Call the Fashion Police! I’m Wearing an Illegal Hatpin!

To keep my hats jaunty but secure at Edwardian events, I use one of my antique, pre-ban hatpins. Pre-ban? What’s that? Well, as silly as it may sound to us, in the 1910s, cities around the globe passed laws outlawing certain sizes of hatpins! Why would governments and police departments waste valuable time outlawing fashion accessories?
Until about 1970, hats were a major part of a woman’s wardrobe. They have varied in size, material, and decor, but one of the primary problems with hats is that, if caught by a gust of wind, it can easily escape from you! Ladies have employed a variety of methods to avert this: making the hat deep enough that it sit snugly on the head or using ribbons to tie them down, wire loops that grasp your head (many 1950s hats use this method), or clips and combs that grab onto your hair. One of the most popular antique methods we no longer use was the hatpin. Hatpins hold your hat on securely by attaching your hat to your hairstyle. That way, as long as your bun is secure, your hat can’t fall off or blow away in the wind! It also helps perch the hat high on your head so it’s not smashing your hairdo or hiding your face. To wear one, you position your hat as desired, thrust the pin through one side of the crown, carefully sliding it under a portion of your hair, and then pushing the pin back out the other side of the hat.

Sort of like this…
The closer yo can get the pin to your scalp, the better. But watch out! You don’t want to jab yourself!

Hatpins  started out as wimple pins used to hold women’s veils in place as far back as Roman times. Those pins were fairly small. However, as women’s headwear changed, so did the pins. It was during the late 18th century– when outrageous large hats perched on outrageously large hairdos–that hatpins first began to appear. Hatpins didn’t truly become common until the mid-to-late 19th century when hats overtook bonnets as the most fashionable form of headwear. A hatpin became an indispensable part of a well-dressed woman’s wardrobe. Victorian hats were fairly small for the most part, but as the turn of the century drew near, the hats grew larger and more elaborate…not unlike the giant hats of 100 years earlier.

Mary Boteler by John Hoppner, 1786

Publicity photo of performer Rhonda Ray, circa 1903-1907

Les Modes Hats, circa 1907

Hats and hairstyles in the Edwardian era were enormous, requiring equally enormous hatpins– often so long and sharp that they could not only jab you, but anyone that got too close to you. Indeed, at over a foot long and made of rigid steel, an Edwardian hatpin makes a formidable weapon! There are even poems, books, and songs written about women defending themselves with hatpins! Mugger trying to get your purse? STAB ‘EM! Pervert “mashing” (harassing) you on the train? EN GARDE!

Poke me, eh? I’LL POKE YOU!

Newspapers published many stories about women defending themselves with their hatpins– including in Chicago, one of the first cities to institute  hatpin laws. In 1902 the Chicago Tribune published an article about Jaunite Bonneau– one of the first female couriers for Western Union– defending herself with “Fists and Hatpin” against a group of young male attackers– and being completely blamed for hurting the lads that attacked her.

You can find even more Chicago Tribune articles about hatpins being used as weapons in their searchable archives. Most have a rather negative view of hatpins and the women wielding them, but there are a few articles that mention their use in a more positive light, including this 1898 blurb about Barbara Stack who “routed street car robbers with a hatpin” or this 1907 horror story about a woman defending herself from a kidnapping rapist.

The uniquely feminine weapon did not sit too well with men used to submissive ladies, so beginning in 1908, they began passing laws limiting the length of hatpins, usually to no more than 7-9 inches. Other cities passed regulations requiring safety caps for hatpins rather than outright banning longer ones. This seemed like a much more practical approach to the problem of accidental stabbings– a naked pin point sticking out of a hat could accidentally injure people around you– though requiring a cap rendered the pin much harder to use for self-defense, too. Other cities allowed longer, uncapped pins, but they could stick out no more than 1/2″ or you could face a hefty fine— including paying reparations:

From the Boston Sacred Heart Review April 12, 1913.
It is probably not a coincidence that the notice about outlawing hatpins as weapons appears just below an article about militant suffragettes in England.

Male lawmakers weren’t just making idle threats, either. Women vehemently opposed the laws and some ladies were even arrested for wearing long or uncapped pins in their hats, especially suffragettes. Yes, policemen would actually stop women to inspect their hats for illegal hatpins. For example, here’s a clip from a newspaper article about arresting women with long hatpins. At a fierce 13 inches long, my hatpin could have landed me in the slammer if I wore it without a permit after 1908!

Pre-ban Hatpin on the left, 13″ long circa 1900
“Legal” hatpin on the right, 7″ long circa 1890-1915
Somewhat ironically, the shorter hatpin is sharper. You could definitely still defend yourself easily with it!

Hatpins do require extra attention in order to wear them safely. Truth be told, a properly worn hatpin should not be noticeable at all when worn. It should hide amid your hat trimmings, showing only the bejeweled end if it has one. The sharp end shouldn’t not stick out more than an inch (unless it also has a decorative cap as some 1910-1950 hatpins do).  If you are like me and have a hatpin a bit too long for your hat, you must be very careful when giving hugs or taking selfies with friends, not to mention being careful not to stab yourself! However,  hatpins are incredibly important if you want to wear historical hats properly…or defeat hooligans.

Post-ban newspaper articles take a decidedly dark view of women using hatpins. Many reference the violent protests of women’s rights activists as proof that women could not be trusted with sharp objects, no matter how prettily decorated:

Whether the hatpin ban made women adopt smaller hats or whether the natural flow of fashion made the edicts obsolete, it’s hard to say, but as the 1910s progressed, hats changed to sit lower on the head and slowly shrunk in scale. By 1920, a decade after the hatpin laws passed, women had adopted shorter hair, shorter skirts, and close-fitting cloches that didn’t need hatpins at all. American women also got the vote so we could fight to wear what we want!

A fight for fashion is a fight for freedom!

I actually don’t know when–or even if!– places like Chicago, New Orleans, and Melbourne repealed their hatpin bans…for all I know, it’s one of those weird laws left on the books after all these years and I’m technically a criminal in some municipalities!

COME AND GET ME, FASHION POLICE!

Advertisements

Fashion and Feminism: Dr. Inès Gaches-Sarraute and the Hunt for a Healthful Corset

anmpx29x3859

Portrait of Dr. Inès Gaches-Sarraute in an article commenting on her corset research and practice (among other things), 1890s.

Before I proceed, I am going to ask that you read this post with the following disclaimer in mind:

I do not fluently read/speak French. Therefore the translations provided below are courtesy of Google Translate, which is not perfect. I tried to verify the translations through multiple dictionaries to ensure that I am not misinterpreting the author’s intent, but sometimes things can be lost in translation which is why I have provided the original French alongside the Google English translations.

