Category Archives: 1920s-1930s

Fingernail Polish Ads from 1917 to 1937

Fingernail polish in an illustration from 1931.  The tips and “half moons” remain white. This was the fashion during the 1920’s and the 1930’s. Delineator, November 1931. The artist was Dhynevor Rhys.

By 1931, the liquid product we call “nail polish” was widely available, but there was an earlier way to shine your fingernails: nail polish powder. It persisted into the 1920’s.

From an ad for Cutex nail powder and polishes, Delineator, November 1924.

Back in the 1940s, my mother still had her old celluloid dresser set, (not as nice as that one!) which included — in addition to a hair brush and a mirror — a button hook, a hair receiver, a container for collar studs, a file, and a nail buffer. She showed me, once, how to put the polish, which came in a small jar, on my bare fingernails and then buff them to a soft shine with a chamois nail buffer.

Using a nail buffer; illustration from an article on nail care, Delineator, July 1924, p. 37.

Buffing your nails was supposed to improve circulation; it gave them a temporary rosy glow. (Pink fingertips go back a long way; Homer describes the dawn as “rosy fingered.”)

“Now when the child of morning, rosy-fingered Dawn, appeared, Nestor left his couch and took his seat on the benches of white and polished marble that stood in front of his house. [Odyssey]”  Thanks to Gary Corby.

In 1917, this is what nail polish could look like:

From an ad for Cutex nail polish, Ladies’ Home Journal, October 1917.

Cutex Nail Polish ad, 1917. Ladies’ Home Journal, October 1917.

The range of Cutex products in a sampler set from 1917 included “the ideal cuticle remover,” an emery board for shaping the nails, an orange stick for cleaning under nails and pushing back the cuticle, a ball of cotton, nail white, “polishing paste pink” and a bar [or is it a box?] of polish.

Cutex manicure products, 1917. This sampler kit “sent for 14 cents” includes two forms of polish, nail white, cuticle remover, “Cuticle Comfort” moisturizer, and basic tools.  Ad from LHJ, October 1917.

There is an excellent history of the Cutex company, which was founded by Northam Warren, complete with product descriptions and early advertising: click here.

This Cutex cuticle remover ad from October 1917 explains how to use it by soaking cotton in the Cutex and applying it to the cuticle with an orange stick. (The thimble-like object is the cork bottle stopper.)

The Cutex company’s initial product was a liquid for softening and minimizing cuticles without cutting them:  Cuticle-“X,”  became the “Cutex” brand.

Cutex Cuticle Remover ad, October 1917; Ladies’ Home Journal. “Discard forever your manicure scissors!”

After removing the cuticle and buffing your nails to a rosy shine, you could finish by whitening the tips of your nails:

Applying Cutex nail white, from a 1917 advertisement. “A touch of Cutex Nail White underneath the nails leaves them immaculate — snowy white.” Later,  Nail White came in a tube, making it easier to apply. This is an ancestor of the “French Manicure” popular at the end of the 2oth century.

In 1917  — and into the 1920’s — the ideal was an almond-shaped nail with a distinct half-moon at the base and white tips:

The twenties’ ideal was almond nails with white half moons and tips; from an ad for Cutex, November 1927; Delineator. Colored polish was not applied to the tip or the base of the nail.

Half moons and lovely oval fingernails. Cutex ad, April 1928. Delineator. The “ideal nail shape” changed to sharply pointed nails in the nineteen thirties, but the half moons and tips remained white.

According to several sources, clear liquid nail polish was available in 1916, and Cutex sold a clear liquid polish, tinted “natural” pink, after 1920, but in this Cutex ad from 1924, Cutex Liquid Polish which “lasts a whole week” is just one option among the older buffing products like powder polish, cake polish, and paste polish.

An introductory set:  Cutex powder polish and liquid polish plus cuticle remover and cuticle cream. Ad in Delineator, October 1924. Full sizes cost 35 cents each.

Throughout the nineteen twenties, liquid polish gained popularity.

The “sophisticated Parisienne” applies Cutex Liquid Nail Polish in this ad from November, 1926. Delineator. The brush is now part of the bottle cap.

Cutex packaging was changing, too.

A sample of Cutex liquid nail polish in a bottle with separate brush. Ad from November 1926. “In two shades, “Natural or the New Deep Rose.” A bottle of nail polish remover was included.

By 1928, Cutex ad campaigns featured celebrities like Anita Loos.

Anita Loos appeared in an ad for Cutex liquid nail polish in 1928.

Illustrator and industrial designer Helen Dryden praised liquid Cutex nail polish.

Fashion Illustrator Helen Dryden illustrated many magazine covers for Delineator. Cutex ad, 1928.

So did this “lady explorer” (Osa Johnson) on a zebra….

Cutex ad, January 1929, Delineator. Cutex liquid nail polish was advertised as nail protection in the late 1920’s.

