2018 year in review

Goodness, it's that time of year again. I don't usually do a separate post on reviewing what I've made but I was looking at the one I wrote last year and decided it may be too long.

One of my goals this year was to blog more, which I don't feel I really did. This year the problem was with actually finishing projects. I realise I have a problem in that I very rarely see projects through to completion. They sit with seams unfinished, fastenings not done, and edges fraying. This will be more like a list of incomplete projects than a review of what I've done in 2018.

1.) Natural form era gown.
This comes with a story, like they all do. I made this for Prior Attire's ball in May, but by April it looked as though my friend couldn't go due to work commitments, and I was never really that keen on attending another one (I have a blog on my experiences of events like this that I'll leave you to find). I had a corset, petticoat, underskirt, over-skirt, and evening bodice all nearly done. I had worked on them for ages, but when I realised we weren't going I lost interest very quickly and they've been moved around the sewing room for the last 8 months. The corset and petticoat are complete (minus flossing and hook and eye, respectively). The underskirt needs another row of pleating at the hem and a fastening. The over-skirt I kind of messed up a wee bit so I'm currently toying with unpicking parts of it and re-doing them. The bodice edges need finishing, and I also had a bit of a nightmare adding hook and eye tape which will need to be fixed.
This is another project that's added to the never-ending list of "needs fixed/finished". I do have a collection of in progress photos that will have to do for now.

2.) 1780s Pierrot ensemble
This was the main project of this year as it was a new era for me. I made a challenge for myself in that I didn't want to use commercial patterns, only ones I had scaled up. I even styled a half-wig for this period, with questionable success. I tried to make a chemise, which was far too big, 2 pairs of stays, a linen petticoat, silk taffeta petticoat, and the Pierrot jacket.
I really liked working in this period, and found a new love for 18th century stays. That love was so strong that I've made at least 3 pairs (all unfinished) in 2018 alone, with some shaky plans to continue into 2019.

3.) 1780s Chemise a la reine ensemble
The 1780s and 90s are my favourite decades of the 18th century, and as a result I spent most of the sewing year making various pieces from the ground up. This consisted of the same semi-disastrous 1780s stays, an experimental petticoat lined with cotton organdie, and a really nice printed cotton for the chemise itself.

4.) 1790s round gown
I don't know what made me do this one...I'd probably found a fabric that I liked. Again I had to make everything from the foundations up with this one, and this was also the first experience I had with using the AD guide to 18th century dress making. This also confirmed to me I don't suit an empire waist, even if it isn't as high as traditional "Austen" style gowns.

5.) 1660s court gown
This one had been on my list for years, and since the final season of Versailles came out this year I decided to start on it. Unfortunately, the sewing drought of 2018 hit in the middle and I found myself going less and less into the sewing room. The gown is nearly finished, finishing edges and adding trim to the bodice kind of stuff, but by this point it does feel never ending. Here are some in progress photos until I finally finish it. It has been a bit of a disaster on the whole, kind of like putting fires out at every junction, but it looks alright....from a distance.

6.) Vintage inspired skirts
I have been wearing the same skirts for about 5-6 years now. Some have small holes, others are faded to a completely different colour, but all of them suddenly became too short for my liking. I also began my journey into vintage clothing this year. Instead of paying through the nose for vintage repro clothes I thought why don't I just make them myself. Using one of my old skater skirts I made a pattern, tweaked it here and there, and then made 2 skirts from 4m of tartan fabric. One was the "mock-up" for the pleating pattern, and the other had a thicker waistband.

7.) Misc
I put this category in here because I made a few accessories this year, and began another hobby. I made an 18th century pocket, hand embroidered; I styled a half-wig into a 1780s hedgehog; and I began a new hobby of crocheting this year.

