"In France, Poise Counts" (Woman's Journal, January 1939)

 "It is with a sigh of real gratitude I register the passing of ugly hats", opines Moma Clarke in the January 1939 issue of Woman's Journal.

The danger of the hour lies in the short, tight skirt.  If a girl has legs too sturdy and hips at all broad, a very short, tight skirt can be unsightly.  A good many flared skirts are worn and as many pleated ones. Coloured dresses look cheerful at a tea or bridge party, high necks persist, and long, tight sleeves are worn more than any others.  They give a nice slender line to the figure and admit of a good splash of brightness in a bracelet at the wrist...

As discipline is the mot d'ordre of the day for all of us, I make no excuse for bringing it to the fore in such things as dress and fashion.  You simply cannot be well dressed if you are not disciplined...

Little did she know just how much discipline would be required in the near future, and how little fashion would count in the great scheme of things!

But back to 1939.

Alix, better known for her postwar label of "Madame Grès" was once described as a "columnar" designer, who used pleats and draping to create vertical effects reminiscent of Ancient Greece.  Here she is in a more conventional mode, but still using pleats to create a slender effect.

A skirt which sways like a willow in the wind is Alix's tribute to grace, and so she puts her fullness in the front of her skirts to make them swing gently in movement.  This grey duvetyn model is perfect in its simplicity and slim line.  The ideal background-to-accessories dress.  The rust coloured woollen frock has a skirt as straight at the back as the front is full, a kindergarten bib, and a Scotch belt—delightful mixture!  More tartan comes in the unusual full gathered blouse, which goes beneath a black suit, and has its basque front pulled through a slot in the jacket.

Bridal Couple (Between 1883 and 1886)

This photograph has a connection to one of Australia's lost department stores!

Inscribed on the back is the name and address of the studio where the photograph was taken:

 GEORGE & GEORGE'S

FEDERAL STUDIO

11, 13, 15 & 17 Collins St East

MELBOURNE

George and George's Federal Emporium was located at this address between 1883 and 1888.  The photographic studio was one of the services they offered, along with products such as "Dress goods, Manchester goods, soft goods, &c, &c".  George & George's Federal Emporium became simply "George's" sometime after the turn of the century, and it remained Melbourne's most fashionable high-end department store until it closed in 1995.

The back of the photograph also gives us the name of the photographer:

F.E. ELLIOTT

PHOTOGRAPHIC ARTIST

F.E. Elliott was Florence Elliott, a photographer who worked at the Federal Studio between 1883 and 1886.

I don't know if the bridal couple are wearing anything bought at George's (the lace? the veil? gloves? the outsize bouquet?) but it would be nice to think that they did!

Styles of '65: Separates (Marcus Clark's, Autumn and Winter 1965)

 Some styles are classics.  The skirts and twin sets below could just have easily been worn in 1955—or 1975!

B27W4—Fully fashioned pure wool Twin Set with fancy rib band trim on V-neck cardigan.  Short sleeve Sweater with Turtle Neck.

B28W4—Pure wool check Skirt.  Box pleated all round with welted seams, firm, narrow waist band, side zip.

B26W4—Pure wool Skirt with box pleats, stitched & welted seams.  Neat band.  Side zip fastening.

B25W4—Fully fashioned, pure wool Twin Set.  Button to neck Cardigan, Crew neck Sweater with long sleeves, narrow ribbed basque, turn back cuffs.

Family Photograph (circa 1896 or 1897)

 I found this in a secondhand ("disposals") shop in Adelaide.  It looks like a family gathering, but there is nothing to say who these people were or on what occasion the photograph was taken.

I assigned it a date of 1896 or 1897, mostly because of the size of the women's sleeves.  As you can see, they are still puffed at the top, but they are not the exaggerated "balloon" size popular in 1894 and 1895.  By 1898 sleeves were much smaller, and by 1899 the only reminder of the big sleeves was a some material gathered at the sleeve head.  Here, the width of the women's shoulders are emphasised by the use of revers, epaulettes and frills.

The woman in the centre of the photograph is wearing a broad ribbon tied in a bow at the back of her neck—a fashionable touch in the mid-1890s.

The babies in the photograph are wearing elaborate long, white gowns, while the little girl sitting at the far right is wearing a loose, smock-like dressed falling from a high yoke.  For everyday wear, children's dresses were usually protected by pinafores, but it is absent here—possibly suggesting that this photograph was taken for some kind of special event?

Both the men have nearly identical moustaches and are wearing wing collars and tie.  The man at the back is wearing a suit with a "lounge" jacket (clearly the ancestor of modern suits) while the man at the front is wearing a jacket and trousers in different materials.

Interestingly enough, no-one in this photograph is wearing a hat!

House Dresses (Peterson's Magazine, October 1862)

 By the beginning of the 20th century a 'house dress' was a simple dress in washable fabrics, designed to be worn while doing housework.  These dresses, made in silk and trimmed with velvet, are obviously very different.

Fig. 1—HOUSE DRESS OF AZULINE-BLUE SILK—Around the bottom is a fluting of black ribbon.  The body and sleeves are trimmed to correspond with the skirt.  Head-dress of black velvet and lace.

Fig. 2—HOUSE-DRESS OF GRAY SILK, SPOTTED WITH BLACK—A heavy black cording passes down the two breadths on each side, as well as around the bottom.  The sleeves are also corded with black velvet, and, like the body, are trimmed with narrow black velvet bows, with a steel buckle in the center of each bow.

On the other hand, these dresses look comparatively simple (by Victorian standards).  It's entirely possible that the readers of Peterson's Magazine could have adapted the designs in cheaper and sturdier fabrics for everyday wear.

Australian Home Journal, August 1958

Are the two dresss illustrated on the right hand mother-daughter fashions—or older sister-younger sister outfits?  Either way, the artist has emphasised the similarity of the designs by drawing them as if they were made up in the same material.

The Australian Home Journal still offered fashion advice to its readers in 1958, though its suggestions were far less detailed than they had been earlier in its history.

Now that Spring is "just around the corner", you'll find a frock in fine wool, crepe or silk indispensible.  Give it "top interest with a crossover fill-in, diagonal bands, an eye catching bow, or three or four small buttons placed one above the other on each side of a V neckline.  You'll be in the mode, too, if you cover up with a jacket-cardigan when the air turns chilly, for the dressy character of much of todays knitwear puts it into the fashion class...

Among current styles, the dress which looks like a suit with a scalloped jacket is one of the best investments a teenager can make.  For a "fashion extra," make a little handbag of the same fabric as your hat; or—if you like to go hatless, and prefer skirts and blouses to frocks—add matching touches to your separates to give them that smooth, ensembled look which spells smartness.

Styles of '65: Chanel-Style Suits (Simplicity Pattern Book, Autumn-Winter 1965)

 If there was one garment that persisted throughout the 1960s, it was the "Chanel-style" suit.  Consisting of a collarless, cardigan jacket and a straight skirt reaching a little below the knee, it was an almost  timeless style.  

To quote Chanel herself, "Fashion changes, but style endures".

The suit pictured above is not a Chanel original, but an imitation produced by Simplicity patterns made up in a natty houndstooth check.  An original Chanel suit was meticulously tailored, taking around 150 hours of manual labour to complete.  A chain was stitched into the hem of the jacket so it hung properly, and a ribbon around the waistband so it sat flat and the blouse could not become untucked.  Best of all, the pockets in a Chanel suit were real pockets, large enough to carry, keys, a handkerchief, a purse.