Also in the late twenties, Cutex packaging took on an Art Deco look:

Cutex Liquid Nail Polish and Nail Polish Remover. January 1929 advertisement. This introductory offer included both for 6 cents, but normal sized bottles cost 35 cents each.

Incredibly, it seems that liquid nail polish was sold in the 1910’s before nail polish remover appeared, but in this 1929 introductory package, they are offered together.

The ideal fingernail was not overly long in the 1920s — and nail polish did not cover the “half-moon” or the tips of the nails. Cutex ad, Delineator, June 1928.

Elegant hands wear colored nail polish on a Delineator cover, February 1932. Dynevor Rhys illustration.

As liquid nail polish became available in a range of bright colors, Cutex had to convince women to wear them. There was an ad campaign stressing that respectable socialites and debutantes wore colored nail polish. Presumably, conservative women thought red nails were the sign of a scarlet woman, and had to be persuaded otherwise.

Do 1932 debutantes choose tinted nails or natural? Cutex ad, Delineator, February 1932. “The popular girl of 1932 is way past losing sleep over whether to wear her nails bright or pale.”

Debutantes were encouraged to wear colored nail polish — and sharply pointed nails. Cutex ad, Delineator, February 1932. Applying polish to just part of the nail is definitely more difficult than painting the entire nail, but fashion is rarely practical….

Pointed nails shaped like claws appeared in the early 1930’s.

The picture of innocence? Strawberry soda and very sharp fingernails painted to match. Delineator cover, July 1933. Dynevor Rhys illustration.

If respectable women were going to have bright red fingernails, they needed to be taught how to coordinate their nail polish with their clothing.

Three highly respectable socialites wear brightly colored nail polish. From left, ruby red nails with a black outfit, rose nails with a green dress and silver fox fur, and coral nails with a beige dress. Cutex ad, February 1933, Delineator.

Tinted or natural colored nail polish? It depended on what you were wearing. Cutex ad, February 1932. “Wear Cardinal with black velvet — Natural with brocaded [metallic] lame — and Coral to accent white satin.”

A larger range of colors was available:

Cutex advertised six nail polish colors in February 1933. Delineator. A woman had to have several choices so she wouldn’t “commit Atrocities” with clashing colors. “If there’s any dress in your closet that hasn’t its special shade of polish to snap it up, go get it!” That should increase sales….

There was also price competition:

Ad for Glazo liquid nail polish, Delineator, February 1934. At 25 cents, Glazo was much cheaper than 35 cent Cutex, which made it easier to own several colors.

From an ad for Glazo nail polish, Delineator, February 1934. “Six authentic shades. Natural, Shell, Flame, Geranium, Crimson, Mandarin Red, Colorless.”

Women also needed more nail polish in the nineteen thirties, because they were encouraged to paint their toenails, too.

A “manicure” included matching polished toenails in this beauty advice article from July 1934. Delineator, p. 37. The new, open-toed sandals for day or evening showed off twinkling toes.

In the thirties, open-toed shoes came out of the bedroom and on to the dance floor. These high-heeled evening sandals , trimmed with gold, were featured in 1934:

Right, evening sandals, June 1934, Delineator.

The sandals pictured below are for daytime wear, but not necessarily on the beach.

Fashion article in Delineator, June 1934. Sandals to show “your tanned feet and tinted toe-nails.”

Daytime sandals described in Delineator fashion article, June 1934.

EXTRAS:  You can still buy a nail buffer and polishing cream at Vermont Country Store.

There is a History of Cutex with color ads at the Chronically Vintage blog, and an authoritative history of Cutex with color ads and images of products 1920, etc. at the Northam Warren (Cutex) site.

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under 1900s to 1920s, 1920s, 1920s-1930s, 1930s, Cosmetics, Beauty Products, Old Advertisements & Popular Culture, World War I

Formal Styles for October, 1926

Afternoon dresses for formal day-time occasions; Butterick 1016 (for “the social butterfly”) came in very large sizes;  7079 is for formal afternoon events, dinners, theater, etc. From Delineator, October 1926.

“1016 — Paris meets the formal demands of Autumn and Winter with frocks suitable for weddings and receptions, for luncheons, tea and bridge. The cut rather than the fabric makes the difference in this mode, for satin crepe, crepe de Chine and crepe meteor are used for simple dresses as well as for the social butterfly shown at the left.  Satin crepe is used for the body and straight skirt and its reverse side for the collar and one-piece slip. The other materials area smart in two shades of the same color or in two harmonizing colors. Georgette and silk voile make charming frocks over matching slips of taffeta or satin…. The collar makes it becoming for women from 36 to 52 bust.” — Delineator, Oct. 1926,  p. 43.

The matte side of the double-sided crepe satin is shown as a lighter color; the shiny side on the lapel, slip and sleeves is shown as a darker color.

