Thrift find

I found the sweetest tiny reticule today at the thrift store. It's linen on the outside, satin lining, and ribbon embroidery just like in "18th Century Embroidery Techniques" by Gail Marsh. I know reticules aren't quite right for early-mid 1700s but it is so charming I think I will just have to use it as a little money purse at events.

Blogger app? No good.

So I have an android tablet and an iphone, and there are Blogger apps for both...but they are AWFUL. I have the worst time getting to my Dashboard from them, and when I do, I can't look through all the recent posts by others. Not sure if anyone else has this problem or a solution to it, but maybe it's my fault for wanting to read blogs more than wanting to post things myself. It SHOULD be easier than this.

I am slumming it with my projects lately, just finished a grey linen petticoat and am almost done with a very light pink-checked apron for my lower-class impression. Although I did recently buy a nice curtain panel from Etsy (not as nice as Lauren's over at American Duchess, sadly, but I like it) for an upper class apron:

 The fabric has little dots all over it, and although the ground is clearly machine-created net and the dots are painted on, it's difficult to tell unless you're scrutinizing it up close, so I'm willing to make the authenticity sacrifice, because to me it looks like:

I also got an interesting plate and saucers that almost match my teacups at the thrift store. The plate itself is a little garish and crudely painted but not too far off from some of the fragments they found in the French-settled areas around here, if I'm remembering correctly.

And lastly I purchased a pocket watch for my gentleman-friend from Jas. Townsend.  I think he'll enjoy it and I will benefit when we're hanging out because neither of us will have to pull out our non-authentic cell phones to see what time it is. I certainly thought it looked sharp!

Rose quarter-back gown -- final photos

I am so, so happy with how my first ever entirely hand-sewn, drafted-from-books gown turned out. It taught me some important lessons along the way, like "don't use extremely heavy upholstery fabric for a gown that would have been made out of silk" but I'm broke and Hancock Fabrics' decorating clearance is impossible to pass up.

 I took a few photos with my phone before I remembered I still had a digital camera...this is kind of grainy but even with poor resolution the silhouette is very elegant. Our clothes nowadays are so unflattering compared to the 18th century. I'd wear this all the time if I could get away with it!

I did self-fabric trim with ordinary pinking shears...I haven't got the scalloped shears yet, maybe eventually, but I do know that there are some extant gowns that have the straight pinking.

 

The bodice is closed with hooks and eyes, which I'm assuming is historically accurate as it showed up in Janet Arnold's patterns. Still not a fan of the puffy sleeves but the fabric was too thick and inflexible to lay down nicely at the shoulder. Next time, next time.

 

I'll post about the shoes with some pictures eventually...they are of course the leather Devonshires from American Duchess with her Fleur buckles. I was so terrified to punch holes in them and kind of felt bad when it was done but of course the buckles are so worth it.

No, I'm not wearing my fichu (and yes, I'm going to call it a fichu instead of a neck handkerchief, because the area I reenact in is French in heritage), I should have been proper and stuffed one under my neckline but it was upstairs and I was lazy. Also I would like to eventually make a fancy, somewhat decoratively short whitework apron to go over this but I don't feel like it's imperative.

Doing my hair was a lot of fun...it reaches almost to the small of my back now so there's plenty to work with. I poufed up the front and bobby-pinned it, then kept making smaller loops and twisted sections and pinned them haphazardly, leaving a couple of pieces loose to curl with the curling iron. Unfortunately with no electricity at the fort, I won't be able to get it to look like this at reenactments most of the time (plus the summer humidity this past year was so disgusting that a crisp piece of paper went limp and soggy within five minutes...curl would have been impossible). But for a first time attempt it looks pretty decent.

What a cute mule you have there...

I'm not sure why I've never seen these before in the Met collections...but I clearly need them. Flamestitched mules. I knew you could make flamestitch wallets, but shoes didn't cross my mind. They would be so perfect for slipping in to in the mornings when waking up and trailing about in my dressing gown while my maids bring me tea and...nevermind, these mules are giving me delusions of grandeur. But they're so pretty!

          See other views here

Also, as far as engagement rings go, I have said the past few years that some day (if that some day ever comes) I wanted a ring with a "halo" around the center stone, thinking it was a fairly new development in the ring design world...but no, it isn't.

So beautiful. I was surprised to see it belonged to a woman in New York, of all places, around 1760. I guess I imagined it on the finger of some European aristocrat...and the Met doesn't list it as paste, either!