Turns out 2018 was the year for building my 18th century wardrobe, which I'm completely ok with. The 18th century and I still have some unfinished business in the shape of stays. I think it feels to me like I didn't make much because there's only 3 completed outfits, and 2 unfinished ones, but I had to make everything from the foundations up with all of them, so I suppose I've actually been quite productive.

I also ventured outside a lot with my costumes, which was something I wanted to accomplish last year. I didn't quite make it outside the safety of my own garden, but let's take baby steps.

2018 was a bit of a quiet year, not that I'm complaining, I just hope it continues that way.

An 18th century Pierrot jacket

I don't think there are many fashion periods in history where the name of an item of clothing it so hotly debated than the latter half of the 18th century.

What's the difference between a caraco, casaquin, and pierrot jacket? Is it a Gaulle, a robe en chemise, or chemise a la reine? When does a sacque become a l'anglaise or italian gown? So much confusion for a period of 50 years.

I fell down the rabbit hole of the first question. Who knew jackets, which were considered informal wear, would become so hotly discussed a few centuries down the line? Here's my take on the difference. A caraco jacket is the earlier incarnation, and could be from thigh to knee length, and had 3/4 length sleeves, with construction similar to a l'anglaise (the pleated back of the francaise is stitched down). A casaquin, according to the all-knowing source of American Duchess, is a slightly shorter caraco decorated with frillies. And a Pierrot is the shortest of them all, and is more like a bodice with a tail.

I like them all, but for late 1780s it's Pierrot central. I already wrote a blog post about the inspiration and historical background for my Pierrot jacket, so I won't go into detail here.
I always devour blog posts about ensembles and get really annoyed when people don't mention undergarments. I'm wearing a shift (technically regency because it fits better than my linen 18th century one), a nearly-finished pair of 1780s stays, a false rump, a linen petticoat (under), and a silk taffeta petticoat (over). Taffeta is a dream for creating volume. The ensemble wouldn't be complete without my hedgehog half-wig.

The making of...

First onto patterning. I was slightly irritated by this. I had intended that my entire 1780s ensemble would be commercial pattern free. I was faced with a choice when it came to making this jacket. I had the Sense and Sensibility pattern for an Italian gown type dress, which could be not-so-easily (as it turned out) modified into a Pierrot, or I had the American Duchess one to scale up. My experience of scaling drawn patterns up hasn't been great lately, so I caved and used the S&S. Yet, after much faffing, I actually used a strange Frankenstein's monster kind of pattern that was neither wholly S&S, AD, or my own.

The fabric was supposed to be everyone's favourite Ikea duvet cover, which I bought two king size when they were on sale. However, when I was fabric shopping for another item in my 18th century wardrobe I came across a really nice floral, that is possibly not as HA, but I don't care.

Ah patterning, old nemesis. Using commercial patterns I always have to do 50 alterations, and this was no different. I've used S&S patterns before with my regency day wear, and it went together like a dream with no alterations. But that was a gathered waist, so a lot easier than a fitted jacket.

Thanks to my earlier adventures of back pleating my Victorian evening bodice, adding the box pleats on these pieces was a breeze, the waist placement was not. It fitted alright the first time, a bit big, the CB waist was too low, the front length was too short, and the neckline was low and high in all the wrong places.

Some alterations later and I had a bodice that fitted well, but wrinkled at the front. I remembered at this point of the trouble-shooting pages they have at the back of the AD guide, and wrinkling bodices is one of the ones they address. I could have sworn they recommended the front to be cut on the bias, whereas the S&S said on the grain. My stays are very curved in the front, which was why the cut on the grain panel was buckling. The next major problem was the back.

Arm scyes are set further back in the 18th century because the fashion was to have shoulders back, but this was ridiculous, and the back neckline was also so low. This wouldn't be a problem if my chemise wasn't high-necked. I ended up drawing the pattern a lot more similar to the American Duchess pattern than the S&S. I probably should just have scaled it up, but both probably would have taken equal time anyway.

Tails!!!