Butterick 1016, on the left, was available for women in sizes up to 52 inch bust measure. Pattern no. 7079 came in the standard range of sizes:  32 to 44 inch bust measure. Hems — even for older women — are at the bottom of the knee.

“7079 — One for every wardrobe should be the ruling for the type of one-piece frock illustrated at the right. Its circular frills and smart sleeve make it what the French dressmaker calls a dinner frock. It leads a double life of great usefulness, for it takes care of all afternoon engagements and answers for small, informal dinners, the theater, and nightlife on an ocean  liner. Chanel red — a dark peony color — in Georgette with the flower of ribbon in the same color, silk voile in string beige with the flowers of lemon and silver ribbon, fern-green moire, black Georgette with jade, with almond, with royal blue or flesh are excellent day and night colors. The lower edge measures about 44 inches…. The style is extremely becoming to women from 32 to 44 bust.” — Delineator, Oct. 1926,  p. 43.

This dress is for “informal dinners” or afternoon wear because it has sleeves. Evening gowns had deeper necklines, no sleeves, and deeper-cut armholes than formal day dresses. The ribbon pom-pom at the shoulder is apparently an important part of the dress. A very long necklace creates a flattering vertical line, although this dress does not have a hip band.

Beaded evening gowns were appropriate for very formal wear, and a truly determined woman could make her own:

Butterick frock pattern 1048 could be made to resemble this illustration if you also used Butterick embroidery and beading transfer 10481. Delineator, Oct. 1926. An alternate view shows it with sleeves and a higher neckline.

There is a copy of this pattern in the Commercial Pattern Archive, which shows the neck and sleeve differences. Some readers have commented that Butterick patterns from the 1920’s and 1930’s often seem much too difficult for a woman to make herself. In fact, since they were aimed at upper-middle-class women, many Butterick patterns must have been made by a professional seamstress, “the little dressmaker” who existed in almost every town. In the case of Butterick 1048, with all that hand beading, the customer was asking a lot!

This lace frock, Butterick 1043, is less formal than a beaded frock, but still very elegant, and more versatile. Delineator, Oct. 1926. It has a trailing “wing cascade” and is ornamented with a fake-flower pom-pom, probably of feathers, velvet, or silk chenille. Notice the bangle worn on her upper arm.

Butterick’s dolman evening coat 7084, in metallic brocade, is shown with Butterick evening dress 1041. Delineator, October 1926. In the twenties, bits of dress were often seen peeking out from the coat’s hem.

Right,Butterick evening frock 1041, October 1926, Delineator. The dress seems to be made of metallic moire, with sheer chiffon panels which have picot edges.

Alternate views of coat 7084 and frocks 1041, 1048, and 1043. Butterick patterns from October 1926. Here, 1041 is shown in an afternoon version, with sleeves and higher neckline.

A picot hem can be faked with a ziz-zag stitch. Sew Historically wrote about how picot hems were done in the 1920’s and also provides a tutorial on faking them with a modern sewing machine. [Note: Always allow your reproduction chiffon dress to hang for several days before finalizing its hem. Chiffon on the bias will stretch … a lot! Gee, I wonder if all those irregular, drooping-hem fashions of the twenties were making a virtue out of necessity….]

1 Comment

Filed under 1920s, 1920s-1930s, evening and afternoon clothes, Uncategorized, Vintage Styles in Larger Sizes

Beauty Advice from the Nineteen Twenties: Keep Your Chin(s) Up

Ad for Catherine McCunes’s Silk Muscle Lifting Mask, January 1928, Delineator magazine. “Note How Mask Lifts and Supports Sagging Facial Muscles.”

Title of a page of beauty advice by Celia Caroline Cole, Delineator, May 1927, p. 35.

The cherubs turn away in distress from the sight of a double chin.

Cherubs avert their eyes from a double chin in this illustration by L. Fevrier. 1927.

In this 1918 ad for rubber reducing garments, a chin strap could be bought for seventy-five cents.

In 1918, the Bailey Rubber Company sold reducing garments, including a “chin band for reducing double chin.” The rubber garment idea was to dissolve body fat by sweating — like rendering lard from a side of beef. Fat and water, however, are not the same thing.

Catherine McCune promised that wearing her Muscle Lifting Mask would wipe out wrinkles, too. Ad from Delineator, Oct. 1927.

Elizabeth Arden ran a series of ads with this disturbing image; this woman is not recovering from surgery, but receiving a beauty treatment:

The Elizabeth Arden salons sold cold cream, skin tonic, astringents,  and other beauty preparations. This image comes from an ad in Delineator, April 1925. “Tones, firms, whitens and refines the skin.” “Use a Patter for brisk resilient strokes.”

This ad is selling Elizabeth Arden’s Amiral “reducing soap” “for a double chin:”

Ad for Elizabeth Arden’s Amiral Soap, November 1924. “Absorbed by the skin, it breaks down fat by a natural harmless process, stimulates circulation to remove fatty waste.” [If only spot reduction were that easy….]

