Pet-en-l'air a.k.a let's talk about the fart in the room

 I've become quite fascinated by this garment for no explicable reason. I love all jackets in the 18th century, whether it's a caraco or Pierrot, but the pet-en-l'air has never called to me in the same way. Much like the robe a la francaise never did until recently

Unlike the francaise the pet en l'air tends to be less commonly made amongst the costuming community. Fortunately there are a few costumers who have and have documented their process. Thank you to them, I will use your experience wisely. However, let's briefly go into extant pet en l'airs and the history behind them.

Firstly, the name. I used to think it was pet en l'air, but I've recently seen is spelled as pet en l'ier. I'm currently unsure as to which one is correct, but I think everyone can agree that the translation into English is roughly "fart in the air". I just don't even....

This garment came into fashion in the mid 18th century and is pretty much just a francaise made by a seamstress who ran out of fabric, and haven't we all been there. I'm only joking, of course, but it is just a shortened version of a robe a la francaise, so if you don't have the 10m+ requirement for a full on francaise, then this is the next best thing.

According to the French Wikipedia, it was given it's name due to the fact that it stops just below the buttocks. The length part is certainly right, pet en l'air's are usually below hip level, but I have seen a tad shorter. Whether this was the reason it was given it's name is beyond me.

Most extant garments I've seen usually come with a matching petticoat, made from the same fabric.

That doesn't necessarily mean they were only worn with the matching petticoat. In the 18th century and beyond it was all about versatility. By this I mean clothes were expensive to buy/make, hence garments had to last quite a long time, and survive the multiple possible alterations of future fashions. Jackets could go with any petticoat, and vice versa. I'm also not a great fan of the look. I like contrast better than matching, so obviously my pet en l'air will not have a "matching" petticoat in the same fabric (because it was expensive and I haven't won the lottery yet despite never having bought a ticket).

Just like the francaise, the pet en l'air could be "closed" 2 different ways; with pins and a stomacher, or compere front with buttons down the front. I've also seen them pinned closed at the centre front, like an italian gown, and tied with ribbons.

Stomacher closure

Looks like hooks and eyes on the CF of this one, correct me if I'm wrong

Compere front

Wild card: Tie front

That brings me onto context. Jackets in previous centuries, like the ones in the 16th and 17th century, were informal wear, casual wear, the day-time pajamas of the era. They'd only be worn in the house, or would be covered if going anywhere. By the middle to late 18th century they're still casual wear, but you can wear them on their own and out of the house. They make their way into fashion plates of the era. They're an accepted part of women's outerwear.

Obviously, they're still informal as you wouldn't wear them to a ball, party, or court, but at least you don't have to cover them up.

Pet en l'airs also have sisters. The tempting Brunswick, which is a pet en l'air with a hood, and the Jesuit. The Brunswick is the travelling version of the pet en l'air with a hood, long sleeves, high neck, and usually buttoned up the front. It didn't need to have the sack-back, and could be fitted instead. It could also have a 2-piece sleeve, with the botton being separate. A Jesuit, according to sources, is a longer version, usually full-length. Because both were travelling outfits, they were commonly not worn over skirt supports.

Arguably, the most famous Brunswick

For my project I'm tackling the normal pet en l'air, with skirt supports and contrasting petticoat. That's it as far as these jackets are concerned. Looks like a relatively straightforward project, but will most definitely not be.

Robe a la francaise a.k.a Oh God, no.

I wouldn't really be a proper costumer if I didn't at least try to make a francaise, would I? But can you believe it's not something I've ever had on my bucket list, solely because it look so time consuming. Yet, somehow, here we are.

ca. 1750s

I'm attending an event in 2020 where a francaise is the order of the day (an optional one but considering it's based on the 18th century French court I'd be mad to go without a francaise). I know what you're thinking - 2020? It only just turned 2019! And you'd be right, but I'm a planner, and since I've never made a francaise before I'd like to get some research in now.

Thankfully for me, the francaise is so iconic that tons of people have tried it before (unlike my 17th century court gown). American Duchess (AD) even have detailed instructions in their book! I am tempted to cave in and buy a commercial pattern, but why go down the easy route when I have an abundance of costuming books up the stairs all with patterns and details about the francaise?

As you know if you've been following me for a while, I'm a no-frills sort of costumer. Minimal trim kind of stuff, which is the complete opposite of the 18th century, especially the francaise where trim is mandatory, the more the better. I don't mind trim, honestly I don't, it's just that whenever I find myself designing costumes they don't have much. Even my 18th century Pierrot ( which almost went completely untrimmed) only has trim around the neckline and cuffs, and the silk petticoat has none at all! The largest amount of trim I've ever done were the 3 rows of pleating and 6 bows I had to put on my natural form era gown.

