Friday, March 18, 2016

They can't all be gems-- EvaDress E30-5918

I had such high hopes for this pattern, you guys.  See all that intricate seaming?  Those early 1930's styles make me weak at the knees.
But no.  No, it was not to be.
The lighting is making this dress look way more flattering than it actually is.  In real life, it looks like a sack.  A sack which clings to my belly and hips and de-emphasizes my bust.  It looks pretty darn bad.  Keep in mind that I have a two-hour walk and go rock climbing every day.  Out of shape I am not. 

As for the back...
Bleh.  Just bleh.  I even made a muslin first!  It totally looked like it was going to be fine!

Do you know where this dress is going to go?  It's going to go to that place so lovingly described by Maurice Sendak's beloved children's book, Where The Wadder Things Are. 

I'm pretty sad.  I was quite attached to this fabric, which is lovely in real life, white polka dots on jungle green in some sort of jacquard weave.  Silk, no less, and bought before I even started graduate school. 
Ah well. 

By way of a pattern review, I'm not sure I can recommend this pattern.  The design looks like it should be awesome, but it has the same problem as most early 1930's designs, which is that they're sacks.  Do you look good in a dress with basically no shaping?  If you do, great.  If you don't...you should look elsewhere. 

I have a few minor complaints about the pattern.  There are 3/8" seam allowances, which I feel is really not wide enough to manipulate precisely for lapped seams.  One of the pattern pieces is mislabled, but that's easy to catch if you sit there and think for a moment. 

Ah well.  Onwards to new and better things!

7 comments:

  1. Silk does not deserve to be sent to wadder-land...maybe you can recut it for a skirt?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eh, I'm not that interested-- I have three boxes full of fabric waiting for me to make them up into something interesting. If anyone wants to take a crack at it themselves, I'd be happy to mail it to them (continental US only).

      Delete
  2. I hate wadders--and muslins. I make 'sample' garments out of cheaper fabric. I guess you could call it a wearable muslin. I'm not really into vintage sewing -- just like oohhing and aahhing over it -- but I like the lines of that pattern. I would repro it into 8 princess panels, keep the 'w' cross seaming and modify the center back a bit, then use peachskin or poly blend for a wearable muslin.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That's too bad, it was/is lovely fabric. I wonder if this is one of those dresses that require some serious foundation garments to look good on anyone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think it is, because the foundation garments of the time were quite insubstantial. I think it's just a matter of their time having a different set of aesthetics than ours-- for instance, a lot of the dresses of the 'glamorous' 1920's look pretty dumpy now, and this dress was coming off the tail end of that trend.

      Delete
  4. I always unpick my wadders while I relax at night. I refuse to send silk or any other natural fiber to the trash. I keep them as pieces to incorporate into a new design. I might use them as sleeves, facings, pockets, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Consider a rescue as a top. Cut just far enough below w seaming to hem. Measure length of remaining skirt. Cut a slash into side of garment an inch or so shorter than skirt length. Cut godets (triangle shaped pieces) from skirt to sew into slashes. Hem. Keeps the nice fit of bust area, and adds fabric to skim over tummy area. Wear with leggings. Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete