An 1890s corset a.k.a the ok-ish housemaid

I'm making all the corsets in 2019 apparently. One of my projects for this year was an 1890s gown. Granted, I could've just used my natural form era one, but to my knowledge the shape slightly changes from the 1870s to the 1890s. I scoured all of my books and found the "pretty housemaid" corset in Salen's "Corsets" to be the easiest pattern.

The making of...

I had bought some black cotton coutil in a sale, and since the original corset in the book is black with yellow I decided just to do that.

I made 1 mock-up, of which I took no pictures. This project flew under the radar a wee bit because I was doing so many other things at the same time. Simultaneously I was also re-doing Waugh's 1776 stays, making prototype pocket hoops, designing a robe a la francaise, and even began to draft a fantasy gown.

The thing about corsets, to me, is that they're hard on the fingers. Because coutil is quite stiff, and tightly woven, sometimes getting pins through is hard, so I tend to get sore hands, and cuts. Thankfully, after 4 years of trying, I actually find corsets rather easy to put together (it's the boning channels in the seams that's difficult).

I realised the problem with my natural form era corset was that it flattened my chest rather than supported it. In other words, it functioned more like 18th century stays than a 19th century corset. So with the 1890s pattern I ensured I was supported rather than squashed.

Yes, that is a 2" waist reduction, but it was laced soooo tightly. I'd never wear it outside like that.

Unfortunately that shape reads more natural form to me than 1890s. There's something softer about the hip curve in the 1890s. I forgot this when I was drafting the pattern and so my hip just shoots out rather than curves out. Still, that shape is better than no shape, and the late 1890s was the time of hip pads, so I think I'm just being picky.

I pondered over what busk to use. The pattern in Salen has a straight one, but spoon busks were being used, and I'd already used one for my natural form era. I can't remember why I chose to use a straight one, but I did.

I also don't think the waistline of the corset matches my actual waistline. Also some of the panels waistline didn't match up. Corsetry experts will now be thinking that means the corset won't fit right, and true, laced tightly it did start digging in just underneath my ribs, a few cm above my natural waist. But here's the thing, I'm relatively straight up and down from bust to waist. And you can see from the pic above that the slight shift in waistline doesn't seem to create much of an issue, unless I lace it tightly which I never do.

At this point there was some gaping at the bust. I wrongly assumed that the corset just went too high, creating a cup shape more like a bra cup than a mid-bust corset curve. Unfortunately I was wrong, but stupidly didn't fix it before boning the seams. So the seam ripper came out. I took the bust in a little bit, but I lost a lot of the shape on my bust. Still not as flat as the natural form era...I honestly don't understand where my boobs go in corsets!

Something mildly annoying happened with this corset, and it's definitely a first. I only did 1 mock-up before cutting into the black coutil. It laced closed all the way in the back, but it fit. Hence I only had to take out the amount that would mean a lacing gap would be created. I took about half an inch from the sidemost panel, and one of the CB panels.

I don't know WTF I did but when I made it all up and tried it on the corset barely reached around my back. I had to go and re-cut the sidemost panel back to the original. The final corset is actually the same pattern I used for the first mock-up (with the waistline altered a few cm). I'm definitely getting better at scaling things up accurately.

Then came boning, on the seams, and usually in the back where it tends to wrinkle for me. I did toy with doing cording at the bust, since it was very popular at the time and that's what the original corset has, but I wasn't sure how that would affect the overall length since I hadn't factored in shrinkage for cording.

I bought special black and yellow lace, in an attempt to match the original, but I placed mine differently.

All in all this didn't take long, in fact I think it's the fastest corset I've ever made, and it was definitely the time saved from not doing multiple mock-ups. Perhaps I just got lucky this time, or perhaps I'm genuinely getting better at scaling things up to my size. Who knows. There was one minor problem in that I ran out of black bias binding for the bottom, and so for a few inches at the back, the black bias binding changes to the yellow I have on the top. Apparently if you don't bleed on your corset something else needs to go wrong.

I like the fit, and there's still some room to put some padding underneath the hips of the corset for that 1890s hourglass figure.

