July 11, 2015 § 8 Comments
The new book by the curator of the Commercial Pattern Archive is the first comprehensive study of the sewing pattern industry. Published through Bloomsbury’s academic imprint, Joy Spanabel Emery’s A History of the Paper Pattern Industry: The Home Dressmaking Fashion Revolution traces the history of commercial patterns from their beginnings in early modern tailors’ drafting systems to the 21st century.
Emery is Professor Emerita of Theater at the University of Rhode Island, where she also taught in the fashion department. In addition to her articles on commercial sewing patterns, she is the author of Stage Costume Techniques (Prentice-Hall, 1981).
The materials found in the University of Rhode Island’s Commercial Pattern Archive (CoPA) and the personal archive of CoPA founder Betty Williams are the main sources for the book, which focuses on the pattern industry and its role in the production of everyday clothing. Emery presents her research in short, textbook-style chapters, ending each chapter with a brief summary. In the back, readers will find an index, endnotes for each chapter, and a detailed bibliography with sections for primary sources, secondary sources, and archival collections.
As a special inducement to those who sew, the book also includes an appendix with nine patterns, each laid out on a grid by Susan Hannel, the chair of the University of Rhode Island’s fashion department. The gridded patterns range from an 1850s Demorest basque [bodice], originally published as a pattern sheet supplement in a ladies’ fashion gazette, to a 1960s men’s Nehru jacket from Spadea.
Recent academic books on sewing have used the framework of gender studies to examine sewing as a cultural practice. Barbara Burman’s collection, The Culture of Sewing: Gender, Consumption and Home Dressmaking (Berg, 1999, to which Emery contributed a chapter, “Dreams on Paper: A Story of the Commercial Pattern Industry”), and Sarah A. Gordon’s “Make It Yourself”: Home Sewing, Gender, and Culture 1890-1930 (Columbia University Press, 2007) both present social histories of sewing that take into account changing understandings of femininity and women’s work.
Emery’s book takes a more conservative approach to the material culture of sewing patterns, aiming to lay the groundwork for further study by focusing on the historical timeline of commercial production and technical development. Each chapter traces the industry’s new technologies and companies, mergers and closures as the pattern business landscape shifted from early diversity to today’s conglomerates.
CoPA’s holdings are so extensive that they show not only the industry’s response to dramatic developments in fashion, like the New Look or youthquake, but also to historical events like the First and Second World Wars. A 1918 issue of Butterick’s magazine, The Delineator, shows two women in naval uniform (Butterick pattern no. 1101), while a 1943 McCall’s pattern for Victory aprons is printed with patriotic verse:
(For more on Butterick 1101 see Michelle Lee’s blog post.)
Industry players competed to improve the sewing customer’s experience. We have McCall’s to thank for the printed pattern. Other pattern companies couldn’t duplicate the technique until McCall’s patent expired—although Pictorial Review found a creative workaround with patterns that were both printed and perforated.
It was during the economic boom of the 1920s that the industry produced the first fully conceived designer patterns. As Betty Williams found in her research, McCall’s interwar couture patterns were based on garments purchased from Parisian couture houses for copying purposes. When Williams shared an early McCall Patou pattern with staff at the house of Patou, they agreed that the design looked like the couturier’s work, but were unable to find documentation of a McCall-Patou relationship (Williams 1995).* Intriguingly, Emery mentions a business agreement model along the lines of today’s licensing, but does not go into further detail.
Infelicities of layout and organization occasionally disrupt the flow. Including the discussion of interwar couture patterns in the 1920s chapter means that we read about the 1933 closure of the Paris Pattern Company, and see a 1930s example of a Paris Pattern, before reaching the 1930s chapter. Paris Patterns in fact survived beyond 1933: by the following year, the company seems to have merged with Style and was still releasing patterns for June, 1934.