It’s probably not a coincidence that Delineator’s beauty writer, Celia Cole,  vouched for the efficacy of astringent soap, “skin food,” and even salon reducing treatments that used electricity. She doesn’t name the salon, but those monthly ads paid for by Elizabeth Arden may have had some influence on the editorial choices of Delineator magazine.

From “Chins in the Air”, by Celia Cole. Delineator, May 1927, p. 35.

Those Elizabeth Arden ads offer the “Arden Patter” (for spanking your double chin) for five dollars. Five dollars! In 1925 !

“Perfectly scientific” beauty treatments as described in Delineator, May 1927. To be fair, Celia Caroline Cole also recommended exercise.

Illustration by Brunner for an article on weight loss, Delineator, September 1928. “Floors trembled and ceilings fell from woman’s effort to get thin. Somebody wrote a book about calories…. The lettuce business increased six-fold in ten years.”

Compared to chin “patters,” pseudo-scientific ointments, and electric shocks, maybe the Silk Muscle Lifting masks weren’t the craziest way to spend money in a attempt to preserve your youth.

Complete ad for Silk Muscle Lifting Mask, Delineator, January 1928.

Complete ad for Muscle Lifting Mask, Delineator, October 1927. It was worn while sleeping, or for a few minutes every day. “Much less expensive than plastic surgery or deep peel.” [Did you realize those treatments were available in the 1920’s?]

A no-longer youthful woman ponders her reflection, May 1927. Delineator.

If you are interested in the history of fashion for the mature woman, you might enjoy a visit to AmericanAgeFashion.

Wrigley's gum Curve of Beauty ad 1934 july

Another, [perfectly unscientific] series of ads recommended chewing Wrigley’s gum as a beauty treatment for the facial muscles. I took me three blog posts to share all the ads I found: Chew Gum for Beauty (Part 1), Part 2, and Part 3. The ad above is from 1934. “Keep [your cheek line] from looking old and saggy; chew Double Mint gum. This gentle exercise 5 to 10 minutes daily aids in toning up unused and lazy facial muscles. Try this new Beauty Treatment.”

3 Comments

Filed under 1900s to 1920s, 1920s, 1920s-1930s, Cosmetics, Beauty Products, Musings, Old Advertisements & Popular Culture, Vintage Styles in Larger Sizes

Back to School Clothes, Fall 1927

“All Aboard for School or College: Butterick patterns for young women, Delineator, August 1927,  top of page 28.

“The Smart Mode on Campus:” Butterick patterns for young women and girls, Delineator, August 1928, top of page 29.

“For the Young and Younger Student:” Butterick patterns for girls, teens, and women. Delineator, August 1927, top of page 32.

“Semi-Formal Frocks for College:” Butterick patterns from Delineator, August 1927, top of page 33.

There’s a lot to like about these outfits; for one thing, they have the proportions I think of as “Twenties’ Style.” I was pleased — and surprised — to find that many of these patterns were also sized for mature women. In fact, it’s very hard to distinguish between 1927 styles for girls and styles for adults on these pages. For those who are deeply interested in the 1920’s, the descriptions of the dresses remind us of a more formal and structured society — the wildness of the “Roaring Twenties” notwithstanding. I’ll include closer views, alternate and back views, and the full text that appeared on these four pages.

Book recommendation: British author Elspeth Huxley attended Cornell University in the U.S. in 1927. Her memoir Love Among the Daughters: Memories of the Twenties in England and America is an insider’s/outsider’s view of American college life.

Butterick 1526, is a “frock for the classroom” for ages 8 to 15 years;  1544, is also for 8 to 15 years;  and 1589, for 15 to 18 years and adults to bust 44″. August 1927. The young girls’ dresses are as stylish and complex as those for adults.

Butterick 1569, for women aged 15 to 20 and in sizes 38 and 40. For football games “this is the frock to wear beneath your fur coat.” Butterick 1566, for girls 8 to 15, has a square neckline attributed to Vionnet. The blouse has a chic monogram. August 1927.

Butterick pattern 1562 is for young girls 8 to 15; 1556 is a coat for young girls and women 15 to 18 years and women with bust 36 to 44 inches. No. 1519 is for teens 15 to 18 and women all the way up to size 48! August 1927.

Butterick coat 1550 has a “mushroom shawl collar” and was available in sizes 15 to 18 years and sizes 36 to 44. For an explanation of “Size 16 Years,” click here. “School costume” 1583 is a two-piece outfit in sizes 15 to 18 years and women’s sizes 38 and 40.

The second dress, No. 1563, is very similar to 1569, for smaller women. The fourth outfit, No. 1532, is a girl’s variation on 1589.

Similar fashions from August 1927. There is no indication of anything “childish” in No. 1532; were children dressing like women in the twenties, or was it the other way around?

