Latest Posts

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

Getting things right: my foundations pledge

Update:  Please do read this post and comment on it, because it’s interesting and pretty and important, but don’t leave your links to your HSF/M Foundations challenge blog posts on this one, because that’s not what it’s for!  They belong on yesterdays  post. 🙂

Five years ago I made this ca. 1800 dress, inspired by two  portraits of Madame Recamier:

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

I managed to make it in one day, even though it is predominantly hand-sewn.  Unfortunately, in the rush to make it, I didn’t double-check Janet Arnold, and I made a rather big mistake.

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

Can you see it?

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

It’s the front-skirt to bodice join.  I gathered my entire front skirt to the apron bodice, where there should have been almost no gathering, and the sides of the skirts should have hung over, and wrapped around the back, thus eliminating that enormous fold running down the side of the skirt, and the weird gathered-front but flat sides effect.

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

 

I realised the mistake almost as soon as the dress was done, but didn’t fix it.  Every time I’ve worn the dress in the 5 years since, it has bugged me, and I’ve thought “I really should fix this.”  But I just didn’t get to it.

Then, two weeks ago when Theresa and I did our Regency photoshoot, I remembered it again, and kicked myself when I hadn’t thought to fix it beforehand.  I’m particularly gutted about it when I look at the photos (so gorgeous) but know the dress isn’t right.

And, to top it all off, when I finally decided to fix it, it took less than two hours, all handsewing, to get it perfect.  I unpicked the bodice from the skirt, flattened the skirt, matched centers, sewed the skirt to the bodice lining, sewed the bodice front down over it, hemmed and sewed together the sides and back facings, sewed on ribbons, and worked ribbon carriers.

Here is what it now (and should) look like.  Flat front, tabs extending to the sides to wrap around the back:

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

 

Tapes  sewn to the sides of the skirt wrap around the back and tie underneath the front:

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

 

The front skirt is folded back and sewn to itself at the side slits, to help to cover them and to form a facing:

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

I worked little thread loops at the back, to help carry the skirt tapes and keep them in place.

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

And while I was at it, I made a new cord for the front lacing that hides under the apron front, as the old cord had broken and was too short (clearly my cord-making skills need work):

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

 

The dress still isn’t 100% correct, and still represents my sewing 5 and a half years ago), not my sewing today.  But it is much, much better, and I feel much better about it.  When I made it, it was meant to be the foundation of a Regency wardrobe – to get sleeves, and a chemisette, and a spencer, and be wearable in lots of situations.

That may still happen, but that is not entirely how this is a foundation.

If not that,  how is this a foundation?  I want the my sewing to be based on getting things right.  Taking  the time to research things, and fit things, and sew things properly, so that every garment represents the best I could possibly do.  And when I do make mistakes, I want to fix them right away.  I’m not going to fix all of my older garments that I am not happy with, but I am going to pledge that everything new going forward will be something I can be 100% proud of.

And that is a good foundation.

ca. 1800 Recamier gown thedreamstress.com

 

The Challenge: #1  Foundations

Fabric:  None new

Pattern:  ca. 1800 Apron front gown in Janet Arnold’s Patterns of Fashion

Year:  ca. 1800

Notions:  cotton thread, art silk ribbon.

How historically accurate is it?:  Well, a lot better than it was!

Hours to complete:  Just 2 to fix it.

First worn:  Not yet, but maybe I can convince Mr D to do another photoshoot this weekend!

Total cost:  None.

Regency dresses thedreamstress.com

HSM ’15 Challenge #1: Foundations

I usually try to write Historical Sew Fortnightly/Monthly inspiration posts wells in advance of the challenge, but I’m running quite late this year, so am writing this post only a few days before the challenge is over.

Challenge #1 for the Historical Sew Monthly 2015 was Foundations.  I deliberately left the challenge quite vague: “make something that is the foundation of an outfit (however you interpret that)”

So what is a foundation?  According to dictionary.com:

[foun-dey-shuh n]

noun
1.
the basis or groundwork of anything:

Lots of scope there!

Interestingly, being able to write this post most of the way through the challenge, with a whole folder full of entries on FB, it turns out that most people have chosen a much more specific  meaning:

foundation garment

noun
1.
an undergarment, as a girdle or corset, worn by women to support or give shape to the contours of the body.

Only you’ve extended that meaning to include any undergarment.  Fascinating.  One HSM-er mentioned that she thought foundations were anything that created structure – rather like the  Shape and Support challenge from last year

Of course, undergarments are often also the foundation of a historical garment in the sense cited above: the basis of the outfit.  Get your undergarments right, and it’s much easier to get the outside right.  Get your undergarments wrong, and it’s almost impossible to get your outers  right.

You could extend that concept, and the idea of foundations, even further.  I like to say that correct fabric choice is the foundation of successful sewing.  Get it wrong, and you just can’t get the garment right.

There are many other ways you could interpret foundations.  By making an item that was the basis for a whole wardrobe, depending on what you paired it with.  Or by making shoes, which are a nice twist on the idea of building foundations.  Or socks – there is an old saying about being able to do anything as long as you have a good pair of socks.  Or a skirt from an era when you had a different evening and day bodice – the skirt becomes the foundation piece for a whole wardrobe.  All these ways to think about foundations!  All interesting and valid

Tomorrow, I’m going to show you how I interpreted it – which is yet another way.

For now, here is a hint:

Regency dresses thedreamstress.com

Rate the Dress: an end-of-the-crinoline era wrap gown

Last week we didn’t have a Rate the Dress, because of the blog makeover.  I’ll be getting to the Rate-the-Dress scores from the week before in a couple of hours, but for now I am dealing with the effects of a 28 degree day in Wellington (I am basically cold-blooded.  I can handle 14-25 degrees, and on either side of that my body freaks out) and have to limit my computer time or trigger a migraine.

I keep going back or forth on whether I think this is a very elaborate wrapper/dressing gown, or a perfectly proper outdoors coat-dress.

The bows on the shoulder  suggest  a most elegant inside wrapper – basically  an early tea gown, which first began to appear in the 1870s.

At the same time, it  is  also very reminiscent of the trimmings and silhouettes of the type of unshaped outdoor dresses that were popular in the 1860s, such as the ones seen in Monet’s Women in the Garden.  The back view makes me lean in that direction.

I suspect on days when my brain wasn’t cooked to a crisp I would know exactly what this was, and the precise  name, but today you shall have to endure me being quite stupid, and will have to make your own suppositions, whilst  you also consider the sartorial merits of this garment.

While the loose fit of the bodice suggests the gown could have been worn by a woman who was expecting, or simply a larger women, very unshaped dresses appear regularly enough in 1860s fashion plates to indicate that it was a general style.

So what do you think this is?  Tea gown?  Wrapper?  Very elaborate coat dress?

And what do you think of it aesthetically?

Rate the Dress on a Scale of 1 to 10