![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
1830s dinner dress plans for 2025
This isn't at all what I should sew first, mind you, but it's occupying brain space so I'll write a post up for it and make a DW tag, and maybe it'll go away!
You know, I know, we all know that the height of Romantic style in the late 1820s-early 1830s hasn't really been my jam. I think it's delightfully ridiculous on everybody else and I love seeing people make it, but I've avoided making a big-sleeved 1830s dress for Robin's Young Victoria dinner for years. I made a few 1830s dresses years ago when the trend first came out here, and I've sold them on because I've never liked them. Too frou-frou, and I don't actually enjoy feeling like a giant ridiculous doll.
But! There is a Costume in Detail dress that I've had half an eye on for years, and it is in fact dated 1830-33.
It's still got the big dumb sleeves, but is relatively simple in cut, with a few nice little details - I love that the under-gown and over-gown were reunited a hundred years after they were made and worn, from completely different locations, because the over-gown is piped with the unusual speckled satin that the under-gown is made of. And I like the look of a sheer gown over a colored base but have never gotten around to making one for any of the eras in which they were popular.
I'm not going to try and recreate it exactly, mainly because I'd never find anything like a close match for the fabric (and I've been half-assedly looking for years, whenever I find a sale on silk!), but following the cut and construction is something I can do!
(Also I don't need to make a new corset for this dress, unlike most other things I want to make this year. Ahem.)
So, the under-gown will be this silk that I got a good deal on a hundred years ago, give or take (and it was a good deal because it's only 40" wide, dumbass)...it's a fairly fabulous changeable dusty-purple-and-emerald-green lightweight taffeta, that I've hoarded for years but haven't used because there wouldn't be enough for much trim on any style of dress. Ah, but an under-gown doesn't need trim, only piping!
I did measure and add up skirt panels and usual bodice yardage requirements plus estimates for big stupid sleeves, and there should be enough. If there isn't enough for the piping I have plenty of scraps of solid green silk that's just about the shade of the weft threads in this fabric. Contrast piping doesn't seem to be much of a Thing in this era, but, fight me. xD
The over-gown is the sticking point, and the one I bought the purple sheer silk on the Black Friday sale for. Lovely fabric, not what I want for this. You can see why I would like the under-gown fabric to be at least slightly visible! So I found a couple of options on Farmhouse Fabrics and er ahem, ordered both of them. One is a self-striped natural white organza, the other a silver-and-mauve-pink organza.
The striped organza is nice enough although I didn't realize the stripes were railroaded (mildly annoying), but I also didn't realize (there is a theme with this order) that when the description on the silver and mauve organza said silver, they did mean METALLIC silver. It didn't say metallic in the description, in my defense. This is some SHINY-ASS fabric.
And you know what, I'm going to use it. xD The shiny weft doesn't hit you in the face quite as much in indoor/artificial light - it's actually a really nice quality lamé. The mauvey-pink warp reads a little darker than it does in these pictures, and I think is a nice complement to the dusty purple in the shot silk. And it's sheer enough to see a bit of the under-gown color when the shiny threads aren't blocking the view.
Am I still going to name this the Liberace dress? Also yes.
Is it anywhere in the neighborhood of historically accurate, because we all know that's usually my jam? Eh. Any lamé in the 1800s would have used real metal threads - as far as I can find, there's no artificial alternative until Lurex in the 1950s. (Lamé was popular in the 1920s as well, but I couldn't easily find any source that told me whether there was a cheaper substitute yet by that point. Fill me in if you do know!) Thus, a dress entirely made of precious metal threads would have been prohibitively expensive...I've found a few extants from this period on Pinterest that might possibly have some sheer trim that's made of now-tarnished lamé, but nothing approaching a full dress, unsurprisingly.
The white striped organza would be a lot more "accurate", but this is more fun, so I'm going to go with "fun" this time around, I think. Plus I'm a big fan of letting the fabric be the statement on a dress, aka not having to bother to trim it. Heh.
You know, I know, we all know that the height of Romantic style in the late 1820s-early 1830s hasn't really been my jam. I think it's delightfully ridiculous on everybody else and I love seeing people make it, but I've avoided making a big-sleeved 1830s dress for Robin's Young Victoria dinner for years. I made a few 1830s dresses years ago when the trend first came out here, and I've sold them on because I've never liked them. Too frou-frou, and I don't actually enjoy feeling like a giant ridiculous doll.
But! There is a Costume in Detail dress that I've had half an eye on for years, and it is in fact dated 1830-33.
It's still got the big dumb sleeves, but is relatively simple in cut, with a few nice little details - I love that the under-gown and over-gown were reunited a hundred years after they were made and worn, from completely different locations, because the over-gown is piped with the unusual speckled satin that the under-gown is made of. And I like the look of a sheer gown over a colored base but have never gotten around to making one for any of the eras in which they were popular.
I'm not going to try and recreate it exactly, mainly because I'd never find anything like a close match for the fabric (and I've been half-assedly looking for years, whenever I find a sale on silk!), but following the cut and construction is something I can do!
(Also I don't need to make a new corset for this dress, unlike most other things I want to make this year. Ahem.)
So, the under-gown will be this silk that I got a good deal on a hundred years ago, give or take (and it was a good deal because it's only 40" wide, dumbass)...it's a fairly fabulous changeable dusty-purple-and-emerald-green lightweight taffeta, that I've hoarded for years but haven't used because there wouldn't be enough for much trim on any style of dress. Ah, but an under-gown doesn't need trim, only piping!
I did measure and add up skirt panels and usual bodice yardage requirements plus estimates for big stupid sleeves, and there should be enough. If there isn't enough for the piping I have plenty of scraps of solid green silk that's just about the shade of the weft threads in this fabric. Contrast piping doesn't seem to be much of a Thing in this era, but, fight me. xD
The over-gown is the sticking point, and the one I bought the purple sheer silk on the Black Friday sale for. Lovely fabric, not what I want for this. You can see why I would like the under-gown fabric to be at least slightly visible! So I found a couple of options on Farmhouse Fabrics and er ahem, ordered both of them. One is a self-striped natural white organza, the other a silver-and-mauve-pink organza.
The striped organza is nice enough although I didn't realize the stripes were railroaded (mildly annoying), but I also didn't realize (there is a theme with this order) that when the description on the silver and mauve organza said silver, they did mean METALLIC silver. It didn't say metallic in the description, in my defense. This is some SHINY-ASS fabric.
And you know what, I'm going to use it. xD The shiny weft doesn't hit you in the face quite as much in indoor/artificial light - it's actually a really nice quality lamé. The mauvey-pink warp reads a little darker than it does in these pictures, and I think is a nice complement to the dusty purple in the shot silk. And it's sheer enough to see a bit of the under-gown color when the shiny threads aren't blocking the view.
Am I still going to name this the Liberace dress? Also yes.
Is it anywhere in the neighborhood of historically accurate, because we all know that's usually my jam? Eh. Any lamé in the 1800s would have used real metal threads - as far as I can find, there's no artificial alternative until Lurex in the 1950s. (Lamé was popular in the 1920s as well, but I couldn't easily find any source that told me whether there was a cheaper substitute yet by that point. Fill me in if you do know!) Thus, a dress entirely made of precious metal threads would have been prohibitively expensive...I've found a few extants from this period on Pinterest that might possibly have some sheer trim that's made of now-tarnished lamé, but nothing approaching a full dress, unsurprisingly.
The white striped organza would be a lot more "accurate", but this is more fun, so I'm going to go with "fun" this time around, I think. Plus I'm a big fan of letting the fabric be the statement on a dress, aka not having to bother to trim it. Heh.