 

le-corset

Wikimedia’s photograph archive from the book “Le Corset” written by Dr. Inès Gaches-Sarraute c. 1900 showcases a wide variety of body shapes in the late Victorian/early Edwardian period. The book has illustrations (photographs overtraced by hand) of women of many body types modelling the “old” corset style from the 19th century and the “new” corset style we call the S-bend or flat front corset, which was supposed to prevent lower tummy expansion and be healthier than the older style.

captureClick here to see all the illustrations.

As you go through the photos, notice all the women the have lower belly paunch that comes from age, childbirth, medical conditions, weight gain, gravity, and from wearing corsets which push belly fat and organs downwards– effects which Gaches-Sarraute wished to correct with her new corset design.

This revolutionary and controversial book is one of the most famous pieces of corset literature from the early 20th century.
(The other, also titled “Le Corset” but by a different author, contains the infamous corset x-rays)

You may already be familiar with some of the images from the book, if not the book itself:

Dr. Inès Gaches-Sarraute vehemently opposed the Victorian corset because of the health problems she observed–like hernias, constricted ribcages, displaced organs, and weakened muscles–in the women wearing them. At first glance, the book may seem decidedly anti-corset and has lent much to the modern hatred/fear of the garment. However, the author herself states that she is not anti-corset:

“I could not think propose the abolition of the corset, we have seen elsewhere that has its uses; it is towards the elimination of its main drawbacks I directed my efforts.
Original French: “Je ne pouvais songer à proposer la suppression du corset, nous avons vu d’ailleurs qu’il a son utilité; c’est vers la suppression de ses principaux inconvénients que j’ai dirigé mes efforts.”

In fact, she is pro-corset, but only if the garment was made to more healthful standards. Her goal was quite a noble one: to improve the overall health of women by changing what she saw as the root cause of many female health problems— bad corsets.
Thus she designed a new support of her own:

Fig. 7 – Corset Gaches-Sarraute

It is very similar to the girdles that we see later in the century and still wear. In many advertisements, the short, light-reduction version of the S-bend corsets closest to Gaches-Sarraute’s original design are called “girdle corsets.”

It was meant to support the organs from below, free the chest from compression, and encourage “proper” posture. She believed her new corset design not only helped women’s organs, but improved their beauty and mental health. This design became the basis for the S-bend or straight front corset that took the fashion world by storm during the first decade of the 20th century.

With an abdominal corset that supports and relaxes her, the woman has less drawn features, eyes less circled, she is more vivacious, more energetic…Many women, sick without the cause of their condition being well determined, condemned to an almost constant repose, are now vigorous, healthy, able to walk, and without exaggerating, are reborn to life. Did the simple change of corset produce such results? Yes, because to this day all corsets, constructed without rules or laws, acted in the opposite direction to natural indications, and thwarted all physiological functions.”
Original French: “Avec un corset abdominal qui la soutient et la repose, la femme a les traits moins tirés, les yeux moins cernés, elle est plus vivace, plus énergique…Bien des femmes, malades sans que la cause de leur état fût bien déterminée, condamnées à un repos presque constant, sont aujourd’hui vigoureuses, bien portantes, peuvent marcher et sans rien exagérer renaissent à la vie.Le simple changement de corset a-t-il pu donner de tels résultats? Oui, parce que jusqu’aujourd’hui tous les corsets, construits sans règles, ni lois, agissaient en sens inverse des indications naturelles et contrariaient toutes les fonctions physiologiques.”

As we know now, the S-bend was not the cure-all Gaches-Sarraute hoped for. It came with its own set of problems.
Though the distended lower stomach caused by the older style of corset was considered unsightly and unhealthy, it had the advantage of allowing viscera some means of expansion. The S-bend/straight front corset did indeed keep the organs from being distended downward, but instead, it pressed them up, much as pregnancy does. The long, rigid front of the S-bend corset could become very uncomfortable since pressure from meals, gas, urine, menstral/hormonal changes, etc. has nowhere to expand except up against the diaphragm. This was not directly the fault of Gaches-Sarraute’s medically-minded design, but the effect was exacerbated by fashion adaptations made by mass manufacturers (as is so often the case, isn’t it?). Many straight front corsets made for the mass market extended too high on the body to allow for expansion of the ribs and upwards movement of the organs.

W. H. K. & S. “Ascot” Straight Fronted Corset Ad, 1902
Notice how much higher it extends compared to Dr. Inès Gaches-Sarraute design.

Modern corsets suffer from similar problems as we value the straight front, but crave full coverage to avoid unsightly bulges. This hybridization contributes in large part to the corset’s uncomfortable reputation as mass-manufacturers focus on overall slimness rather than the comfort of their wares. Without room left at the top and bottom of the corset to allow for the expansion and movement of flesh, tubular fashion corsets press too much everywhere, leading to chafing, numbness, breathlessness, and constriction. Coupled with general ignorance of how corsets should fit and be worn, it’s no surprise that the garment has gained such a painful reputation.

Inès Gaches-Sarraute and corset-lovers everywhere are cringing so hard right now.

The size/looks-before-comfort method of corset wearing has always been a problem.
Yes, even Victorian and Edwardian women wore ill-fitting or improperly worn corsets, often purchased “off the rack” in shops or through catalogs.  It’s a common myth that everything was perfectly tailor-made to fit by the women themselves. By the mid-19th century, corsets were manufactured in large factories and purchased much as we purchase a pair of jeans today.
Victorian women were number-conscious just like us, too!

Women have heard from their friends about a corset that looks good, which makes a pretty size [waist] – that is the only fact that interests them: they want to wear it, hoping to benefit also from an aesthetic point of view; But as their physiological state and conformation differ, if the corset is applied under the same conditions it produces the contrary effect and hurts them.
Original French: “Elles ont entendu parler par leurs amies d’un corset dont on se trouve bien, qui fait une jolie taille — c’est le seul fait qui les intéresse: elles veulent le porter, espérant en bénéficier, elles aussi, au point de vue esthétique; mais comme leur état physiologique et leur conformation diffèrent, si le corset est appliqué dans les mêmes conditions il produit l’effet contraire et leur fait mal.”

On this point, Gaches-Sarraute and modern corsetiers absolutely agree: do not sacrifice fit for looks! Fortunately for modern corset makers, the corset’s recent rise in popularity has increased awareness of proper fit. Gaches-Sarraute’s principles play heavily into modern corset design, like reduction points closer to the hips, cupped ribs to allow room for comfortable breathing, and embracing the underbust cut for ease of movement.

