A Dress A Day

A Rejoinder and Statement of Principles

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Thu, 15 May 2008 12:49:00 +0000

I don't usually take the time to reply to negative comments that are left on this blog -- why encourage people who are spoiling for a fight? I'm not bothered by their criticism, for the most part (and if it's justified I do try to take it to heart, however unpleasant it may be to do so!). But most of the time replying to negative comments falls under the heading "Never wrestle with a pig. You get dirty and only the pig enjoys it."

However, there have been a few comments on a recent post which I feel I need to respond to, if only for clarification. A commenter, mainly anonymous, but also signing one comment "7/10 split", suggested that I am a "professional what? writer/ advertisers? whose goal is to sell things", and also a "shill."

For the record: I am not a "professional advertiser". I am a writer, but of a very particular kind.

The same commenter (who may be this blogger) also suggested that I don't sew the dresses that I post here. If you would like to see pictures of ME in the dresses I have sewn (and I admit, I don't often post pictures of myself here because, all things considered, I had a better time in labor -- and I didn't have an epidural! -- than I do having my picture taken) you can see them in five out of the first six pictures here.
(The dresses shown in that link include a Duro, the pink jellybean dress, the blogiversary dress, the stunt Valentine's Dress, and the yellow-bird dress.)

Whether you enjoy my posts or not, I would like to state unequivocally that I do NOT accept money to post about any particular dress, fabric, pattern, pair of shoes, etc. There is NO payola or kickback scheme in effect on this blog.

For book reviews, I am, as is common practice in publishing, often provided with free copies of the book in question, to review or to give away.

The advertisers on the right-hand side are just that: advertisers. They have no influence on content, and I do *not* ask them for free stuff.

I accept pictorial ads ONLY from people who sell patterns, fabric, or vintage clothes, or are otherwise related to sewing. I must approve the ad before it will run. My ad rates are very low; $25/month (with a minimum three-month commitment, because I'm lazy and don't want to be bothered putting up and taking down ads all the time). I also participate in Google's AdSense program, which are the boxed text ads you see on the page, and in the Amazon Associates program, which gives me a commission on books purchased by Amazon customers who clicked on links to books from this blog. (To give you an idea of the revenue from those two sources; my last "payment" from Amazon was a $35 gift certificate which I used ... to buy more sewing books. Google pays every two months or so; I think my last check from them was in the $125 range.)

I have set up "Dress a Day Inc" as a LLC company, so that, if I say something libelous and am sued, the company will be the target of any lawsuit (and not my family). This means I file taxes on all the income from this blog -- if there is any, after paying hosting fees to my internet service provider.

As for the comments about the sweater in question, I am doing a little research on the subject; the commenter suggested that the sweater probably cost less than $1 to make, and that all the labor involved was sweatshop labor in Asia. I don't think that's right, given that the cost of a pound of even low-grade cotton is about .71¢ -- that's a pound of unspun cotton. From what I can tell, the spinning of one pound of raw cotton fiber produces 840 yards of yarn. That seems to be on the low end of the number of yards you'd need for a sweater -- any knitters want to jump in here? -- and the sweater I posted about was 14 gauge, which is a fairly fine knit). So, at least .71¢ in raw materials, plus the spinning cost, plus the fashioning cost, plus the cost of the buttons -- I think it would be hard to get the raw goods cost of this garment under $1. Even leaving aside that the garment is made in China (I called and asked) -- there's the cost of the coming up with the design, a job almost certainly done by an American at American wages. (J.Crew employs about 7600 people.) The same commenter said that the sweater I linked to could be found in discount stores for under $20; if, in fact, that is the case -- why haven't I found it there? It's not like I haven't been looking! Do you factor the salary of the designer into the cost of the sweater? If not, why not? Do you factor in the jobs of the catalog writers (Americans), shop employees (American and for the stores in Japan, Japanese)? The distribution center employees (in Virginia and North Carolina)? The UPS guy who will bring it to me? (Hi Luis!) The short answer, it seems to me, is that a narrow focus on manufacturing jobs is not helpful; if the company can't manufacture goods at a reasonable price, then all those other jobs I mentioned above -- they go away, too. Despite conjecture about how much of the price of the sweater is pure profit, large retail chains have VERY small profit margins -- one source puts it at 2%. Another source (from 1998!) puts the apparel profit margin at 5.4% ... and given the rising costs of commodities since 1998, I can't imagine that margin has gone up.

I apologize for such a long and tedious post, without even any pretty pictures to enliven it; I promise not to make a habit of this kind of thing. However, I do treasure the trust you place in me by visiting this blog, leaving comments, and contributing to a little oasis of dress-loving camaraderie online, and I didn't want to give credence to accusations of shilling, payola, and "blogging under false pretenses" by letting them go by in silence.

(Comments of the kind "all her taste is in her mouth," "this is soooooo ugly lol", and "i cant believe u wear this!" will still be ignored. De gustibus, etc.)

If you ever have any questions about me or this blog, well, my email address is on the right-hand side, towards the bottom. I do try to answer all the email I receive.

Days of Miracles and Wonders

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Tue, 13 May 2008 12:55:00 +0000

Every time I worry that we are, in fact, in the end times (trying to remember if those wackaloons have bred their red heifer yet, and then beginning, ridiculously, to wonder what exactly would be the best thing to wear to the Apocalypse -- certainly it would need a lot of pockets, and of course if you are facing the Apocalypse surely you wouldn't care about eventual lung cancer, but could use asbestos cloth ... and would red be too matchy-matchy?) I remember that, even if we are rapidly approaching the time of Peak Everything; there are consolations; even if the world is running down, we can make the best of what's still around.

