How to Alter a Twenties’ Dress Pattern; Advice from December 1926

Delineator magazine, December 1926: “The Plus and Minus of Figures and Patterns.”

I find surprisingly little sewing information in Butterick’s Delineator magazines from the 1920s, considering that, like McCall’s magazine, it originally existed to sell patterns. That makes this brief article from December 1926 all the more interesting.

Delineator, December 1926.

The Plus and Minus of Figures and Patterns, 1926

I’ll transcribe the whole thing, complete with its nasty assumption that all blondes are gold-diggers.

“Leila — the little creature without the hat — is a blonde, a Nordic by nature as well as by the color of her hair, but when she couldn’t gold-dig a new frock from her husband she decided to make something dazzling for herself and burst out in one of the new dolman frocks.

A dolman blouse, Butterick 1174, with a separate skirt, #6588, and Butterick’s dolman dress pattern 1167. December, 1926.

“She had her bust and hip measures taken when she bought her pattern, so she knew the size was right. ‘And that’s that,’ she thought, and cut it out gaily. It went together like a shot and she turned up the lower edges several inches, for, as I said, she’s a little creature. All went merrily as a wedding-bell until she tried it on and then, it was just all wrong.

“It was just all wrong. It was all top and no skirt,… the dolman armhole came below the hips….”

“It was all top and no skirt, the waistline and the dolman armhole came below the hips and the sleeve itself acted very strangely on the lower part of the arm. You see, she’d done all the shortening at the lower edges while the frock was as long for her in the body as it was in the skirt.

[Butterick patterns from the 1920’s were for women taller than we’d expect. “Misses patterns,” sold by age instead of bust measurement,  often had the words “or small women” in their description, but a short woman with a bust bigger than 37 inches (age 20) would need to do the same pattern alterations as “Leila.” (Age 17 was expected to have a 34 inch bust; age 18, 35″, age 19, 36.” )]

“I’m on the short side myself, so I knew she ought to have shortened her pattern before she cut her material. We pinned half of the pattern together and put it on with a tape measure at her natural waist.

“We pinned half of the pattern together and put it on . . .”

The we put the small perforations that mark the waistline of the pattern at the lower edge of the tape measure and took up the extra length in a plait across the body of the pattern, making it just the right length.

We “took up the extra length in a plait across the body of the pattern” just below the natural waist. The sleeve is shortened below the elbow, not at the wrist.

“Very tricky, for it kept the waistline in place and gave the body and skirt an even break.

“We took the extra length out of the sleeve below the elbow instead of at the wrist, so that the dolman drapery wouldn’t come down on the lower arm where it is clumsy and ungainly.

“Trying on the pinned-up paper pattern is the easiest way to find out if the length needs altering — the pattern directions will tell you where to do it.

The third picture . . . shows the recut frock is precisely the right length . . .”

“The third picture of Leila, registering success, shows the recut frock is precisely the right length with its original proportions intact in spite of shortening.”

Before and After

Before and after correct pattern alteration. Delineator, December 1926.

The skirt, which was originally pinned up several inches, is now at the length called for in the pattern. Good thing Leila didn’t cut it shorter before consulting her friend!

Serendipity Again

Normally, I don’t write two consecutive posts about the same year and issue of a magazine, but The Delineator for December 1926 has both this discussion of the importance of adjusting the dress to the actual, not ideal, body, and another connection to “Pleated Dresses from 1926.” The friend who is helping Leila adjust her pattern is wearing that great art deco dress, Butterick 1163! I was sorry that I had no back views of it; while working on these pictures I remembered that its description mentioned “a tab yoke in back.” Here it is! On her left shoulder you can just make out the start of the button-trimmed arrow on the front of #1163, and her sleeves have the identical buttoned trim at the wrists.

The back of Butterick 1163, with “tab yoke,”and its front view, from elsewhere in the same issue. Dec. 1926.

In the early twenties, dresses often had surprisingly boring one-piece backs; the skirt godets, drapery and pleats were usually limited to the front.