I also had a problem with boobage. That's right, me, the Queen of no-boobs. The bodice is actually a little tight at the bust because of the curved front that apparently thrusts me out. For the first time in my costuming career, I had to take out the seams at the bust. Unfortunately, I never managed to get rid of the wrinkling at the front, despite cutting the front panel on the bias. Even in hindsight, I still can't figure out why...

After much faffing with patterns I either finally got one that fit fine, or gave up the will to pattern anymore mock-ups.

I cut out the floral cotton, which was thin as hell. I flatline with.....iron on interfacing. That's right, I am completely non-HA now, and it still feels good. There's actually a reason beyond outright rebellion against the HA community. I've had problems with flatlining recently. When I flatline there are always wrinkles, I can never get them smooth, despite actually ironing them together before pinning and sewing. I can't understand it, but I was desperate not to get wrinkles on this jacket, which is ironic since there are major wrinkles on the front panel.

One of my solutions to prevent flatline wrinkling was to just iron on the interfacing, and in all honesty it worked, no wrinkles.

I did a bit of a hybrid method of construction with this because I couldn't remember or couldn't be bothered looking up the HA method. I knew I didn't want to bagline it because that has a habit of the lining peeking out from underneath. Instead, I attached them at the CF where the closure is, and then did a kind of stitch in the ditch to attach the rest of the seams.

Sleeves.....sleevils. To be fair, they weren't that bad, but the pattern for this ensemble was just awful, and it was my fault. Because I had changed the placement of the arm scyes on the bodice, the original sleeve pattern didn't work. It was when I was trying to fit them in that the sewing Gods smiled upon me. I realised, through a strange fit of genius, that the arm cap was too high. Without measuring, and really eyeballing it, I hacked off some of the height. Can you believe it worked perfectly? I've never had so much luck and I think I may be cursed for the rest of the sewing year.

The other slight problem was that the sleeves were a little too big at the forearm. I know, sexy but too tight sleeves is another problem, but since this jacket was so tailored and well-fitting everywhere else the big sleeves just made it look sloppy. Unfortunately, I had used the AD book method of sleeves that hides the seam allowances between the fashion fabric and lining, and the sleeves had already been painstakingly set in by the time I decided I wanted to change it.

Solution? Darts. The other problem with the S&S sleeve pattern was that it wasn't curved. What I did to solve the problem was to put a dart at the seam between the elbow and wrist. It, surprisingly, worked. The pattern on the fabric is really forgiving in that it's so busy that it hides most construction mistakes.

Finally was trim. I had a completely stupid moment for a few days. Because I'm so used to making trim for Victorian garments, where the edges are all finished, I was cutting out strips and putting small hems on them. I mean I even have pinking scissors! It wasn't until I saw something, or watched a video, that I remembered that it was really fashionable in the 18th century to have pinked trim.

I wanted cuffs on my jacket, because who doesn't like cuffs? I box pleated a strip and attached it at the wrist, but I decided that the strips I'd cut out were too thick for the neckline, which I was tempted to leave bare.

I had to reduce the width for the neckline trim, which I debated with myself about whether to add. Because the floral pattern is so busy I felt the neckline trim was getting lost, so I did a test strip, changing the box pleats to small knife pleats, and pinned it in place. It just gave the jacket that something extra, another dimensionality (not a word, whoops), so on it went.

As we do for scientific papers let's look at the strengths and limitations of this study. Strength, it's a nice fabric, if not a bit thin. There's trim, which is rare in my case. It fits well, and because the fabric is so busy it's difficult to see the wrinkles at the front, although not the mysterious ones at the back.

Limitations. I'm pretty sure the sleeves are pulling the straps down, widening the neckline. I've read the cause somewhere but can't for the life of me remember what it is. It might be that my hacking away at the sleeve head was too much. Serves me right for not measuring. It's not that noticeable in my opinion.
Yes, those are my stays you can see poking through, but that's an undergarment issue, one of many with those stays.
The wrinkling......

