I’m always surprised by what does and what doesn’t come under criticism with a Rate the Dress. I knew the print and non-symetrical matching of last week’s credited-as-1860s-almost-certainly-early-1850s-instead frock wouldn’t be everyone’s favourite, but it didn’t occur to me that quite a few of you would castigate it for the anatomy it was meant to fit over.  The lady who wore it couldn’t help her very long torsos and slope-y shoulders (and the shoulders, at least, were very fashionable at the time)!  Many of you did, however, appreciated the pairing of a very busy fabric with a very simple design, which helped to give the dress a modest but respectable 7 out of 10. This frock, from the Hillwood Estate Museum, features very muted fabrics, and the transitional silhouette of 1909ish, as fashions moved from the sweeping skirts and drooping bodices of the first decade of the 20th century, to the raised waists and slim columnar shape of the second. This evening dress still features the sweeping skirts, but they are considerably restrained.  The colours …

Last week I showed you an all-white 1820s frock with a profusion of detailing.  I expected that you would dislike the slightly raised waistline, the mish-mash of design inspiration, and the plain white fabric, but, much to my surprise, most of you liked it! Some of you thought it was fussy, and that the hem was particularly misplaced, bringing the score down to 8.3 out of 10. Since last week’s all white frock went over so well, we’re going to stick to pale tones this week, with just a bit of bright hues and florals to lift the design. Sadly, the Metropolitan Museum of Art gives very little information about this gown, so we’re going to have to do a bit of guessing as we rate it: The dress is of silk satin trimmed with lace (probably linen), and is shaped almost entirely through the use of pintucks.  Long graduated pintucks in the torso  nip in the dress around the waist, and short horizontal pintucks down  the front of the sleeves help the sleeves to …