Weldons 120313 - Betsy Trotwood

Late 1930s or early 1940s.

David Copperfield is the first of Dickens's books that I listened to rather than read, and I found that 33 hours of the audiobook was a great distraction from the endless dark days of winter.

Betsy Trotwood is one of my favorite of all of Dickens' characters, so I was intrigued to find this pattern for Betsy Trotwood (but Dickens spells it Betsey.)

My provisional date of late 1930s is based in part on the design of the envelope and the illustration,  but I also wonder if the 1935 film adaptation by George Cukor (starring Freddy Bartholomew as David and W.C. Fields as Mr. Micawber) spawned an interest in David Copperfield-themed fancy dress in the years following the release.  I haven't been able to find evidence of a stage adaptation that might also have triggered Copperfield-mania.

Serial publication of David Copperfield started in 1849, but when does take place?  If you assume that it's partially auto-biographical, that sets the novel in the 1820s through the 1830s.  I think that this is an awkward period for women's clothing, with the long sloping shoulder line leading to enormous sleeves - a difficult look for even a very well-proportioned woman to wear successfully.

Edna May Oliver played Aunt Betsey in the 1935 film, and Dolly Tree, the costume designer, seems to borrow from the 1830s for the exuberant cap.

Image from oldhollywoodfilms.com

The Weldons designer provides a basic gray or brown front buttoning, long-sleeved dress of no particular period and uses the white collar and cuffs, and the black sateen apron to evoke the 1830s.    It's a little hard to tell from the illustration, but the pattern includes both a cap and a bonnet, although confusingly, the illustration seems to show the basic mob cap worn over the rather sketchy bonnet.

Weldon's Betsy Trotwood carries a garden hod and trowel, a visual cue that this vaguely 19th century lady is the Aunt Betsy that David Copperfield surprised as she was working in her garden.

This unprinted pattern does not appear to have been used, though it is water stained.

Simplicity 4683 - Men's, Boys' and Women's Apron

Mid 1940s.

This unprinted pattern dates to before 1946, as this is apparently when Simplicity started printing their patterns.

A nice, straightforward apron for the Gentleman and his Missus, who has also made Buddy a spiffy apron for his first Industrial Arts class.  Why the illustrator chose to show the Gentleman wearing a shop apron but gearing up for kitchen duty is a bit of mystery.  And that tiny little cookbook he's holding seems to be awfully entertaining.

Your fifteen cents really bought you a good, thoughtful design.  Note that the Men's and Boys apron is darted at the sides.  This will make the apron set close through the hips, which will probably make it safer by making it less likely to snag, and should also make it more efficient at keeping the wearer clean.

The handling of the shoulder straps and ties is clever.  The straps will adjust to almost any size or shape and don't require any hardware to fasten:

Note that the topstitching around the pockets and the edges make this a very sturdy garment.

No fabric recommendations are given, but the aprons in the illustration surely look like chambray.  Denim would also have been popular, and frequently came in the 35" width called out in the yardage requirements.

Here is the men's apron made up in denim:

Here are the side darts from the inside:

And here they are from the outside:

The instructions call for a small patch of fabric to be sewn in as a backing for the button holes on the sides.  You can see that I've sewn down the patch and stitched a rectangle to outline the buttonhole.  The button holes were worked by hand.

And in the event this apron ever wanders away, I've "branded" it.

In the future, I'd probably use a good-quality twill tape for the straps, rather than making them myself, since folding those narrow strips of denim resulted in a certain amount of questionable language as I repeatedly steamed my fingers.

This denim is wonderful to work with.  Made under the SAFEDenim brand, it's made entirely in the United States by farmers who are trying to produce a sustainable product.  Cotton is demanding of the soil and can require enormous amounts of pesticides, so producing this denim requires a lot of commitment from the farmers.  I don't know where you can buy yard goods, but if you're willing to commit to a 30 yard bolt, you can buy it from the web site.

You can get a free pattern for a very similar apron from the James Thompson web site, makers of my preferred pillow ticking.  (This apron would also look great made up in ticking.)

I'm delighted to report that Simplicity has re-issued this pattern as Simplicity 8151.  Get yours now before it goes out of print again!

Originally posted on June 8, 2011.  Additional material added to show the men's apron made up. Additional information provided on the re-print.

Weldons No. 83 - Smart Overalls

1940s (World War II).  Probably after June, 1941.

Weldons was the British equivalent of McCalls, producing both a women's magazine and home sewing patterns.

Weldon's "So-Easy" line of patterns seems to have started in the late 1930s, and may have been expanded during the war years.  According to the web site for the Imperial War Museum, clothing rationing was imposed on June 1, 1941. Utility clothing, which regulated fabric, trims, and findings, was introduced in 1942.