P.S. If I had to come up with a sophisticated 1920s outfit in a hurry, that metallic [tissue lamé? ] blouse #1174 and its timeless flared skirt would look very tempting.

Paris Calls for Pleats, 1926 (Part 2: Styles for Larger Women)

In Part 1, I showed some Delineator pattern illustrations for Misses and Women’s dresses for September, 1926. The same issue had a second article about the importance of pleats [called plaits] — this time for larger women.

Plaits Reduce New Parisian Frocks to Their Slimmest Terms

“Plaits Reduce New Parisian Frocks to Their Slimmest Terms.” Delineator magazine, Sept. 1926.

All but one of these Butterick patterns from 1926 is meant for larger-than-average women. The three on the right are for women with bust measurements from 36 to 52 inches, far from the boyish figure associated with 1920s styles. The four on the left are drawn, as usual, as they might look on women at the smallest end of their size range, not size 46.

Butterick Skirts and Blouses

“Slimming” Butterick patterns 7066 (blouse), 6286 (skirt), 7078 (blouse), 6331 (skirt) from September 1926. Delineator magazine.

The blouse patterns are new, but the skirt patterns’ numbers show that they first appeared in the previous year. The pleated skirt on the left came in hip sizes 35 to 49.5 inches. Skirt 6331 was available up to hip size 52 inches — equivalent to a modern size 28W. Most early twenties dresses had straight backs, with any flare or fullness in the front only, like skirt 6286, but that was changing by 1926.

Many mid-twenties illustrations show a decorative colored hankie peeking out from a pocket, like these.

Blouse patterns 7066 and 7078. September 1926.

That narrow ribbon tie on # 7078 is slenderizing. These blouses were available for bust sizes 32 to 46, a little larger than the normal size range. They both have yokes with gathers or tucks adding fullness in front, unlike this similar design for Misses aged 15 to 20 “and small women,” which has no bust fullness.

Butterick pattern No. 7950 for Misses and small women, Sept. 1926.

Butterick 7051

Butterick pattern No. 7051 for larger women, 1926.

This dress was available up to bust size 48; whether the embroidered horizontal band across the front — widened further with decorative buttons — would be becoming to its wearer is questionable. The bodice insert giving the impression of an exposed slip is a “vestee” which could be removed for laundering. It could also be made of a contrasting fabric, like pattern 7089, below.She wears a fairly lavish fox fur stole; even the woman wearing sporty blouse #7078 has put a pair of dead animals around her throat.

A small fox stole.

My mother (the former flapper) was very proud of her fur stole, which had baleful glass eyes and a hinged clip under the jaw, so that the little critters, like this one, appeared to be biting each other.

Butterick 7089

Butterick No. 7089, Sept. 1926.

This dress, with a high collar that can be worn buttoned as shown, or open like No. 7051, features a long opening in the center front. Butterick made this dress pattern in its usual range of sizes, bust 32 to 44 inches, roughly equivalent to modern pattern sizes 10 through 22. Her hat is trimmed with a very long jeweled pin.

Butterick 7077 and 7016

These two patterns were not only available in large sizes, but were described as able “to thin down a stout figure” and “to make the least of a large figure.” I wouldn’t agree about the one on the right.

Butterick patterns 7077 and 7046 for bust sizes 36 to 52. Sept. 1926.

Number 7077 certainly does its best to create a long vertical area from neck to hem, drawing our eyes to the center, rather than the outline, of the body. Number 7016 has a diagonal “surplice” line intended to do the same, but the hip band and wide space between two sets of front pleats negates the effect. The top of the dress doesn’t really relate to the lower part. The evening gown below, also from 1926, came in sizes 36 to 48; here, the surplice line is effectively carried down into a side drape so your eye travels past the hip, rather than across it.

Butterick pattern No. 1187 from Dec. 1926 had “reducing properties” and came in sizes 36 to 48.

Butterick 7077 and 7016, details.

