Category: 1920s fashion

1920s fashion, sewing, sewing patterns

Excella and Pictorial Review

Lisa

I found out a few months ago that there was a connection between Pictorial Review patterns and Excella patterns. I verified this over the weekend when I realized that I had a men’s pattern from Pictorial Review that I’d also had in the past as Excella.

I don’t know the year on these, and would love to know if they were published at the same time. Look closely at the Pictorial Review, and “last pattern 1928” is written on it. I don’t know if that pertains to this pattern, and it would be hard to say. Though sewing pattern catalogs included some men’s patterns, they didn’t include many, so finding a reference to them from now-defunct companies would be a difficult task.

I saw an article at some point that mentioned the connection they had, but darned if I can find it now. I went searching, and here is what I found. This first mention of Excella in ads was in 1922. Excella patterns were touted as being simple, and that completed projects would exactly match the illustrations. They even had ads saying that if you incurred any loss in creating a garment with Excella patterns, they would reimburse the customer for every penny of loss. Imagine that today!

In1924, Excella began advertising their “Pictograf” which was similar to Butterick’s Deltor, in that it was the name they gave to the instruction sheets. Pictograf later became associated with Pictorial Review. In fact, in 1927, ads are seen for “Excella Pictorial Review” patterns.

In 1934, ads are seen saying that some stores contracts had ended with Pictorial Review, and that they were selling Excella patterns in their place. Pictorial Review patterns were still being sold however, as ads were seen for them up until

Excella ads were seen up until early 1938, though not as frequently as in the earlier years. In contrast, Pictorial Review liquidation sales were seen as early as 1939 and Pictorial Review Magazine isn’t seen after 1940.Any mention of the pattern line disappeared in late 1942. My grandmother worked for Pictorial Review as a fashion editor in the early to mid 1920s, and I believe, from family history, that they were absorbed into McCall’s when they closed.

I would consider this parallel selling of patterns to what Butterick and Vogue did. Vogue would issue patterns, and when sales cooled, they were changed to Butterick and sold with different pattern numbers. I haven’t dived into this practice far enough to show an example, but I know it happened. I’m not sure if it still happens today. Interesting, huh?

Advertisement
1920s fashion, designers, sewing, sewing patterns, vintage clothing, vintage fashion

When a Designer Pattern isn’t a Designer Pattern

Lisa

I’ve been uploading some patterns to the Vintage Sewing Patterns Wiki. They are from an August, 1926 issue of Pictorial Review magazine, and wow are the styles beautiful. I’ve come across this lately more than once, and figured it deserved a bit of a spotlight: sometimes designer patterns aren’t designer patterns.

We all know about designer patterns by Vogue, which include everyone from Schiaparelli to Oscar de la Renta. Many of you know about the designer series by Advance, which included designers like Jo Copeland and even Adrian (I have two. See them here.). Spadea, of course, did tons of designer patterns by Ceil Chapman, the Dutchess of Windsor, and many, many more. McCalls had patterns by designers like Givenchy and Geoffrey Beene. There are even some mail order designer patterns — Charles James did two. I’ve been lucky enough to have one. But did you know that some designer patterns are not labelled as such?

The pattern above, for example, was “designed after Lanvin.” It is Pictorial Review 3405. It was not labelled as a designer pattern, and most likely was not approved by the couture house, but back in the day, it was regular practice to send people to the couture fashion shows in Paris, with their only purpose to be making copies of the designs. They would sketch out the designs, then come back to America and have patterns made from the sketches. This Pictorial Review has four pages of “designed after” patterns from Lanvin, Worth, Molyneux and more. They’re gorgeous.

In the more modern era, you can find patterns attributed to Alexander McQueen by looking at Givenchy patterns from the era when he was their designer. Here’s one:

I recently sold a Chloe that was most likely Karl Lagerfeld as well. These are the things you find when you do a deep dive into sewing patterns. I find it fascinating, and maybe others do too. I just really love nerding out over the history involved in sewing and the patterns women used. Perhaps they knew what they had. Perhaps they didn’t care. But the details in it are so interesting to me. You never know what you have till you know what you have.