Gaches-Sarraute’s underbust design was revolutionary. For the first time in over 300+ years of corset evolution, the female breast was not held within the corset. This was a big change. The low front leaves the bust unsupported and pulls weight from the abdomen upwards, creating a top-heavy apple shape with natural-state breasts, which didn’t suit the Victorian feminine ideal of defined hourglass curves. Dr. Inès Gaches-Sarraute saw this as an bothersome, but positive side effect:

There is therefore a reform to bring to the costume, tedious reform, but which is necessary. The woman who wishes to wear the abdominal corset must not allow herself to be stopped by this modification; She must not hesitate to subject her clothes to the radical transformations required by the apparatus.
Original French: “…il y a donc une réforme à apporter au costume, réforme ennuyeuse, mais qui s’impose. La femme qui veut porter le corset abdominal ne doit point se laisser arrêter par cette modification; il ne faut pas qu’elle hésite à faire subir à ses vêtements les transformations radicales exigées par l’appareil.”


This is the sort of loose, unrestrictive clothing Gaches-Sarraute was probably expecting.

Fashions did change, but not quite as Gaches-Sarraute might have hoped. To adapt to the new corset shape, the dresses of the early 1900s are different than any feminine fashion before them: the waist moves low to the pelvis, bodices hang full and loose, and women in fashion illustrations appear to be rushing forward so fast they are leaving their skirts behind them.

Fashion Plate, 1903

Fashion Plate, 1904

Les Modes, 1904

Because the new style of corset moved the point of reduction to the soft abdomen rather than over the floating ribs, women discovered they could achieve greater reductions than before, an effect Gaches-Sarraute obviously was not aiming to achieve originally. She notes with some amused befuddlement in her book:

Before ending the long enumeration of the modifications made by the Abdominal Corset , I must point out a curious phenomenon, which is difficult to explain; I mean the general thinning of the woman and the slimming of the whole area covered by the apparatus.
Original French: “Avant de terminer l’énumération déjà bien longue des modifications apportées par le corsetabdominal, il me faut signaler un phénomène assez curieux, assez difficile à expliquer; I mean the general thinning of the woman and the slimming of the whole area covered by the apparatus.

We would call this effect “waist training” in our modern vernacular. Gaches-Sarraute noticed that the shape and weight of her patients changed after they had worn the corset regularly. From her Observations section later in the book:

Madame. H, 48 years old. Obesity, heart palpitations, very bad condition, does not leave the couch, varicose veins. First corset, October 1898. Since then, a lot thinner: 40 cm of belly circumference [15.75 inches], Since then, has thinned a lot: 40 centimeters belly, circulatory disorders have decreased and general health is much better, the patient walks very well”
Original French: “
Mme H…, 48 ans. Obésité, palpitations de cœur, état général très mauvais, ne quitte pas la chaise longue, varices des membres inférieurs. 1er Corset, octobre 1898. Depuis lors, a beaucoup aminci : 40 centimètres de tour de ventre, les troubles circulatoires ont diminué et la santé générale est beaucoup meilleure, la malade marche très bien.”

It probably wasn’t just the cinching power responsible for Mme. H’s transformation. She might have been able to move around more due to the lower back support provided by her new corset, boosting her impressive weight loss results with increased physical activity.

Back support has long been one of the main functions of corsets and corset-like garments. To provide the back support which Gaches-Sarraute believed Victorian corsets lacked, her corset design was very sharply angled at the lower back. This created artificial lumbar hyperlordosis, commonly called swayback. Some people develop this naturally, but by modern medical standards, it is considered a form of bad posture because it places stress on the lower disks, hip joints, knees, and, with the added pressure from the corset, the kidneys. However, this sort of posture was considered both powerful and graceful– and quite masculine. It was the posture of well-pedigreed gentlemen and soldiers standing at attention with their chests puffed out in confidence.

Early 19th Century British Uniforms

German Soldiers, 1901

Dr. Gaches-Sarraute’s design gave women this same posture, and straight-front corsets were often advertised as “military front” for that reason:

Foster Hose Supporter Ad from 1901

Corset advertisement, circa 1901-1905

This hyper-extended ideal posture was adopted by models, fashionistas, socialites, and famous personalities like Camille Clifford and Edith Lambelle Langerfeld:

Camille Clifford is famous for the curvy figure and is known to many as the original Gibson Girl. She embodied the epitome of the new S-bend look: flat abdomen, swelling bust, and prominent derriere. Her extraordinary photos must be taken with a grain of salt: she is also one of the greatest examples of early photo retouching. The retouching is evident here by the unnatural smoothness of everything from her hips up where the wrinkles of fabric suddenly vanish.

Edith Langerfeild “La Sylphe” was an exotic dancer known her extreme flexibility and extreme forward-arching posture, though not for wearing corsets (she regularly danced semi-nude). She combined the fashionable swayback posture and her contortionist skills to create an exaggerated version of the look sans-corset. Her career– and signature style–extended the forward-leaning trend into the 1910s, though the waistline moved up from the hips to the just under the bust.

Outside fashion photographs and illustrations, the average woman did not usually adopt the exaggerated posture–as this informative article, “The S-bend in Context” by Marion McNealy, shows– and some created the illusion of the shape with padding rather than posture.

Women walking, circa 1902-1905
Edwardian women in day dresses going about their daily lives for comparison to the fashion images above.

Photograph of a working class woman walking, circa 1905-1908
A great example of how the underbust design affects the fit of the bodice over the bust compared to a Victorian corset.

img_0130

Padding options from the 1905 Sears Catalogue
They are still called bustles, though they are quite a bit smaller than those of the 1880s!

The S-bend posture ideal had lasting effects. In 1932, Elizabeth Arden released a newsreel urging women to abandon the now “old” swayback style of posture Gaches-Sarraute’s straight front corset encouraged:

Elizabeth Arden advises women to adopt the modern straight posture we still strive for today. This posture ideal has much to do with our focus on unisex athleticism and greatly slimmed-down fashions (athleisure, anyone?). It’s quite impossible to hide the edge of a rigid corset under a pair of yoga pants! Many women wear only one or two layers which hug the body and is often cut to reveal skin and structure. We no longer deal with the bulky layers and heavy skirts our female ancestors considered fashionable, which leads to another of Gaches-Sarraute’s reasons for not throwing out the notion of corsets entirely:

The main role of the corset should be to support the clothes and prevent constriction of ties around the waist, so as to prevent overflow of the viscera downward under the influence of this constriction.
Original French: “Le rôle principal du corset doit être de soutenir les vêtements et d’empêcher la constriction des liens autour de la taille, de façon à éviter le refoulement des viscères vers le bas sous l’influence de cette constriction.”

