I agree that the skirt is not quite right, and if there are no underpinnings, it will not move right. Re the sleeve, one of the neat antique assessories that I have is a pair of kidney shaped 'pillows' that tie into the sleeve head. These small muslin bags about10"x7' are filled with down. They also appear in the Kyoto book in the underwear section for the first Q of the 19thC. I use them for both the log-o-mutton sleeve as well as this later one with some success of keeping the full sleeve distended as fashion required. Through the years, I have struggled with a variety of methods to preserve the full sleeve when being worn. One (not period, but it works) is to leave or make a smallish slit in the lining at about the elbow and stuff the upper sleeve with netting.This works for taffeta or other lighter weight materials, but if the fabric is heavy, they just won't lift it enough to hold... unless you over stuff it and that will not look right or be comfortable. My little pillows work really well here!
Kathleen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Katy Bishop" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Historical Costume" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 9:26 AM Subject: Re: [h-cost] Re: Simplicity 4156 - Victorian > Yes, definitely not enough skirt stiffening for 1895 > > Katy > > On 4/29/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > In a message dated 4/29/2006 12:04:41 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > One problem that can cause droopy sleeve puffs is that the shoulders > > might be a little too wide, the sleeves should start more on the > > shoulder rather than at or after the turn of the shoulder, that helps > > keep them from drooping. > > > > > > ***************** > > > > Indeed. Helps distinguish them from the large Gigot sleeves of the 1830s > > which do spring from off the shoulder. But since photography was off and running > > even before the 1890s, you can see in photographs all manner of droopy and > > perky and everything in between in sleeves. > > > > There's a fondness for structure in the 1890s...stiff fabrics and heavy > > trims held up by complex underpinnings. The skirt in the pattern sorta suffers > > from not being manipulated enough. I can't tell if she even has a petticoat. It > > seems a little too clingy in the hips and not full enough...things that do > > indeed start to happen as the decade wears on. In Janet Arnold you see the > > circular cut of the back of the skirts, achieved in several ways. Sometimes it > > is a big circle or semicircle cut out as one piece even if the fabric needs > > piecing to get a large enough width to do so. Sometimes it is gored. This is > > sewn to a front panel that is shaped to the hips. the whole thing is usually > > stiffened with something. In Arnold it says buckram....sometimes innerlining > > the lower half of the front gore and all of the back of the skirt. I've dressed > > extras in real 1890s stuff where the skirt practically stands on its own. > > > > As you move towards the turn of the century, the stiffness starts to wane > > and you end up at that droopy, flowing silhouette in light fabrics of the 1900s. > > _______________________________________________ > > h-costume mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume > > > > > -- > Katy Bishop, Vintage Victorian > [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.VintageVictorian.com > Custom reproduction gowns of the Victorian Era. > Publisher of the Vintage Dress Series books. > > _______________________________________________ > h-costume mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume > _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected] http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
