Latest Posts

Evening dress, Lucile Ltd, Paris, France, c.1918-1920, Silk, gold-embroidered net, satin binding, silk flowers, National Museums of Scotland

Rate the Dress: Hope personified by Lucile, c. 1918-20

Last week’s Rate the Dress looked towards autumn, so this week I’m balancing the globe and showing a dress that evokes springtime.  Last week’s dress also beat the rating of the dress of the week before.  Can this one do even better?

Last week: a pleated polonaise gown in rust brown

I hadn’t realised how much people loved this dress until I started tallying the ratings, where it quickly became evident that almost all of you thought it was wonderful.  It was just such a flattering, elegant, universal dress, that it received almost universal acclaim.  I’m sure I can’t be the only person who is now on the lookout for rust coloured silk…

The Total: 9.6 out of 10

Even better than the 18th century not-a-polonaise!  AND it got 10 scores of 10/10 in a row!

This week: a late 1910s Lucile dress

This time of year is usually the darkest, grimmest bit of a New Zealand winter (although it’s been eerily non-dark and grim this year), and, from what I hear, it’s the hottest, driest part of a what has been an eerily and horribly hot and dry summer in most of the Northern Hemisphere.  I thought all of us could use a Rate the Dress that spoke of cool woods, and bubbling brooks, and spring flowers.

So here is a Lucile frock in shot green taffeta, overlaid with gold-embroidered net, like sunlight filtering through a leaf canopy, and trimmed with bright yellow binding, with dangling strings of delicate flowers, like the first buds of spring.

According to the National Museums of Scotland, the green shade of this dress is a deliberate choice on the part of Lucile, Lady Duff Gordon, to evoke hope and wisdom:

The colour choice was particularly symbolic in France, and particularly relevant in the aftermath of World War One, which people hoped would be ‘the war to end all wars’.

Symbolism aside, what do you think of this vibrant take on late 1910s fashion, in all its quirky glory?

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.  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!  Thanks in advance!)

The Pictoral Review, July 1916

Lingerie frocks from the Pictorial Review 1915 & 1916

Following on from my terminology post about lingerie dresses and lingerie frocks, here are a few more advertisements featuring lingerie frocks from the June 1915 and July 1916 issues of the Pictoral Review magazine.

These illustrations show patterns sold by the American Fashion Company.  The detailed images give ideas for fabrics and trim, while the simple line drawings show the basic dress lines.

Pictoral Review June 1915

Pictoral Review June 1915

Pictoral Review June 1915

Pictoral Review June 1915

Pictoral Review June 1915

Pictoral Review June 1915

The simple line drawings also show other pattern variants, like the fancy puffed mameluke sleeves of 6203, instead of the simpler sleeves shown above.

Pictoral Review June 1915

Pictoral Review June 1915

The July 1916 page shows fashions for spectators and sportswomen.  It should be pretty clear which is which!

The Pictoral Review, July 1916

This page is quite interesting, because it shows how garments were considered ‘frocks’ or ‘dresses’ even when they were two-piece garments.

(side note, how adorable are those hats?  The sculptural ribbons on the one with the plaid dress, and the little tipped-up bergere revival hat on the far right… delicious!)

The Pictoral Review, July 1916

Check out how the shoes shown with 6582 and 6787 are the twins of the American Duchess Molieres!

Here is the full descriptions of the outfits:

The Pictoral Review, July 1916

Pictoral Review, July 1916

(more hat side notes.  The feathers on the underside of the brim?  Brilliant!)

The Pictoral Review, July 1916

Look at the extremely sheer blouse worn with this: the artist has taken care to show how translucent the collar is.

The Pictoral Review, July 1916

(final side note:  I desperately want something that does a good approximation of a 1910s sports boot.  I wonder if there is enough demand for American Duchess to think about it…)

Hope you enjoyed this peek into mid 1910s fashions, and more insight into lingerie frocks!

Rate the Dress: a proper polonaise dress

This week Rate the Dress is going from not-a-polonaise to actually-a-polonaise, with dresses separated in time by a century.  Last week’s was exquisitely presented, this week’s choice less so – but hopefully you’ll find it no less worthy of comment.

Last week: a painted silk ca 1780s not-a-polonaise.

You thought this dress was practically perfect in every way: it even racked up a total of 360 points: a round of applause if I ever saw one!  It lost a few points for the not-matched but not-not matched bodice, which I quite expected.  But otherwise…pretty much fabulous.

The Total: 9.5/10

Woot woot!

This week:

Since last week’s dress wasn’t an actual polonaise, I thought I’d pick a real one this week.  Not a real 18th century polonaise dress, but one from another era that used the term.

1870s and 1880s ‘polonaise’ dresses were bustle dresses with the bodice and bustling overskirt cut in one, and the bustling overskirt opening over the (often contrasting) underskirt in a V, inspired by 18th century dresses which opened over petticoats.  The  overall aesthetic as well as the use of the term ‘polonaise’ was a deliberate nod to the 18th century.

Bustle dress, silk, 1880s, August Auctions, Lot 356, May 9, 2017

Bustle dress, silk, 1880s, August Auctions, Lot 356, May 9, 2017

Victorian polonaise gowns were just one part of the Georgian revivalism so fashionable in the second half of the 18th century (other examples I’ve covered are 1870s  Louis heels, 1860s-80s Pompadour fabrics or Pompadour taffeta,  and 1860s bergere , but they have contributed to the modern confusion around ‘robe a la polonaise’ dresses.

The front of this dress, with its open bodice front that evokes a stomacher, and open skirt, is classic Victorian polonaise.  The back view is a little less straightforward: the butterfly bustle on this 1880s gown could just as easily be referencing 17th century mantua as late 18th century pick-ups.

Bustle dress, silk, 1880s, August Auctions, Lot 356, May 9, 2017

Bustle dress, silk, 1880s, August Auctions, Lot 356, May 9, 2017

This dress is an example I’d love to see given a full museum treatment and presentation.  Auction houses are under significant time and financial constraints, so their mannequins and steaming are less than ideal, and it’s definitely not doing this dress any favours.

Bustle dress, silk, 1880s, August Auctions, Lot 356, May 9, 2017

I know it’s not the ideal presentation, but let’s not hold that against the dress.  What do you think of it?

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.  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!  Thanks in advance!)