The Empire Strikes Back

There it is. With practically no measurements, except "I bought a size -- bridesmaid dress, and they altered it a lot for me," and only 14 hours to finish it in, I managed to pull it together, petticoat and all. Empire--I love you!

The extremely thin, gauzy material was ideal for this dress, and it floated around my pal all night whenever she moved, making her look vaguely like a goddess. The bodiced-petticoat was a necessity to keep that fine fabric from being completely indecent in the skirt. And, the heavy linen lining in the bodice also provided a perfect sturdy base to keep the dress from feeling too fragile.

Sadly, this picture makes the sizing look terrible, but once we realized what was going on and pulled the drawstrings in tighter, everything worked out (note: bib front is a little tougher for multi-sizing than leaving the opening in the back as the pattern calls for). The sleeves will also need to be pulled in a bit, as you can see. They are decidedly shapeless right now.

Construction photos to come; it appears that my husband took the camera they were on when he left for the weekend. But at least I got a few new pictures of the red 18th century Polonaise gown while we were there. Sadly, the pictures lacked the super-perfect hairdo I wore to my own party--that was a pro job. But Kate did a nice job with what knowledge she had, and she loaned me her exquisite repro jewelry from Amey's Adornments to me so I could feel extra pretty.

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.

Petticoat Princess

The issue of Empire-era petticoats has never been dealt with to my satisfaction. Nobody seems to be positive what all gets worn down there.

I mean, yes. We know that pantalets were coming into use (split crotch of course), and everybody points to the existing bodiced petticoats out there. But like I said, I'm still not satisfied.

From Kosha the Kat showing a bodiced petticoat. God how I love her work.

Because you can't wear that many bodiced petticoats at once. And they're not uncommon, but they're not that common. And I don't think I've seen a single historic sketch, print, or painting that shows them in use (please tell me if you've got one, because I'd kill to have one for my presentation next week).

Gowns of 1795, when extra pouf was still in fashion
From the English fashion magazine Gallery of Fashion

And yet, I know that I once read a brief historic quote where someone was complaining about the "young things of today going around in as few as one or two petticoats" (it's a paraphrase. Lord knows I also didn't memorize it). Adequate petticoats were required for decency, sufficient pouf in your silhouette, and warmth. This one person, at least, thought that three was a bare minimum.

Satirical "Three Graces in a High Wind" image lampooning inadequate undies

So if the ladies of the Regency/Empire/Federal era (say around 1795-1820) needed to add up more petticoats, what was the answer?

1807 image from La Beau Monde showing petticoat under lifted hem of gown

I've spent extra time looking at this over the past week because I am giving my "UnderWhere? in 1800" presentation at work at the end of the month, and I need to have something to say about the issue. I have come to some hesitant conclusions.

I am going to go with the assumption that my memory of this quote is correct and say that three is a good set of petticoats. Say I wear one bodiced petticoat, because we know they aren't excessively common, and any more than that is going to result in some bulking around the shoulders.

What of the other two petticoats?

1813 Fashion plate from La Belle Assemblee

Wearing a standard petticoat around the waist, outside your corset seems like it might create a funny-looking line in your costume, but I have seen people get away with it successfully, provided you don't wear too many.

But I've decided that it must be acceptable to where petticoats underneath your corset in order to get enough of them. This practice went back through the 18th century and would have been considered standard up until at least 1795 when waistlines and bustlines became one-in-the-same.

In the well-known print "Fashion Before Ease," from the last quarter of the 18th century, you can see that this woman is clearly wearing several petticoats, her false rump, and her pockets underneath her stays (corset). From personal experience, I can only guess that her waist was feeling quite squished with all of those under a tight pair of stays.

Fashion Before Ease

The same arrangement is seen on madame below in a 1791 satirical image.

And this 1823 image (now into the Empire era) seems to suggest that this woman could be wearing one underneath hers as well. If you look at her hem, you can decorative tucks. At this point in time, chemises were generally unadorned at the hem, though some decoration was appearing at the neckline.

Book of English Trades, 1823-4

This 1809 French Engraving is less clear. The woman on the right appears to be wearing just her chemise under her stays. But the woman on the left could be seen as wearing a petticoat as well since again there seems to be some ornamentation along her hemline.

However, the woman in the 1810 image "Progress of the Toilet" is planning to depend on petticoats outside her corset, rather than underneath.

"Progress of the toilet," 1810

So where does all this leave me?

Petticoats, like all clothing, would have been heavily influenced by the status, living/working conditions, geographic location, and familial tradition of the wearer, making a standardized practice for garment wear unlikely. This holds especially true in the absence of a popular form of media or other distribution source (such as fashion magazines, which were not commonly circulated and did not show underwear during this period) that would teach women the "right" way to wear their petticoats.

The best any of us can do in recreating this era of costuming is stick to what we know of preceeding practices, written accounts, and the few existing images.

I am standing by my theory that some petticoats continued to be worn under the stays, and I am making myself a new, leightweight white petticoat for the purpose. The best I can do is point to the images I've got and hope that something more conclusive falls in my lap one day.


My thanks to www.pemberly.com, who supplied me with most of my images.

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.

Flapper's Ball

After hemming and hawing, all 1920s gowns are done, the event is over, and I am relieved! I will definitely do more 1920s gowns in the future. Very fun and pretty easy (try that drafting system I mentioned before--it was great).

On a whim, I beaded my gown, which was time-consuming. But it came out alright. If I have time in the future, I will add more beads to the vertical lines along the side-seam. The 1920s gowns I looked at mostly seemed to favor this decorative element, an no wonder! It made the gown much more slimming.

Sadly, taking pictures in the dark was a little difficult. I will just have to say that the blur is intentionally artistic, right?

The Steamboat Ball Gowns

The purple faille Empire gown debuted this weekend at Clermont State Historic Site's Steamboat Bicentennial Ball. My thanks go out to Suzie and Sarah who submitted good-naturedly to be ornaments at the event as I and most of the other 300 guests snapped almost constant pictures of them--and also for making my costumes look so pretty! Tah-dah:

Pinups! Pinups for All!

Had a little fun with my camera, a tripod, and the timer setting the other day. I still need a real photographer to take some better photos one of these days, but until then, here's what those pinup dresses look like on a real person: