carry
Member since 10/26/07
Posts: 167 |
Login to reply to this post
 1 member likes this. I associate the 50's and 60's style with being 18 weighing 115 lbs and having a 23'' waist.The lack of fitting through the bodice: usually just bust darts,the clavicle height unadorned neckline,the waistline at the natural waist with elastic in the seam.The design line was short waisted,small busted and fluffy around the hips,or pencil shaped.This is creeping into the style lines of fashion again and after all I've have learned about fitting and shaping,I am bemused that the whole thing can be solved with elastic in the waistline seam. As a youngster,I did not find these clothes very comfortable,especially when you added petticoats,nylons and garters. I can see a vintage look just for fun but I think fashion progressed after that time with more detailed body-conscious styling and fit.There was Le Saque but even that fit better through the upper bodice with more detail.Knitwear became popular which allowed for draping and a more 3 dimensional figure.The late 50's and early 60's remind me of paper dolls which modern women are too grown-up for, fashion wise and culturally.What do you think? |
sewsally
 
Intermediate
WA USA
Member since 8/18/02
Posts: 1197 |
Login to reply to this post
Subject: the 50s influence on todays style Date: 2/27/13 3:54 PM I really liked shirt waist dresses back then when I had a small waist. |
marec
Intermediate
OR USA
Member since 5/11/08
Posts: 3538 |
Login to reply to this post
Date: 2/27/13 8:10 PM I love the entire rockabilly look, for others. I am not comfy in that type of bodice and waist definition. It's a fun look for some. ------
my blog: http://kf-biblioblog.blogspot.com/
Sewing through my pattern stash-125
completed. |
frellit
Beginner
AUSTRALIA
Member since 5/28/12
Posts: 26 |
Login to reply to this post
Date: 2/27/13 9:13 PM I like this kind of silhouette (though with a more fitted bodice) because it suits my figure (hips 3-4 sizes bigger than bust and waist). |
NancyAnn2
Intermediate
UNITED KINGDOM
Member since 1/31/10
Posts: 33
|
Login to reply to this post
1 member likes this. When I joined PR I thought it would be people like me. Old and dumpy. But, I see review after review done by really gorgeous ladies with figures to die for. I wore the 50's styles in the 50's and I really don't recommend them. They depend on a very tidy waist, no midriff, and no tummy. You need to be 17! ------
NancyAnn2 |
SandiMacD
Intermediate
FL USA
Member since 2/8/09
Posts: 1041 |
Login to reply to this post
Subject: the 50s influence on todays style Date: 2/28/13 6:37 AM I have been looking closely at the 40-60's styles. Of course the 60's caftan types and flowy pants are comfy but really not me anymore.
I do like some of the 40-50 sleeves. They cover my arms and offer range of motion. I am thinking about the ones that are split with 2 pieces overlapping or full and flowing.
I still have a small shoulder frame but todays tight set in sleeves offer little room to move unless done in knits or stretch. And I like cotton wovens but I have grown wider in the back and bodice areas.
Looking at vintage patterns I see a few that were designed for wovens and still permit bodice area movement. The waist is a no-go, that flat tummy and 22 in waist is never returning on my body!
-- Edited on 2/28/13 6:38 AM -- ------
re-living my youth through sewing... |
LDT2011
Advanced Beginner
UNITED KINGDOM
Member since 11/18/11
Posts: 451 |
Login to reply to this post
Date: 2/28/13 7:51 AM I like 50's style but then I'm an hourglass with a 28inch waist...prefer 40's though as its a softer hourglass sillouette and is a bit more forgiving of the shorter in stature.
60's doesn't suit me. And 70's seems to be more for tall people. ------
'The purpose of most fashion is to be ostentatiously non-functional.' |
KathySews
Advanced Beginner
MI USA
Member since 10/1/06
Posts: 2892 |
Login to reply to this post
Date: 2/28/13 8:37 AM I like the 50s style looks also. I don't have the body for them but have adapted some of the looks for dresses at weddings, etc. I do like the idea of adding a bit of elastic at the waistline. |
Miss Fairchild
Advanced
USA
Member since 8/24/02
Posts: 6985 |
Login to reply to this post
1 member likes this.
