Similar patterns

source image

I came across this 1943 Stitchcraft cover today. The pattern used here is very similar to the Top Honors jumper pattern. There are probably more stitches in between the slip-stitch sections, but otherwise it is the same.
Knit in the Italian (or Hungarian) tricolor it would look very cheerful for spring!

Jumper styles and shapes from the 30's to the 60's

It is interesting to look at how jumper styles changed through the decades. Before starting to knit you really need to look at the pictures of the finished items and ask yourself the quetion: Will this look good on me? We all have different body shapes and let's be honest, not every garment accentuates the best parts of it. The models, even from 100 years ago seem to have the same, slender body shapes with tiny waists which makes every item look wonderful on them. Frustrating!

When it comes to making vintage inspired garments I think you need to know which era produced the most flattering patterns for your body type.
As you might know by now, I prefer the 40's. This is why:

• The accentuated shoulders are perfect to disguise the lack of shape in the waist. 
• The 30's could also be a good choice because of a wide variety of embellishments, for the same reason. 

I also know which parts to adjust:

• Those era's are well-known for the high necklines. I lower them a bit because of my round face. 
• Since I am high waisted I know it is more flattering to add extra width above the waistline to create a slightly blousy shape.
• Of course, I lengthen the tops too, because a very short jumper with a high waist is not a good combination...

The 60's are not my fashion era, simply because of the lack of shaping in the garments. I can imagine those garments would look fabulous on a thin person with small boobs, but with my swayback and broad shoulders they'd just look shapeless sacks on me. The 50's have a question mark in my book, because the hourglass shape which I simply don't have...

Which fashion era do you prefer and which one looks best on you?
Sloping shoulders or elevated ones, dolman sleeves or puff sleeves, fitted tops or relaxed ones?

Vintage inspired shoes from...Clarks

very 30's: lace up shoes, shaped heels, slingback sandals, suede

very 40's: heavier heels, pumps, suede, platform soles, ankle straps, wedges, fabric & canvas

Continuing the vintage inspired shoes series I've recently found a few gems in the collection of Clarks. you find the other posts under the label 'shoes' To be honest, never looked at the Clarks shoes until now because my mom who has 'difficult feet' loves them. The good thing is, the fit must be good, but on the downside she tends to like really shapeless shoes lately. It took me some time to talk her into buying a few neat and feminine shoes with low heels instead of the Birkenstock-type sandals she likes to wear.
The shoes above have typical late 30's and 40's shapes, they would all look equally pretty worn with a skirt or trousers. Now, that we finally (almost) sold our old house I'm aloud to buy new shoes. Above there are quite a few from the 2013 autumn/winter collection which are amazing but sadly, already sold out here. How about the Alma Kendra? To die for!
From now on I really need to watch the Clarks collections for new, vintage inspired items for myself...

As a little extra, below a 1946 article on tips for buying the right shoes for your feet:

Inspiration: contemporary knitted jackets

Have you ever tried to knit a jacket instead of a sweater? Knitted jackets can be fun! I've found a few great examples which are both modern looking and versatile. What do these designs have in common?
- the perfect choice of color combinations
- simple lines
- inventive accents

elegant:

knitted in simple stocking stitch with interesting ribbon details.
idea to remember: contrast color ribbon is pulled through the knitted holes.

parisian chic:

double breasted classic white jacket with black accents.
idea to remember: textured cross-stitch pattern imitating fabric-effect

chanelesque:

collarless, straight jacket with Irish cable patterns
idea to remember: crocheted Chanel-like trimming bands along the edges
Patterns from: Bergere de France yarns

from designer dresses to body image

   

So, what's wrong with these dresses?
Whenever I see a red-carpet picture of a celebrity the first thing I check is the fit of the garments. Not he total look, the accessories or the colors. Is that weird? One thing I often see is designer garments which somehow seem to be out of proportion, mostly regarding the length. As discussed in another post here designer outfits of celebrities are most of the time samples and not made to fit.