Like, for instance, the Internets. Which lets me, with the click of several buttons, browse through an exhibit from the Met back in 2002 -- Blithe Spirit: The Windsor Set, and see the dresses of another time when some had it that there was no use planning for the next year, much less the next decade; a time when they were going to party like it's 1939.

It always surprises me that mere electrons can manage to carry such treasures to me through wires and waves; treasures nearly as ephemeral as those electrons. How improbable, how ridiculous! What petite main in Vionnet's studio would believe it, if she were told that some American woman would, seventy years in the future, look at this dress--basically over the telephone? She'd stick you with a pin, and tell you to stop wasting her time. The woman for whom this dress was made would snort -- she'd believe that in a year, maybe two, her dress would be hopelessly out of style, and not worth anyone's attention.

This dress is black silk satin and black silk net, with sequins. (A dress made of wet toilet paper would probably be less fragile.) And yet -- it's still here. Its maker is gone; its wearer is gone; every man who guided it through a foxtrot, long gone: but it's still here. Still here, and since it's in a museum, safe and protected from everything from excess humidity to violent video games, likely to continue to be here, and through various generosities and some very clever engineering, we can up our brass periscopes outside our daily concerns and just, for a moment, look at it.

It might be taken (black birds, so ill-omened!) as a memento mori, but it might also be taken as kind of defiant monument: if something so delicate could abide through such terrible history, why shouldn't we? I'd like to call this a reverse Ozymandias; no "look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!" but instead, a quiet invitation to rejoice.

Answered Prayers

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Mon, 12 May 2008 13:03:00 +0000

I know this isn't a dress, but regular readers will know of my preoccupation -- really, obsession -- with short-sleeved cardigan sweaters. I *love* them. There is no better A/C-fighter/shoulder-coverup in the summer than a short-sleeved cardigan. A cardigan, a nice tee, and a pretty skirt is perfect for nearly any occasion ... but it's been so hard to find decent short-sleeved cardigans! (Searches tend to turn up these horrors.)

And now, in answer to unarticulated prayers, it seems that J. Crew -- yes, that J. Crew -- has them. In TWELVE colors, including orange, kelly green, and TWO different yellows.

They're not cheap, unfortunately ($65) but they're not insanely unreasonable, and I've been satisfied with J. Crew quality in the past. But here's the most important part: I called to get the neck-hem measurement, and it's 21.5 inches in the medium. Yep -- if you're shortwaisted, as I am, that should hit you perfectly at the top of the hip, which is where sweaters should fall. (Honestly. They've done all sorts of calculations, and invoked the golden ratio, and everything. That's where they should be.)

Sadly, about half the colors (including the green, the orange, and one of the yellows) won't ship until 6/16. (I really want ALL OF THEM, but I'm going to limit myself to one or two and see how they work out. I'm even tempted by the bright purple, and I hate purple.)

Now if I could only find mesh polo shirts that measured 21 inches or less, shoulder to hem, in nice colors, WITHOUT some big honking logo, my (sartorial) life would be nearly perfect.

Calling All Steel Magnolias: Come Out From Behind Your Ruffles

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Fri, 09 May 2008 15:27:00 +0000

Lisa sent this to me from her store, telling me it made her think of Bozo. Which is a reaction I completely understand, but don't share -- this dress makes me think of a particular kind of woman who is all ruffles and sweetness on the outside, but inside is made of pure Kevlar, reinforced with carbon steel.

You know the type, I'm sure -- they're a staple of soaps both day- and night-time -- pretty, frail, completely ruthless. They (or their costume designers) like pastels, ruffles, bows, matching bags and shoes ... and, occasionally, for a change of pace, red negligeés. The storylines write themselves.

Now, don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that you can't look pretty and have power. Quite the opposite. What I'm saying is that you shouldn't use looking pretty to pretend you DON'T have power ... while wielding the equivalent of a ten-megaton bomb. If you can make or break multinational corporations and destabilize smaller republics while trying on marabou slides in the shoe lounge at Saks, fine. Just don't put on a "little ol' me? I don't have two brain cells to rub together!" act while doing it.

I see less and less of the "little ol' me?" act these days, and that's encouraging. Because it's only by acknowledging that, yes, in fact, you DO have power, that you can accomplish things directly, that you can say "Do this because I said so," that the game will change so that direct power, wielded by women, becomes an everyday occurrence. When people ask "How did she make that happen?" and are interested in the actual work, and not any purported relationships of the woman in question, the world will be safe for ruffles as ruffles, and not as camouflage netting over machine-gun emplacements.

And, as someone who likes both ruffles *and* running the show, and makes no secret of either, I'm hoping that day comes sooner, rather than later.

Ooh! Sneakers!

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Tue, 06 May 2008 15:42:00 +0000

Are these, or are they not, insufferably adorable? Seriously, these are the cutest things I've seen since my son was two.

And I know, I know, I've sworn undying devotion to the shoes of Jack Purcell, but a girl can LOOK, can't she?

I think it's the extremely low vamp, which I think always looks feminine and dainty. (YES, no matter HOW big your feet are. Seriously.) In fact, this reminds me of a holy-grail pair of shoes: the very-low-vamp saddle shoe. There was a girl in my junior high who had a pair, and damned if I can remember her name, what she looked like, whether she was even in any of my classes ... but I remember the low-cut two-tone saddle shoes she had. In detail. It was a sad, sad day when I finally figured out where she got them (Thom McAn! Back when they had standalone stores!) and got my folks to take me to the mall ... only to find they were sold out of my size.