This same sentiment is shared by Robert L. Dickinson who wrote “The Corset: Questions of Pressure and Displacement” for The New York Medical Journal in 1887:

“In the woman who wears no corsets, the many layers of bands about the waist on which heavy skirts drag are sufficient to cause considerable constriction”

Just like the fashions of the Victorian era, the fashions of 1900 were all about layers that relied on a tight fit at the waist. Women sought to make these layers as lightweight and full as possible to avoid bulk, but there was still many hidden supports under those beautiful outer skirts:

I covered more about historical clothing layers in earlier posts: “With and Without: How Wearing a Corset Affects You and Your Clothes” and “Lifting Skirts and Loosening Ties: What goes under an Edwardian Dress?

A corset takes and distributes the weight of the skirts, supporting all the layers so they do not dig into the skin– the very definition of a “foundation garment!”
Gaches-Sarraute’s low-cut corset lead to the creation of a new  foundation garment: the brassiere, though not quite as we know it now. Gaches-Sarraute was emphatically against altering her corset design to provide breast support, devoting an entire chapter in her book to her argument against it. She believed that the new design provided enough support to the breasts by means of the expanded, upraised ribcage it created and that:

Trapping the breasts in an impermeable fabric promotes wilting and atrophy of the gland.
Original French: “Le fait d’emprisonner les seins dans un tissu imperméable favorise le flétrissement et l’atrophie de la glande.”

Gaches-Sarraute’s entire mission was to spare as many organs as possible from pressure, including the mammary glands. She even describes a problem many modern women who have worn an underbust corset with a modern bra have experienced: the dreaded pinch that happens to the flesh trapped between the corset and bra band.  Modern tastes and social mores press Western women today to wear bras, especially in conservative American culture: modern American women are expected to have high, round breasts that do not show nipples– a goal that mandates daily bra wearing under our relatively thin, sheer clothing. Edwardian women, in contrast, wore multiple layers of cloth over their breasts, so show-through wasn’t as much of a worry. Their concern with the lack of breast support was out of habit (used to old corsets) and practical (the need for support while working/exercising) which is why  some women found the underbust unsatisfactory. This meant that underbust corsets didn’t take over the world in a blink. Instead, Victorian styles and high, demi-bust versions of S-bend corsets were sold right along side the shorter style, much, I am sure, to Gaches-Sarraute’s chagrin:

img_0127

Corsets Department page from the 1905 Sears Catalogue. Left side shows older Victorian style corsets while the right side corsets are S-bend straight front corsets.

As any large-breasted woman–myself included– can attest, unsupported breasts have many painful complications of their own. Once they are past a certain size and age, they no longer are self-supporting, creating both comfort, health, and aesthetic issues. She brushes these notions aside, saying, “there are few women with breasts sufficiently large for it to be necessary to provide them with a support/il y a peu de femmes pourvues de seins assez volumineux pour qu’il soit indispensable de leur fournir un appui.” However, she begrudgingly acknowledges the criticism of her design and offers a solution. One of the most famous images from the book shows her brassiere design of choice:

She was far ahead of her time when it came to the design: fifty years later, women would be wearing a very similar look:

Formfit Ad, 1949

Spencer Ad, 1959

Inès Gaches-Sarraute’s corset design, whatever our personal opinions of it, undeniably revolutionized fashion even though the woman herself cared very little for any of the outside frills and fashion. She was concerned only with the internal workings of women, not that of their needles and thread. From her earliest design trials in the late 1890s (her first recorded recorded observation is dated 1895), she recorded the health improvements she saw in her patients after wearing her new corset design, claiming to have observed nearly 4,000 cases of successful recoveries ranging from healing incontinence to treating infertility.

When studying old texts like “Le Corset,” it is important to remember that medical practices and knowledge 120 years ago were very different than today. We cannot verify all of Dr. Inès Gaches-Sarraute’s claims. Her writing must be viewed with some skepticism, as she is writing to promote both her work and designs as well as writing with the limitations of Victorian medical knowledge. As even she states, it was hard to find enough uncorseted women to form a control group, making it difficult to tell which medical conditions were caused by corsets, exacerbated by them, relieved by them, or completely unrelated. For example, many 21st century women have rounded, low bellies like those pictured in “Le Corset” even though they have never worn a corset in their life– it’s just how some bodies store fat and where loose skin forms after childbirth.

 One thing that is clear, however, is Gaches-Sarraute’s steadfast devotion to the healing and liberation of women’s bodies. She was determined to improve and advance women’s lives via her new corset design:

Woman has glimpsed the possibility of altering her way of life; she wants to take part in the work and physical exercise of men; On the other hand, she is incommoded by the present dress, she is ill, and, consequently, ready to accept its modifications. I appreciate this happy disposition, convinced that nothing can be done for women except with their own consent, and I shall be happy if my work, based on scientific and physiological data, is appreciated by the medical profession and by hygienists. It will be much easier for me to fight against fashion and prejudice, which take no account of the needs of our organism.
Original French: “La femme a entrevu la possibilité de modifier son genre de vie, elle veut prendre part aux travaux et aux exercices physiques des hommes; d’autre part, elle est incommodée par le vêtement actuel, elle est malade, et, par suite, prête à en accepter les modifications. Je saisis cette heureuse disposition, convaincue qu’on ne peut rien faire pour les femmes qu’avec leur propre assentiment, et je serai heureuse si mon travail, basé sur des données scientifiques et physiologiques, est apprécié du corps médical et des hygiénistes, car il me sera alors beaucoup plus aisé de lutter contre la mode et les préjugés qui ne tiennent aucun compte des besoins de notre organisme.”

Dr. Inès Gaches-Sarraute, as a female doctor, saw her unique opportunity to influence female freedom. As a medical doctor, she had the knowledge of anatomy, physiology, and biology that seamstresses, fashion designers, and corset manufacturers at the time lacked. As a woman, she personally understood feminine needs and sensibilities in a way that her male medical colleagues could not. In addition to designing a new corset, she advocated for sensible dress, championed bicycle riding, and was even willing to let women wear pants if they agreed to stop wearing old-fashioned corsets.

Bike Riding with a Corset

Bicycling in lounge pants and and old-fashioned corset. Whoopsie! Sorry, Dr. Inès!

Her legacy continues today in the form of medical corsets/braces (which help thousands find relief from back pain/scoliosis, postnatal complications, hernias, and more), modern corsetry design principles, and, for better or worse, our cantankerous relationship with one of the most controversial garments ever made.

The full text of “Le Corset” is available in the original French on Wikimedia.
It is available in multiple formats, including a wonderful scanned PDF version.