The text is sometimes marred by typographical errors, as well as errors traceable to data entry errors in the pattern archive. Schiaparelli’s first Vogue Paris Original (no. 1051) is included in the chapter devoted to World War 2 rather than the postwar chapter, and its date is given as 1947 when it should be 1949—the year Vogue Patterns, still owned by Condé Nast, launched its Paris Originals with great fanfare. (See my postwar Schiaparelli post here.)
Countering the assertion that commercial pattern designs are already out of fashion, Emery argues that patterns historically allowed their customers to keep abreast of trends, giving some interesting before and after examples of patterns adapted to reflect the new proportions of the postwar New Look.
The question of the relationship between high fashion and the commercial pattern industry is an interesting one. Contemporary high fashion adaptations in pattern form are relatively current. Roland Mouret’s Fall 2005 blockbuster, the Galaxy dress, was adapted in 2006 as Vogue 8280, and Carven’s dress for Spring 2013 was adapted for that season as Vogue 8900 (see As I Said…). Current adaptations can be seen in McCall’s #sewthelook series on Instagram.
But licensed designer patterns are a different story. While trend-setting styles such as those from Yves Saint Laurent’s Mondrian and Ballets Russes collections could count on expedited production, more often there seems to have been a seasonal lag. A 1950s Laroche pattern discussed as typical in a contemporary report, Vogue 1450, is a design from the Spring 1959 couture that was released a season later, in late 1959.
Today, when the production time for a commercial pattern has been cut to as little as four weeks,** it’s still unusual for a new designer pattern to represent the current season. To take some recent examples: of Simplicity’s Cynthia Rowley patterns from the Summer 2015 release, Simplicity 1105 is unusual for being from the current season, Spring/Summer 2015:
In Vogue Patterns’ Fall 2014 release, the Donna Karan, Guy Laroche, and Rachel Comey selections are from the Fall 2013 collections, while the Ralph Rucci coat, Vogue 1419, is from the Pre-Fall 2013 collection:
The fashion industry has changed, and fewer designers are willing to enter into licensing agreements for commercial patterns, let alone license current-season designs. Historical analysis of the pattern industry shows how it has adapted in response not only to economic and social trends, but also to home sewers’ changing relationship with fashion. Emery has taken a much-needed look to the archives in this essential resource.
(Press release and interview here.)
Joy Spanabel Emery, A History of the Paper Pattern Industry: The Home Dressmaking Fashion Revolution, London: Bloomsbury, 2014.
ISBN (cloth): 9780857858306
ISBN (paper): 9780857858313
* Betty Williams, “1920s Couturier Patterns and the Home Sewer,” Cutters’ Research Journal 6.4 (Spring 1995).
** According to a Forbes article cited on p. 201.
For review purposes I received a complimentary copy from the publisher.
June 13, 2014 § 7 Comments
When I first started collecting sewing patterns, Naomi was baffled. She couldn’t understand my interest when the styling on modern pattern envelopes was bland or worse. This new, occasional series looks at designer patterns that fail to convey the strengths of the original—not as an end in itself, but in the hope of provoking reflection and discussion of the frequent disparity between designer fashion and the licensed versions offered to home sewers.
(You can see an earlier discussion in the comments on my Alber Elbaz post.)
Launching the series is Vogue 2893, a top and skirt pattern by Donna Karan from 2006. The off-the-shoulder, back-laced ensemble is drawn from Karan’s Spring/Summer 2005 collection, and was the centrepiece of the Peter Lindbergh advertising campaign starring Erin Wasson.
The look was even chosen to open the Spring 2005 runway presentation. The second photo shows the top’s contrast mesh inserts, elasticized shoulders, and decorative zigzag stitching detail:
Now consider the pattern envelope:
The envelope replaces the original’s bared shoulders, open back, and slight flare at the hips with a much higher décolletage and tightly laced back. The result is a more covered-up, middle-of-the-road, body-con look that lacks the original’s confidence and wit.