Anyway, nostalgic digression aside, these are some darn cute sneakers. (Click on the image if your first reaction is OMG MUST HAVE NOW.) And if you were one of the folks who emailed me last summer about what sneakers go well with skirts? Here's the answer. (But, purist that I am ... I'd put laces in 'em.)

Cleaning Out My Closet, Part 1

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Mon, 05 May 2008 13:06:00 +0000

I spent a few hours yesterday moving the winter clothes OUT and the summer clothes IN. This involves a great deal of dusting, both mental and physical. (For instance, why did I let another year pass without wearing my turquoise shantung hostess coat?)

Every time I make this switch I *vow* that I will finally pare down my closet to essentials. Just a few well-chosen pieces, blah blah blah. The truth is that I am not a "few well-chosen pieces" kinda gal. I am the kind of gal that has fifty cotton summer dresses and wears a different one every day, if she can.

However, I *am* getting rid of a few things, such as this brown-and-gold wool crepe wiggle dress. I made it several years ago (maybe even five or six?) and wore it, I dunno, once. I was having a wiggle-dress moment, back then; I don't know why. (Perhaps it was the joy of no longer looking mildly pregnant?) Anyway, I spent a lot of time on it and figured I should now set it free to live a full life with someone who will love it the way it ought to be loved.

Here's a closer view of the bodice:

The points on the tabs are a little lumpy, I have to say. Luckily the buttons are so nice (vintage!) that it draws the eye away.

This dress measures B 36-38, W 32, H 46, and the skirt is 28 inches waistline to hem. From the front neckline to the waist is 13.5 inches; from the back neckline to the waist is 14 inches.

So here's the plan: I'm going to put it up on eBay, at a very very low starting bid. If it sells for that, fine. But if it sells for anything upwards of $25, anything over that will go to charity -- I'm thinking helping victims of rape in the Congo. How does that sound?

Here's the link: Brown Crepe Wiggle Dress.

Gathering My Thoughts

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Fri, 02 May 2008 13:02:00 +0000

Carol, a little while back, sent me THREE BOXES of patterns. Just because. (I know, am I lucky, or what?)

The boxes were FULL of treasures, but this one in particular caught my eye, even though I'm not a huge devotee of this era. But look at those gathers, and the sweet curve of the neckline!

So the plan is to go ahead and make the bodice, slap it onto a plain circle skirt, and see what happens. I'll have to change the waistline gathers to small darts (I don't like blousiness at my waist), and there will be some fiddling involved with the sizing (this is a B32; I ... am not). However, I figure that the 1940s propensity for shoulderpads will work in my favor; by leaving them out I will get more room through the shoulder seam and the gathers should help with fullness over the bust. (And I have the "make the waist bigger" alteration down pat.)

I'm sure La BellaDonna could tell me why I want to put a circle skirt on this one -- I think this straight-skirt cut is probably fine for those shaped like Rulers and Vs, but I need more sweep in the skirt to balance out what I insist is an Hourglass (but may in fact be a Pear -- or perhaps just an Hourglass that needs to be flipped over?)

The only thing I can't decide is what fabric to use. I was thinking "huge floral!" (because I always think "huge floral!") but this might also be adorable in, say, gingham. Or seersucker. Or even eyelet. Ideas?

Oh, if you want to see the back of the pattern, it's here.

Fear of the Fear of Failure

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Thu, 01 May 2008 13:35:00 +0000

The Liberty fabric above costs roughly $45/yard, slightly less if you're a lucky eBay bidder (click on the image if you feel lucky, punk). And though I often recommend that if you possibly can, you should sew with Liberty prints, many people tell me that they couldn't possibly cut into such expensive fabric -- even people who have been sewing for many more years than I have, even people who have made tailored jackets, for pete's sake. They're too afraid they'll screw it up.

So I was wondering about this, and decided (very uncharacteristically for me) to do the math. So let's say you buy fabric for four Liberty-print dresses: that's ($45*4 yds)*4, which would be $720.00.

And let's say that you ruin, beyond hope of recovery, ALL FOUR of your Liberty-print projects. That's a lot of money wasted, right? That's a month's rent for some people. Two or three car payments, maybe. Months of groceries, depending on how many teenage boys are in your household.

It's also 5.76 $125 dresses bought at a department store. (I'm taking $125 NOT as the median department-store dress price, but because it's the absolute maximum price I think I could bring myself to pay for a new dress off the rack.) Have you bought more than 6 dresses in your life that you didn't like? That you wore once, maybe? That hung in your closet until you pushed them into the forgiving arms of the Salvation Army? (Replace "$125 dress" with "$45 sweater" and "6" with "more than I want to recall" and you have MY experience.) What did you learn from buying those dresses? A lot less than you would have learned from trying to sew them, I wager.

Here I'm assuming (highly unlikely) that you would be unable to salvage anything that you had sewn ... but I'm also assuming (highly likely) that you would learn a GREAT DEAL from four sewing projects, even if they were all sobbing failures. So much so that with the *next* project, you would most likely make something wearable.

That's just what failure is, or what it ought to be: failure is just figuring stuff out the hard way.

Almost every Saturday morning my little boy and I go roller-skating together. And every Saturday I tell my son (who HATES to fall down) that if he doesn't fall down, he won't learn anything. If you don't fall, you won't ever know how fast is too fast, how tight is too tight to take a turn, how soon (after a mega-blast blue-raspberry Slurpee) is too soon to head back to the floor. And if you don't screw up something -- anything -- in your life, you won't ever know how good you could have been.