This project was really fun, and it actually turned out pretty much exactly as I pictured it, which is always a win.

An 18th century false rump

I fell victim to the American Duchess bug many years ago, so when they released a book I had to have it. The first project from it I attempted was the 1780s false rump, because I don't have a big enough arse as it is....

The making of...

The only thing HA about this project is the pattern. I used white cotton, because that's the first thing I laid my hands on in the sewing room. I used the suggested measurements in the guide, but I have very wide hips, and a disproportionately small waist, so the difference between them is large, meaning that my suggested measurements for the rump were offensive. I instead, just used the original pattern, with a few inches added on. It was only really meant to be a test run, a quick and dirty project I could finish since all of my others are in various stages of completion.

It's stuffed with poly fibre-fill, and completely machine sewn. I have embraced my non-HA desires, and it feels good.

I wasn't too happy with the size of the gap at the back. I know it's normal for there to be a gap since that's where the deep V at the back of gowns will sit, but I won't just be wearing this with a gown.

My solution was to add ties to the inside corners of the pillows and tie them together, and it actually worked. I saw another costumer had done this but can't remember their name, or the blog, but it did work, and it means my rump is now versatile.

To see how it looks underneath the petticoats and Pierrot jacket.

Late 18th century Fashion

I've had a few obsessions in the last few months, and they mostly surround the latter quarter of the 18th century. For someone who didn't particular like it less than 6 months ago, I've become one of its biggest fangirls.

Yes, the 18th century, darling.

It's become so bad that I'm even coming around to liking the sacque-back gowns, which I loathed before. However, my changing emotions aren't what this post is about.

From recent trolling of blogs, I notice a lot of people do progression posts, starting from inspiration. I have always loved the gowns of the 1780s and early 1790s, and have a grudging admiration for the floofiness of the late 1790s, but as soon as the skirts start narrowing I'm gone.

The Anglaise is nice, in any incarnation, but I haven't attempted anything like that. By this I mean the back of the bodice cut with the skirt as one piece, then pleated. I could attempt an Italian gown, where the skirt is cut completely separately, but then that involves having to deal with the deep V at the back. If you are interested in the different types of gown of the 18th century, then I recommend this post by American Duchess.
As much as I love these gowns, especially the "zone-front" versions, this isn't what I was immediately drawn to.

Gorgeous, but no.

These are all lovely, but I'm a simplistic seamstress, and a minimalistic person, which is no doubt why I began chasing after the frilly tails of the Pierrot jacket.

Now, I'll openly admit, I'm a little confused by what the difference between a Caraco jacket and a Pierrot jacket is, save perhaps the length. They're both hanging about at the same time, although the Caraco is a little earlier than the Pierrot, by my estimation.

Everyone's favourite Caraco

A lot of people's favourite Pierrot

I'm not saying they're the same, but...well, they are very similar. Kind of like one is a progression of the other. There is probably some expert out there that will tell me there's a construction difference, or some such minutae detail, but this is why I'm no longer part of the HA crowd. Regardless, both are nice, but the reason I'm leaning towards the Pierrot is the frickin' amazing wee tail!

Love them. I could say that these images were my original inspiration, but it's actually a painting that's dated a bit earlier, and one that many costumers will be familiar with. It's a bit like Eilean Donan castle in Scotland, it's been overused, and is now synonymous with Scotland.

It is obviously "The Chocolate Girl" by Jeanne-Etienne Liotard, painted around 1743, so almost 40 years before the time period I'm specifically looking at. I absolutely love the pleats and tail at the back of that whatever-the-hell-you-call-it jacket. Obviously I think the big bums of the 1780s will give the tail the necessary oomph out the back.

One niggle is skirt length. From what I understand these jackets, whether Caraco, Pierrot, or something in between, were considered "casual wear", and would have been worn with just a petticoat. As seen in the painting above, her petticoat is about ankle length, slightly lower, however if we look at many full length pictures of surviving Pierrot jackets, we can see that petticoats are at or above ankle length.

