The Dreamstress

This post is late because I booked my schedule to the limit without giving myself any space for emergencies and things going wrong — which meant of course there were, and they did!  It’s also late because my browser freezes every time I visit the Centraal Museum’s website, which is rather annoying when you’re trying to Rate a Dress from that site.

Last Week:  a mid 1890s dress in red silk faille and silk velvet

Last Rate the Dress was quite theatrical…or costumey.  Perfect for a Victorian Disney villain, or a gothic horror movie, but perhaps less effective in real life.  Some of you loved the drama of it, but not everyone.

The Total: 7.5 out of 10

Even worse than the week before!

This week: a sporty 1920s day dress in spring shades

After something so heavy and plush and upholstered, I thought something light and sleek would be a nice contrast:

Day dress, 1920-1929, silk, Gift of Karen Olson, Goldstein Museum of Design 2004.003.001

This 1920s ensemble is a dress in two parts, consisting of a pleated skirt with attached slip, and a long tunic-blouse with patch pocket and asymmetrical swag collar.

Day dress, 1920-1929, silk, Gift of Karen Olson, Goldstein Museum of Design 2004.003.001

The dress features embroidered motifs of tennis rackets and crossed field-hockey sticks on the collar and patch pocket.  It seems unlikely the dress was actually worn for sports: the silk crepe de chine would stain with the slightest amount of perspiration.  There were silk tennis dresses in the 20s: they were just made of silk weaves more amenable to washing.

The owner must have been a sports fan though.  Perhaps it was worn by a keen player off the court or field, or a keen spectator on the sidelines?   It might even be a club insignia.

Day dress, 1920-1929, silk, Gift of Karen Olson, Goldstein Museum of Design 2004.003.001

Whatever the reason for this one, we know that  embroidered motifs were a fashionable touch on 20s sportswear.

Day dress, 1920-1929, silk, Gift of Karen Olson, Goldstein Museum of Design 2004.003.001

While the sporty embroidery is worked in subtle white threads, the dress is also decorated with fagotting on the collar and cuffs in bright grass green, providing a lime zing to the yellow of the dress.

Day dress, 1920-1929, silk, Gift of Karen Olson, Goldstein Museum of Design 2004.003.001

There is some exquisite sewing in the dress (that fagotting!), but also a few moments of refreshingly imperfection.  Look closely and you can see wobbles in the stitching round the collar facing, and on the pocket.  Silk crepe de chine is notoriously tricky so sew, so I have full sympathy.

Day dress, 1920-1929, silk, Gift of Karen Olson, Goldstein Museum of Design 2004.003.001

What do you think?  Would you feel chic swanning up to support your favourite team in this ensemble?

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.

This post is late because I booked my schedule to the limit without giving myself any space for emergencies and things going wrong – which meant of course there were, and they did!  It’s also late because my browser freezes every time I visit the Centraal Museum’s website, which is rather annoying when you’re trying to Rate a Dress from that site.

Last Week: An 1810s dress of pink roll-printed cotton, with lots of frills

Comments on last week’s dress focused on how frilly and pink and youthful it was – and how much it reminded some of you of a nightgown!  For some people that wasn’t an issue, or even made the dress more charming.  For others….not so much.

The Total: 7.6 out of 10

Looking like a nightgown was a little too much for some of you, and the rating definitely reflects that.

This week: a mid 1890s dress in red silk faille and silk velvet

A number of the comments on last week’s dress focused on how girlish it was.  I feel confident in saying that week’s dress is definitely not a debutant frock.

Dress in two parts, 1896, silk, lace and passementerie, 10592:001-002 Centraal Museum Utrecht

The deep red shades and heavy fabrics are definitely one for a mature woman who was not afraid to make a statement.

Dress in two parts, 1896, silk, lace and passementerie, 10592:001-002 Centraal Museum Utrecht

I picked this dress for Rate the Dress almost entirely based on the front bodice decoration.  The rest of the dress is very nice and typical of its time (although I feel that the bustle its been staged with is too large – a common fault with the Centraal Museum’s costume staging), but the frayed fringing is interesting.  And interesting is what makes Rate the Dress fun.

Dress in two parts, 1896, silk, lace and passementerie, 10592:001-002 Centraal Museum Utrecht

The dress has many elements of 18th century historicism: the deep, square neckline; a petticoat and stomacher effect front; and the length of the sleeves and lace engageantes.   The frayed fringing is a nod to 18th century pinked trim, with a Victorian twist.

Dress in two parts, 1896, silk, lace and passementerie, 10592:001-002 Centraal Museum Utrecht

The last time I showed a dress with frayed fringing the trim was not particularly popular.  Will this dress receive a different reception?

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.