So I *hate* it when someone tells me they don't want to try something because they might screw it up. So what? Unless what you're trying to do involves tightrope walking 5000 feet up, you probably won't DIE. And short of death, almost everything is fixable. Don't ask me for advice if that's not what you want to hear, because I'm the person who is going to tell you to take the new job, to ask the guy (or girl) out already, to move to the new city, to wear orange. I'll tell you to stop focusing on what you might lose, and start thinking about what you might LEARN.

Sometimes when people say they're afraid of failure, what they really mean is that they are afraid of humiliation. Which is completely understandable. But, speaking as someone who has felt humiliated more times than she'd like to remember, humiliation passes. (It passes like a kidney stone passes, but that's another story.) Not to mention that humiliation passes differently for each person: you remember it for months; the witnesses remember it for seconds (they have their own humiliations to obsess over, and don't have time for yours). You wake up the next morning, same as always. You head back into work, you run into that guy again ("Uh, hi!"), you get a new haircut to fix the one that wasn't such a good idea, after all. But at least you tried, and now you know something you didn't know before.

Or ... you try, and it works! It works beyond your wildest dreams. (Insert wildest dreams here.) Even if it works a little bit short of your wildest dreams, that's still further along than you were yesterday. And there's no rule that you can't try again.

So, that thing? That thing you've been scared to try, because you think there's NO POSSIBLE WAY you could do it? That everyone would point and laugh when you fell? Today looks like an EXCELLENT day to give it a shot. Take it from me. (Everyone's looking the other way, anyway.) Go for it!

And if you're going to do it, you might as well wear something orange while you do. (I'm just saying.)

Back to Shirtdresses

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:34:00 +0000

I swear I was going to post about something other than shirtdresses today, but Mary Fran sent me the link to this one, and I could not resist. It's up at MOMSPatterns and it's only $8.50. (And it's only not MINE because it's a B39, and if there's anything I hate more than grading UP, it's grading DOWN.)

I love the little pointy collar, the front skirt seams just scream "pocketize me!" and those gathers at the shoulder just make me swoon. I should add "shoulder gathers" that to the list of my "triggers"—isn't it true that once you're aware of your triggers, you can change them (if you want to)? My trigger list would probably read "penny loafers, robots, sarcasm, Peter Pan collars, synthesized handclaps, Adidas Gazelles (on guys), books that smell like old books, red lipsticks (which I never wear) ..." Actually, looking over that list, I don't think I want to change any of those triggers. (Except maybe to start wearing the damn lipstick.) Oh, well.

Before I forget I should let y'all know that Janet at Lanetz Living is going to Mexico. Why should you care that Janet is going to Mexico? Because she's using it as an excuse to have a sale! You can take 25% off on all orders from now until she comes home next Tuesday. The sale will end at Midnight (CST) on 5/6/08. Use the coupon discount code "Mexico25". It needs to be entered on the shipping page as one word. (If you try to put a space between Mexico and 25 it will not work.) And, as always, Janet offers free shipping with 3 or more patterns ... and patterns will continue to ship out while Janet's on the beach.

Oh -- I really like the idea of Sept. 1 being "wear a dress day," as proposed in the comments on yesterday's post. Let's start working on the logistics, people!

Well, I Guess It's Time To Wrap This Up, Then

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:55:00 +0000

Yes, I did see the NYT article about the "demise of the dress". (I was actually surprised that the story didn't make the NYT's most-forwarded list, since so many people sent it to me!)

The main point of the article seemed to be that those in the fashion industry are tired of dresses, and are looking towards pushing "the pant" for fall. Yes, even though the article touts dresses as "glamorous", "easy", "slimming", "efficient", "flattering", and "attractive", (not to mention the obligatory nod to the patriarchy with "guys like [them]") their time is UP.

In fact, Anne Slowey, of Elle, was quoted saying that the "expiration date" for the dress “is end of August.”

Which gives me, what, 124 days, more or less? Is "PantADay.com" already taken?

No, no, no, don't worry -- I've made it this far without taking the pronouncements of the fashion editors seriously, and I think I can struggle through an autumn where "the full-legged, pleated high- and low-waisted legions will be out in the urban jungle" (as Ms. Slowey put it).

But if, like me, you are going to continue wearing dresses past 31 August, there are some strategies for getting through this difficult time of dress shortages and rationing. The most obvious work-around is to learn to sew, so that you simply don't care what's in the stores (aside from the fabric stores). If you don't think you can swing that by the end of August, you should start looking to buy vintage. Don't wait until October when the shortages will be most acute; start searching now -- especially if you're an odd size. If you are shopping for velvet in July you won't have many competing bidders, and you can ward off the tragedy of having to wear pants to all your holiday parties.

Don't forget the downturn in accessories availability that accompanies a dress shortage, as well: tights may be in short supply, along with slips of all kinds and full-skirted coats. It's a little trickier to predict what will happen with shoes, but if you want taller boots, they tend to be harder to find in an environment where dresses are scarce.

With some careful planning you should be able to continue dress-wearing activities well past the expiration date forecast by Ms. Slowey and her ilk. And, while they're waiting in line at the tailor to get things taken in and let out and taken up and let down (pants are notoriously NOT one-size-fits-all), you can swan by in your easy, nicely-fitting dress. Don't forget to thumb your nose as you pass.

Increasingly less-rare sighting of alphabet dress in the wild

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:48:00 +0000

[photo from GEL 2008 by the fantastic Gene Driskell; L to R: Michael Montes, yours truly, Bran Dougherty-Johnson]

I know y'all are always clamoring for pictures of me wearing the dresses I make, and I know I have been consistently disappointing on that front. (I would do so more often if I weren't too lazy to go get a tripod to use with my camera. Also, I never know what to reply to the inevitable comments of "Erin, I thought you'd be taller.")

