On 19/01/2012 09:15, Alex Stillwell wrote:
Dear Arachnids
I am making lace for doll's underwear and am currently working on a bodice to
go with her drawers. I have been told that this article of clothing is a
spencer. Is this correct? I tried Wilipedia but there is no reference.
As you don't mention the historical period you have in mind, I'm afraid
I've written rather a lot, but I hope it will help.
In England spencer began as a jacket, worn in the 'Jane Austen' period.
It was made of woven wool and at times had a very military cut. It
was outerwear and distinctively waist length: for men, who wore it over
their tailcoats, the natural waist; for women, to the waist on their
empire-line dresses. It had long, straight sleeves, for both sexes,
although their was a brief women's fashion where this was set into a
puff sleeve at the top, rather than directly into the armscye. For
adults, the fashion had mostly disappeared by the 1830s, but it
persisted for small children much longer. It was still a garment for
babies in the 1860s.
The clothing of the Regency period had a free, "Rousseau-esque" basis as
a reaction to the complicated, heavily stayed look of just before. The
Victorian look was a pious reaction to the light muslins and "nude"
look, and there were swings towards a back-to-nature ideal later on.
This meant that children were released from their stays, (under which
was worn a corset protector - a simple cloth bodice to protect the
corset from contact with the skin, since the corset was much more
difficult to launder). In 1867, a doctor was suggesting that ladies
should suspend their crinolines on braces, so that the weight might be
carried by the shoulders instead of the waist. He also suggested that
they could leave off the corset and wear just their camisole, (stiffened
if they wished), to which drawers and petticoats might be buttoned. At
the same time, Mrs. Ada Ballin, editor of a magazine called "Baby" was
urging more sensible clothing for children, and refers to a spencer in a
way which makes it seem like the later matinee jacket of recent times.
(The liberty bodice was another attempt to give children more
comfortable clothes; it had buttons to fasten the fronts togerther, and
others to support the drawers and on suspenders for stockings too.)
May I suggest that you call the garment either a chemise or a camisole.
Yes, a chemise was the name for an earlier garment, but it came back
again - among the Edwardians it was a simple tube with shoulder straps
which went on over - and often was decorated to match - the
combinations. A camisole was similar, but went over the corset, if worn.
I have had the opportunity to examine a great many Victorian garments
for women and girls, and of course paid special attention to lace.
There was only one item that did not have some lace on them somewhere.
(Even a pair of bloomers which had belonged to a hard-working housemaid
- as the wear and repairs showed - had a strip of lace at the edge of
each leg.) The narrowest was a baby's vest, which had a very narrow
edging at the neck. This was the only garment I've seen where the lace
was mounted directly on to the fabric. All the others made a double
tucks: the upper one was very narrow and the lace was sewn on to it;
beneath that was a deeper tuck, about the same depth as the lace or a
little deeper; it formed a sort of frill which supported the lace away
from the main garment, and looked very pretty. The arrangement may also
have had something to do with making it easier to take the lace off when
the garment was laundered.
Hoping to hear more about your fascinating project,
Linda Walton
(in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, U.K., remembering my first interest
in costume, which was making and dressing historical dolls, and the
delight I discovered in researching what the real personages would have
worn).
-
To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace [email protected]. For help, write to
[email protected]. Photo site:
http://community.webshots.com/user/arachne2003/albums/most-recent