Photoshoot location: St Cohan's church, Merther

Every costumer has a portfolio, no matter how big or small, but how do you give your costumes the showing they deserve if you're on your own, or you've made something and can't find an event to attend? You take pictures yourself, following my 3 simple steps.

But where?

I'm not a photographer, not by any means. I have a DSLR camera, a remote control, and a tripod. That's it. But have you ever visited somewhere, or gone walking in enchanted forest land with the dog and just thought, my God this would be the perfect setting for my such and such outfit? I have, many, many times.

I usually take to my back garden for pictures, but that comes with it's own dangers. Mainly, my nosy neighbours. I don't like conversation with people and will avoid it at all costs, especially when I stick out like a sore thumb in my Victorian or Georgian ensemble. It's just not really something I want to chat about with my neighbours. This means my photoshoots are often rushed, which isn't ideal.

Then I came across the idea of using abandoned places to take photoshoots. There must be hundreds, even thousands of places in this country that have been abandoned but still good for a photoshoot. Hell, I used to live practically beside an abandoned victorian asylum (which unfortuantely was still attached to a functioning hospital).

On my recent holiday in Cornwall I decided that because I was away for a week it was a great opportunity to take pictures of the outfits that I'd finished but never photographed. I did what any savvy millenial does when they have a problem, I took to Google. I searched for abandoned places in Cornwall and wasn't disappointed. Turns out this is a big-ish category.

Amateur costumers like myself aren't the only ones who need cool places for photographs of their products. Obviously I was limited by geography (Cornwall is surprisingly large), because of where I was staying it took ages to get to a main road, and I didn't want to spend long driving. Some of the places were abandoned/derelict buildings, but in towns and villages, so not really ideal if I didn't want to have a chat with strangers.

Then I came across a location better than I could've hoped for. St Cohan's church in Merther, just south of Truro. It was 30 minutes away from my holiday let, and from the pictures I saw it was hauntingly beautiful. Who doesn't love an abandoned church?

St Cohan's church was reportedly built in the 14th century and enjoyed success right up until the end of the Victorian era, when it began to decline. The population of the parish unsurprisingly dwindled duing this time until the church was completely abandoned in the early 20th century. A gruesome fact was that it was also used as a mortuary chapel for a while because it's replacement church didn't have a graveyard, but St Cohan's did.

The church in 2019 has mostly been reclaimed by nature, and there's a small notice at the entrance advising people not to enter because it's unstable and may fall down at any moment. To be honest you can't see the church from the road, and barely any brick is left uncovered by the ivy that's engulfed this once thriving wee church. It is enchanting to look at though.

It's very peaceful, despite the people who still live beside it doing their gardening whilst I was there. No main road will take you directly to it, and it's surrounded by farms, fields, and narrow country roads (thank God for my go-kart size car). The upside is that you'r sat-nav will take you right there, just be careful not to miss it!

As I said two people actually live beside it, and there's a farm at the end of the lane which you can just see from the churchyard. It is unsafe to enter, although I saw a picture from 2017 of the inside, so not that unsafe, apparently.

I didn't go inside, just in case someone took issue to it. Someone still takes care of the grounds though, and apparently they still have an easter service outside every year.

The church's future is unclear, but for now, it's a pretty destination if you have costumes to photograph.

1890s evening gown

Pumpkin spice natural form era gown

Fantasy Baldoch dress

An 1890s evening gown a.k.a under the radar

This ensemble really emphasises the historically inspired rather than historically accurate tagline of my recent costuming experiences. It was also one of those outfits that came together rather quickly for once. I felt like I was doing a lot of other things whilst chipping away at this gown that it kind of flew under the radar a wee bit. But, it's finished-ish (sans bodice fastenings).

In my post about my sewing plans for 2019 I said I wanted to make an 1890s gown similar to the one Dakota Fanning wears in The (awful) Alienist TV series. Obviously it is quite 1890s, but I'm still undecided as to how accurate it is. The sleeveless-ness is definitely more late 90s than any other time, edging towards Edwardian and early 1900s with the S-bend corsets.

I'm not ready to try and tackle an S-bend corset, so I tried to keep mine firmly in the 1890s (with limited success). First was, obviously, an 1890s corset, which has to be my best corset so far. I already had a suitable petticoat, the one I used for my natural form era ensemble. Then it was onto outer wear. I know, that was fast!