But here, ta-dah, is a brand-new dress that I made to wear to last week's GEL conference. (If you don't know the GEL conference, it is my great pleasure to introduce it to you -- go check out the link above! Watch the videos! Pressure your employer to send you next year!)

This is made from some fabric I bought from Reprodepot, but which seems to be missing from their site now. And the pattern is Butterick 7513, which sews up like a dream. So easy! (I left off the sleeve bands, though, as I thought they'd be bulgy under a cardigan.)

What you can't see in the photo is that the buttons are covered in scraps of a different-scale black-and-white alphabet print. (You also can't see how hard Michael was making me laugh a few minutes earlier.)

This was a two-alphabet-dress trip for me; I wore the blue letter-and-number print dress the next day. Eventually I suppose I'll have made enough alphabet-print dresses that I can wear nothing but fonts for a week straight, and will have completed my descent into caricature.

Faith in the Youth of Today

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:02:00 +0000

Last week I got this wonderful email from Clarissa, who wanted to tell me about her first major project: her junior prom dress.

Not just any junior prom dress: Clarissa, as so many of us are, is infatuated with Audrey Hepburn, and she wanted to recreate (on a scale appropriate for a junior prom) this iconic dress from "Sabrina":

With some help from her mom (a former home-ec teacher -- thanks mom!), Clarissa modified a Vogue pattern to get this:

Isn't it lovely? The overskirt attaches by a waistband, so it can be removed for less-formal occasions. I love that Clarissa didn't try to completely recreate the Audrey dress (that way lies tears, I tell you -- it probably took a team of people three months to make that dress) but concentrated on the essential elements: the sheath and overskirt, the colors, and the embroidery. (Clarissa had the front embroidery done professionally, as she doesn't have an embroidery sewing machine.)

And she was so smart to turn it into a sheath with straps; I wore a strapless dress to a prom once and spent the whole night tugging it UPWARDS. Not what you want to be doing at prom!

In short, well done! I'm especially impressed by any young lady who chooses to look so elegant, when there are so many options to look ... not-elegant.

Also: those are really cute shoes.

Shirtdresses I Have Not (Yet) Purchased

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:44:00 +0000

I know the general perception is that I am cornering the market on shirtdresses, but I swear that is not true. As evidence, I present these patterns that I have not (and probably will not -- probably) buy:

This one, from Miss Helene's, is really cute. I love the faux-western yoke. But I am NOT BUYING IT.

And this one,

Sent by Deb, and available from BootyVintage, is really elegant and sophisticated. (Probably too elegant and sophisticated for me, as those of you who know me will attest.) So it's available to YOU!

Both TCarole and Deirdre left comments pointing out this one, which is a new Vogue pattern, and so is available both at the Vogue Patterns site and in major fabric stores:

And William N. pointed out this one, at Cemetarian:

Just the thing for when you can't decide between a wrap dress and a shirtdress.

So, see? I haven't bought the ALL. There's plenty left for you guys!

[Update: But that Butterick 7373 at Vintage Martini? Was already sold! Sob.]

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:58:00 +0000

I get a lot of email now from people who are new to sewing, and who want (for some reason) my advice. Just last week I got a very kind email from Elizabeth, who wanted me to help her choose between two patterns.

Now, usually, my advice is just to buy both, to avoid regret, but I went and looked at her pattern choices. Her choice B was unremarkable (and a little difficult for a first project) but her choice A ... I fell in love.

If her choice A had been in a romantic comedy, I would have been in the role of matchmaker, and this would have been the perfect guy ... who then asked to be set up with my best friend. Hijinks would ensue.

But, I hear you asking, how lovely WAS choice A? Here, you tell me:

Now, giving advice to newbies is a sacred trust, and even though the dress was up for auction on eBay, I couldn't go and snipe it! That wouldn't be sporting! So I appeal to you all -- does anyone have a copy of this for sale? B36, by preference?

At least I am consoled by the thought that one new sewist is going to have a very happy first dress!

Linktastic Monday!

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:58:00 +0000

Oh, yes. The links are too good, and just keep coming. You all spoil me, you know?

First off, I don't know how many of you ARE fans of Simon Winchester, but I know how many of you SHOULD BE fans of Simon Winchester (that would be "all"). He just sent me a link to him talking about his new book on YouTube, and that link would be here. If you ever have a chance to hear him speak in person, grab it (and if you need help figuring out when Simon's coming to your neck of the woods, you can sign up to stalk, I mean track, his readings here). He's tremendously entertaining (and so are his books).

Rita sends me this perplexing novelty-print dress:

Where do you think would be an appropriate place to wear this? I'm thinking either the Kentucky Derby (if you're clueless about what to wear to the Derby, i.e., you think "The Derby's in the South ... this has Southern belles on it ... perfect!") or perhaps the funeral of your hated ex-husband Rhett. ("What? It's black!") I'm happy to entertain your theories in the comments (and if you think "It's perfect! I must have it! Now if only Rhett would die!" click on the image to visit the ebay auction.)

And remember those Liberty-print Jack Purcells? Ronnie sent me a kind email letting me know that they're on sale now, online at the Converse store. You have to click on the "online outlet store" image to get to them, as they don't seem to come up in the search. But now they're only $57, instead of $100. (I got a pair from my lovely husband for Christmas, and plan to wear them constantly now that it's not friggin' SNOWING all the time.)