What do you think? Did Vogue Patterns assume the original styling wouldn’t appeal to their customers?
February 8, 2013 § 5 Comments
Vogue Patterns doesn’t have an archive of their old patterns, so the company is calling on the sewing public to lend patterns from their collections for reissue in the Vintage Vogue line.
Reissued Forties and Fifties patterns have done best with customers, but they’re interested in patterns from all periods. The only exception is designer patterns credited to a named designer—these can’t be reissued due to licensing issues. This means that Vogue Couturier patterns are fair game unless they have a designer credit.
(The illustrations show a selection of Vintage Vogue reissues from 1928 to 1960. Hover for pattern numbers and dates, or click to enlarge.)
If you have vintage Vogue patterns that you’d be willing to lend, you can send images of your patterns by e-mail (Subject: Vintage Vogue Search) to email@example.com or by post to Vintage Vogue Search, Vogue Patterns, 120 Broadway, 34th floor, New York, NY 10271, USA.
If your pattern is chosen, you will be asked to lend your original for about 9 months. When the reissue is ready, your original is returned to you, and you receive a copy of the new Vintage Vogue release, a credit on the pattern envelope, and 5 free patterns.
Even if you aren’t contacted right away, one of your patterns could still be chosen to become a new Vintage Vogue pattern. Staff keep the pattern images on file and choose two each season, tailoring their choices to current trends. I sent in my scans about 16 months before I was contacted about lending my Fifties pattern. Happy scanning!
February 8, 2013 § 5 Comments
The results of the Vintage Vogue 8875 giveaway are in! Thank you so much to everyone who entered and commented. The B5 size range goes to:
The F5 size range goes to:
Congratulations to the winners! I’ll be in touch by e-mail to get your mailing addresses.
Thanks again to Vogue Patterns for providing the patterns. If you’re new to my blog, you might be interested in my earlier post, How Do You Take Your Vintage Vogue?, for discussion of the Vintage Vogue pattern line since 1998 and changing approaches to vintage.
As it turns out, this is actually the second time Vogue S-4595 has been reissued. After I added my pattern to the Vintage Patterns Wiki, admin Petite Main noted that it was reissued in 1957 as Vogue S-4771:
If you have patterns you’re interested in sharing with Vogue Patterns, I’ve put together a special post with the details on the Vintage Vogue Search.
January 28, 2013 § 263 Comments
Last June a Vogue Patterns representative contacted me about borrowing a pattern from my collection, to be reissued in the Vintage Vogue line.
Because Vogue Patterns doesn’t have all their patterns archived, the company runs an ongoing Vintage Vogue search to find patterns for reproduction. (More details in pattern junkie’s post here.) I had e-mailed a few scans of my vintage, non-designer Vogue patterns (designer patterns are ineligible due to licensing issues) and they chose this 1950s Vogue Special Design:
The envelope description reads: One piece dress and redingote. Slim skirt joins the bodice at waist-line. Low, oval neck-line. Short kimono sleeves. Fitted redingote flared below hip-line. Shawl collar and detachable top collar. Tied closing at waist-line. Below elbow length sleeves cut in one with front and back.
Here are the original fabric suggestions:
Here is the new, reissued pattern, V8875:
The updated description reads: Misses’ dress, belt, coat and detachable collar. Dress has close-fitting bodice with side front/side back seams, inside belt, front pleated skirt, side zipper, and self belt with buckle. Fitted and flared coat has front extending into back collar, detachable collar, princess darts, hook/eye closure and tie ends. A and B: front and back cut-in-one with sleeves.
Recommended fabrics: A (dress): crepe, shantung and tissue taffeta. B (coat): wool crepe, flannel and worsted.
To celebrate the new Vintage Vogue release, I’m giving away two copies of V8875, one in each size range—B5 (8-10-12-14-16) and F5 (16-18-20-22-24).* To enter the giveaway, leave a comment below by midnight on Thursday, February 7th (deadline extended), and mention your preferred size range. (Size chart here.) The winners will be announced on Friday, February 8th. Good luck!
