Yes, the shift fronts (or backs) have an opening with button closure at the neck. The necks are very wide (shoulder-to-shoulder), and there does not appear to be a difference between front/back, height-wise.
I have teenaged daughters, and let's just say I am familiar with that particular stain... We take (not great) documentation photos, and I'm not sure where the photos are being stored. The shifts (at least the stack we tackled today) were in near-perfect condition, save for staining caused by poor storage conditions. When I say "vast" collection I mean VAST -- our clothing collection has been described as the largest collection of American country clothing in existence... because generations of the Reed family never threw any of it away. -Dede --- On Wed, 8/10/11, Marjorie Wilser <[email protected]> wrote: Dede, If by "the closure side" you mean the neck button side of the garment, it seems reasonable that the marking would be on the same side (the back and not the front). Back closing garments were not that uncommon, though many shifts did indeed close in front. Even if the marking were on the front, ladies' shifts were never intended to be viewed by anybody, so who would care where a laundry mark was placed? The stain may be indicative of use, as you surmise. I'm guessing it's a blood stain? However, if the lady had slaughtered a chicken she may have gotten blood on the front of her dress and underpinnings (just a thought here!), so you'd have to identify the source of the stain to assume back vs front. Are the front pattern pieces higher in the back than the front? I'd look for that: more allowance for back pieces to be worn a little higher. That would be a construction detail you may have missed while folding. It will be interesting to see what you come up with. Any photos which could be posted to the library? (or does indra have a library?) == Marjorie Wilser _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected] http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