Cherie at Shrimpton Couture is hoping to get your feedback to improve her site ... and if you give her some, you'll be in the running for a $100 gift certificate ...

Stephanie asked if there was a dressaday tag on Flickr, and there is. My Dress A Day Flickr stream is here, although I've been lazy about uploading stuff to it. If you want to tag photos "dressaday", please do so and I'll set up a feed to see them! I also set up a Dress A Day group. Go nuts. (And if you want to send me pictures, sending me Flickr links is a great way to do that! Especially if you license them under the Creative Commons!)

Have I linked to the COPA (Commercial Pattern Archive) yet? It's at the University of Rhode Island. There are some broken links AND their CDs don't work on Macs (!) ... but it's still pretty neat. I wish there was a way we could hook them up with the wiki ... the wiki right now is about 25% of the size of COPA, which has 25,000 patterns dating to 1868.

Kristy (at Lower Your Presser Foot) sent this marvelous link to some Ikea dressers that fit patterns perfectly ... so perfectly that her husband thought that she had GOTTEN RID OF SOME PATTERNS. (Ha! Never!)

Eva made a gorgeous dress of Liberty babycord. And she's says it's all my fault. (Who, me?)

Also, Eirlys points out that there's a new exhibition coming to the V&A in May: Story of the Supremes - performance costumes from the Mary Wilson Collection, which means all the sequins your little hearts desire. There's ALSO a good chance I'll be in London the weekend after this exhibit opens -- Saturday May 24 -- would anyone want to do a Dress A Day meetup at the V&A? And possibly go either fabric-shopping or to tea afterwards? Leave a comment, let me know ...

How Not To Respond To Criticism

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:38:00 +0000

Has everyone heard about the Butterick 6015/St. Louis Fashion week kerfuffle by now? If not, I will give you a precis.

-- St. Louis recently had a Fashion Week. (They sent me the release and a gazillion large jpgs. I don't really cover fashion shows, so I didn't post about it.)
-- A blogger (who asked me not to use her name) did look at the photos, and noticed right away that one of the dresses was line-for-line a copy of Butterick 6015, aka the Walkaway Dress. See it here?

-- The blogger tries to find out who the designer was that submitted such an iconic dress to a fashion show.
-- She finds the designer, Ashley Dayley, and talks with her. Ms. Dayley doesn't seem to think there's anything wrong with just making a dress from a vintage pattern and submitting it to a show.
-- She posts all this on her blog. In her post, she gives Ms. Dayley the benefit of the doubt, calling her "young" and "enthusiastic".

Now here's where the story gets interesting -- the last three comments on that blog, before the post was taken down, were from anonymous "friends" of the "designer", calling the blogger out for posting about this. They were so nasty that the blogger took down the post.

Dumb. Don't those "friends" know (or doesn't the "designer" know) that the best and ONLY thing to do when you've done something dumb is to take your lumps and own up? Why not say "I didn't know?" Why not say "I won't do it again?" Why not say (as hard as it is, through gritted teeth) "Thanks for letting me know?"

Instead they decided to wear their matching "I'm a Bully" t-shirts (which are probably pink, with sequins) and harass the person who had the temerity to call them on their misdeeds. The commenters, if they are the designer's friends, were just making her look MORE clueless. (If they're her enemies, they're doing a stand-up job.)

Now, I'm not saying that fashion doesn't tolerate knockoffs. (Victor Costa, anyone?) But a fashion show, especially one that was put on to feature "independent designers" is not the place for knockoffs; it's the place for original work.

The best part is the commenters saying that the original blogger didn't have the right to post the pictures of the show. So ... let me get this straight: she can't post images that were widely distributed to bloggers just for that purpose, but "designers" can knock off old patterns and that's just fine?

The best way to fix this would be for Ms. Dayley to issue a formal letter of apology to the show's organizers and post it somewhere public online. Then at least the first hit for her might show her doing something thoughtful and grown-up instead of something clueless.

[On a happier note, Marge of Born Too Late Vintage is turning 49, and is offering 50% off shipping on all items in her store to US and international customers from April 18 up to and including April 24th. On everything: patterns, clothes, accessories ... Use the code "49 and holding."]

Exercising: Some Options

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 14:14:00 +0000

Although I often declare that I am not athletic, the evidence probably wouldn't acquit me of that charge. Since junior high I have committed the following sports and/or exercise activities: cross-country running (very slowly), throwing the discus and shotput (ineptly), playing soccer, both high-school indoor (hello, knee damage!) and college outdoor (position: benchwarmer), step aerobics (lots of fun but requires suspension of natural sense of the ridiculous), yoga (Iyengar, most fun ever, but really only with one specific teacher [YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE]), treadmill walking [only supportable by viewing of Dr. Who and Torchwood]. Oh, and weightlifting, either intermittently or concurrently with any or all of the above.

And, of course, roller-skating, although anything done in a venue where you can also buy a corn dog is automatically suspect as exercise.

My biggest problem with exercise, of course, has always been the general crappitude of exercise WEAR. Tight pants? Tighter tops? After a certain age, a "Don't Mess With Texas" t-shirt and raggedy soccer shorts just don't cut it.

And then came these folks. They sent me an email and I grudgingly took a look at their site, but the grudging turned to grudging admiration. This skirt is GREEN! It has workout shorts under it! It has TWO pockets. It has something called "tummy-tuck" technology. And the best part? The style name is "Rollergirl."

I don't like the logo (I don't like ANY logos) but hey, nothing's PERFECT.

