confusing the Victorians

[jennylafleur]

As per the TV board, apparently I confused a 1870s fashion plate with an 1880s wedding gown. How embarrassing! My response:

Umm... oops! I wasn't looking at the dates when searching my files, I didn't realize the extent gown was so late. So perhaps it's not the best example of what I was looking for. I don't intend to copy the decoration per-say (or the bodice, I'm using TV405). What I liked was the line and proportions of the skirt/pouf/overskirt.

I'm not into the aprons and swags in front so I like the idea of that decorated flat front, pouf behind as shown in these 1875 fashion plates:
http://www.festiveattyre.com/victorian/p75/may1.html (left green)
http://www.festiveattyre.com/victorian/p75/sep1.html (middle blue)
http://www.festiveattyre.com/victorian/p75/jul9.html

I'm really bad at translating the plates into reality though and couldn't tell if it was separate (full underskirt) or sewn together (false like TV216). I'm guessing now that either is acceptable for the 1870s? Thanks for you help and advice!

Clear as mud? Yep, thought so. :P

Comments

[gilded-garb.livejournal.com]

I would say that it's probably all one skirt. I have no historical information to back that up, just common sense. With that much going on, one skirt will be way lighter than two. Plus, it saves on fabric AND trimming to do it in one.

Just my two cents :o)

[jennylafleur.livejournal.com]

True... and less to pack for CC! :> Thanks!