Don't get me wrong, my francaise will be trimmed....the silk version anyway. But this is more of an inspiration post. What are the garments I use to get ideas onto paper?  My francaise will be mid-century, so before the big hair of the 1770s. I'm thinking about 1750s-1760s, but of course the francaise doesn't go through that many changes in the entire century, let alone these 20 years, so it might be difficult to pinpoint an extant garment to a precise year. Paintings are better.

The only thing different between earlier gowns and later ones is the size of the pleats at the back. They tend to be wider earlier in the century. Can't say I've noticed.

Madame de Pompadour was my first person of interest during my research because it was she who was dominant during these decades, despite not being the official Maitresse en titre (she retired in 1750 from that role and just became the King's close friend).

The first is by far the most famous portrait of her painted by Francois Bouchet about 1750. In fact I think all of the above are painted by him during her lifetime. Obviously I love the colour of the first one, but just the thought of all that floof makes me sad.

Then I moved onto extant garments. Now, I don't know about you, but most reproduction francaise by costumers are done in silk taffeta which tends to be one colour. Conversely, most, if not all, extant francaises are silk brocade. To add another layer onto this mess most of the paintings from the era also have the gowns as one or two solid colour silk. Obviously silk is still expensive, and after finding out you need at least 10m for one I fell out with silk taffeta for a little while. Let's just say that any silk francaise you make will be an investment.

The robe a la francaise can be fastened 2 ways. The first is the old stomacher and pins method, which was very, very common. The other is the so-called compere front, which usually attached the stomacher to the sides of the gown and buttoned up down the centre front. A lot of the stomacher's I noticed, both in portraits and extant garments, were trimmed up the wazoo, and I'm just not a fan.

circa 1760s, currently held in the Bath Fashion museum

circa 1760s, Museum of Fine Arts Boston

circa 1740s

circa 1760s

You see I'm more of an embroidery kind of gal. Ironic since embroidery actually takes longer than normal 18th century stomacher trim, but I just prefer it. And embroidered stomachers were also worn with the robe a la francaise.

ca. 1775

Stomacher ca. 1730-1750, VA museum

All in all designing the francaise itself was actually one of the easiest parts of this idea. On the other hand, we had the foundation garments. WTF is up with the 18th century and all of these weird cushions, cages, panniers, and rumps? Just calm the f**k down.

At least in the 19th century its the crinoline, then bustle, then 2nd bustle, there's one silhouette for each, and usually one or two variations on the same undergarment. God forbid the 18th century is the same.

We have pocket hoops, court panniers, normal panniers, square panniers, and all give a slightly different silhouette. I've spent more time researching these garments than I did the friggin francaise itself!!

These are my current favourite, but I have the intentions of shortening it a bit. There is a name for it, I think it's a short hoop (at least that's what they call it in POF 5). I came to this conclusion after reading somewhere that pocket hoops tend to be a bit unstable, but I;m not sure if perhaps tying them together would alleviate that problem. Never having made or worn them I can't say either way, but I have plans to make them as well (I've got an abundance of books with a pattern in it).

The square/rectangular panniers I'm talking about I think are usually worn with court gowns, like whatever is underneath the gown below.

Court gown ca. 1750, The Met

ca. 1759

If I thought I had the skills I'd want to make these minimalist ones.

POF 5 has 2 patterns for a pannier similar to this, but from a brief skim it looked quite fiddly, so I think I'll stick to the short hoop for now.

I am making pocket hoops, but I'm unsure if they're as large as I'd like, especially the ones below. I know there is a costumer recently who's made slightly bigger ones and they look perfect, but again stability issues. Don't get me wrong, I'm not making a court pannier size, but I just feel the pocket hoops are a little too small and flimsy for me.

Perhaps it's just the mannequin. I did notice with my prototype pair that the size of my hips did make them stick out more, but it's more the stability issues that concern me.

I've found recently that I actually prefer making undergarments. I know that's a strange thing to enjoy because a lot of people find it tedious and just want to get onto the actual gown, but with gowns come trim. I find undergarments fascinating, and despite the sheer number of them in the 18th century, I really enjoy finding the differences between them, and when they would've been worn.

So, that's it for my inspiration post, but don't expect a completed francaise this year (2019). I still intend to do my 1890s gown first, then if my obsession for the francaise lingers then I'll attempt one in cotton because can you believe, my money tree still hasn't grown.