Vogue Patterns for Summer Dresses, 1936

Vogue patterns featured in Ladies’ Home Journal, July 1936.

The Ladies’ Home Journal sold its own line of patterns early in the twentieth century, but in 1935 it entered into a special agreement with Vogue patterns to feature “exclusive but ‘Easy to Make’ Vogue patterns.”

Announcing the first anniversary of Vogue-Journal “Easy-to-Make” patterns, Ladies’ Home Journal, August 1936. Most of the patterns illustrated above are “Easy-to-Make”, but none is the four-in-one pattern mentioned here.

The Vogue-Journal patterns illustrated in July, 1936, are for “little summer daytime dresses.” One is a wrap dress, recommended for pregnancy; two are for “big ladies;” another has an optional zipper closing in front. 1936 is the year when couture collections began showing dresses — not necessarily sport dresses — with slide fasteners, although the zippered gold dress shown here is a sporty two-piece.

Summer dresses from Vogue patterns, Ladies’ Home Journal, July 1936.

“How about adding some of these little summer dresses to your repertoire? Any of them could be made of nice gay fabrics whose cost is negligible, but with Vogue’s styling, you can be sure of a dress that looks like — well, not a million dollars but many more than you put into it.”

This was 1936, when the Great Depression was in its sixth year, and many families were lucky to have $25 per week to live on. A new cotton dress was a luxury for most housewives. The Woman’s Home Companion, April 1936, reported that a survey of 16,000 professional women showed a median income of $1,625 per year. “Although a salary of $1,625 . . . is several hundred dollars over the average income received by nearly nine million typical American wage-earners, the majority of them men.” (p. 25.)

Nevertheless, there is a tempting variety of styles in these seven dresses.

Vogue 7402 and 7407

Vogue 7402 and 7407, July 1936. Ladies’ Home Journal.

“The pleated front of No. 7402 will notify your friends that you know fashions. Use a sheer or a challis.  No. 7407, being a bit dressy, can take a flowered lawn or a plain pastel batiste, and add a flower and ribbon sash. ‘Easy-to-Make.’ “

To my eyes, No. 7407 looks dressy, too. In fact, it reminds me of a yoked and pleated Albert Nipon dress I bought around 1980. The shape of this yoke is unusual; the contrast collar and cuffs, puffed shoulders, little bow at the neck, and bodice-to-hem pleats all reappeared in 1980’s styles. This dress, reserving its pleats for the center front, with a close, stitched-down fit over the hips, was probably more flattering than many 1980’s versions.

A 1936 dress that was echoed in the 1980s. Vogue pattern No. 7402.

Vogue 7398 and 7397

“Now, after you look at 7398, an ‘Easy-to-Make,’ look at its rear view. Its wrapped panel will tell you how it could serve for those of you who are going to have babies this fall.” Many 1930’s maternity fashions [absurdly] had extra fullness in the back, rather than in the front. See “Who Would Ever Guess?”

Vogue 7398 and 7397, July 1936. Ladies’ Home Journal.

“No. 7397, ‘Easy-to-Make’ is sketched with a slide fastener, but there’s an alternate opening shown below. The tuck-in blouse and four-gored skirt are separate.” The novelty sleeve and partially in-seam bodice pockets are rather special. The bolero-shaped front bodice seams, sleeves and all pockets are top-stitched or prick-stitched.

Vogue 7405 and 7404

“Nos. 7405 and 7404 are our answer to your plea, ‘Show some dresses for big ladies!’ “

Vogue patterns 7405 and 7404 for “big ladies.” Ladies’ Home Journal, July 1936.

“No. 7405 [top left] if you’re the tailored type, and No. 7404 ‘Easy-to-Make’ if you can stand bows.” [My concept of “tailored” did not include giant rick-rack, but live and learn. Inserting rick-rack between the garment front and the facing makes a more sophisticated trim than applied rick-rack. Only half of the rick-rack shows.]

Small-scale rick-rack inserted in a 1930’s waitress uniform.

The range of available pattern sizes for “big ladies” were not mentioned in the LHJ article. As usual, they are illustrated on very thin ladies.

Vogue 7399

“And No. 7399 is a grand sun-back dress with an after-sunning bolero.”

Vogue pattern 7399, Ladies’ Home Journal, July 1936.

The bias pockets on this slim, red checked halter dress — plus the deeply notched white collar — give it that “Vogue” look.

Stylish Details, Vogue No. 7399, July 1936. Ladies’ Home Journal.

 

According to Type: December 1937 Styles for Four Kinds of Figure

Just when you think you’re starting to understand the styles of a certain period, surprises come along.

Dresses According to Type. Butterick Fashion News, December 1937.

These four dress patterns were presented as appropriate for four different types of figure — and different ages. Can you tell which is which? The bodies illustrated don’t help much.