When it comes to corsets–and clothes in general–everyone has different needs. Corsets are certainly not one-size-fits-all, and they aren’t all one-style-fits-all either! Some find the underbust S-bend corset suits their body and is just as pleasant to wear as Gaches-Sarraute hoped it would be. Other people find the flowing curves and high front of the Victorian corset more comfortable and supportive. Many more still have no want for any corset at all, and that is perfectly fine, too.
As for my tastes: Remember those too-tall S-Bends from earlier? Yeah, those work great for me if patterned right! I like the flexible demi-bust front of a Victorian corset for support, but the curve of my back and titled pelvis work best with the back and hips of the S-bend, so long as there is plenty of extra room in the ribs and hips for all my luscious lipids to move around in!
This sort of knowledge is not inherent or concrete. It is something you learn over time with experience. Remember: a corset is just a garment. It is the person filling it with that matters most!

smile-gif

Animated Edwardian Stereograph by Thiophene_Guy

Looking Ahead: 1870 Imagines the Fashions of the Future

I’ve not done much this past year, or at least it feels that way. I am looking forward to the New Year, making plans and imagining where life will take me.

I was going through old digitized Harper Bazaar magazines from 1870 when I found this gem in the March 19th issue:

harpers-1870s-does-1890

Text:
A LOOK AHEAD
Scene – A Costumer’s   Time – 1890
LADY. “I want a Costume for a Private Fancy Dress Party I am to attend. Something Absurd or Ridiculous.”
COSTUMER. “How do you like That One?”
LADY. “That will do. But is it possible that People ever made such Frights of Themselves!”

There’s nothing like poking fun at the now through the eyes of tomorrow! For the curious, here’s two decadent, fluffy, fashionable dresses and hairstyles…published by the very same magazine only a few days before and after the cartoon lampooning them:

harpers-bazaar-1870

Ball Gown, March 12th, 1870

april-2-1870-harpers-bazaar-house-dress

House Dress, April 2nd, 1870

Oh, the delicious, delicious irony! We still do it today (just look for “Trends we need to ditch in 2017” videos on YouTube posted by beauty gurus who were touting the same things only a few weeks ago to see what I mean). What’s really wonderful about this cartoon, though, isn’t the Punch-style biting commentary or even hypocrisy of it, but how close they got the fashion forecast! They were just a little early in their predictions, though. Here’s a dress from Harper’s Bazar/Bazaar in 1890:

harpers-1890-2

Harper’s Bazar, October 18th 1890harpers-october-1890

Harper’s Bazar, October 18th 1890

There’s a hint of a similarity, but these don’t really look much like the cartoon’s facetious forecast, does it?

But skip forward a bit into the 20th century and…

1903-harpers harpers-1903 harpers-1904Select plates from 1903 issues of Harper’s Bazar

Just to refresh our memory:

harpers-1870s-does-1890

Let’s break it down, shall we?

Tightly fitted, flared-bottom skirts?
Check!

Fashion Plate, 1902

How about some more exciting hemlines?
As you wish…

Fashion Plate, 1903

Fashion Plate, 1901

But those big, puffy cuffs? Surely nobody would…
Like meringues for your wrists!

Fashion Plate, 1902

Fashion Plate, 1903

Paired with cape-like Sailor collars?!
Mmmmmhmmmmm! Classic.

Fashion Plate 1902

Fashion Plate, 1903

Cute little empire waist jackets with asymmetrical detailing?
You know I could never deny you!

Fashion Plate, 1902

Mounds of hair topped with hats?
Oh, honey, that hat is FAR too tiny, but if you insist….

Fashion Plate, 1903

Fashion Plate, 1903

Fashion Plate, 1905

But what about the raised waist, short skirt, fluffy hemline, and cute little hats?
Well, I suppose you could wait another decade…

Fashion Plate, 1915

…of course, you’ll sacrifice the fantastic pastry puff sleeves, but, hey, we can’t all be as fabulous as an Edwardian lady fancy dress shopping for vintage 1870s clothes in 1890!

HAPPY NEW YEAR, EVERYBODY!

Find amazing FREE digitized copies of 19th and early 20th century Harper’s Bazar/Bazaar magazines here: https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000641436/Home

The Genteel Fashionista’s Dialogue: A Humorous Timeline of Fashion

In the Classic Style of Historical Fashion Satire and in the Spirit of Congenial Camaraderie, I Present to You the Product of an Overly-Active Brain in the Form of a Fashion Timeline in which there is much Over-Generalization, a Single Expletive, and a Dearth of Illustrations:

THE GENTEEL FASHIONISTA’S DIALOGUE

The Genteel Fashionista Dialog

1770s – Let’s flaunt how wealthy we are with lots of delicate, expensive fabric and wall-like skirts so wide we need special doors, furniture, and houses built just to accommodate them! Pass the hair powder and Pomeranians!

1780s – Thanks to new technological advances and the start of the Industrial Revolution, I am enjoying my emerging merchant-class lifestyle! However, panniers get in the way when I try to navigate city living. High hats and hair, though, I can do. Also, I am strangely beguiled by these cork rumps….

1790s – The peasants are pissed. Maybe big hair, big hats, and big butts weren’t the way to go. Plus, there’s a bunch of cool Greco-Roman stuff in style. Let’s ditch ridged stays and huge skirts for the more refined Empire look…YIKES! A PIKE!

1800s – What a mess that was! Now that the bloodshed is over, I can safely wear white again. These fine, diaphanous fabrics are really expensive and the white makes my spendy imported shawls really pop! I feel on top of the world again!

1810s – Slim sleeves and silhouettes make me look like every other belle at the ball. Some fancy hem trims and puffier sleeves will make me stand out!

1820s – MORE TRIMS! MORE SLEEVES!
Also, maybe some petticoats to help show off ALL THESE HEM TRIMS better.

1830s – F*ck yeah, giant sleeves! Also, I’ve got a pretty hot bod. Those old Regency sacks hide all my hotness, so let’s go back to natural waistlines and open up the neckline for some shoulder action. I am ready for some romancin’!

1840s – Hmmm…maybe I went a little too crazy with the sleeves, low necklines, and bonnets the size of a serving platter. But I like having a waistline again. Let’s see just how much waistline we can get. Longer! I NEED LOOOOONGER!

1850s – Thanks to my corset, my waist is looking better than ever! However, I’m beginning to miss big sleeves. Every belle needs bell sleeves. I could layer them, like those exotic Asian pagoda roofs I saw in a book once. Speaking of roofs, these stacks of petticoats are getting tough to walk in. Maybe I need some rafters…

1856 – HELLO STEEL HOOPED CAGED CRINOLINE, MY NEW BEST FRIEND.

1860s – These hoops are awesome! Now I can display yards and yards of expensive fabric easily again and everyone has to clear the sidewalk to let me through, like Moses parting the sea. Bonus points for getting the sofa all to myself! Let’s see just how big these hoops can go.

1870s – I’ll admit that I might have gone overboard with the hoops, but now that I’ve turned them into a bustle, I can hug people again and the sidewalks of town are cleaner than ever! The sewing machine makes adding trims to my trim’s trim so easy, too!