Butterick 1554 is “for the boarding-school girl” aged 8 to 15 years. Butterick 1563 was available from size 15 years to women’s size 44, and 1553 was also sized for 15 year-olds to women with a 44 inch bust. Its belt glides in and out of the skirt.

Butterick 1532 is “correct for school wear” for girls 8 to 15,  and “school coat” 1586 is also for girls 8 to 15 years. August 1927.

“Semi-formal” dresses for college women. 1927.

Butterick 1575 “for the formal occasions of school or college” has a “straight Vionnet neckline” and opens under the left arm, so the bodice can fit closely. For 15 to 18 years and in sizes 38 and 40. No. 1565, seems much more sophisticated (or is that because of her severely cropped hair?) It was intended for teens and for adult women up to size 44. Butterick 1581 is also suitable for teens or adults. “Concerts and that important institution, the ‘Sunday-night supper’ of schools and colleges, require a formal frock on this order.” From 1927. (Even in the 1960’s, at my women’s college we were required to “dress” for dinner, and to be back on campus by Sunday evening. Luckily, “dressing” in 1965 just meant wearing high heels and stockings with our normal school clothes.)

Butterick dress 1541, for teens and small women, is a versatile pattern; depending on the fabric used, it could be a day dress or a semi-formal one. Butterick 1577 could be made “without sleeves and with an evening neckline” to be worn to proms. As shown, it’s an afternoon dress.  For teens and small women. 1927.

Did women really dress this formally for school or college? Didn’t most female students usually wear a skirt and blouse or sweater for attending classes? Well, Delineator aimed at a middle-class readership, and it should be noted that all these dresses are for women going away to school, to boarding schools or colleges, and not to a public institution close to home.

I also wonder if this way of showing Butterick’s new dresses was really a good idea; did all readers realize, by reading the descriptions, that many of these styles were suitable for mature women, and came in sizes equal to a modern size 22, or bigger? (See dress 1589, coat 1556, coat 1550, dress 1519, dress 1563, dress 1565, and dress 1581.)

That many styles were considered suitable for mature women and college girls does emphasize the importance of a youthful look in 1927.

 

 

1 Comment

Filed under 1920s, 1920s-1930s, Children's Vintage styles, Sportswear, Vintage patterns, Vintage Styles in Larger Sizes

Pajamas for Girls and Women, 1920’s

Lingerie for Christmas, Delineator magazine, December 1925. Pajama pattern 6031 is lacy and ruffled, clearly for indoor wear only.

I was working on these images of 1920’s pajamas when The Vintage Traveler showed this photo of 1920’s pajamas at the beach, dated 1929. Lizzie said she is tracing the progress of pajamas from bedroom to beach in the Twenties, so this seems like a good time to share 1920’s patterns for pajamas (also spelled pyjamas) from Butterick. These are in roughly chronological order.

I have already written about pajamas from 1917, like these. The gathered ankles were also used on work overalls for women at the time. (Butterick 6031, above, has similar gathered ankles.)

Butterick pajamas from 1917. No. 9433 for girls or women.

Below: the deep, open armholes on this pair of pajamas from 1923-24 were also seen on day dresses.

Pajamas from Butterick, January 1924. Meant for lounging as well as sleeping, they have an oriental scene embroidered on the front; the pajamas have pockets, with contrasting bands at the top, the hem, and at the pants’ hems. Butterick 4639, illustrated among Christmas gifts in January 1924.

These seem to have a close relationship — except for the delicate fabric — to  the beach pajamas of 1929. Below: a pair of PJ’s from 1924 is banded with lace — for a bride’s trousseau.

Butterick pajama pattern 5309, June 1924. The trousers expose her ankles.

Below: strictly practical — but attractive, with contrasting collar and frog closings — are these pajamas for girls.

Butterick 5388, pajamas for girls aged 4 to 15; August 1924.

Much younger children might wear warm, one-piece night-drawers/pajamas with optional hood.

Night-drawers, Butterick 5506, for children 1 to 12. 1924.

Girls’ tw0-piece pajamas, Butterick 5529, from October, 1924. Pajamas for girls 4 to 15 years old.

Meanwhile, in Paris….

Glamorous lounging pajamas by Molyneux; couture sketched for Delineator, January 1925.

This 1925 pajama pattern was recommended for beach wear:

“Pajamas are smart for sleeping garments, or for the southern beaches.” Butterick 5948, April, 1925.

Here, Butterick pajama pattern 5948 is shown with satin bindings — sleeves, collar, and cuffs. The beach pajamas in The Vintage Traveler’s 1929 photograph appear to have satin binding at the hip and print binding at the ankles.

The Vintage Traveler found this picture, dated 1929, which shows beach pyjamas very similar to Butterick 5948, although I don’t see any pockets, and these pants are banded with the print fabric instead of the solid, shiny fabric used at the hip [and collar?]  Photo used with permission.

I don’t think they were made using Butterick pattern 5948, but, if I had Butterick 5948, I could make those beach pajamas.