One is “For the Smart Matron,” one is “For Junior Miss Figures,” one is “For Shorter Women of Larger Hip,” and one is “For Misses 5 feet 4 inches and under.” Try matching the description to the dress without being able to see the face and hair:

Does it help to know that this dress, from the same issue, is a “Junior Miss frock?”

Companion-Butterick pattern 7633, for Junior Miss, sizes 12 -20 or bust measurements 30″ to 38″. Butterick Fashion News, December 1937.

Not very youthful, is it?

Answers

The fact that the two figures on the left are in active poses while those on the right are standing still is a big hint. Those are styles for larger and older women. Here are the descriptions, from left to right in the main illustration.

Butterick pattern 7643, for Misses 5’4″ and under, sizes 12 to 20, and bust 30 to 40″. Dec. 1937.

Butterick pattern 7620 for Junior Miss figures, sizes 12 -20, or bust 30 to 38.”

Butterick pattern 7647 for Shorter Women of Larger Hip. Bust sizes 34 to 50.”

Butterick pattern 7645 “for the Smart Matron — a draped dress with slim skirt.” Bust 34 to 48.”

I think the Smart Matron has the profile of Barbara Stanwyck. She certainly does not look like a woman with a 48″ bust, with waist and hips to match . . . . Readers of The Lost Art of Dress may recall that draped bodices and skirts were only considered appropriate for women in their 30s or older, women “of a certain age” and level of sophistication.

Back views, 7643, 7620, 7647, 7645.

The woman of larger hip (7647) would probably benefit from a center back seam in her skirt to match the one in front.

“Silver Hair Fashions”: Spring Styles for Older (and Larger) Women, 1931

“Silver Hair Fashions” from Butterick’s Delineator, April 1931

Six “Silver Hair Fashions” for April, 1931

A closer look at Butterick dress patterns # 3812 & 3797 (Top Right and Top Left):

3812   OLD IVORY LACE adds the final touch of distinction to this frock of sheer crêpe. There’s graceful movement in every line of the flared skirt, and the frills at the wrist match the self jabot. Choose this in soft rose if you are slim – if not-so-slim, black. For 40, 4 7/8 yards 39-inch georgette. Designed for 34 to 44. [bust] [I do wish the writers at Butterick Publishing had not repeatedly suggested that black was the only sensible color choice for larger women! How about something really daring – like navy?]

3797   PARIS SAYS GRAY and for the woman with silvery hair, nothing could be more flattering. This afternoon frock with vestee of white georgette  has gracefully molded hips and sleeves of three-quarter length. Flared wrapped skirt. For 40, 4 3/4 yards 39-inch silk crêpe; 3/8 yard 39-inch contrast.  Designed for 34 to 48.

Butterick patterns 3806, 3804, 3814, 3810; April 1931 Delineator

3806   ONE-REVERS FASHION  Every line of this frock is either up-and-down or diagonal, creating the illusion of height and slenderness. Gray tweed would be very smart, with a white piqué collar, white gloves, and a matching tweed hat. . . . Designed for 34 to 52. [inch bust]

3804   IF YOU’RE NOT SLIM  This surplice frock with pleats will do amazing things in the way of slenderizing and lending additional height. The pleats are stitched down so that fullness begins just above the knee. Contrasting jabot. . . . Designed for 34 to 48 [inch bust. The “surplice line,” running diagonally across the bodice, was a favorite suggestion for women who wore large sizes in the 1920s, too.]

3814   PLEATS FOR FLATNESS This is the kind of ‘useful frock’ you’ll wear for everything from marketing to motoring and golf. [!] The points on the yoke match the points on the skirt panel, and there are four kick pleats. One-piece back. . . . Designed for 34 to 44 [bust.]

3810   LONG SLIM LINES For anyone inclined to be a bit overweight. The low V neck and diagonal flare of this frock will subtract pounds from the silhouette. Wear it in a print if you like. One-piece from shoulder to hem. . . . Designed for sizes 34 to 52 [inch bust.]

And a Reality Check from Lane Bryant, 1931

Obviously, all six of these dresses for “mature figures” have been illustrated by Butterick as they would appear on an elongated fashion figure, in smallish sizes, even when the pattern is “for anyone inclined to be a bit overweight,” or “not-so-slim.” Numbers 3806 and 3810 go up to size 52, which is several inches larger than a modern Size 24. [I give Butterick credit for realizing — in the 1930s! —  that many women make their own clothes because they have hard-to-fit figures.]

This Lane Bryant catalog advertisement — from the February 1931 Delineator — doesn’t mince words: “For Stout Women and Misses.”

Lane Bryant “Style Book”/Catalog Ad, February 1931

The Lane Bryant  illustrations give a more realistic idea of how a 1931 dress would look on a woman with 48 inch hips and a good corset. The Lane Bryant styles also have that slenderizing, diagonal “surplice line,” even on the coat.