proportions
When we see the garments on the runway or in promotion pictures we see the tall and thin fashion models of 5'9" (=180cm) high and taller. Celebrities come in every size, and although they often are (too) thin, because 'everyone looks bigger on screen' (yeah, right...) most of them don't have the height of a runway model. Often, the petite actresses are wearing the prettiest runway designs. This means, when a garment fits them in the width it will be automatically too long as well. Let's take a look at two examples:

Claire Danes wore this Dior S/S 2014 dress about a week ago. The original runway dress below has a fitted bodice and a high waisted pencil skirt with an elegant, just-below-the-knee length. The pockets add an almost sportive detail. The actresses skirt has an odd length which hits her somewhere between the calves and the ankles. (and it is not only because the picture is made from another angle!)
   

Keira Knightley wore this vintage inspired Chanel dress recently:

Keira's dress looks out of proportion too.  The fit of the bodice is ok, but the skirt is way too long for her. Laura Ingalls, anyone? I couldn't find the runway picture of this dress, but I'm sure it is not intended to look like this. The seam hits her legs at the ankles which gives the dress an oversized, and rather matrony look. A shorter length would be much more youthful and flattering for her. How about a shorter, pretty tea-length?

the intention of the designer
The interesting question is of course, what was the intention of the designer? Would shortening the skirt ruin the total proportions of the garment (bodice vs skirt) or would it help to achieve the right proportions: a skirt with the right length in combination with a well-fitting bodice?
We all are familiar with the never-ending debate about the length and weight of fashion models. Who wouldn't remember the famous declaration of Kate Moss: "Nothing tastes as good as skinny feels" and the controversial "little too fat" comment of Karl Lagerfeld on the weight of singer Adele. Just look at these idealised design drawings - Miley Cyrus tour costumes by Cavalli and Pucci tour costume design for Beyonce. We know, both ladies have a slender figure, but how ridiculously long are those legs?! Spiderwoman is born...and reborn...


body image and marketing
We are still talking about celebrities, but how does this influence of our,  'average' people's body image? The University of Bath conducted a survey in 2006 about how women felt about thin fashion models in ads. The results were quite surprising (or not?...)

"Researchers from the University of Bath found that two-thirds of women they interviewed reacted favourably to print advertisements featuring thinner female models whereas less than a third liked models of a larger size. Those who preferred thinner models tended to believe that weight can be controlled by dieting or exercise. They tended to think the thinner models were more elegant, interesting, likeable and pleasant."

The population they interviewed consisted of 460 undergraduates, so sadly, this is the way young women felt about beauty back in 2006. I'm sure this image didn't change during the past years.

weight loss
Weight loss seems to be the theme of our times. Not surprisingly, even back in the early 1930's advertisements promoted weight loss all the time. Nothing has changed, they promoted 'simple' methods to lose weight, of course 'without dieting or exercise'. Below two ads from 1934 and 1935. Watch the marketing strategy: While one is quite rude, talking about "unnaturally bulging hips", "unlovely waist" the other refers to health hazards associated with obesity like a high blood pressure... (they didn't tell you don't get high blood pressure from a few extra pounds 'ugly fat' and called their product 'Youth-o-form' which suggested you even could look younger by losing weight:
   

Did you know that back in the 1940's the shape of the mannequins were adjusted for the new fashion trends? Yes, we are talking of the famous Dior New Look, which I personally don't like because the corseted, unnatural lines. (For me, that was the end of my dear, 1940's fashion era) If you read the article you'll discover that the mannequins were made taller and thinner because that was what 'average' women wanted to see. 70 years before the survey mentioned above!

there is hope
Personally, I don't feel good when I try on an outfit which looks fab on the thinner than thin mannequins in the store and looks ridiculously different when I try it on. I'd really prefer to see those outfits on a more 'average'  sized mannequin, and often wonder how would those garments look on an XL body? Don't you? On the bright side, the English department store Debenhams unveiled their size 16 mannequin for a trial in 2013:
   

"Like most retailers Debenhams generally uses standard size 10 mannequins in window displays. But with the majority of women in the UK either a size 14 or 16 it was time for us to take notice and try something a bit different. Our Head of Creative, Mark Stevens, told us about the idea behind this trial: “We are proud to offer a broad and varied choice for women of all ages, shapes and sizes in store. So we thought we should reflect this in our window displays. If it’s popular with customers we would love to roll it out.”