1920s fashion, sewing, sewing patterns, vintage clothing, vintage fashion

1926 Laws of Decoration

Lisa

I listed a series of sewing books from 1926 on Etsy over the past few months, called A Modern Course in Home Sewing and Dressmaking. They are available as downloads, and are a fascinating look into the mid 1920s era of sewing and styling techniques. They incorporate hand and machine sewing, and cover everything from seams, to fabric choices, to trims, to construction. I posted the last one today, and it covers silhouettes and style. I thought I’d share some of the ideas found.

They call them Leonardo’s Five Laws of Decoration.

  1. Decoration exists to make more beautiful the object decorated, and not to exploit itself. (I think Coco Chanel took this concept when she said to look in the mirror before going out the door and remove one thing, so as not to overdo it.)
  2. The first premise of decorative treatment is a crying need for decoration on the part of the thing to be decorated. (If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.)
  3. Decoration should follow the structural lines of the thing decorated and add an appearance of strength. (Don’t weaken the design by trying to go outside the lines.)
  4. Decoration should not interfere with the proper function of the object decorated. (This is especially important in sewing. Don’t try to use chiffon when the pattern calls for cotton, or the garment won’t function as designed.)
  5. Decorations should be consistent in technique, material, scale, color and texture with the object decorated and with each other. (Don’t mix apples and oranges.)

Keep in mind that these principles work just as well for home decor as they do for sewing. I think it’s a great little short course in taste. What would you add to the list?

1920s fashion, designers, sewing, sewing patterns, vintage clothing, vintage fashion

Look what I found!

Lisa

I don’t know if you remember, but I mentioned McCall 4882 in a former post about 1920s designer patterns from McCall. Well, waddya know, I found the Model by Jenny of Paris in my stash! Truthfully, I had the pattern for some time, but thought the envelope was long gone. Look what happens when one actually tidies:

McCall 4882, 1928.

I am so excited, because this is something of a rare find, much less in factory folds AND in a bust size 34 which, for some, is a wearable size. How cool is that?

Jenny of Paris is quoted in 1929 (the year after this pattern was printed) as saying, “I not only believe but actually preach the creed that it is vitally necessary for the modern woman to be as lovely and charming as is possible for her to be, and accordingly I design.” She goes on to say that the suffrage movement took as long as it did because of the way the women dressed, including stiff collars and flat shoes, and then says that chivalry in men also had dropped because of the way women chose to clothe themselves. Miss Jenny took her fashion SERIOUSLY. She says that women in fiction were only admired if they were not dowdy (she obviously didn’t read Pride and Prejudice), and that men will never woo a woman unless she is fashionable.

Jenny said to choose your clothing carefully, regardless of your budget. She favored carefully selected black dresses, and liked velvet trim as an accessory. She strongly disliked the robe de style, first saying women didn’t take the time to choose a frock that favored them, and second, saying basically that she didn’t understand why women would dress in a style from the past when the entire future of fashion was in front of them. She was also not a fan of fads, though she would toss in a trendy item or two like a bustle, in each collection, just to keep people interested.

She mentions that she prefers natural waistlines, though she would drop them occasionally. This jacket is a case in point. Though it doesn’t officially have a dropped waist, it gives the illusion of one with the lower placement of buttons and belt. The jacket itself really has no waistline, as the silhouette is straight. Miss Jenny knew how to design something that was on trend, without compromising her ideals.

Side note, I just finished Season One of Making the Cut on Amazon Prime. I have mixed feelings about it. I find Heidi Klum to be insufferably narcissistic, and actually have to fast forward the little Heidi and Tim segments — I love Tim Gunn, but Heidi is such an attention hound I just cannot. Plus, I would much rather see the design process or even the business side of things instead of seeing Heidi dance half naked at the Moulin Rouge, or fence with Tim. The insights the designers give to how the fashion business works is really interesting, and of course the fashion is wonderful. Miss Jenny’s idea of designing on trend without losing herself and loving black reminded me of Esther on MtC. ***SPOILER ALERT*** Esther, without a doubt, was a FAR superior designer to Jonny, but I think that the judges probably chose the right winner, since she was unlikely to veer from her black color palette. Jonny, however, should’ve been booted at least a couple of episodes prior, since he couldn’t finish without help from other designers, but the judges didn’t see that. I must say too that the judges should have listened to Naomi, as she gave the best insights, and was obviously frustrated by Heidi running over her all the time. I would’ve been surprised if she had come back for season 2, but I miss her. She was a good judge. And for those who think that the judges were rough on the designers: these were not rookie designers. All of these people had their own lines coming in. They know the business is tough. I think the judges were just being truthful and direct, though I could do without the “have you changed your mind” schtick from Heidi. UGH. I really don’t like her. And I hate myself for starting Season 2, but that’s life. I just love fashion.