1875 – The bustle’s poofs and swags are hiding my hot bod again. :(

1878 – This princess line gown shows off my naturally-enhanced-by-a-corset form perfectly. I’ll never hide my glorious bum under a bustle again! What a folly!

1882 – Well, a little padding back there couldn’t hurt…

1885 – HELLO BUSTLES, MY OLD FRIEND.
I’m sorry I ever doubted you!

1890s – Okay, I’ll admit that the bustle thing got out of hand, but I have learned the error of my ways. Let’s go back to the classic combo of tons of petticoats and huge sleeves.

1900s – I have given up big sleeves in favor of something new: tons of lace and s-bend corsets! They say a puffy breast makes my waist look tinier, but in reality, it makes me look like I am careening forward towards social, industrial, and technological progress, just like a new-fangled motorcar draped in an heirloom tablecloth!

1910s – Rushing towards progress is hard to do in full skirts. A slimmer skirt line is in order. Should I go hobble skirt to display my fashion prowess or skirt suit to further the march towards women’s independence? Either way, it will need more decorative buttons.

1920s – Corsets and curves have been incumbent for too long! I vote for President Bob Haircut and Senator Cloche! Drop waists from the ballot and pass the mascara! The world is ready to finally revel in the glory of my knees!

____

____

Here is 160 years worth of fashion plates!
See if you can spot the trends:

1770s fashion plates

1780s fashion plates

1790s fashion plates

1800s fashion plates

1810s fashion plates

1820s fashion plates

1830s fashion plates

1840s fashion plates

1850s fashion plates

1860s fashion plates

1870s fashion plates

1880s fashion plates

1890s fashion plates

1900s fashion plates

1910s fashion plates

1920s fashion plates

Bothersome Bosoms: Am I Too Curvy for Victorian Clothes?

Coming to Terms with My Curvature

Everybody has their own hang-ups and frustrations, especially when it comes to their own body. I’m just starting to feel comfortable in my own skin which I credit to supportive family, friends, and a husband who loves me no matter how monstrous I look when I wake up in the morning. Since costuming is an intensely body-conscious hobby, however, I often find myself fighting against my shape rather than working with it.

For example, I have a very boisterous love/hate relationship with my breasts. They are not massive–37 inches around (34F)–but they are definitely large and in charge. This becomes painfully clear in my costuming endeavors.

CondescendingCamille

Shuttup, Camille! Nobody asked you!

Most commercial patterns are drafted for a B cup, so even if you try sizing up to fit you bust measurement, the pattern will still fit strangely because the underbust (and often waist) will be too big. This leads to some of the most intense pattern slicing and dicing that even handy fitting guides cannot make less tiresome.

101_6955

I make this face much too often…

Another big hang-up? Corsets. If you dress in historical clothing, you will need one, either by sewing your own or, if you don’t have the skills or patience to make your own, buying one. Finding a historical corset is difficult on a good day, especially if you are on a tight budget (custom corsets run about $300-$800) and that trouble is compounded if you have a cup size larger than a C or so. However, I have managed quite well in my eBay corset almost precisely because it flattens my chest down. Why? Well, having a large, forward-protruding breast is decidedly modern and generally frowned upon in historical costuming. For example, a big no-no is princess seams on an 18th century court dress:

Under-boob Shadow = Bad

18th century stays should be funneling her torso into the famous cone shape. My eBay corset isn’t exactly historical, but thanks to its B-cup and thus tight boob control, I can get the sexy Marie Antoinette V in a cinch, plus some appropriate cleavage as it scrunches my abundant boobage upwards:

corset

Here’s the shape my eBay corset gives me when it has an even lacing gap in the back. Not bad, right? Very smooth!

IMG_0002

Cleavage = good
I altered this dress from a pattern that had princess seams that curved over the bust. I simply ignored the curve as I sewed the bodice together. Instant +50 pts. to accuracy! Still farbing it, though. A real pair of 18th century stays should fit like this.

Since my corset squishes my bust down from 37 inches to <35 inches in circumference, I also magically fit into modern patterns without having to make major alterations, a boon for my impatient side. By containing my boobs, my corset creates the standard proportions for most pattern sizes: a 7 inch bust-to-waist ratio and a 9 inch waist-to-hip ratio. Less boobs + less work = a win in my book!

But my heart isn’t planted in 18th century rococo. It likes to scamper freely between eras, and lately, it has been wooing the late 19th century. Despite their corsets, many Victorian ladies were actually very modestly proportioned. Not everyone laced down dramatically or was blessed with natural curves:

Woman from Nebraska, late 1880s from Etsy

In both photographs and extant garments, it’s easy to see that while many ladies are indeed tiny, they are often proportionately so– bust and hips included. When you look at photographs and dresses, the curve of their corsets is still fairly conical, just like the 18th century but with a little more curve over the bust, especially during the 1880s and 1890s when the long, slim look was popular:

Fashion plate, circa 1886
Corsets from 1880-1900 ended about mid-bust (also called demi-bust). Many photographs, however, show ladies whose corsets are full overbusts, especially during the 1880s when tightly-fitted bodices were in vogue.

For a more in depth analysis of late Victorian and early Edwardian “standard sizes,” click here. There’s a brilliant chart and you’ll see that most bustle-era women were only expected to be slightly curvier than modern women– a 9 inch bust-to-waist ratio instead of 7 inches. That’s equivalent to the standard modern woman wearing a corset lightly laced down 2 inches, and is fairly close to my own natural measurements without a corset.

Still, there is the matter of my corset. I love how perky and slim it makes me look, but I am so tired of smooshing my boobs. They may be annoying, but they give my otherwise straight figure some pizzazz. My overly-cone-shaped corset totally robs my pizzazz! Here is my hilariously bad attempt to show you what I mean:

differencesLeft: Hamster in a shotglass
Right : Monkey in a turtleneck

Bad graphics aside, you can see my dilemma. The shape on the left is how my body fits into my current off-the-rack corset. The bust is flattened and it doesn’t even touch my underbust. It appears “historical” enough that any passerby will notice how antique-looking my figure is since the bust is thrust up and the shape is very rigid. It’s very similar to a dress form, in fact, which is why fitting a dress to a conical corset is a breeze. What I lose, however, is a lot of definition between my bust and waist. I have an 8 inch difference between my bust and underbust. Aside from that, I am very tubular.  An overbust corset that lacks properly gusseted cups will actually make me larger in the ribcage because it skims over my ribs instead of fitting to them.

101_6733

This is a CS-411 from Orchard Corsets. It is the only OTR corset under $100 that is short enough to accommodate my stumpy torso.

