Layer Cake

I am the underwear nazi. I mean, I guess it shouldn't surprise anyone, since I spent a full year of graduate school obsessing about teenagers and corsets for my thesis. But really, when you are going to dress up--historically or otherwise--it's your underwear I'm checking out most aggressively.

Okay, I promise, I am not going to go around peeking under anyone's skirts. That's not the kind of underwear I'm worried about. It's just that I like to see that if you put the time and effort into procuring a lovely outfit, don't spoil it by stopping at the surface. This goes for anyone: brides, reenactors, fancy costume lovers of all kinds.

Underwear shapes your body and the clothes over it. Cloth is soft and it needs the right support to make you look utterly fabulous. The human body is soft too (unless your a super model--and even they get their arm flab air brushed out) so you need something to give it the right silhouette.

Lesson 1--Brides: Wedding dresses can cost a small fortune. It's one day when we ladies have some extra drive (and a nice excuse) to really look fabulous.

But even a nice simple $100 dress can look stellar with good alterations to fit you properly and the right undergarments.

Torso: Ladies, very few of us have a perfectly smooth figure. That's normal. The "lunch meat" on the sides flops over. The boobs slip down and flatten out, and then there's that irritating lump that I have right above my belly button.
But it really does look better in a dress (for anyone size 6-26) to smooth yourself out with a good foundation garment. You don't need a steel-boned corset if you don't want one (I didn't). Even just a good $50-$100 modern shaper will do the trick. Tuck your waist in a little bit and keep your boobs up where they look their best.

Even if your gown is boned, taking this step will take the stress off the dress, leaving the underwear to do the work.

Want to go whole-hog for a steel-boned corset? Awesome! They look gorgeous, and can make your posture look stellar (which is worth more than you would think). Think carefully about what kind will serve you best. Try my blog entries here about how to pick it out.

Just be sure that no matter what underwear you get, you wear it to each and every fitting!

Skirt: Please, please, please do not buy a gown with a big puffy skirt and then try to save money by cutting out the petticoat. If you want a sleek silhouette, go for it, but big skirts fall flat without some help from below. Check out the difference it can make in the 1950s dress:

Same dress, but on the right I added the petticoat. See how much better that is? Making your hips and skirt look bigger also has the added bonus of making your waist look smaller. Nice.

Until you get used to it, you may feel a little funny. But please put something under there!



Lesson 2--Historical Dressing: This is the one that always gets my goat. You cannot slap on a pretty dress and call yourself done. Historical silhouettes are based on enhancing the natural body. See the lady in the blue dress? This Copely portrait was done in the mid 18th century. I can tell you for a fact, that when this lady got undressed for bed, her boobs were not that flat against her chest. She is wearing a pair of stays (also called a corset by modern Americans). Like this pair. They're not just important to make you look skinny. They're important to make you look right. That sexy shelf bra look that we like now was so uncool in 1775.

Also, don't you dare skimp on the petticoats. It takes a lot more than you think to get this kind of pouf. One or two is a start. But try getting bold and pile on three or four. You will notice the difference right away!

The same goes for the Victorian era. The corset seems obvious. You need a smallish waist, and you need to get your boobs up to make this look right. But, you think this gal's butt is naturally this big? For all 60-ish years of Queen Victoria's reign, volume was in. And there were so many ways to get it. Piling on the petticoats is the first step. And Victorian petticoats have extra layers sewn onto them to make the bottom fuller. They're called flounces.

If you really want to get involved, you can start adding bustles, hoopskirts, etc. Just make sure you pick the right one for your decade. In the Victorian era, fashion started to move almost as fast as it does today. Every decade had it's own look. You wouldn't want to be caught with a '80s bustle under your '50s dress! This would be just as odd (fashion speaking) as wearing your 1980s big feathered hairdo withr your 1950s poodle skirt.

Just remember, not wearing enough undergarments in your historic costume (from an historic point of view) would make you look poor, sloppy, and half-dressed. If you are trying for authenticity, pile on the layers. Even just adding a few can really improve your look.


I am in favor of this for Halloween costumes as well. Even when I sell my pinup dresses (at left) I add not just one, but two petticoats to get the right pouf.

Once I was super disapointed when, in a pinch, I ordered a costume from a major producer of sexy Halloween get-ups, and the cheap fabric clung to every lump and bulge and then fell flat over my pudgey butt. However, by throwing on two fluffy short petticoats (oh God I love petticoats) and just a basic plastic-boned corset, I had a super-sexy look that gave me pinup curves.

So don't be shy! Layer it up. Get your best look by building a frame for your dress to hang off of. Rely on a good foundation garment (corset, waist cincher, or bustier) and be sure to add enough petticoats to get the volume you want.

My Masquerade: Part 3

It certainly took all the energy I (and my husband. and several friends) had to get ready for my 30th birthday masquerade, but it was well worth it in the end. Of the costumes there, I was proud to say I made four, and one young bride was wearing her SkyeLine wedding corset under 1993 prom dress (it made her bust look awesome).

Just a few photos of the action so you can see how it all came out.

1770s taffeta polonaise gown and Captain Morgan Pirate costume

both by me!

me with Ashley in the 1860s ball gown

The one on the right is a SkyeLine costume

Oh the dancing!

You know if Marie Antoinette had had beer pong, she totally would have played it!

