I’m mildly amused that this weeks rating is 8.4 — both numbers that always look like they are pregnant to me!)

This week: an 1890s dress in plum and leaf print chine

Today’s pick is a classic 1890s day dress, though the choice and combination of fabric make it rather striking and unusual.

The sleeves and bodice front and back are made from a chine silk with a leaf pattern in shades of green on a dark plum.

The chine silk has been perfectly matched to a plain plum silk taffeta for the skirt, bodice sides, and cuffs.

The skirt and bodice are separate pieces, the join hidden by the leaf print sash, and the bodice closing beneath the puffed silk at centre front.

Not only is the ensemble perfectly matched but it also comes with a coordinating hat: a little percher designed to sit tipped over the front of the face, with a wired flourish of the chine silk.

The hat is unexpectedly bright: a flourish of vivid yellow and orange to contrast the muted purples and greens of the dress.

What do you think of the ensemble? The dress, in its muted greens and purples, with its jaunty topper, typically 1890s in shape with a rather quirky twist to the design. Do you enjoy the combination, find it whimsical? Or is it just a terrible mis-match?

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!)

Last week’s Rate the Dress was so dark and heavy that I really wanted a light coloured, light feeling frock to balance it out. I couldn’t find something that was as light and frothy as I’d hoped – but this beaded and be-spangled ca. 1908 evening gown is certainly a contrast to last week.

Last week: a very short-waisted ca. 1855 afternoon dress

No consensus on whether the dress might have been a maternity gown, but lots of discussion of the non-mirrored front (as expected – not a point winning feature). The general feeling was the fabric was so lovely, and the dress was overall rather elegant.

The Total: 8.4

(I’m mildly amused that this weeks rating is 8.4 – both numbers that always look like they are pregnant to me!)

This week:  a ca. 1908 evening dress covered in metallic embroidery & beading

Augusta Auctions describes this strikingly beaded frock, with its streamlined silhouette, as a ball gown. With that elaborate train, it’s not exactly practical for dancing, but it definitely would have been worn to a very formal evening event.

The gown is an excellent illustration of the rather body-conscious silhouette of the last few years of the first decade of the 20th century.

The elaborate beading and embroidery almost anticipate the colour blocking and pattern shaping of early 2010s body con dresses – a la the Stella McCartney ‘Octavia’ number Kate Winslet wore to the 2011 Venice Film festival.

In addition to anticipating trends from a century later, this dress also looks back a century, with a clear neoclassical influence in its shape and decorations.

So how is this dress, and its combination of historicism and avant-garde-ness, sitting with you?

It would definitely have been worn with a more fitting under-dress, but I think we can still see the gist of what this frock was, and would have looked like on a person.

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!)