I finished my Colette Hawthorn last weekend (just getting pics together) and I’m already on my next dress. This 1964 vintage pattern, which I’ve been crazy about for years, is finally getting made. I can’t find anything on the internet about this dress. Do you know if anyone else has made it?
Of course when I envisage myself wearing this, I’m walking along tree-lined boulevards in dappled sunlight, wearing gloves and heels and maybe carrying a small bunch of flowers. My reality is more about dragging a heavy bag of marking through tube stations whilst getting elbowed by the commuters because I’m heading the opposite direction to everyone else. It’s not that bad, going the opposite way to everyone else means I get a seat at least.
Extra points if anyone can guess the station.
Lucky for me, I have a week and a bit off so lots of time to sew. I started cutting this out on Tuesday night and spent Thursday assembling it. I don’t want to jinx anything but I’m really surprised with how quickly it’s coming together.I won’t go for a contrasting collar, that’s certain, I left the collar reversed so it would “read” in a picture. It also helps me get an idea of the shape and size I want for the finished collar. It probably won’t look like this.
The skirt has an underlay at the back, which is something I hadn’t encountered before but proved to be pretty simple. I have a long-standing love affair with asymmetry , especially on collars. Big, asymmetric collars, I love ’em. I’ve already cut out the original collar but I don’t think this process is quite over yet. We shall see! The fabric is a heavier cotton so it’ll be perfect for the cooler weather, I even managed to squeeze sleeves out of the fabric (from Wimbledon Sewing Centre).
Emil pointed out that this pattern is almost 50 years old. According to Laver’s Law, that makes it “Quaint” – or maybe Mary Quant ; )
Laver’s Law ascribes adjectives to fashion trends. For example, something 50 years after its time, like this dress is considered “Quaint”. Interesting but I’m not sure I completely agree with this. Things have changed so much since this was written in 1937, fashions changes much faster and people tend to not be so constrained by what they “should” or “shouldn’t” wear. I’ve been reading a lot of books on this stuff lately but more on that later.
|Indecent||10 years before its time|
|Shameless||5 years before its time|
|Outré (Daring)||1 year before its time|
|Dowdy||1 year after its time|
|Hideous||10 years after its time|
|Ridiculous||20 years after its time|
|Amusing||30 years after its time|
|Quaint||50 years after its time|
|Charming||70 years after its time|
|Romantic||100 years after its time|
|Beautiful||150 years after its time|
Above table from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Laver
original source – Laver, James, Taste and Fashion, chapter 18, (London, 1937)
(edit- Had to reference that with slightly more detail. Can you tell I’ve been marking a stack of academic papers?)