I haven't yet found any indication that sewing patterns were rationed.  When Weldons indicates that their So-Easy patterns are "special coupon value designs," I take this to mean that the designs accounted for rationing of yard goods, which did require coupons.

The use of the term "overall" is a shortening of the earlier term "overall apron."  ("Overall" is also used in Britain for the sleeveless double-fronted apron that we know here in the states as a Hoover apron or Hooverette.)

The overall would have been important to women is several ways.  First, women who did factory work would often have been required to provide their own "work" clothes, and some women probably made their own.

This woman's cheery garment is an overall, the short sleeves not quite covering the blouse or dress sleeve underneath:

Second, with strict rationing reducing one's clothes purchases to about one outfit per year, an overall worn over one's dress or skirt and blouse would have kept them clean and lasting longer.

Here's a lovely photograph of ladies of the Women's Institute in their aprons and overalls,  making fruit preserves of some kind (my money is on marmalade.)

Florals seem to have been the most popular print for overalls, and overalls even make their way into books.  Chapter 10 of Angela Thirkell's 1940 book Cheerfulness Breaks In starts with:

"...Lydia Keith...went off on foot to Northbridge village with a large flowered overall in a bag."

Lydia wears her overall while cooking lunch for evacuees.

The Weldons overall is essentially a simple, button-front shirt waist dress.  Raglan sleeves would have been a little simpler to make up than set-in sleeves.

This unprinted pattern is unused.

Les Patrons Favoris & Les Patrons Parisiens 17.6 - Tablier Fantaisie

Late 1940s, early 1950s.

This is a nice example of how "The New Look" made its way into all aspects of women's clothing, not just dressy clothing.  What makes this "fancy" apron such a wonderful example is that the essence of the new look shape has been captured in the shape of the applied pockets.   Probably M. Dior didn't foresee this apron in 1947 when he launched his stylistic sigh of relief that World War II was finally over.

The instructions indicate that this apron can be made up in gingham or cretonne (a printed cotton fabric often recommended for aprons) and that the pockets, as shown in the illustration, can be cut from a contrasting fabric.

This style with a full back wrap is also popular at this period in the United States.

This cut, unprinted, pattern doesn't include allowances for either seams or hem, and was produced in only a single size.  French patterns were typically offered only in a single size with a bust measurement of about 38 inches.  Not having the seam allowances actually makes it easier to alter the pattern.  Note the small box on the back of the envelope that describes how to resize the pattern.   There are some interesting questions around this.  Where did women learn to alter patterns with confidence?  Altering an apron is one thing - altering a pattern for a suit jacket is another matter entirely.  Could women hire somebody to alter home sewing patterns for them if they weren't confident of their own skill at this?  What was women's tolerance for less-than-perfect alterations?  Striving to avoid that "home-made look" comes up repeatedly in home sewing books, but for the demographic who bought these patterns, was a slightly gappy neckline or twisted sleeve acceptable?

McCall 1104 - Ladies' and Misses' Apron

1944

If you tell most people to close their eyes and imagine a "vintage apron" this is the apron they'll see in their mind's eye.  This apron goes by many names:  pinafore apron, bib apron, farmhouse apron, kitchen apron, full coverage apron, work apron, church ladies' apron.  The pattern companies have always offered this style of apron for their customers, though in the last 15 years or so the style has been called out more as a vintage or retro offering than work wear.

This particular pattern shows up on eBay pretty regularly.  There may be several reasons for this. It may have been considered a good teaching pattern for Home Economics classes.  For some wartime industrial jobs, this type of apron would have been acceptable work wear.  If the pattern companies reduced their new offerings during World War II, women might have had fewer choices when they went to buy an apron pattern.  I have two copies of this apron pattern.  One is pristine and unused.  And then there is this one, which I thought was much more interesting.

This pattern has had a very productive life.  Both the envelope and the pattern pieces have seen a lot of use.  This was somebody's favorite apron pattern - or perhaps the maker had neither the desire nor the means to replace a perfectly functional pattern.  I suspect she made aprons for her own use.

Observing the way a pattern has been used almost allows us to hear the maker's voice:

"I never cut that little facing piece for the back - too much trouble."
"I don't know why you'd need to a pattern piece for the strings - they're just rectangles, and anyway, I like mine narrower/wider/longer/shorter."
"I don't pay any attention to the grain line for the lower back piece - I just line up the back edge along the selvage - it's faster that way.""
"Why would I want to spend time putting those pepper appliques on a work apron?"

I decided to start the new year by making myself a new apron, and I chose to use this pattern more or less as it was provided, using the pattern pieces for the fiddly facing bits and the strings, but not the pepper appliques - my whimsy goes only so far!  The fabric is a remnant I've had in my stash for years, and regular readers will recognize the lavender gingham bias binding from an enormous quantity I cut a few years ago and use regularly.