Organizing in the New Year

I am so happy. No longer does my basement crafting area resemble a rag bin! Like more than a few craft-minded persons, I tend to start projects, get excited about a new one and forget the old one, so I had a hunting bag, two men's shirts, one pair of breeches, a cap, a jacket, and several pockets that I had stuffed into bags and forgotten about before finishing, so now I'm telling myself I cannot work on a new gown until I get these things done (hey, as long as Gentleman E. is paying me in woodworked items like chairs and thread-winders, which I cannot make myself, it's a fair deal)! The thrift stores around here have proved a lovely place for fabric, so my cabinets were full of new lengths that were just tossed in them willy-nilly...and after a four-hour effort last night, they are now all color coded and I can see what I have instead of digging through boxes and bags! I have a huge thing for stripes, apparently, based on my selection over the past year and a half. Also I was given an antique wooden sewing organizer for Christmas, and I dumped out every last bag and box and gathered up all my spools of thread to put into it, with hooks and eyes, seam rippers, pinking shears, lace and ribbons. It holds a ton! And I was still motivated enough to organize all my paints (I paint illuminated manuscripts when not sewing) and pull all my reenactment clothes out of their boxes...they are sadly wrinkled so the next step is to iron them gently and hang them up...perhaps I will even dress up and take a few pictures for here.

Not. Enough. Time! :(

Alright, where do all the hours in a day go?! I am currently trimming my rose-pink gown and adding ruffles to it, but I'm thinking about lowering the neckline a bit now because it feels much too high. If I re-do it and it's too low there's always the neck handkerchief, but too high is just dowdy for my age.

My 2012 to-do list (for my own future reference more than anything) is as follows:

1. Finish trimming the rose-pink gown (self trim).
2. Possibly redo the yellow-striped anglaise with a compere stomacher, or with bands across the front to pass tails of an extra-long neck handkerchief down through. I feel like it needs some ruffles on the sleeves also but very short, plain ones.
3. Sew an en fourreau gown out of the blue/white striped fabric, with a stomacher out of the ivory pre-floral-quilted material I got from the bargain bin at Joann's.
4. Do any number of accessories: trim a new hat (pink, hopefully), embroider a satin workbag (also pink), make a couple more aprons, several more under-petticoats, make a new oversized neck-handkerchief, paint a couple more fans, possibly embroider garters...this list is getting ridiculously ambitious.

I never realized before getting into the 18th century how many clothing and accessory options there were. Between Dangerous Liaisons (the movie AND the gorgeous, droolworthy display book by the same name), The Duchess, and The Aristocrats (plus all the blogs of the ridiculously talented people right now), if I am ever bored and wanting a project, it's my own fault and laziness. I go to bed dreaming of clocked stockings and wake up thinking about whitework and shoe buckles. No other time period is going to hold the same magic for me ever again!

Just when you think you've seen it all...

You know, I have come to the conclusion, after doing a great deal of reading and clicking and examining in extreme newbie desperation to nail down some hard and fast rules of 18th century clothing, that there are no rules. I have read and heard from self-proclaimed "veteran" re-enactors that solid browns and blues and yellows were about the only colors and linen about the only fabric available to colonists in America and should be the only colors worn at events. Interesting that extant wills from the area I reenact in (French Illinois territory, about as "on the outskirts" during the 18th century as you can get) list some of the inhabitants as having green and pink silk gowns, stockings and shoes, even though the families were mostly farmers and trappers. And then all over reenactment websites and costuming books, I have read that no 18th century woman in her right mind would have ever created or worn a gown out of the very picturesque Toile de Jouy fabric that was used for bedhangings and drapery. Well....

            TA-DA!  An Open Robe, dated 1785 - 1795, from the National Trust Snowshill Collection.

Granted, it is bizarre-looking, late in the century, and I wouldn't be caught dead in it, but it exists. If you are absolutely desperate to wear your drapery to a late 18th-century event, you now can do so and wave this picture in the face of all the finger-pointers.

It makes sense that there's particular commonalities and details specific to various decades within the 1700s, as well as regional differences, and there do seem to be a number of universally accepted facts about material, print and color that are borne out in existing pieces of clothing. However, if your fabric meets the major qualifications, unless you're using something way off base like My Little Pony quilting fabric or 1970s green, orange and brown floral couch fabric to make your gown (and even then there were some remarkably hideous almost "70s"-looking patterns in the early 18th century) nobody can with perfect accuracy say "that pattern would never have been used on fabric back then" or "they would never have constructed a gown with seams in that fashion." I keep finding astonishing exceptions to the so-called "rules" that a lot of re-enactors seem to have laid down. And yes, perhaps in many cases, these extant gowns/jackets/petticoats/hats were just that: exceptions. One of a kind mishaps or lapses in judgement or just plain making-do with the only materials they had. And when you think that none of these clothes came out of an industry or factory that was standardizing them, and each mantuamaker would have been taught certain basics but had their own preference for how to do things, it makes sense that a great deal of variation existed. The fact is that they DO exist and if you really want to justify your decision with an obscure example, why the heck not?  As long as we aren't trying to make sweeping generalizations and are willing to talk about the uncommonality of an item, I think it's important to appreciate the variety necessitated by the unregulated circumstances under which clothing was made.

Also, a few hapless seamstresses or tailors occasionally accomplished some unbelievably hideous stitchery and seams back then. I feel better about mine.