Pajamas from Butterick: left, a lace-free version of pajamas 6031; center, pajama negligee 6093. Right: negligee 6107. Delineator, June 1925. Mid-twenties’ pajamas stop inches above the ankle.

About the “pajama negligee:” If you grew up in the nineteen fifties, you probably picture a “negligee” as a see-through robe worn by femmes fatales on the covers of  paperback detective stories. However, Yahoo mentions that the origin of “negligee” is “mid 18th century (denoting a kind of loose gown worn by women in the 18th century): from French, literally ‘given little thought or attention,’ feminine past participle of négliger ‘to neglect.’”  Encyclopedia Britannica explains: “Negligee, ( French: “careless, neglected”) informal gown, usually of a soft sheer fabric, worn at home by women. When the corset was fashionable, the negligee was a loose-fitting gown worn during the rest period after lunch. Women’s dresses were also referred to as negligés after the Restoration of Charles II in 1660, when the trend was toward loose fashions characterized by ‘studied negligence.’ “

In the twentieth century, such “at home” clothes were sometimes called “lounge wear.”

TwoNerdyHistoryGirls blogged about a painting of an 18th c. lady receiving a visitor while finishing her toilette. She wears a short, sheer combing gown (which gave us the word “peignoir.”) Peignoir, negligee, lingerie, boudoir — my, we owe a lot of words to the French!

“Pajama negligee” No. 6093 appeared more than once.

Butterick 6093, the pajama negligee, left; and pajamas 6178, right. Illustration from September, 1925. “Negligee” can mean a short robe.

Alternate version of Butterick pajama 6178, illustrated in August, 1925. Also called a “lounging-robe.”

One thing all these straight-legged pajamas have in common is their ankle-baring hems.

Butterick pajama-negligee 6093 in a short-sleeved summer version. July 1925.

Here, a luxurious, lacy version of pajama 6031 is suggested as a Christmas gift.

Lingerie for Christmas, Delineator magazine, December 1925. In this version, pajama pattern 6031 is lacy and ruffled, clearly for indoor wear only.

Pajama 6947 is scalloped, with gathered ankles trimmed in Valenciennes lace — Not for the beach. July 1926.

Butterick pajamas 6975, and child’s night-drawers, 6993. August 1926. Is it just the pattern of rectangles that gives “lounging-robe” 6975 such a wonderful twenties’ flavor? Maybe it’s the low pocket placement, too.

In 1927, Molyneux showed this lounging set:

A sketch of Molyneux’ luxurious velvet and chiffon pajamas for entertaining at home. Delineator, November 1927. In black chiffon and vermillion [red-orange] velvet, with [vermillion?] poppies and green leaf embroidery. The ankles are unusual.

These ready-to-wear pajamas have the more customary banded ankles.

Carter’s rayon knit pajamas, in an ad from November 1927.

Butterick pajama pattern 2143 was featured in the December 1928 issue. The pajamas are powder blue, trimmed in apple green — another unexpected 1920’s color combination.

https://witness2fashion.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/1925-oct-orange-blue-kitchen.jpg?w=500

[Edited 8/30/17: This color ad for Hoosier cabinets appeared in Delineator magazine, October 1925. I used it in a post about Orange and Blue in the 1920’s.]

A different Butterick pajama pattern was the centerpiece of an advertisement for Belding’s fabrics in September 1928.

This ad for Belding’s silk suggested patterns from Pictorial (dress no. 4337,) Butterick ( pajamas no. 2103,) and McCall (dress no. 5345.) Delineator, September 1928. “Two contrasting shades of Belding’s Crepe Iris make these cunning negligee pajamas.”

So: “negligee pajamas” were for lounging, and did not necessarily have the robe-like top of pajama-negligee 6093.

This three-piece lounging ensemble of pajamas and short robe was featured in the December 1928 issue of Delineator. They have “wide trousers” –something new.

My collection of images from 1929 and 1930 is not complete. I need to get back to the library, because, by 1931, pajamas had moved from boudoir to beach and even to public dances.

“Fascinating Pajamas,” Delineator, August 1931. For lounging, leisure, loafing or working. Second from the left is a special slip to wear under your pajamas.

For more about 1930’s pajamas, see The Fascinating Pajama, 1931.

https://witness2fashion.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/1931-top-of-aug-gowns-p-65.jpg?w=500

The pajamas for dancing are on the right. Delineator, August, 1931.

5 Comments

Filed under 1920s, 1920s-1930s, Children's Vintage styles, Nightclothes and Robes, Old Advertisements & Popular Culture, Slips and Petticoats, Vintage Couture Designs, Women in Trousers

Twenties’ Fashions for Larger Women, September 1928

One of these dresses was available in size 52. Butterick patterns in Delineator, September 1928, p. 36.