Now available in the Etsy shop.

1920s fashion, vintage clothing, vintage fashion

Annie Got Her Garter Purse

Lisa

This is a new thing for me. I came across a pattern from 1916, for a crocheted garter purse. Interesting. I’ve seen garter guns and garter flasks, but an actual purse is new to me.

I found a 1914 article that talks about the “new fad” of garter purses. It mentions it as an alternate to carrying a bag, and different from the custom of tucking one’s cash into one’s stockings — inconvenient and rather scandalous when you need to pull out money in public. The article mentions that they were made in suede, in bright colors like emerald and violet, and consisted of a series of flat pocketbooks attached to a strap, then carefully strapped to one’s leg.

Going back further, a 1905 article talks about how unhygienic putting money into your stocking is, and states that a banking house of the time offered female patrons garter purses, which led to them being made at home. Here is the illustration of the garter purse (left) and the “old way” of putting money into one’s stocking (right):

The one the bank offered ladies had a steel band to hold it in place. Homemade ones had elastic straps, which was considered safer “in the case of a fall or robbery.” Garter purses were advertised as Christmas gifts between girlfriends, and were even sold with powder and powder puffs in two sections, with another section for money to be kept.

The earliest article about garter purses mentions stocking that were made with a chamois pocket to keep valuables in as the first type of garter purse. It wondered if the fad would catch on. It seems to have morphed into the 1905 styles mentioned above, and were commonly used to carry keys, money and valuables. Men tended to marvel at women’s ability to remove money from their garter purses unnoticed. This is because women wore them with slashed skirts and would simply make an excuse to remove themselves momentarily, slip out of sight and get their money out, then return seconds later, cash in hand. Women know how the magic works, don’t we?

A later article from 1920 mentions the unfortunate Mrs. E.M. Lied, who went shopping in Kansas City with her jewels tucked into her garter purse. She arrived home to find that she had unfortunately put the purse on upside down and her jewels had been lost, to the tune of $5000. Lost were a three inch diamond brooch, a platinum lavalliere with three diamond pendants, a fancy dinner ring set with diamonds and Oriental sapphires, and three diamond rings. That’s over $65,000 in value today. Methinks that Mrs. Lied likely took to her bed after this.

It also appears that garter purses did not keep women from being robbed, as bandits grew wise to the fad and would pat women down for them and grab them during a robbery. Moral of the story: don’t carry your valuables with you. Another alternative is a belt wallet, where the wallet attaches inside the belt and rests against your belly, but as for me, I just leave my stuff at home.

1920s fashion, vintage fashion

Hair Pillows

Lisa

I found this letter inside a 1920’s children’s pattern and my curiosity was piqued, never having heard of a hair pillow. I went on a researching quest, and found that they are just as you might think — pillows full of hair.

A 1917 newspaper touts the better choice of a hair pillow versus a feather pillow. Reasons: feathers get hot and sticky, the smell, and who knows how many generations of your family have slept using that very same feather pillow. Hair pillows were considered cooler, causing less sweat on the back of the head and neck (remember, there was no air conditioning during this time). The article states that they are quite comfortable, once you get used to them, and they are softer as well.

A 1962 article to a home advice column questioned what to do with a hair pillow that became matted after it was run through a washing machine. The answer? Take the hair out, wash and detangle, and stuff it back in.

Seems like we’ve used just about everything to lay our heads on, but this is one I’d never heard of. The cost in 1917 for a 12X14″ pillow was about $1.25 according to the letter. The newspaper mentions that they were similar or only slightly higher in cost than feathers. So if you have some hair lying around that you can’t donate to Locks of Love, consider making a hair pillow and letting me know how it works for you. I’m curious, but not that curious.