SIGNUP - FREE Membership and 1 FREE Sewing Lesson
| FAQ | Login
 

Platinum Sponsor
PatternReview.com
PatternReview.com

Forum > Vintage Sewing > Simplicity 9769 - how to wear? ( Moderated by JEF)

Please LOGIN or Join PatternReview
Go to Page:
Simplicity 9769 - how to wear?
Capricorna
Capricorna  Friend of PR
Intermediate
International GERMANY
Member since 12/5/03
Posts: 15
Send Message

      



Date: 7/6/12 12:24 PM

Hey all,

Im considering sewing Simplicity 9769 (not sure if linking to pattern is allowed here?)

But Im wondering how you would wear both the chemise with the pants... The chemise is more than knee-length. How would one be able to wear such long a dress underneath the pants, as the pattern photo suggests?

Would they really have you gather the long dress into the pants upper part? Sounds both uncomfortable and rather puffy looking to me. Am I missing something here?

Im really bummed here, but itching to sew both to go with a ready made corset.

Anyone out there who already sewed this or has any experience with underwear like this and how to properly wear it?

Thanks everyone for any help!

SquishSews
star
SquishSews  Friend of PR
Advanced Beginner
Member since 1/18/09
Posts: 442
Send Message

      



Date: 7/6/12 12:52 PM

No idea; I would agree it looks uncomfortable but a lot of fashion is, to me anyway, regardless of era.

In the meantime, here's a link 9769

Elona
star
Elona  Friend of PR
Advanced
Member since 8/24/02
Posts: 8456
Send Message

      



In reply to Capricorna <<
thumbsup 1 member likes this.


Date: 7/6/12 10:04 PM

But these were not intended to be worn as outer garments.

If you check out historical costumes, the chemise was the first layer next to your skin. It was nightwear and/or the first layer of daywear, depending on your income and social status. Back then, appearing in your chemise was as shocking to them as running around in public in a bra and panties used to be to us, but is no longer.

Here's how it was all put together. The article has the pantaloons going on first, and in that time period, perhaps it was so. But originally, the basic thing was the chemise for the simple reason that panties had not been invented.

When they did come along, they were--sensibly, given the hygiene of the times--crotchless. That's what makes this Fragonard painting scandalous: The lady is flashing her boyfriend (supposedly hidden in the bushes) while her older husband is pushing the swing.
-- Edited on 7/6/12 10:05 PM --

Courtney Ostaff
Courtney Ostaff
Intermediate
West Virginia USA
Member since 11/23/10
Posts: 664
Send Message

      



Date: 7/6/12 11:19 PM

Heh! I had no idea that painting existed!

mastdenman
star
mastdenman  Friend of PR
Intermediate
California USA
Member since 1/12/04
Posts: 6134
Send Message

      



Date: 7/7/12 0:03 AM

I've seen that painting before, but had no idea . .

------
Marilyn

January 2009 to January 2010 81 yards out and 71yards in January 2010 to the present 106.7 yards out and 146.5 yards in. January 2011 to the present: 47 yards out and 69 yards in.

Capricorna
Capricorna  Friend of PR
Intermediate
International GERMANY
Member since 12/5/03
Posts: 15
Send Message

      



In reply to Elona <<


Date: 7/7/12 11:12 AM

Thank you so much for the helpful link and your explanations! :)

I will wear the chemise and pants under the corset, as is intended, but in a non-public environment, so no one will be shocked - quite the contrary, I do hope... :D

Now wearing the chemise over the pants makes much more sense in terms of comfort. Im not one to find the easiest solution myself, and I wanted to do it just right, so I thought the photo must be correct!

I knew the Fragonard painting-always wondered how the story would go on... Would her lover be hit by her lost shoe, revealing it all? :D

The Dreamstress
star
The Dreamstress
Advanced
NEW ZEALAND
Member since 7/4/09
Posts: 31
Send Message

      



Date: 7/7/12 7:17 PM

Yep, wear your chemise over your drawers - don't try to tuck it in.

Actually, in the era of the Fragonard painting they didn't wear any drawers - crotchless or otherwise. There are numerous examples of the merriment and court gossip that ensued when a lady fell off a horse or otherwise exposed herself.

Still, despite all the clothes they wore, because drawers weren't the norm an occasional flashing didn't cause quite the sensation that it does now when a modern starlet goes out without knickers. We expect women to wear knickers - they didn't.

unfinishedprojects
starstar
unfinishedprojects  Friend of PR
Advanced
Alberta CANADA
Member since 8/26/07
Posts: 610
Send Message

      



Date: 7/7/12 10:41 PM

Crotchless drawers were apparently one of the reasons that the Can-can was considered so scandalous.

Go to Page:
Please LOGIN or Join PatternReview

printable version Printable Version

* Advertising and soliciting is strictly prohibited on PatternReview.com. If you find a post which is not in agreement with our Terms and Conditions, please click on the Report Post button to report it. Vintage Sewing >> Simplicity 9769 - how to wear?

 
adv. search»
pattern | machine | member
        
The Technique of Underlining Garments
The Technique of Underlining Garments

Register

Leather 101
Leather 101

Register

BurdaStyle Magazine 09-2012-104B

photo
by: redsilvia

Review
Favorite Things Prairie Girl Pattern

Favorite Things Prairie Girl Pattern

Buy Now
Petite Plus 204 Pattern

Petite Plus 204 Pattern

Buy Now
StyleArc Holiday Hollie jacket

photo
by: Karen Carr

Review

Conditions of Use | Posting Guidelines | Privacy Policy | Shipping Rates | Returns & Refunds | Contact Us | About | New To PR | Advertising

Copyright © 2014 PatternReview.com® , OSATech, Inc. All rights reserved.