The fashion editors at Delineator magazine often grouped patterns for larger or more “mature” women together in a one-page article, but in the September 1928 issue, large-sized dresses were shown beside patterns for college girls and women of standard sizes. I’ve long been surprised than in the mid-twenties, when the “Boyish” figure was extolled, the standard Butterick pattern sizes — based on bust measurement — were 33 to 44 inches. But some patterns were issued up to “bust measure 52 inches.”

Left, pattern 2226 for college and career girls; right, pattern 2211, for women with bust sizes up to 52 inches. From 1928.

Details of Butterick 2226, for 15 to 20 years and bust 32 to 40;  and Butterick 2211,  an “all day frock” for sizes 34 to 52. Delineator, Sept. 1928, pg. 35. Are those herringbone stripes in this wool dress?

Top of page 35, which featured wool frocks and coats in sizes from 15 years (bust 32″) to size 52.

Butterick frock 2233 and coat 2230. The coat was sized from bust 32″ to 48″. Delineator, Sept. 1928, p. 35. Note the coat’s triangular pockets, which “merge” into a belt. And what was going on with that dress front? Over? Under?

Butterick 2209 and 2217. To me, the dress on the right, with its little “lingerie finish” ruffles and conservatively feminine qualities, looks like something aimed at mature women, but it is only offered in smaller sizes: age 15 to 20 years and 38, 40 [bust].

The unusual front tabs and sleeves on Butterick 2209 are worth a closer look:

Detail of Butterick 2209 and 2217, Sept. 1928. No. 2209 (left) was available for bust sizes 32 to 44.

“Sport Clothes” to wear to the “big games.” Delineator, Sept. 1928, top of pg. 34.

The second dress from the left looks rather fancy for watching football; the dress on the top left was suggested for larger-than-average women.

Butterick 2231 and 2221, from 1928. No. 2231 was available up to bust size 52 inches.

A vestee is a kind of dickey — a partial blouse.

Some of these dresses have skirts that are plain in the back, with all the fullness, pleats, etc., in the front. This was common in early twenties’ dresses, and still seen here, on some dresses, in 1928. (Patterns 2226 and 2211 show pleats in back, too.)

The back views of Nos. 2226 and 2211 show pleats in the skirt back, too.

Nos. 2193 and 2180 (plaid) have plain skirts in back, with pleats only in the front.

Butterick wool sports frock 2193 and coat pattern 2151. September 1928. Only the front of 2193 is pleated. Both dress and coat are in the average pattern size range. For a dressier version of the same coat, click here. 

This jaunty plaid coat and dress were not limited to slender women:

Butterick two-piece dress 2180 coordinated with coat 2222. September 1928. This “youthful and becoming dress was for bust 32 to [a bigger than average] 46. The coat pattern came in a standard range of sizes, 32 to 44 (with a 47.5″ hip.) I love the diamond shaped “belt encrustation.”

As for evening gowns, the pattern on the left was available up to size 52.

Butterick evening dresses from 1928. Left, no. 2131, with a long side drape, for sizes from 34 to 52; right, Butterick 2125 in sizes from 32 to 44 bust.

Here are some advertisements from the same issue of the magazine. For “the larger woman,” hosiery manufacturers offered slenderizing styles like this one:

From an ad for Allen-A hosiery, Delineator, Sept. 1928. “Note the slenderizing effect this new, longer point Allen-A Heel gives to the ankle.”

Shoe advertisements show that even brands which promised comfort to mature women offered some very high, narrow heels.

Top of Dorothy Dodd shoe ad, Delineator, Sept. 1928.  “Dorothy Dodd shoes are designed to make the foot look youthful.”

Ad for Dorothy Dodd shoes (this image is slightly skewed at the bottom.) Delineator, Sept. 1928.

Queen Quality shoe ad, Delineator, September 1928. The “Sherwood” and “Tiffany” models look like somewhat practical walking shoes, but the “Trickie” (lower left) seems aptly named.

“And Queen Quality keeps the cost of all four pairs less than the cost of a single frock.” They total $37.00 — not an inexpensive frock! (They are not cheap shoes.)

This jersey dress could be ordered for $8:

Ad for a Hubrite wool jersey dress, Delineator, September 1928, p. 101.

Hubrite dress in sizes 16-20 — 36-46. Ad in Delineator, Sept. 1928.

 

1 Comment

Filed under 1920s, 1920s-1930s, Hosiery, Hosiery, Old Advertisements & Popular Culture, Shoes, Sportswear, Vintage patterns, Vintage Styles in Larger Sizes

The Bows of Summer, 1928

Big bows accent these evening dresses from July 1928. Left, Butterick 2087; right, Butterick 2109. Delineator magazine illustrations.

As much as I admire the Art Deco geometry of many 1920’s dresses, I can’t ignore the huge number of softly draped dresses accented with big bows, like this couture dress by Lucien Lelong from 1928.

