Doesn’t it look just like the the cast of Anne of Green Gables? I love those books! I wanted to wear the clothes, ramble in the woods and gather the flowers, make the food. Everything. I think Anne is the one in front with the umbrella and the big smile.
It turns out that there are a lot of very saucy vintage beauties frolicking around the internet. When I first found some I was a bit taken aback. My inner Victorian prude fainted. Luckily, with her on the floor, my inner bohemian artist had room to appreciate them. I love these photos because their bodies look just like mine. They have a bit of squish. Their waists aren’t that small, and their busts aren’t that big. Their thighs rub together. Sometimes they have ugly feet (I don’t have ugly feet). And somehow, showing you long dead ladies in their altogether doesn’t seem quite as naughty.
Last week so many of you loved the unusually cut and coloured 1750s robe a la anglaise that it rated a 9 out of 10. Some interesting questions were raised about the dress. Was it displayed on a too-small mannequin? Was intended to be a pregnancy frock that adapted with the size of the wearer? Was it made by an amateur dressmaker who couldn’t make it symmetrical? This week won’t raise any of that sort of questions, because we know a lot about the dress in question. Remember the party that the Smith’s house in Meet Me In St Louis? Judy Garland, as the teenage Esther, attempts to romance the neighbor boy while wearing a memorable tassel trimmed ensemble, which may or may not have been blue and yellow, depending on how much you believe the colourist. UPDATE: Now with a video clip, so you can see the context and rate the dress in motion. Apologies for the dreadfully un-PC song! What do you think of 1944 doing 1904? Does Judy deserve a ribbon for …