* Copies of V8875 courtesy of Vogue Patterns; worldwide shipping costs covered by me.
** This giveaway is now closed. Thanks to everyone who participated! **
October 5, 2012 § 2 Comments
My 1926 copy of Vogue’s Book of Practical Dressmaking has endpapers charmingly illustrated by W. Mury. They’re a great example of aspirational marketing in that they situate the dressmaking process in a world of wealth and leisure. The illustrations show the elegant dressmaker beginning by consulting her copy of Vogue magazine before her trip into town:
Madame’s driver waits outside with the car during her visit to a department store. In the Vogue department, sales attendants measure her and show her the latest patterns and Vogue-approved fabrics:
Back at home she cuts, sews, and finishes her new dress, which sets her “apart from the crowd”:
Mury’s illustrated sequence presents sewing as a leisure activity: guided by Vogue’s fashion authority, the chic young woman sews for pleasure. It’s interesting how, with the increasing availability of ready-made women’s wear, the sewing industry took to promoting itself by appealing to the desire for leisure and social status. Even if a car and driver weren’t in the budget, you could still sew from a Vogue pattern.
April 23, 2012 § 3 Comments
Lately I’ve been listing a lot of mid-century vintage patterns in the shop, including this 1950s Givenchy pattern from McCall’s:
Inside the pattern envelope is an insert introducing Hubert de Givenchy and detailing the production process for these McCall’s “exclusives.” The insert doesn’t mention that Givenchy is a French aristocrat. Instead, it proclaims he was “born to the fashion tradition,” noting his family’s connection to the Beauvais Tapestry Works and his experience at the Parisian couture houses of Jacques Fath, Robert Piguet, and Elsa Schiaparelli.
The insert is emphatic that these French designs are suitable for Americans: “French in feeling and typically Givenchy, they’re still easy to make and easy to wear—admirably suited to the American way of life because Givenchy designed them especially for McCall’s and for you.”
We are told how, in 1956, the “tall, blond young Frenchman” flew to America for a tour of McCall’s facilities, then flew back to Paris to create his first exclusive series of designs for the company. The designer constructs his toile on an American dress form; he also produces a finished garment using American fabric. Both toile and garment are “air-expressed” to McCall’s headquarters in New York City. A paper pattern is made from half the toile, and the resulting prototype is compared against the designer’s original.
The last section of the insert, headed “Your Spring Wardrobe Designed by Givenchy,” gives an illustration and description for each of the four spring patterns:
“Givenchy’s all-day ‘runabout frock’ in lightweight flannel. Typical of this dynamic young designer: the wonderful line in the roll-away collar, the way the high-waisted young sash buttons onto the dress. You might also make it in linen or shantung.”
“A suit that cries ‘Givenchy’ in every line. Look at the inimitable cut of the jacket, the rolling curve of the collar. Another Givenchy inspiration: grosgrain-bound buttonholes an inch and a half wide. Givenchy suggests silk or rayon suiting.”
“Givenchy’s young-in-heart evening gown for any age, the belling skirt curved in a prophetic cut-away hemline. Givenchy chose a paper-crisp taffeta, but you could also use polished cotton, silk or satin. The pattern includes a beautifully shaped petticoat.” (4007) “Two flightly [sic] little bow-knots hint at a high waistline on this afternoon frock with bell-shaped skirt buoyed by its own print-bordered petticoat. Givenchy selected a printed tissue-weight taffeta, also suggests silk surah or peau de soie.” (4006)
It’s interesting to see how McCall’s production process for designer patterns differs from Vogue’s, as described in my earlier post. Vogue claimed to adjust Paris originals for American figures, whereas McCall’s exclusives were made directly on an American dress form. Apparently national differences were still an issue, and McCall’s felt it had to address postwar patriotism, even amid continued demand for European designer fashions.