Wow, what a difference! I'd love to see those mannequins everywhere, don't you? Sadly, no other department stores are planning to follow this example. Wonder, what would it take to make that happen?
Anyway, it's time for a recap on the designer outfits and celebrities we started with. We can conclude, that being thin doesn't mean that an any expensive designer outfit would look great on you. I also believe that any garment that is made to fit could look great on you, even if it's not an expensive one.
What are your thoughts on the subject?

Schiaparelli-chic 1937

"Originality, plus simplicity of line is the secret of chic."

Schiaparelli wearing her own design: a shoe-hat (black wool, winter 1937/38)

Elsa Schiaparelli (1890–1973) was an Italian fashion designer. She ruled the fashion world of the 1920's and 30's along with Coco Chanel. Like Chanel she retired soon after WW2. One of her most famous deaigns is Wallis Simpson's lobster dress which she created in collaboration with Salvador dali. She contributed to fashion articles from time to time, in several magazines/newspapers during the 30's. In 1937 she gave her 7 rules on how to dress chic.

Wallis Simpson wearing Schiaparelli's famous Lobster dress

schiaparelli's seven rules 
On how to dress chic:
1. simple, beautiful lines and good (quality) materials
2. spotlessly clean clothes
3. be tidy, take good care of every garment
4. in color matching garments
5. dress to suit the occasion
6. keep a small stock of matching clothes
7. spend to buy the very best quality of accessories (shoes, hats, bags) you can afford

1934 spring inspiration: the third and fourth models from Schiaparelli: blue wool suit and white cotton blouse with linen lace ending on the jabot, black wool coat with silver fox scarf

The key is to invest in small stock, but matching clothes, made of quality materials. Nowadays it is easy to forget the importance of quality, when we can buy new, cheap clothing for every season. Looking at myself I prefer to invest in just one or two better pieces (on sale) than filling my wardrobe with tons of cheap and 'fashionable' clothes each season. On the downside, I must say, I looooove colors, and little details so often forget to buy clothes that I can wear in different combinations.
I don't follow the newest fashion trends, and prefer to wear my own, authentic mix of vintage inspired and modern day garments, and I certainly invest in good quality accessories. How about you?


Schiaparelli blouses from 1938: pink Vyella fabric with brown leather buttons, crochet hat, Vyella jacket blouse with chinese collar and leather buttons.

did you know that...
...Vyella fabric was a twill weave blend of 55% merino's wool and 45% cotton in the early 20th century? Later they modified the fabric mix in 80% cotton and 20% wool. In the early years, the fabric’s unique selling point was its combination of lightness and fashion, whilst providing warmth and durability.

1939 beautiful felt hats, left a cocoa-brown forward jutting beret from Schiaparelli


Source newspaper image: AWW through trove

impression of the Chanel exhibition in the Hague

   



Above right Gabriele Chanel in 1929, wearing a jersey suit.
Finally visited the Chanel exhibition in the Hague I wrote about here. I made a couple of pictures, but the glass screens and poor lighting didn't make it easy, so here is an impression:

1920's Chanel dresses:
 



   

the little black dress section (not only Chanel's!)


   

60's Chanel suit:
   

pocket details (on the right grosgrain ribbon!)
   

details of a 20's cotton dress:


   

A beautiful silk evening gown:
   

   

The delicate fabric edges were finished with tiny zigzag stitches!


More jacket details, different cuffs and pockets:
   

did you know that...
...professional 'copying houses' have been making illegal, counterfeit versions of Coo Chanel couture for years? It has even happened that Chanel suits, ready fir shipment to the United States, were stolen off the ship so that they could be copied quickly and hung back.

Real and copied suits. Though the one on the left is not a real Chanel, I love the shape!
   
   

Inside a real Chanel jacket:


...and in a real Chanel jacket! Visitors were aloud to try one on for a picture!