It’s hard to be sure if the hat on the right was made of the same fabric as the lapels on the dress, or not.  It could be fur. The woman on the left is wearing what looks like a magnifying glass on a long necklace, but it might hold a secret, like this one:

A vintage lorgnette, courtesy of RememberedSummers.

When you press a tiny button on the silvery filigree, it opens to become a pair of hand held-spectacles:

Lorgnette photo courtesy of RememberedSummers.

Butterick 7083

Butterick pattern 7083 is “chic for stout women” with bust sizes up to 52″. Sept. 1926.

The image is curved and distorted because it was photographed from a thick, bound periodical volume. In spite of this garment’s princess seams, the model is drawn as if wearing a bust-flattening corset or corselet.She, too, carries a fox fur piece.

One pleasure of Delineator pattern illustrations is the carefully drawn accessories, like these hats:

A selection of hats from September, 1926. Delineator magazine.

Folds, droopiness, and tiny brims can also be seen in the hats from Part 1. Click here.

Winter Fashions for Women, 1926

Paquin model imported by Hattie Carnegie; Delineator, Dec. 1926.

The lavish use of fur in the twenties and thirties may be repellent to us now, but these fashions for December, 1926, are undeniably glamorous. They are all from Delineator magazine. Two images illustrate clothes in the stores — very exclusive stores — and the rest illustrate Butterick patterns (Delineator was a Butterick publication.) The suit pictured above  is a Hattie Carnegie copy of a wine red velvet suit trimmed with beige fox, from the house of Paquin (French designer Jeanne Paquin had retired in 1920.)

Original model by Frances Clyne, in green and gray. Delineator, Dec. 1926.

Titled “Green and Gray,” the caption says “The New York version of the Paris ensemble is made by Frances Clyne in sea green bordered with dyed gray fox. The coat of green French wool swings slightly from the shoulder and is made with the new double animal collar. The frock is of green satin opening over lighter green crepe Elizabeth.” Frances Clyne operated an exclusive New York dress shop; in the 1930s, it was on Fifth Avenue.

This Butterick advertisement showed women how similar styles could be made at home, or by your own professional dressmaker.

Ad for Butterick patterns from Delineator, Dec. 1926.

“She has Paris taste and knowledge of clothes, and her Frock is Butterick Design 1155 and her Coat is Butterick Design 1105 made with the aid of the Deltor — a dressmaking chart in pictures for cutting, putting together, and finishing.” [punctuation added.]

Butterick was one of the first companies to offer a separate sheet of written instructions with its patterns. At the start of the twentieth century, patterns came with only the minimal instructions that would fit on the outside of the (usually quite small) pattern envelope.  “By 1920, Butterick referred to the [illustrated] instruction sheet as the ‘Deltor,’ short for Delineator.” [Joy Spanbel Emery in A History of the Paper Pattern Industry.]

I love the bold Art Deco fabric on this sporty coat:

Butterick coat and dress patterns, Dec. 1926; A Chanel suit, January 1925. Both illustrations are from Delineator.

The dress shown with the coat (left) shows the lasting influence of Gabrielle Chanel’s outfit from January 1925. The proportions of the tops are slightly different to balance the skirt length, which has risen drastically in just two years.

Here are four more styles from Butterick, featured in the same December 1926 issue.

Butterick coat and dress patterns, Delineator, Dec. 1926.

Back views and description of Butterick 1174 and 1157, Dec. 1926.

The deep armholes of the dress at left required a similarly constructed coat:

Back views and description of Butterick patterns 1185 and 1158. Dec. 1926.

[Fine ‘Plaits’ means fine pleats, not braids.] The backs of many 1920s dresses and coats were straight and plain, but this coat is snugged to the hip with tucks in front and back.

So far, I have not seen any mention in Delineator magazine of how women obtained the furs which were so often an important design element in Butterick coats. (Working with real furs is not the same as sewing with fabrics, and where would a small-town dressmaker find whole skins?)

Also, notice how similar many of these 1926 cloche hats are, with pinched or dented crowns.

Four cloche hats from Dec. 1926 Delineator.