I'm seriously tempted to get one of these; the weather's getting better, I could use more exercise, my outdoor roller skates have just been gathering dust ... and this would solve my "what can I wear skating in the Skokie Sculpture Park and not feel like a very conspicuous idiot in the grocery store on the way home?" problem.

And if I got the black one maybe I'd even feel up to skating in Central Park. Certainly more up to it than skating in street clothes or in the ubiquitous (and too-tight) black lycra capri pants. You never know ...

The skirt's $56, click on the image to visit their site. Their size chart goes up to XXL (22), but it looks like this skirt is only up to XL (about an 18).

Bolero? Collar? Huh?

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:41:00 +0000

Lisa at Miss Helene's sent me this link a while back (click on the image to visit the Main Street Mall listing). She sent it for a linktastic Friday, but it really deserves its own post, because I am simultaneously fascinated and horrified by this pattern.

First off: who dreamed up the fake bolero? (Because, obviously, a real bolero is too much trouble, right? What with all the tedious being able to take it off and put it back on again.) Or is it an elaborate collar? I'm much more sympathetic to the elaborate collar, although I don't like buttonholes that will never feel the touch of a button. Buttons on their lonesome: okay. Buttons sewn over snaps ... eh, whatever floats your boat. Buttons condemned to look longingly at their buttonholes across a never-to-be-crossed divide? That's just cruel.

I do like the little contrast print along the roll of the fake bolero/elaborate collar. And the lines of this dress, too, are quite captivating. I love how perfectly the dress nips in at the waist (without a waistline seam, which means it is pure fantasy, or something to be achieved only with terrifying undergarments).

So: I'm conflicted. Is this gorgeous, or is this ludicrous? (Or both? Both is certainly an acceptable answer.) What do you think?

[I'm also wondering if the women on the pattern envelope are laughing about being able to put this one over on the pattern company. "I can't believe they bought this one! Let's try for a fake vest effect next!"]

Linktastic Tuesday, All-Pockets Edition

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:44:00 +0000

The pattern above (click on the image to visit the eBay auction) is not only a great, easy dress, but it also inspired me to post some pocket links, or quasi-pocket links. (The one above is a B32, but there's also two B38s on eBay right now, too.)

Michelle (of Green Kitchen) sends this great link to Bitter Betty's site, where she posts a pocket tutorial.

This (sent by Mary Beth) isn't actually a pocket, but I think they're missing a significant use case by not including a stealth pocket in it. Considering how many women do keep things in their bras, why wouldn't you add a pocket to a bra accessory? Seems like a no-brainer to me. (Of course, I don't think I'd ever buy one of those things, as they seem uncomfortable and liable to wiggle around, but hey, I admire their problem-solving gumption.)

Also in the thing-that-should-have-pockets-but-doesn't category, Pretty Bourgeois posted a link to a dress that looks like the LL Bean Tote Bag. Too bad there's only one monogram option.

I missed the original auction for this one, sent by Ginger Lane:

But if you click the image there's a B34, sans envelope, up on the 'bay right now. I'd rather not have the envelope -- for some reason, the pictures on that pattern creep me out.

And one more pocket link, from Summerset. Seriously, this link, which explains how to put a pocket and an invisible zipper in the same seam, changed my life. Do you know how many 1950s side-zipper dresses I can put pockets in now? EVERY ONE OF THEM.

Robots! Robots! Robots!

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:14:00 +0000

Nora *and* Theresa sent me links to some robot fabric that I *must have*:

It's at CraftyPlanet -- click the image to visit their store. I haven't bought any yet, though, because I don't know what it wants to be, and thus don't know how much I need. (I would normally just suck it up and buy five yards, but this fabric is EXPENSIVE.) I'm hoping it decides it wants to be a skirt, so I can get away with buying two and a half yards.

If you already know what you'd like to sew out of robot fabric, maybe you need twill robot trim from SuperBuzzy:

And while I'm talking about robots -- I "collect" songs that have the word "robot" in the title or that are sung/played by bands with "robot" in their name. (What can I say? I like music made by happy machines.) If you want to subscribe to the Yahoo! Pipes feed I made (which looks on Hype Machine for songs fitting those criteria) I think that link will let you do so.

Linktastic Friday No. 4: The Return of Linktastic Friday

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:30:00 +0000

Tina at What-I-Found sent me a link to the pillow above; I need to put it on my couch and sit next to it wearing my letter/number dress, don't I?

Dilly sent a link to these sewing-themed shoes from the UK chain Office, which makes it very difficult for people to grab their pics. I guess you'll have to click on the link if you want to see them.

Remember those "Four Yard Line" patterns? There's also a One Yard Line line: check out this skirt and blouse pattern (Butterick 9475), sent by Myra.

Ann sent a great link to a post by Babazeka, where she quotes an old sewing manual about how to be properly dressed when you sit down at the machine. Priceless. (Ann also sent a link to Donate My Dress, which passes along gently used prom dresses to girls who need them.)

Hana in Brno sent a link to this dress -- a wedding dress made completely of dollar store materials. It looks pretty good!

I know I haven't said much about the wiki lately (I think we need to have another contest), but we have another seller who is happy to have her images loaded up into it: Vintage Swampcrone.

Blogreader Carol has a wonderful blog about papercraft. Check it out!

Kristine sent this, which is up right now on eBay (click the image). Isn't it cute?

Doug (yeah, I said Doug) sent this link to a site called Unraveling Histories, which features dresses made from silk RAF parachutists' maps. The site is hard to navigate and even harder to pull pics from but it's definitely worth a link! And there's a Dutch version.

Lee (at when she was knitting) sent in pictures of her Duro! And it's her first dress! You should click the link and check it out, her color choice is beautiful.