Most OTR overbusts are 15.5 inches long, which is too long for me to sit comfortably in. My underbust, however, is very comfy and provides good curve. It gives the same silhouette as my eBay corset, but without flattening my chest. It is shorter, closer-fitting, and allows me more freedom of movement. It’s also really easy to hide under modern clothes. When I pair it with my favorite sports bra or balconette, it also controls jiggle without squishing.

“Soutien des seine par une brassière” (Support of the bosom by a bodice), circa 1900

Underbust corsets (and even bras) became popular right around the mid-1890s–an era I love and am planning on costuming for, so I do not feel like I am sacrificing a terrible amount of accuracy by wearing one. But the amount of…erm…forward protrusion seems solidly modern. Surely our ancestors would have looked upon such a silhouette as vulgar…or did they?

1880s Victorian Tintype Portrait of a Couple from Etsy
This lovely young lady is wearing a classic demi bust corset. You can see the outline of it through her dress. But notice how her corset and bodice are fitted around her breasts instead of straight over them.

Portrait of a Couple, circa 1890s from Etsy
Sha-ZAM! Them curves! A very flexible busk at the front (possibly curved by design) gives this lady a slimmer line and more definition than a flat-front corset does.

The more I look, the more I find photos of women who are shaped like I am. And while picking through museum collections, there are even more crazy-curvy gowns:

Dinner Dress, circa 1878-80

Pastel Striped Silk Dress, circa 1885

Wedding Dress, circa 1889

The very first antique piece of clothing I ever purchased also has some pretty radical curves of her own:

101_6976

Black Silk Bodice, circa 1889-95
This bodice measures 32 inches at the bust and 21 inches in the waist– a difference of 11 inches! Looks pretty wild, doesn’t it? It’s actually not too crazy. When I wear my underbust, my measurements are 37 bust, 26 waist– also 11 inches of difference! What makes this silhouette so dramatic is the extreme wasp waist fit which controls the ribs. Fashionable 1880s and 1890s corsets were rather tubular through the waist and flared dramatically at the bust, creating a “light bulb” shape.

What have I learned from all this?
Being a top-heavy Victorian is not a sin! Our ancestors came in all shapes and sizes. Many Victorian beauties corseted themselves at rather modest proportions, reducing their waists by only a few inches for a gentle, swooping curve. Others were very curvacious, both through corsets, padding, and genetics.
I’m not using that as an excuse to abandon my over-bust corsets forever to start prancing around in my push-up bra pretending it’s historically accurate. Even those “light bulb” bodices are relatively smooth-fronted from the side and quite rigid. However, the realization that I can be top-heavy and still be acceptable gives me the confidence to work with what I have until I can procure something better.

I am possessed by the spirit of possibility…

As for the “standard pattern problem,” you just have to buckle down and learn some pattern manipulation. If you are worried about how a pattern will fit your body, make a mock-up. It’s extra work and I hate doing it, but it saves so much misery later on! If you are concerned about how your alterations will affect the accuracy of the pattern, I recommend looking at photographs and extant garments rather than relying on fashion plates or paintings (for Victorian fashions. Earlier eras have other challenges). Pretty pictures are great for inspiration, but they are often idealized. Go for real instead!

American Corset, circa 1895

I’ll take the one on the left, please!
If anyone knows where to buy a short, busty corset under $300, please share!

If you love a good treasure hunt, Ageless Patterns is a website filled with genuine Victorian patterns drafted directly from originals complete with original measurements! Looking through the website gives you a good idea of just how varied in size everyone was (and is). I’ve found many patterns that list my exact measurements. I’m curious to give them a try, but I have so many other projects right now that I don’t need to keep starting new ones. I look forward to trying a pattern or two in the near future!

Elsa Schiaparelli’s Wonderland: Fantastic Fashions of the Late 1930s and Early 1940s

A Designer of Dreams

Elsa Schiaparelli Butterfly Evening dress, circa 1937
With a matching parasol!

The iconic Elsa Schiaparelli butterfly dress is the perfect introduction to one of the most ingenious designers of the 20th century. Elsa was a butterfly herself: a metamorphosis out of the fashion conventions of the past and into a new, colorful world of her own fearless design.

Elsa Schiaparelli Seed Packet Dress, circa 1939-41

Elsa’s designs are playful. Always one to lighten the mood, Elsa’s collections often have distinct themes, often involving butterflies, mythology, the zodiac, and natural curiosities.

Elsa Schiaparelli Evening Dress with Plastic Flowers, circa 1938

The flowers adorning this dress are made of plastic. Elsa embraced new materials and loved to play with texture.

Elsa Schiaparelli Musical Evening Dress, circa 1939

This lyrical creation was worn by Millicent Rogers who was a big admirer of Schiaparelli’s imaginative fashions. Besides the bright musical notes applied to the dress itself, the belt buckle provided more music from a working music box built inside. Elsa’s belts are some of my favorite pieces. They are cheeky and very modern looking. Many of them would still be considered on the cutting edge of fashion today.

Elsa Schiaparelli Sequined Evening Blouse, circa 1938-39

Feeling a little bit of a 1980s flashback coming on? Elsa’s brilliant and over-the-top fashion designs featured padded shoulders, layers of embellishment, and the decorative use of zippers, studs, and buckles 50 years before “Power Dressing” for women became fashionable; she was like the Vivian Westwood of the 1930s and 1940s! Her fashions were considered quite daring–shocking even–and she collaborated with many surreal and dadaist artists throughout her career. For example, she collaborated with Salvador Dali to create the Circus Collection, which even by modern standards is considered avant-garde.

Elsa Schiaparelli and Salvador Dalí Skeleton Dress, circa 1938

Elsa Schiaparelli Clasped Hands Belt, circa 1934

Elsa Schiaparelli High Heel Hat, circa 1937-38

Elsa played both sides of the fashion card: she would design swoon-worthy, romantic pieces, then mix in pieces with modernist angles and experimental shapes. Many people would find this seesaw rather jarring, but Elsa always struck a balance between old and new. She enjoyed change and was always looking for the next fashion adventure without abandoning what she already knew was beautiful.

Two Schiaparelli Pieces from the same Year and Season:

Elsa Schiaparelli Ivy Necklace, fall 1938

Elsa Schiaparelli Rhodoid Insect Necklace, fall 1938

What is truly wonderful about Elsa’s designs, however, is that as couture and over-the-top they are, they are still wearable. She doesn’t reach so far into surreality that function disappears. Many of her pieces would still be considered chic–even comfortable–by the women of today.

Elsa Schiaparelli Sweater, circa 1932-38

Elsa Schiaparelli Taurus Belt, circa 1938

Elsa Schiaparelli Jacket for Millicent Rogers, circa 1938-39

Sadly, the austerity of 1940s wartime and post-war fashion did not meld well with Elsa’s vision and she closed her fashion house in 1954 as Christian Dior’s “New Look” became the favored style. However, the beauty of her work has not diminished and her collections continue to inspire fashion designers, costumers, and artists around the globe.