A day dress from Paris designer Lucien Lelong; sketched for Delineator, August 1928. “Deep blue is very new for fall. It is the color of this crepe satin frock with its drooping skirt and bow-tied bolero.”

Title of page 37, Delineator, August 1928. “The Bow Continues to Play its Part.”

A solitary bow at the shoulder could be used to balance asymmetrical skirt drapery, as in this evening pattern:

Butterick evening gown pattern 2176, Delineator, August 1928.

Bows could be placed symmetrically in the center of the body or and/or neckline:

Illustration for “Are Fashions French?” article. Delineator, August 1928. [Symmetrical, but slightly dull…]

A single bow in the center of the hip girdle is the focus of Butterick 2125, left. The single bow is shifted to the left side of Butterick 2135. August 1938.

When two bows were used, they could balance each other by being offset, one high on the right side and one near the waist on the left, but this was not always the case.

Left, a day dress with a bow centered on the neck and another bow, far to the side, on the hip. Far right, a more formal dress with bows that balance each other, one on the right shoulder and one on the left hip. Butterick 2129 and 2178. August 1928. On No. 2178, the eye is led from the shoulder to the hip diagonally across and down the body, for a dynamic and slenderizing effect.

Sometimes bows were both placed on one side of the body:

In this dress, all the interest is on the frock’s left side, at the asymmetrical neck and the skirt — not an easy look to do successfully.  Butterick coat 2149 and dress 2187. August 1928. The side panel on the dress hangs below the coat hem; this was acceptable in the twenties.

Butterick afternoon dress 2174 has a bow centered at the neck line and another off to the side hip. Butterick dress 2174 and coat 2151. Delineator, July 1928. (In this case, the illustrator does not show the side panel of the dress hanging out below the hem of the coat, as it does in the previous coat and dress illustration.)

Even schoolgirls had bows on their “good” dresses:

Left, Butterick 2137 — with four bows — shown on a teen-aged girl. Right, a “bolero” outfit, Butterick 2167. August 1928. After idealizing the “boyish” look, now the magazine extols the “new feminine feeling.” The book Uplift says teens were buying brassieres, not flatteners, in the late twenties.

Dress 2137 — with four bows — was not just for teens; the pattern was also available for women sizes 36 to 44 bust. There’s a different illustration of the same dress later in this post. The dress on the right, below (No. 2066) was similarly available for teens or adults.

All three of thee dresses from July 1928 focus on large bows. from left, Butterick 2038, 2129, and 2066. Delineator.

The dress on the left has a “bridge coat” worn over a sleeveless chiffon evening dress. “Without the coat it is a chic evening frock….” Day dresses were usually not so completely sleeveless that the shoulder bone was visible; evening dresses were sleeveless and had lower-cut armholes than tennis dresses.

The print dress in the center has “a blouse with crushed waistline, square neck, and bows at hip, neck, and wrists;” for sizes up to 44 inch bust. For the dress at the right with shirred front, a color scheme of red, white and blue was suggested.

Even dresses with a modern geometric quality might be made with an accent bow:

Butterick 2137 and 2127 have a style moderne quality — and big bows. Delineator, July 1928. This illustration of 2137 is much more stylized than its version for a teen, shown earlier.

Number 2127 could be made without the bow:

Butterick 2127 in two versions, August and July of 1928.

As you might expect, bows reached their full glory in evening wear. The bow could be at the back, suggesting a bustle…

Butterick 2087, an evening dress with enormous back bow, June and July illustrations, 1928. For young or small women.

Like the dresses of the thirties and forties, its bodice has an underarm opening in the left side seam.

… or the bow could be at the side:

Butterick evening gowns, No. 2148 and 2140. August 1928, Delineator. 2148 has both bows on its left side.

Butterick evening dresses 2112 and 2123 have bows at the side hip. July 1928, Delineator. Showing bare shoulders with narrow straps, seen on No. 2112, was a very new fashion. They were called “lingerie straps.”  Chanel showed one in 1926.

Paris designer louiseboulanger (the house of Louise Boulanger) even put one enormouse bow on the front of a dress, an idea which Butterick seems to have copied…. [Butterick’s bow could be on the left side of the front — the illustration is hard to read — but the dress itself is symmetrical, so I would guess the bow’s in the center.]

Left, couture gown by louiseboulanger, sketched for the May issue; right, Butterick pattern 2108. Delineator, May and July 1928.

This complex satin dress was featured in an ad for Kotex:

Draped satin dress from an ad for Kotex sanitary napkins, Delineator, August 1928. The effect of a bow seems to be created by the tucked satin, but it is probably a separate piece of fabric.

I didn’t find a credit for the dress designer. Is the model a living woman or a store mannequin? What a lovely face….

Detail of Kotex ad, Aug. 1928.

I think she resembles Lee Miller, photographer and model. Mannequins were sometimes based on recognizable people.

 

 

2 Comments

Filed under 1920s, 1920s-1930s, Vintage Couture Designs, Vintage patterns