I'm obviously just wearing one petticoat (because I'm lazy and another probably wouldn't fit under it due to the snugness of the skirt). My hair didn't cooperate with me, hence the flat looking attempt at a gibson girl hairstyle.

Massive fart, anyone? If you came here for serious, you came to the wrong place....

For the hawk-eyed out there you can see the white petticoat peeking out from underneath the opening because the skirt is a wee bit snug (and doesn't have a placket).

I'm even starting to make videos now (that I've figured out how to use my camera properly....).

The making of....

I scoured my books, and I was incredibly picky. I ended up settling on the 1890s gown in Waugh's Cut of Women's clothes. I can't find a picture of it online so you'll have to use your imagination. I only used the skirt pattern from this as I re-used my natural form era evening bodice pattern, with some design tweaks. That pattern is proving very versatile, this is the 2nd time I've altered it for a different era/project.

Let's talk about fabric. I originally wanted to make this out of silk satin (I know, don't know what I was thinking), but I didn't want to spend a lot of money, so I did the unthinkable....I bought polyester!! Not my first foray into poly fabrics for historical garments, but at least this time it wasn't because I thought I'd cock up. I got a really nice polyester Italian Duchess Satin, and honestly, I think it looks great. Very similar to my £50p/m real duchess silk satin, and it cost me about £11p/m. So it is higher end than the awful £5p/m you get in most fabric stores. My colour of choice was berry/plum/wine, don't really know what you call it. I just really wanted a purple gown.

I began with the skirt, and I had quite a bit of trouble scaling it up. The original pattern has 6 panels, CF (cut on the fold), side, side back, and centre back (which is very thin and gathered to a mere 3/4"). The original waistband is 22", if I remember correctly. Let's just say my waist is no where near that, and is very much bigger, so I did the usual of adding a few inches to each panel.

I actually made a full mock-up of this in horrible satinised polyester (I didn't realise what it was when I ordered it online, but I've learned my lesson). It has all way stretch. It fit, with a few tweaks here and there, so I began to cut out the panels in the satin and cotton interlining.

Skirts in the 19th century, particularly the Victorian era, were flatlined with another fabric to stabilise them and give them a particular shape. This was especially important in the latter half of the century. In the 1890s the panels are flatlined, and the hem is also stabilised with stiff braid, or something similar.

I hand basted the cotton to the satin, and it took ages. I usually use the machine, but I always get wrinkles. I decided to try the hand basting, and ended up with smooth skirt panels....crap/yay. Then i quickly constructed it and tried it on. The original pattern has 4 darts on the side panels, 2 on each side. They are angled more towards the back, but the way I'd scaled mine up they landed smack on the sides, and it made everything look weird. The shape of the skirt was all wrong.

Granted, the hem wasn't stabilised, and I didn't have my petticoat on underneath (I know, my brain decided it was going to leave for an afternoon), but that does not look 1890s to me. So I left it for a day or two, and in that time I realised that a) I hadn't worn my petticoat underneath, and b.) the shape needed changed. The only thing I loved about it was the train at the back (because I love trains on everything!).

The easiest way to do that was to remove the darts in the side panels. In reality I possibly could have just used the original pattern and it would've fit, but I had a completely cut out skirt sewn together, so the smaller the alteration the better. The other bad thing was that rather than a CB closure like in the original I'd decided to opt for side back opening, on the panel I needed to alter.

I would've just pleated down the excess if it wasn't for the opening being there. Instead I had to get the seam-ripper out (a rare occurrence because I'm that lazy) in what turned out to be a ripper-happy week (see post on my 1890s corset) and unpick the seam between the side panels and the side back panels. I think I removed 2" from it (the darts were about 1" each), and then re-stitched it. It was still a bit big, but this time I just took in the SF seams about 1/2" and it was all fixed.

Much better with the addition of a petticoat underneath and the excess at the waist taken away. Now happy with the shape I set to making a waistband.

The last thing was to stabilise the hem. I had bought horsehair braid/crin tape in a sale and learned how to insert that, then I pondered over the hem facing. This is just a strip of fabric that is attached to the hem and then folded in to the wrong side, and is exactly like the crin tape. Was it overkill to use both? And if it wasn't then what should the facing be of?