Stephanie sent in this Whole Food halter dress, in the front of her local WF in Oakland:

The *very* funny Jonathan Caws-Elwitt has made up these t-shirts (click the image to visit his CafePress store):

Whew! I think that's it for this Friday. Wouldn't want to break the internet ...

It was Julie's Birthday, But I Got the Present ...

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:42:00 +0000

A little bird told me that Julie (of Damn Good Vintage) had a birthday earlier this week, and I thought maybe I'd head to her site and find something delicious to post and wish her a (belated) happy day ... and (of course) I ended up buying this:

It's not MY birthday until August, so this cannot be justified as a birthday present to ME. But -- isn't it adorable? I love the little gathers at the yoke. And that pink is just edible ... I'd use little covered buttons in a pink floral print, wouldn't you?

(I think the women on this pattern envelope are all in an art gallery, and are looking forward to going out to lunch afterwards. They will all have cake.)

Now, if you also wanted to celebrate Julie's birthday as an excuse to buy patterns, as I did, may I suggest this one?

Or maybe this one:

It's a B40! And it has a circle skirt! And the women on the pattern envelope are like a clone-race of fembots!

And, speaking of birthdays and excuses to go pattern-shopping, Jen at MOMSPatterns had a modem meltdown. And while LESSER women would yell and scream, Jen is offering a special sale: use the code 'friedmodem15' and save 15% off any sized order on the MOMSPatterns site all weekend and she'll ship as soon as she's back online with a broadband connection. (What's the birthday connection? Jen's birthday is tomorrow! Obviously a reason to BUY MORE PATTERNS.)

Happy birthday, everyone!

Seriously, I am cornering the market on shirtdresses

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:07:00 +0000

I could barely make out the line drawing on this, and the seller said she had no clue whether or not it was complete ... and I bought it anyway. It's a sickness, right?

I am a sucker for these Butterick Four-Yard-Line patterns, though. I love the football reference in something marketed exclusively to women (and supposedly thrifty women at that!) but I liked the open collar with the front band and the full skirt a little more. I think this one will be fun to make.

I'm seriously considering making this shirtdress in a solid color, even. Wouldn't that be a switch? I just can't decide WHICH color. Pale blue and green are too hospitally; yellow shows too much dirt; black is too boring to sew, ditto white; red a little much for all that skirt ... I'm bored with pink lately, and orange would just be insane (not that I'm against insane, usually). I don't like brown in summer, and I never wear beige (or purple) if I can help it. What am I forgetting? Ooh, maybe a deep blue?

By the Numbers

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:56:00 +0000

Remember those nursery curtains I bought at Target? They turned into this:

It's Butterick 2626, the same dress as the one in this post. It's not ironed -- this is how it looks after being hung up wet from the dryer.

I didn't realize until I took the picture how ... prominent ... the numbers are on the bodice. In my mind, it's an alphabet dress, not a numbers dress, but I don't mind. (And since I'm going to be wearing this mostly for work, I hope I earworm everyone I meet with Dolly Parton's "9 to 5".)

It took me forever to figure out what buttons to use, until I remembered I bought fifteen packets of covered-button forms at the last Hancock's notions sale:

The covered buttons were EASY. There's a template on the back of the package and then all you have to do is get the fabric wet and put it in the mold. It took less time to make the buttons than it did to sew them on. (Just remember to check the orientation of the shanks if your buttons have a definite up-and-down ... a couple of mine are sewn on an angle for that reason!)

If I had it to do over again, I would, and with a glad heart, but this time I'd unpick the curtain hems BEFORE washing them; the sizing made the fabric stiff and in my haste I ripped one of the hems along the seamline, which made cutting-out a bit awkward. (If you have rips or stains in your fabric, you can mark them the way I do, with blue painter's tape -- it's stiff enough so that you can feel it from the wrong side but it comes off easily without leaving any sticky stuff behind.)

The obligatory "Let me show you where I screwed up" part is here:

The skirt has an interesting slashed/darted opening on the left for the zipper, and the right-hand side is supposed to have just a plain dart. Which I forgot to make. Which means the back skirt is not centered on the back bodice. To which I say: big whoop; I gave up being worried if people were staring at my ass a decade ago.

Here's the full back view:

Despite that annoyance and assorted others (if you remember, this is the dress where I turned front and back bodice gathers into darts, plus I had to let out the waist an inch, which is irritating on a skirt with side-seam pleats) I will probably make this pattern at least once more. It's so comfortable!

If you're playing "spot the pockets", they're set in the front skirt seam, between the third and fourth outermost pleats. Very convenient!

But this one has a zipper!

noreply@blogger.com (Erin) — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:53:00 +0000

Even though I now probably have enough shirtwaist patterns to paper my sewing room with them (not that I *would*, but I could), this one caught my eye ... it has a zipper! A center-front zipper, which you hardly ever see on non-athletic clothing any more.

If I made this I'd do it in some kind of fine black lawn with one of those fancy rhinestone zippers. Which reminds me: I really need to do a big online notions/zippers/etc. order: what sites do you all recommend? I should compile a list ...

And speaking of lists, yes, this marks the second Friday that has been bereft of linktasticness, but my wifi connection while traveling has been a bit ... unreliable. And linktasticity needs, above all, reliable internet, so I can follow all those links to their stunning conclusions. But keep those links coming; the next one is likely to be overwhelming. You'll need to set aside a whole morning just to click them all ...

(Oh, and in this picture, don't you think Flowered Dress has just said something completely inane to Green Dress? I think so, too, but I can't decide what it was. If you know, leave a comment, please!)