Vogue Couturier Design, copyright 1956
I introduce you, dear readers, to my favorite dressy dress, my favorite ballroom dancing dress. It’s June Allyson and Cyd Charisse gently stirred, not shaken. Yes, this beauty does require pantyhose, and that, pals, is a definite drawback. But. I feel so elegant, so marvelous, so irresistible in this frock that I will endure the discomfort. Occasionally. It is, without a doubt, my go-to dress for those times when I cannot weasel out of shaving my legs and slithering into what surely must be today’s equivalent to the girdle, pantyhose. And, no, I do not wear tummy control. Sheesh. Manufacturers make it sound so warm, so fuzzy: tummy control, not abdomen control. Puppies have tummies. Toddlers have tummies. Teddy bears have tummies. Women have abs if they pay regular visits to the gym, stomachs if they don't. Not tummies. Do the packages carry a warning: Wearing enclosed undergarment may severely hamper breathing? I've never read the fine print — I'm too busy stockpiling air before struggling to get the pantyhose over my thighs.
Do I sound like a tomboy? Like I squeal when made to scrub behind my ears? I’m really not. In fact, there was a time when I wore nylons every day. In the humid heat. I digress. Let me get back to the dress. The dress I wear when I want to get my glamour on.
Note the details: The bound buttonholes that form a queenly base for the covered buttons. The peaks that soar almost to the waistline. (The peaks that hide pockets!) The wide collar that so clearly states this dress is more than a just a contender. This is why I want to sew.
Comments
Kendra Hamilton on May 20, 2015 12:08
I love the writing on this blog! It has such a unique voice!
KH
Caitlin O'Connor on May 20, 2015 12:08
That is a SPECTACULAR dress, well worthy of the struggle with the I agree with Pattern_nut – it doesn’t look that hard. If you can get hold of the back issue of Threads that illustrates the difference between “home made dressmaker” following the instructions and “Couture” techniques (Which honestly are often EASIER, just more fiddly) then I reckon you should have a go. (Wanders off to check Threads index: I believe it might be issue 93)
Pattern_Nut on May 20, 2015 12:08
Okay, so you have the unaltered pattern pieces, and you have the instruction sheet. And the dress. I wonder whether the dressmaker followed the 1956 instructions and used all the pieces or whether she used updated techniques. Perhaps some of both.
When you find a sewing teacher (and you will!), you can read the instruction sheet together, look at the dress, and figure out the construction. In the meantime, you could pull out that instruction sheet now and see what makes sense to you and what doesn’t. What looks like an insurmountable task can be broken down into steps you understand.
Denise Calhoun on May 20, 2015 12:08
I did have a dressmaker stitch it up, and she did such a lovely job. Alas, she moved to the city. Drat double drat. I did not allow her to use the original pattern, and it did not occur to me to have her give me the copy she used. As I recall, there were few alterations. Vogue Bust 38 from the 50s tends to fit me almost perfectly. Now, if I can only manage to learn to sew a fine seam!
Pattern_Nut on May 20, 2015 12:08
Wow! You must feel like a million bucks in that dress! So did you have your dress made for you from that pattern? Do you have the altered pattern pieces? It would be great to sew it up again someday in other fabrics. And you could examine the construction in the dress you have to help you see how to sew it again.