Ladies Home Journal S-36 - "ENGLAND"

After 1905, probably before 1920.

Ladies' Home Journal produced quite a few of these country-themed fancy dress patterns.  Here is their description of this pattern representing England:

"ENGLAND." Pastoral life in England may be charmingly depicted by the eighteenth century milkmaid, whose picturesque dress makes even the most democratic person regret the repealing of all sumptuary law which is responsible for the gradual elimination of the picturesque peasant garb of foreign countries and the adoption of less attractive and usually more tawdry modern dress.

Never let boring old historical fact get in the way of a good marketing strategy.  England is generally held up as one of the few countries which never developed distinctive "folk" or peasant costume, though there are a few garments with strong regional affiliations (farmers' smock frocks and fishermen's ganseys, for example.)

The linking of the repeal of sumptuary laws (which attempted but always failed to control what people wore, particularly in the matter of luxury and imported textiles) with the decline of peasant garb is a real head scratcher as well.

Fancy dress parties or balls were common during the first part of the twentieth century.   They were sometimes used as charity fund-raising events, perhaps on the theory that people might be more inclined to attend if they didn't have to deal with the pressure of being properly turned out in evening clothes.  With fancy dress, just about anything goes.  Recall also the fancy dress party that goes horribly wrong in Daphne DuMarier's Rebecca.

The milkmaid's occupational cousin, the shepherdess, was apparently a common sight at these fancy dress dances.  In a fashion column for February 15, 1914, The New York Times states:

The day has gone by when a group of shepherdesses, some short and plump, some tall and scrawny, some diminutively dainty and some possessing truly Minerva-like proportions, would be likely to meet on the floor at a fancy-dress dance.

The image of the milkmaid has carried a lot of iconography for hundreds of years, for those who are interested in that sort of thing.

Our milkmaid, whose occupation is confirmed by her pail and little milking stool, wears the stock "peasant" laced bodice and long skirt.  The panniers and cap declare her to be nominally eighteenth century.

This pattern, which was offered in one size only, retailed for 35 cents at a time when most Ladies' Home Journal patterns sold for 15 cents.

Simplicity 376 - Utility Robe

About 1930.

I've seen the word "utility" used to describe clothing as early as 1898, but the term gets its last big hurrah during World War II, particularly in Britain, where utility clothing was endorsed by the government.  I suspect the whole idea of utility clothing carried such emotionally difficult connotations by the time the war was over that nobody ever wanted to hear the term again, and I don't think anybody has.

Thus, a utility robe is serviceable and economical to make and maintain.  Simplicity's three-in-one strategy serves them well with this pattern.  Here is the chirpy description from the instruction sheet:

Three distinctly different utility garments for 'round the house wear may be made from this one SIMPLICITY hand cut pattern.

Style #1 With its feminine frill is a dainty, useful morning apron or house-frock.

Style #2 A careful choice of fabrics creates a mannish, tailored, lounging robe.

Style #3 The Hooverette is the ideal garment for the practical side of housekeeping.

This fairly brief passage gives us a lot of information.  First, these garments were for household wear only, although I suspect it was acceptable to go out in the back yard to hang some laundry or to nip on down to the end of the driveway to leave a letter in the mailbox.  Also, even for garments worn only at home, a desire for femininity is recognized (or perhaps just marketed to.)  Lastly, a morning apron and a Hooverette were either perceived to have different functions, or met differing ideas of acceptable or desirable dress.  (For example, my grandmother wore house coats, I wear robes, they look pretty much identical to me, but I would probably shop for a robe pattern rather than one for a house coat.)

Butterick 1629 - Ladies' One-Piece House Dress

About 1920.

The design of the crossed collar which buttons into the waist belt is odd, particularly in a hue darker than the dress itself, but the sailor's collar is very common at this period, and is a first cousin to the collars found on middy blouses, commonly worn at this period for casual, sporting, or athletic use.

Outside of the peculiar collar, this is a nice design. The button front means that the dress can be opened out for ironing.  The tucks on either side of the front and on the back add some practical fulness as well as provide an attractive vertical line.

At this time, Butterick's instruction sheet, hasn't yet been titled "The Deltor," though Butterick has applied for a patent for it.

By 1921, Butterick was advertising the advantages of The Deltor with a full page advertisement in the February 1921 issue of Everybody's Magazine:

McCall 8232 - Women's and Misses' Back-Wrap-Around Smock

1950

Sometimes you have to wonder if the illustrator was happy in her work.  Illustrating a severely plain garment in two different solids is sort of uninspiring, and that large windowpane check is probably not a good choice for a pregnant lady.

This garment has quite a long history.  We've seen it before, called different things: see Banner 131 Overall, and Pictorial Review 3783 Work Apron.  The garments called smocks that we see in the 1920's and 1930's tend to be front-buttoning.

No fabric recommendations are given, and yardages are offered for only 35" and 39" wide fabric.

This pattern does not appear to have been used.

Simplicity 1505 - Ladies' Nightgown

Mid 1930's.

A nice simple nightgown pattern.  The model on the left is clearly made of flannel.  The model on the right is probably batiste, with the puffed sleeves and lace trim around the neckline adding a little feminine fancy.

The advertising slogan "You are always in style when you dress with SIMPLICITY" represents a slight shift in Simplicity's marketing strategy of providing well-made patterns for making serviceable clothing.

McCall 1435 - Misses' Skating Ensemble

1948

There are plenty of options here.  The outfit could be made of woven material or felt (back when good quality wool felt was still available.)

The decorations could be appliqued or embroidered, and the embroidery could be carried out in either knitting worsted or embroidery floss.

Slide fasteners were used for both the jacket and the skirt, using colors that harmonize with the decorations.  The jacket is lined, and consistent with the big-shouldered look of the period, pattern pieces are provided for shoulder pads.

View B shows how to put together a very sporty ensemble by making up the jacket on its own and wearing it with a hat and skirt made up in a tweed that harmonizes with the jacket.

I can't quite make out the inscription in blue ink found on the front of the envelope.

The skirt pieces as well as the transfers are missing.  I can imagine a young skater's mother making up a whole wardrobe of skating skirts in different colors, to be worn with a variety of jackets and sweaters.

Here's some lovely 1940's home movie footage of skaters.

Pictorial Review 1438 - Ladies' Riding Breeches

Mid 1920's.

Given the proximity of the pattern numbers, my guess is that this is a companion piece to Pictorial Review 1435, the Semi-fitted Riding Jacket.  It's also clearly related to Butterick 4147, which is calling itself knickers.

Like the Pictorial Review Riding Jacket, the only layout given is for 54" material.

Part of reading clothing is observing it on the body.  Here's a wonderful photo from Shorpy of a young Louisita Wood in 1913.  Wood's family had money, so I suspect that her riding clothes were custom made for her and that this was considered a good fit.

And here she is seated.

It's not uncommon to find names written on the pattern envelopes.  There are several possible explanations for this.  One is that patterns sometimes had to be special ordered, and the purchaser's names were written on the envelopes by the store clerk when the patterns arrived from the supplier.  Another possibility is that the garment was made up by a dressmaker, and either she or her customer wrote the name on the envelope.

In this case, we have Mrs. Flora Grove, on Winchester Avenue.