Monday, September 25, 2023

"Answers to Your Question on Suit Making" (McCall's Style News, April 1953)

 In the early 1950s, women's suits were very fitted and very structured.  This left the average woman who wanted to wear a suit in a bit of a dilemma... buy a ready-to-wear suit in standard sizings (that might or might not fit) or try making her own?  McCall's obviously preferred the latter, and in this issue of McCall's Style News it even offered a few hints on how to make a success of it.

Above: McCALL'S 9248.  The diagonal swing of the jacket closing is something new.  Notch collar, two-piece sleeves, slim skirt.

First was the vexed problem of shoulder pads:

So much is said about natural shoulders.   Should I make my suit jacket without pads?

Definitely no.  Use thin pads.  The new smart shoulder pads are delicate, beautifully shaped and excessively thin.  You need just that amount of padding in the shoulders of your suit.  Don't use any old pads, they are probably all wrong. 

Interfacing was another worry.  It was clear that some dressmakers would prefer to do without it:

Is it necessary to put interfacing into a suit when the material is firm in itself?

Definitely yes.  Especially in the collar, revers and through the shoulders.  Often down the closing.  Your pattern tells you where, and that is expert advice.  Don't make hard work of it.  Hair canvas interfacing is easy to work with—it's a woven material, not stiff or hard and the needle slips through as lightly as through silk.

Wouldn't interfacing make the points of collars and revers bumpy?

No, because you do not carry the interfacing up into the corner.

Keeping everything in place was another problem:

What can I do to keep the waistband of a suit skirt from wrinkling down?

Make a belt of boned belting in the same width as your skirt band is when finished.  Sew hooks and eyes on the ends, and stitch this belting belt to the top edge of your skirt band.

And there in a condensed form you have it—the not-so-simple art of making a woman's suit in 1953.  I suspect less experienced dressmakers would have given up at this point, and turned their attention to making something easier! 

No comments:

Post a Comment