My Collection, Inside Out: Early Edwardian Velvet Jacket Blouse

Turning Coats and Staring at the Seams

I am slowly getting settled into my new apartment in Fort Worth. It’s not huge, but there is enough room for my collections and for that I am incredibly grateful! The rest of the place is still a mess of boxes, random mounds of stuff, and scattered papers. My collection, however, is neatly stored in my too-giant-to-fit-upstairs chifforobe in the living room where I am slowly repacking it in new acid free tissue (Fort Worth has a Container Store? Yes please!).

One of the first items I rewrapped is one of my favorite pieces: An 1890-1905 striped velvet jacket/blouse.

100_0761

Velvet Jacket or Blouse, turn of the 20th Century

I found this gem at the Veteran’s Thrift Store in Lubbock, TX (If you are ever in the area, go there! It’s one of those old-fashioned thrift stores packed with unknown treasures). It was on a rack of vintage clothing and tagged as “1970s.” Though it was likely worn a few times during the boho era, it was certainly not manufactured then! The construction, quality of sewing, and wear tipped me off, and I was walking on clouds when I paid my seven dollars at the resister. To be quite honest, I didn’t really know what this piece was at the time, but I liked it! At first, I thought it might be a jacket due to its loose fit and the fact that it is completely unlined, but the raw polished cotton tie around the waist is obviously not meant to be seen, leading me to believe it was either made to be or converted into a blouse to be tucked into a skirt or covered with a wide sash (a popular accessory during the Edwardian era).

The 1890s waffle between Victorian and Edwardian, but I consider most things from this era to be early Edwardian pieces since Queen Victoria had been replaced by Princess Alexandra as fashion’s muse. Plus, early Edwardian clothes, including the 1890s, are generally puffy on top and narrow on the bottom (hmmm…sounds like someone I see in the mirror every morning).

100_0763

Back of the Jacket

133_4914

Then I thought it may be an Edwardian pouter blouse since it is shaped correctly for that in the front, but the shape of the puff sleeves is very 1892. The 1890s saw the emergence of the pleated, poof-front, so this piece could have at least started out life in the 1890s. I even entertained the idea that it may have been a 90s morning or dressing gown that was later converted, but that seemed a little far fetched. That little cotton tie seems quite original to the piece. The sleeves, however, are shaped correctly for the 1890s.

133_4917

Terribly blurry picture of the sleeve shape. Notice how it is slightly fuller near that top and narrows to the cuff. 1890s sleeves are generally full at the top while Edwardian sleeves are fuller near the bottom. However, there are always exceptions to the “rules.”

“France Mode” fashion plate, circa 1892
Also, what is with the blue lady’s creepy double eyes?!

I have other examples of poofy 1890s sleeves, like my HOLY COW IT’S RED 1890’s bodice:

136_3894

Red Silk Bodice, circa 1890-95
Red was a very popular color during the Gay Nineties. Think Moulin Rouge.

Or the slightly-later 1890s Yellow silk-front gown:

IMG_0399

Ensemble, circa 1894-99

This dress also highlights how the shirred, poof-front emerged in the 1890s and eventually grew into the dangling pouter pigeon look the Edwardian era is famous for.  Puff sleeves saw a resurgence later in the Edwardian era, around 1905, in a similar shape to the 1890s. My striped jacket’s loose fit points equally to this era even if the dark, heavy velvet is not what we would consider fashionable for a period known for pastels and lace. Dark velvets, however, were still used:

Fashion Plate, circa 1905

“The draped blouse is the favorite whim of Fashion for the Spring walking costume, and it is very becoming to slender figures. The costume shows such a jacket, bloused or eased at the back, and with the fronts gathered at the waistline, a girdle belt affording a finish.”

A jacket in the Edwardian era could be a bolero-style, or it could be tucked into a skirt to complete a Fall or early Spring outfit, as mine likely was. The cotton drawstring and lack of a lining indicate that my velvet blouse/jacket was probably worn over a shirtwaist or dickey/chemisette like the illustration of the red outfit above shows.

If the jacket is nearer to 1905, the simplicity of the fit–especially in tandem with the richness of the material– is unusual. Most Edwardian clothes from around 1905 have plenty of “sewing action” going on, like insertion, buttons, collars, yokes, and lapels. Also, jackets from this era usually have V necks or a chin-high lace collar. My piece has a comparatively runty, soft collar and no decoration beyond the fashion fabric itself. And though the velvet is fairly eye-catching on its own, to an Edwardian, such a straight-forward jacket would be very plain indeed. However, if this jacket was worn by a working woman, such as a secretary or sales clerk, it’s no-nonsense modesty would be expected. Even the interior of the garment is relatively simplistic:

100_0769

It is unlined except for the cuffs and collar. The front of the blouse has two pleats carefully made to match the stripes in the velvet:

133_4913

The pleats are created at the shoulder seam and sewn down the breast, though most of the red stitching has come undone:

133_4926

Missing stitches are also a problem on the front placket:

133_4920

I cannot tell if this piece ever had any hook and eye closures, but I found no evidence of them at all. However, I did find evidence of heavy collar pin usage on the part of the lady who wore this. Throat pins were popular during both the Victorian and Edwardian periods and many collars bear pinprick scars from the habit. I consider such “damage” to be a nice little treat, actually. It adds a touch of humanity to an otherwise empty clothing shell. It also helps that I love antique jewelry almost as much as I like antique clothing…

133_4945

The major seams in the piece are machine sewn while the rest of the sewing is done by hand. The velvet selvedges were machine sewn together to create larger piece of fabric to work with, a clever, frugal technique. The person who created this jacket was very aware of the stripe pattern and worked hard to maintain it.

133_4928

The edges of all the major seams are edged with thin strips of polished cotton. The armscye is rolled and covered with cotton as well. I like to finish my own unlined garments like this because it doesn’t rub or feel bulky, providing smoother movement and protecting the seam. I am inordinately pleased that a historical seamstress preferred this method as well:

100_0771

Also: Notice how all the shoulder seams are ironed open. Ironing your seam allowances flat like that instantly improves the way the garment sits. It’s like magic!

Even though this jacket is bit too generic to put a hard date on, it is punched up with bright colors, bold pattern, and the thrill of a garment well thrifted!

For more information on the actual sewing techniques and practical applications for Historical costuming, I highly recommend visiting

Historical Sewing: 19th Century Costuming by Jennifer Rosbrugh

Her blog is full of Victorian sewing techniques, pattern advice, fitting tips, and historical fashion in general.

More Inside Out Posts

136_3793

1874 Kate Pendergast Early Bustle Dress