I'm busting out!

Captain Morgan entertains the crowd with a few banjo rolls

With a neckline this open, your chest gets a little cold

What's a masquerade without the masks?

All in all, it was a perfect party, and I have decided to turn 30 again next year...

Under Where?

I try to be careful about separating my sewing from the museum I work in to avoid any possible conflicts of interest. But when my director started asking me to look for some sort of winter programming, I realized that it was much easier to do a lecture myself than it was to research other lecturers. And darn it all, if I'm going to give a lecture, it's going to have to be about what I know best--historic underwear.

So I gave the first of my UnderWhere? lectures at work today. They go chronologically, so today's was underwear in 1770, and I got to wear the big red gown again (3 times in one month--awesome!).

I have to admit to being a little anxious, despite studying historic Underwear for the past 10-12 years, it's only sensible that I got a little anxious when the people who make the museum repros for my museum came down to see my talk.

Perhaps it is a little odd that taking my clothes off in front of people doesn't make me worried. But the fact is, that an 18th century chemise is large enough to conceal a complete compliment of 21st century gym clothes, which is precisely what I wear underneath--that and I have no shame. :)

Once I was crammed into my gown (I have to tight lace because I made it too small--dummy) and people started filling up out lecture room, I felt pretty at ease though. There's something about wearing a really impressive costume that makes me just feel good.

So away I went, confidently declaring myself an expert and doing my best to stick to what I know (instead of giving into the temptation to meander off in conjecture) as I peeled off 11 costume items and explained each one. Just like the last time I did this program, my only problem turned out to be keeping it to just one hour.

Two more to go this winter: 1800 and 1880. The 1880 will be tough, but only because the gown is so F-ing tiny (I didn't make that one, I bought it second hand, which is why it is too small). At the 1880 session, I fully plan to get into corsets full-on though, because that is the era I kick ass at. If there's any way for me to weave in my graduate thesis on adolescent corsetry, you know I'll be all over that one too.

My Masquerade: Part 2

All of the major machine work is done on the dress now. I would like to add some furbellows (the ruffles along the neckline and gown opening), but will have to wait until some more crucial stuff is done on other costumes first. Plus, there is plenty of hand-work left.

My Masquerade

Turning 30 this month hasn't phased me a bit. Maybe that's because I've taken it as an excuse to throw an over-the-top, totally self-indulgent Masquerade Birthday Party in early January: I mean, masks and glitter and champagne and all. And let's not forget the magnificent costumes.

I had planned to make something extravagant for myself, but the truth is,most of my friends can't afford to go buying giant gowns on their own. Now I am not only making my own 18th century gown, but I am trying to assist a few other people in finding something to wear.

First came a good friend of mine from work. Using the old blue "Cornelia" skirt to start with, I whipped to together an 1860s gown.

Okay, so it's not quite finished yet. I still have to do all the finishing touches (boning channels and lacing holes), but here it is in its current state:

Funny story: I had a piece of fabric left over from making the original skirt, but when the bodice was all together and I put them both on my dummy, I realized that I had the wrong fabric! I had a similar, but not quite matching dark blue taffeta. Duh! The effect is not quite what I was going for, but it will be alright for the party. Maybe one of these days I will make a skirt actually matches.


My next challenge is my husband. This is always a challenge because I don't make a lot of men's clothes--nor do I have a man-dummy to use for photos. Since this costume still has a ways to go, I will leave it to your imagination until I am closer to done (yes, I know I only have two and half working weeks to finish it. Stop reminding me!)


My dress however has come together smoothly so far. I returned to my old favorite, the Mill Farm pattern. This s my third use of this pattern, and it works pretty well (although I always forget how much smaller than expected it is so this will be another tight-lacing event for me).



I want to make a voluminous impression so I started with a bustle pad from the Butterick pattern (don't try it; the instructions are lousy) so I could get this silhouette:

gown by Sharon Ann Burnston

I picked an iridescent taffeta, primarily because I would need a lot of it, it was historically appropriate, and I could get it for cheap. Let's just be honest about that. I found a good deal on eBay.

The fabric really does look stellar when the light glints off all of the gathers and pleats though, so once I get that Polonaise looped up, I should look awesome.

My favorite part thus far is the sleeves. I followed Mrs. Burnston's instructions for cutting around the pattern in the lace for the under ruffle to create a border patter. So easy, and so pretty, I feel like a smarty-pants! After studying my V&A 18th century book for sleeve ornamentation suggestions, it came out like this:

I still have a ways to go, but here is the current state of this gown.

Wish me luck on getting on everything done by the 9th. As usual, there is a strong chance that I have bitten off more than I can chew!

Baby Frock!

I finally got my butt in gear on my friend's baby frock. It looks much better with the sleeves attached, as you can see:

And here's the back of the cap as well. I hand-stitched the whole thing because it looks so much better that way:

I used the Kannik's Korner pattern, which was so much easier than try to guess at the size of a baby on my own. Plus, I'm positive the sleeves look better as well (sleeves are one of the things I hate most, along with binding tabs). The cap patterns was great to work with. Caps are fast becoming one of my favorite things to do because I can sit in front of the TV and veg while I sew... Unfortunately 20 years of tiny hand sewing is probably the cause of my deteriorating vision. Now I need glasses to see across the room to the TV. *Sigh*