Oh these stays are going to be front and back lacing, btw, because I simply cannot deal with only back lacing. This is one of the very few areas where I'm okay with semi-authenticity or stretching a point.
I am definitely going with white cotton for a gown. The reference to women looking like Abigails in them clinched it - it's so versatile, as long as it fits decently and is clean. I'm going to use one of my patterns, and give it a broad-bottomed front. I don't know how else to refer to it, but it's on this and this - instead of the bottom of the front of the bodice coming down to a blunted point, which is pretty popular as it's what's in JA and NW, because I've been seeing it in some of my more recent patterns. And I'm going to have a pleated back, because I love a pleated back.
Elbow-curving sleeves are the biggest pain in the ass to pattern, but I would really like to sew them, so that's also in as well.
Oh, and definitely with loops for tying up. I'm torn between the straight lines of loops and the weird curved ones in one of my patterns - probably I will try out the curved with pins and ribbons just to see what it looks like, but then I will probably go with the straight.
I am going back and forth on the petticoat. A silk petticoat would be really cool - accurate, and a cost-effective way of incorporating silk without having to make a whole silk gown. On the other hand, it could make me too fancy in a group with other people. I suppose I might make a silk one (pink or lilac, as much as I like a "rich blue" - I can't make everything blue) and then if we're having a fun gathering wear that, and if I'm going to a proper re-enacting event wear my light blue linen one.
Kind of went a little crazy on a person at The Powder Room (site on the Gawker network) because they were really, really wrong about Margaret from Boardwalk Empire. I love Margaret so much you guys, like you don't even know, and if you dismiss her as "yet another nagging, ball-busting wife" and blame the writers for your dislike, I will lose it.
Tim Gunn is so amazing.
So, looking at this gown was making me think of that 1750s mantua I just did. It closed center front and did not appear to have been altered. Now, I'm setting the wedding date aside because who knows if it's right or not, but that fabric is 1740s (1730s?). And the back pleats are early, quite wide. And the skirt pleats (about 9 or 10 on each side) are also early. It does look like there's something altered with the ends of the sleeves ... but it honestly looks to me like the front is not altered. Obviously it's not as close a look as I could get in person, right, but it really doesn't look altered to me. Oh, and like the mantua - the front edges of the bodice are cut on the grain instead of on the bias. Any thoughts?
Original post: http://chocolatepot.dreamwidth.org/7268