I read somewhere, don't ask me where (it's been a long road), that petticoats were usually short because they would be worn underneath the gowns I mentioned before, which are all floor length or longer. Interestingly, because of the skirt supports underneath, it was also a hassle to get an even hem all the way around, and therefore if it were above floor length, uneven hems wouldn't be so obvious, with the further benefit that they would be covered by a gown.

I like the length of the one in the 1743 painting, and on a few petticoats made by other costumers to go with their jackets. There's just something about the shorter length that doesn't sit well. I'm still unsure as to what was standard, but I know that the fashion plates of the early 1790s featuring jackets, the petticoats are floor length.

Circa. 1793

The next fashion I'm focusing on is the Chemise a la reine, or robe en chemise, or the gaulle, no one really knows. This is an infamous fashion, made so by Marie Antoinette, Queen of France, who was painted in one of these. At the time it was deemed to be "undress" because it looked like a shift or an undergarment, and was very far away of the strict, regimented, and stiff fashions of the French court. Regardless of its scandal, it quickly became very popular.

Despite the masses of paintings of the gown, mostly in white, it was made out of different colours, but white seems to have been the most popular (Ugh). I like these gowns, and I don't know why. It's become an obsession, and I think I can safely say I've devoured every single blog post ever published on the internet about them. My 18th century Pinterest board should be renamed "chemse a la reine".
Like many fashions, the robe en chemise transformed over time, starting in the early 1780s, and then eventually becoming the high-waisted empire gowns (it's easy to alter). In the beginning, everything was poufy. The gown was essentially just a large rectangle of fabric gathered at the waist.

Ruffle at the neckline, and gathered 3/4 sleeves makes a robe en chemise at the beginning of the 1780s. By the latter half of the decade and into the 1790s, sleeves are becoming tighter fitting, and end at the wrist. Some are even starting to have panelled backs, like the Italian and round gowns, with only the front gathered. I prefer the later incarnations. Fitted clothes are actually more flattering on me than gathered. Mine is also not going to be white, but I'll get to that in a later blog post.

The final thing I want to focus on in this era of fashion is hair. These are the years of the Hedgehog haircut, made famous by Marie Antoinette, and Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire. Looks simple, but as many other costumers have found it, it's not.

You have no idea how long this took my hair-dresser, the table's here to keep me upright

Of course, ladies in those days had no reason to cut their hair short like some of us in the 21st century, and they had access to hair pieces, extensions, wigs, etc. Lauren over at American Duchess has a few posts about the Hedgehog hairstyle, which proves how tricky it actually is to recreate. The one I think works best is the 3/4 wig, which she's styled, and then added her own hair too, which is what I'm going to try and experiment with.

Since I'm making 2 18th century outfits for summer events, one Pierrot ensemble, and a late robe on chemise, the hedgehog will be paired with the Pierrot, but what about the chemise? Yes, I could re-use it, but with the design I'm going for with the robe en chemise lands it roughly in the early 1790s. And to be honest, I prefer the later hairstyles, the ones just before the "natural, classical" hairstyles that dominate the latter half of the 1790s.

I also don't have enough natural hair to do these either, but they look a lot easier to style. I should mention some of these are apparently from the 1780s as well, although unsure where they fall, so could possibly get away with that and the Pierrot, but what kind of costumer would I be if I didn't try the ridiculous floofy Hedgehog?
Or we could just go full blown natural, like this lovely lady below. Side note, can I just have her hair, please?

Her husband wants her hair too

The above painting is also from the 1780s, but I'll admit I've not seen another instance where the female sitter has her hair just flowing so freely, so definitely the exception.

That's what I've been wading through in the last few months, whilst trying to sew a correctly fitting pair of stays, and a suspicious false rump.