"New Idea Star Pattern" (New Idea, June 8 1955)

 

New Idea wasn't a fashion magazine.  It was a weekly that offered the standard mix of fiction, recipes and housekeeping advice found in most women's magazines. It also published many knitting and crochet patterns—and each week advertised a few sewing patterns, obtainable by writing to the magazine.

This pattern for a "feminine house dress" is aimed squarely at its main readership: housewives.  The magazine suggested that it be made up in cottons "in gay designs" and it featured a buttoned yoke, ric-rac trim and gathered pouch pockets.  The magazine promised that the wearer would feel like "the queen of the household" in this dress—no doubt while doing her daily chores!

"...Pants and You" (Roaman's catalog, Summer 1968)

 In the late 1960s a daring new fashion trend was upsetting all the conventional fashion rules.  No, I'm not talking about the miniskirt—I'm talking about women wearing pants!  The whole trend was so disturbing that the editor of  Roaman's catalog took some time in the summer of 1968 out to address her readers (and potential customers) on the subject.  

I've taken the liberty of reproducing the text below, and illustrating it with pictures from various clothing catalogues from the year 1968.

Roaman's, Summer 1968

"With the trend in recent years toward the type of clothes that are both practical and comfortable, pants of one type or another have gained enormous popularity.  During the season just past, the pant-suit was a fashion headliner, and designers the world over brought us versions that were as attractive as they were easy-to-wear and as varied as they were smart."

Skylark, Summer 1968

"But with the swing to pants two problems have arisen:

1. Who should and should not wear pants?
2. Where and when should pants be worn?"

Lana Lobell, Fall 1968

"The answer to the first question is a personal decision that each one of us must make for herself.  If pants are to be worn only in private, there is actually no problem at all.  But I'm sure each of you has at one time or another seen, as I have, pants on a woman who badly needed to lose many pounds before appearing in public in pants—as a matter of personal pride in her own appearance, if nothing else.  Enough said? "

National Bellas Hess, Winter 1968

"The question of where and when to wear pants is a far easier one to answer than ever before.  Currently pants are available in styles suitable for every occasion.  Only one rule applies here—be certain that the ones you choose are suitable for the occasion.  If you follow this simple rule, your taste will never be open to question."

"Promenade d'Automne" (Le Petit Echo de la Mode, October 7 1917)

 By October 1917, World War I had ground on for over three years.  Though today we think of the War as it affected the men in the trenches, it also had profound effects on the civilian population.  In particular it lead to harsh shortages on the home front as men were called away to fight and resources were diverted from civilian use into the military.

The coats depicted below show how wartime conditions affected fashion.  They are warm (essential in a time of fuel shortages) and practical (well off the ground and with big pockets!) and are noticeably plainer than they would have been before the War.

1.  Heavy jersey coat, straight fit, with corner closed by a buckle covered with the same fabric.

2. Tailored suit in wool velvet.  Long, straight frock coat, with two large pleats behind and in front passing over a buttoned belt.

3. Duvetine coat, straight and solid shape, with a high belt decorated with buttons.

4. Coat for girls in terry fabric, straight shape with a buttoned belt.  Scarf shaped collar, draped, closed  with a button.

"The Newest French Fashions" (Ladies Treasury, November 1877)

Late Victorian fashions tended to be cumbersome and over-ornamented, but by Heaven! they looked warm.

 From which the astute reader can deduce that I'm writing this on a cold winter's day.

Above is a fashion plate depicting the newest fashions of 1877.  Both models wear dresses with long trains but no bustles.  "The back breadths of dresses," The Ladies Treasury informs us, are made as flat as possible, the loopings, if any to be at the sides".  The figure on the left is dressed in French merino or cashmere:

"The bodice is in Princess form.  The wide and full train is trimmed from the waist downwards, and caught together with a broad ruching of black satin.  Cuirass paletot of double cashmere lined with flannel and silk, and in the form of three square capes, the two lowest fitting to the figure.  The trimming is of clair-de-lune or moonlight beads and fringe."

Paper patterns for the dress and jacket were available from the magazine.

The figure on the right is wearing a "Home Costume":

"of light gray Royal Wellington serge (Egerton Burnett's).  Robe of Princess form, split up the back, where a full breadth to form the train is inserted, the to split sides being drawn together with grenat cords and tassels.   The cuirass bodice is simulated [my emphasis] by narrow velvet trimming and fringe."

Patterns were not advertised for this dress.

Genuine Red Fox (Spiegel Catalog, Fall/Winter 1965)

 Some years ago I visited a vintage clothing shop which had an entire long wall devoted to old furs.  There was everything from 1930s fox fur scarves (complete with heads and tails) to floor-sweeping mink evening capes.  It made me think of how values change, and how the status symbols of one era turn into the embarrassments of another.  Who, in the 21st century, would want to parade around in dead animal pelts?

Which brings me to this image.  Women in the 1960s were still wearing furs as a sign of wealth and status, but their value was being nibbled away on the one side by cheaper, artificial furs that looked like the Real Thing, and on the other by blatantly artificial "fun" furs worn by the young and with-it.  As for the ethical side of things, the anti-fur movement was still nascent at this point.  It first started making the news as protests against sealing in the 1970s, and coalesced in around 1980 as a movement against all kinds of fashionable fur-wearing.

This, incidentally was a real red fox fur, lining a coat made of mixed wool and nylon, and available from Spiegel for $US179 (that would be around $1642 now).

100 Years Ago (The Delineator, June 1922)

Though I posted something very similar before, I can't let my series exploring the fashions of 100 years ago go by without at least one post depicting the beach fashions of 1922.

 The Delineator describes the tops of these two-piece bathing costumes as "blouses" and the bottoms as "knickers".  Suggested materials included wool jersey, gingham, taffeta, crȇpe de Chine, satin and foulard.  In other words, these garments don't seem intended to be worn by serious swimmers (especially when you consider that the figure second from the left is wearing ruffles, and the model wearing gingham has pockets in her costume!)   Swimwear would steadily become more streamlined and spare through the 1920s and into the 1930s, but would remain impractical by modern standards until the invention of waterproof and elasticised synthetic materials.