Here's that facing piece (on the right; the upper back apron is on the left.)

This pattern specifies one inch binding - eight yards of it, finishing to 1/4 inch.  My current sewing machine doesn't have a binder attachment, and I don't trust myself to sew the binding on in one pass, so I pinned and sewed it first to the back, then folded to the front, pressed and pinned again, and finally sewing down on the front.  This is one of my very least favorite sewing operations, but I do love the look of the end result.

As usual with McCall patterns, this printed pattern was very accurate and went together very well.

Note the horizontal slashed dart in the side fronts to add bust fullness.  You can see on the inside where I've left in my yellow gathering stitches.

Although the instructions didn't call for it, I topstitched this dart for added strength.

Here's the completed apron, just before its maiden voyage to the kitchen.  I'm afraid it'll never look this nice again:

Here it is opened out, showing that it would be relatively easy to iron (if one were so inclined.)

The back is fastened with a single vintage shell button from my stash. 

I've been wearing this apron for kitchen work for about two weeks now, and I find it very comfortable. I think I understand why the pattern was used so much.

Butterick 2360 - Women's and Misses' Work Garment

1940s (World War II)

It's hard to think of a more generic description than "work garment." Simplicity called their similar pattern a "Slack Suit or Coverall,"  but the concept is largely the same - a shirt and trousers united at the waist.  Butterick's solution to the drop seat is to sew the belt to the top edge of the trousers, with the shirt being buttoned to the trousers only at the side back edges.

In the description, Butterick advises us to "Note the large utility pocket,"which is the very long breast pocket on the shirt, with its convenient pencil slot.

Even though Butterick's copy department thinks that the sleeveless version is "perfect for your outdoor life," the illustrator decided to show the lady holding a pipe wrench, an implement not generally required for "outdoor life." I can imagine the sleeveless version being worn over a pullover sweater during the winter.

For the photographer's visit to the plant, this young lady has layered a white shirt with her "work garment:"

This unprinted pattern does not appear to have been used.

Simplicity 4104 - Misses' and women's Slack Suit and Coverall

1942

This one shows up on eBay now and again, and there may be a reason for this.  In the '40s Simplicity published a periodical for Home Economics teachers called School Sewing Service News.   The issue for March 1942 profiled five patterns in a section called "Fashions for Freedom."

In that feature we find this stylish, permed-and-lipsticked young woman modeling the coverall.  Note the fabric recommendations for corduroy, denim, or duck.  (Unfortunately, the snappy garrison cap - also known as a side cap - is not included in the pattern.)

One imagines young women making up this pattern during the spring of '42 so that they'd be ready to jump right into war-time work over the summer break.

Notice that the shirt is sewn to the trousers only in the front.  The overalls have a drop seat, which is achieved by opening the zippers or snaps on either side and unbuttoning the trousers from shirt at the waist.  To keep the whole ensemble together the belt is buttoned through.

Most of us are familiar with "the Rosie pictures" at the Library of Congress, and even if you have a suspicion that these color photos are a bit staged, they're still wonderfully inspirational photographs.

Starting in 1943 there was also Jenny on the Job, who appears in a series of posters issue by the U.S. Public Health Services. Jenny was drawn by an illustrator by the name of Kula Robbins, who seems to have vanished into the mists of unrecorded history.  Jenny would have approved of the Simplicity pattern!

In another poster, Jennie recommended low-heeled shoes.  As our model shows us, saddles shoes finish off the ensemble.  Here's a little lagniappe for Lesli - a nice Bass advert from School Sewing Service News:

This unprinted pattern was offered in sizes up to a 40" bust.  Mine is battered and I suspect it has some terrific stories to tell, if only it could.

McCall 1310 - Boys' or Girls Western Shirts

 1946.  With Embroidery or applique trim.

A terrific western shirt, particularly appealing because it allows the girls to play, perhaps in the Dale Evans role.  Who wouldn't want to be "Queen of the West!"

From http://www.denveroldwest.com/

This printed pattern has been cut but doesn't seem to have been used.

Maudella 2987 - Keep Fit Costume

Late 1930s, early 1940s.

This seems to be a pretty early Maudella offering.  In the United States this would almost certainly be called a "gymnasium suit," and might be worn with a white blouse underneath.

This pattern may have been offered in response to movement started in the 1930s to promote fitness for women.  It's tempting to imagine Maude Dunsford reading about (or even being a member of) the Women's League of Heath and Beauty, founded in 1930 by Mary Bagot-Stack and in 1935 carried on by her daughter Prunella. (1)

Click on the image to watch a lovely 1930s British Pathe film of League ladies going through their paces.

This pattern is unprinted but each pattern piece is stamped with its name.  There is no separate instruction sheet, only the text instructions on the back of the envelope.

                                                                                                                                                                        

(1)The League survives today as The Fitness League.