The Dreamstress

Latest Posts

Playing at pastoralism in Augusta Stays

I’ve been hard at work planning online teaching for costume history and pattern drafting at Toi Whakaari, and doing pattern stuff for Scroop Patterns, and my brain is exhausted and tired of looking at the computer. I’ve got a whole bunch of blog ideas, but they were all just too much effort today.

So I had a rummage around in my photo library for inspiration for today’s post, and found a bunch of gorgeous images from back in October and our 2019 Sew & Eat Historical Retreat which I’ve never posted.

We spent an afternoon dressed up in Augusta stays, pretending to be 18th century ladies pretending to be milkmaids, wandering around in the meadows picking flowers and inspecting old farm equipment and having romantic interludes with attractively lichened fences (as you do).

Eloise @eloise_faith_gladrags went very historical, in her gorgeous completely handsewn Augustas, and perfectly pastel ensemble. She always picks the most beautiful soft colours for her sewing!

I went slightly less historical, because I’d forgotten to pack 18th c caps:

And I dressed up Miss Priscilla in total fantasy, in the theatrical version of the Augusta Stays and my much-beloved and much-used silk organza petticoat.

Priscilla said she wasn’t sure if she felt like a bride or a witch. She pointed out that witches in movies and fairytale books are often shown with 1780s hair, and now that she’s said it I can’t unsee it!

These photos are just what my heart needs right now. It was a dry summer in Wellington, and we’re just coming out of it now. The hills are still rather barren and brown. We’ve been in lockdown for just over two weeks, and I’ve only seen whatever bits of nature are within an easy walk of my house. Old growth forests, lush meadows, hawthorne trees, honeysuckle and queen anne’s lace are a balm for the soul.

Hopefully one day we’ll get back to this farm and get to explore the meadows and woods again. It was such a beautiful place, and such a beautiful day.

But…not quite as beautiful as it looks in the photos. It was WINDY, and out good photos were taken between gusts. Half the shoot looked like this:

And this:

And this, which looks like Eloise is doing interpretive dance, but is actually the moment the wind stole her cap!

Maybe I was better off without one after all!

Rate the Dress: Bustle Era Plaid

Published by The Dreamstress

This week’s Rate the Dress stays in the same general time-period as last week’s tea gown, but goes from silliness and swoosh to severity, straight lines and tailoring.

Last Week: an almost-certainly-a-tea-gown in warm yellow

Sometimes the ratings for a Rate the Dress are all over the place. Sometimes there are a few clear blocks of opinions and ratings. And every once in a while there is an almost unanimous agreement – or at least a substantially cohesive verdict. A few of you did really like last week’s dress. And an even smaller few (well, single, not even few) of you didn’t. But more than 2/3rds of you fell into the 6-7.5 range and thought that the dress just had too much trim, but not enough of it in some places, and would have looked much better shorn of its fringe and beading and lace.

The Total: 7 out of 10

The total for last week was so obvious I didn’t need a calculator!

This week: a tailored walking dress

This week’s Rate the Dress is a severely tailored walking dress in large scale check from the John Bright Collection.

Dress, wool, circa 1890, John Bright Historic Costume Collection

It features a streamlined bodice with many, many, many buttons on the overbodice, false underbodice with standing collar, and slim sleeves.

The skirt is un-ornamented except for the many gathers that add fullness in back, and were cut to fall over a small bustle.

The skirt, sleeves, and bodice back are cut on the bias, creating the impression that the dress wraps around the wearer, enclosing her in a web of worsted wool.

If it weren’t that this dress were later, you could poetically say that this dress is almost the chrysalis from which last week’s butterfly emerged. Is this a case of the cocoon being preferable to the hatchling?

What do you think?

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

Spring Styles for 1915, thedreamstress.com

Spring Styles for 1915 from the Standard Mail Order Co.

Published by The Dreamstress

I’m out of posting inspiration for the time (or, more accurately, I’ve got lots of inspiration, but I’m out of the mindset that allows me to sit down and pursue an involved research idea), so I’m turning to the catalogue stash for blogging material again.

Up today: two pages from the Standard Mail Order Co ‘Spring Styles for 1915’ catalogue.

The Standard Mail Order Co was an American mail order company that operated in the 1900s-1910s. They sold men’s, women’s and children’s clothes, hats and shoes, as well as a range of toiletries, trimmings for hats and clothes, and a few other small personal items.

As far as I can tell, it had no relationship the Standard Pattern Company, which put out the Designer Magazine at the same time.

Based on other mail order catalogues in my collection, Standard was low-midrange. Their pricing is slightly higher than Sears (the ultimate budget mail order catalogue), but significantly lower than Bella Hesse & Co, the creme de la creme of mail order fashion magazines.

The priciest frock in the Standard Catalogue is the silk number in the lower right corner of the front cover at $11.50. There is also has a whole page of $1 wash frocks (dresses that could be washed at home without the dyes bleeding), which are only about US$25 in modern money. In comparison, my Autumn/Winter 1914/15 Belle Hesse has at least three frocks costing over $20 (about $500 in 2020!), and none less than $5.

Because Standard was a small low-midrange catalogue, they couldn’t afford fancy artwork for their front cover, and their front page doubles a sale page, featuring four of their most tempting frocks.

I always play “which garment from this page would I buy” when I go through catalogues (fess up, who else does this?!) and my choice for this page is easy: I’d definitely go for the wool serge dress in the top right corner.

I love the tailored look, tuxedo revers and the standing collar. The only tricky bit would be choosing the colour. I love the sand its shown in, but I’m already sand coloured: I can’t wear it all over. I look great in black, but it’s so boring, I always end up buying blue, so I try to avoid that. Dark green, or wine are awfully tempting! What do you think?

One thing of interesting things in this catalogue are the amount of designs that are described as being based on another era.

The pricey silk taffeta number shown in palest grey (also available in black, navy blue, dark green, and dark Copenhagen [blue]) is described as a ‘Colonial’ design. I presume the colonial element is the standing ruff collar, which evokes a Regency/1820s ruff (they are only off by 30-50 years…).

The next page features the lavender voile floral frock in the lower right corner, which ’embodies all the charm and grace of the “Crinoline” fashions.’

I struggled to pick my favourite from this page. I love the pink floral (very affordably priced at $1.98!), but I’ve never quite reconciled myself to the mid-hip design-line on so many 1915 dresses. In fact, 1915 is the only year in the 1910s I don’t love: I just feel that so many styles are an awkward transition between the sleeker lines of 1914, and the fullness of 1916.

Note the reference to ‘business disturbances’ – this is due to WWI. Although America wouldn’t enter the war for another 2 and a bit years, they were economic repercussions, and access to some goods was limited, which drove up the prices.

The tub silk (‘tub’ means it’s washable at home) dress in black floral is rather lovely. Three layers of tiers with horizontal and then vertical stripes is a lot, and the ruched sash and Elizabethan collar (note that historicism!) are…not to my taste. But at least the collar is detachable! And I’m rather fond of the hat and shoes.

Here’s a close up of the fabrics on the two top dresses. The florals over stripes motif of the black is SO typical of the mid teens. It’s a type of pattern I wish we saw more of in modern silks and cottons.

I’m very torn on the silk faille poplin dress. It’s so close to elegant, but yet there’s something really off about it to me. Is it the cummerbund waistband? The embroidery? The ruched panel on the lower skirt? It feels like it should be beautiful, but just isn’t. What do you think?

The hat is tres chic though, and I bet it would look smashing on me.

Which are your favourites?