Date: 2/28/13 8:42 AM Oh my, those were the days! I was 102 lbs with a 24" waist, and my bust was flat. There are times when I see women who have bodies like I had, and wish I could be like them again, but realize I'd probably look silly.
The problems I had with fitting was a flat bust and broad back (what turned out to be later a spine curvature). I could never bring my arms forward because I'd rip out the sleeve, and my bust was always buried under fabric. On top of that, my arms are long and I could never find sleeves long enough.
I remember Le Saque--I liked their designs and detail, but too expensive. The fabrics and the prints were really nice.
It seems clear that these styles are repeating themselves, but not with the quality of design and fabrics of the 50's and 60's. ------
"We don't impose our rhythm on Nature. The key is to respect and live within Her." Jean-Charles Boisset, Winemaker
"And no, now that you asked, I didn't enjoy that play one bit, and I'd like a refund" Signed, Mrs. Lincoln
My Etsy shop: auntmaymesattic
My blog: auntmaymesattic.wordpress.com
Avatar: First place award for jacket at county fair |
LuceLu
Advanced Beginner
NY USA
Member since 8/4/06
Posts: 1386 |
Login to reply to this post
Date: 2/28/13 8:51 AM The dresses with the full skirts and the tiny waist are, I'm sure a boon for people shaped with an hourglass/ large hip to waist ratio. The skirts in the 50's were kind of too full and exaggerated.
My mother who was a girl/teen then, was very slim and could not find clothes to fit her--she said the smallest retail was a size 10 so her mother made her clothes. She tended to favor the slim skirts more and she loved to dance. Her family was poor so before they moved to Long Island, they lived in Queens and all the kids wore dungarees after school, in summer they cut off the legs to turn them into shorts. In Long Island, they did not wear the dungarees but did wear pants (but not to school). I'm sure many remember the wardrobe duality of "school clothes" and "play or knock around clothes".
After watching the show Mad Men and seeing women wearing those full skirts with crinolines, I have to say that even if I had that figure type, I would feel infantilized wearing them. The older women wearing them (Gene's girlfriend)--it just seemed kind of jarring to me. It seemed like fashion conspired with society to keep women "little girls."
The long sheaths/narrower skirts seem more adult (Joan wear) but boy, the undergirding you had to wear for the right look seems daunting and the hemlines are much longer than what many wear today. However, those ladies who lunch suits are nice and I could see that translate today as more formal wear for events like weddings, banquets. In the office they might look a little dated/or maybe inadvertently maturing the wearer.
I do seem to like the later 20's, 40's--many of the fashions then seem more sophisticated than those full crinolines (which Mom says you were still expected to wear girdles with) and some the 60's--the shifts/skimmers, some of the 70's and up--I'm just not a big fan of Dior's New Look (which perhaps was stimulative to the textile/mills). Some of the 30's are cool (Vionnet, etc.) but I have seen many dresses from that time that were just horrendous (on old movies) with frills, ruffles, etc.
Ultimately, what I like about vintage clothes is that they had fabric and were not just knit tubes leaving nothing to the imagination. The clothes of today that I see young women wear would have seemed to be very frisky underwear to the people of the previous decades. I could write paragraphs about hose and the perception of women that did not wear them (except when it was over 90 degrees F, and wearing a maxi or sundress--that was your out...) Now today there are women wearing tights and leggings exposed as if they are pants and the tiniest skirts with nothing but a tan.
My friend posted a picture of herself at 18 in the early eighties wearing a fairly simple dress (you know underneath she had an unpadded bra without cutlet inserts or "wonder" support, underwear that covered the buttocks, slip and hose--she could walk in front of lights without giving a show). It does not reveal anything/emphasize a body part or parts-- just made her look sweet. here it is: 
|
|Login|Help]
Printable Version