I didn't fancy cutting bias strips (because it's a circular hem it should be bias strips you use as facing) of the remnants of the cotton I'd used to flatline because I was saving that for the bodice, which left me with cutting into the remnants of the cotton organdy I had left over from another project, or the weird glazed/waxed cotton I used to interline my 1660s skirt with surprising success.

I opted for none of the above because why waste that fabric when the crin tape should serve the same purpose? I suppose we'll never know what would've happened if I'd used both.

Then onto the bodice. As I said before I used my natural form era evening bodice pattern because I knew it fitted and it was very similar to the 1890s bodice in Hunnisett. Obviously, by the 1890s off the shoulder evening bodices aren't really in fashion anymore, so I had to altar where the straps were.

Instead of a CF or CB opening, I decided to to a SF opening. This was because I wanted a weird gathered bodice front. It was inevitable I was going to get wrinkles in the satin on the bodice, so I just decided to steer into the skid. By the late 1890s and into the Edwardian era, bodice closures began to get quite complicated in that they didn't have to be hooks and eyes or ties up the CB or CF.

I kind of wish I hadn't chosen this design because I did not execute it properly. You can see the tiny prick stitches I used to secure all of the pleats on the gathered bodice front. My sash of black organza was also a last minute addition, but I actually really like it, and it hid a lot of the awful pleats.

The neckline was meant to be square, but you can see that didn't quite work out...I'd already finished the neckline by the time I realised it was wonky and was losing steam quite quickly with the whole project so just decided to leave it.

The skirt is also a bit too snug and just closes. It is in desperate need of a placket. If I ever intend to wear this to an event then I'll add one (and actual fastenings to the bodice, it had to be pinned closed shut for the photos). I think the arm scyes are also too high up, I think I forgot to trim it down before finishing the edge. Oh well.

Overall I like it, and I don't. I feel this is happening a lot with things I make recently. I like them, but then my laziness just stops them from being exactly what I pictured in my head. At least this one is a lot more structurally sound than my 1660s gown...

Sewing goals for 2019

See here for my separate post for 2018 in review. This will hopefully be a short post because I haven't really thought about sewing goals for next year as I want to concentrate more on my writing, but we'll see how that pans out.

1.) Finish.
I said in my review post that I have issues with actually finishing projects. There are two outstanding from last year; my natural form evening gown, and my 1660s gown. I'm hoping to get these finished early in 2019.
I also have an outstanding 1790s gown to finish, and altered 1790s stays to put together, but I'm not promising anything.

2.) 1840s gown
There's only one era of the 19th century that I don't like, but it's not the 40s. I think a few years ago I wanted to try a repro from one of the gowns worn in Victoria but never did. This has been an era I've always been interested in, and with the influx of corded petticoats and 1830s-style pics from American bloggers in the latter few months of 2018 it inspired most of us here in the UK. I don't like the 1830s, the sleeves and hair is just too much for me, but the 1840s is right up my alley.
This ensemble will also involve making everything from foundations up, like most of the things I've ever sewn, but I'm definitely interested in it.

3.) 1860s, take 2
The first historical costume I ever did was an 1860s ball gown, which I still think was the best thing I've ever made. I want to try a repro of an extant gown, which I'm going to keep to myself for now. I've also been wanting to redo my elliptical hoop skirt and petticoat, as both were a wee bit off.

4.) 1890s
Another new decade for me. My natural form era petticoat may be able to work for this era, and perhaps my natural form corset, but I kind of want to try an 1890s corset pattern, so we'll have to see. I already made designs for this project but never started it. This was mostly inspired by Dakota Fanning in The Alienist (which I didn't particularly like, but loved her green evening gown).

5.) Vintage wardrobe
I started this in 2018 but want to continue. I've purchased 2 vintage dress patterns from the 40s and also have a desire to make a pair of trousers, a non-patterned dress, and a blouse or two, but we'll see if I fit them all in given how busy I've planned this year to be.

If the theme for 2018 was 18th century, then 2019 will firmly be 19th & 20th century. I never know where inspiration will take me so we'l see how closely I stick to this list. Here's to a productive 2019!