Claire McCardell wrap dress label

[No Accounting For Taste]

Hi! I will post pics of the dress and construction soon, but I wanted to see if anyone had any information on this Claire McCardell label. Obviously it's not a Townley label, and the dress has no pockets, which is really strange, but the construction of the gathered skirt to the bodice is identical to the Townley-era dresses I have. Has anyone ever come across this label?

Thank you!

 

[northstarvintage]

Interesting label.

Could you post a photo of the dress? Selfishly I'd love to see it. Plus I have the Claire McCardell book (as do several other members) so we might be able to use the book to give you more information.

 

[The Vintage Merchant]

would also love to see the entire dress (and construction) too!

just at a glance, that label is sewn in (very) crooked...indicating the possibility of a previous owner trying to boost it's value (by adding a pirated label), or, it's possible it may have fallen off during cleaning, and the owner wanted to have it sewn back in for whatever purpose. Whichever the case, the way it's attached doesn't look original.

 

[Jonathan]

I've never seen that label for Claire McCardell before... I wonder if its one of those labels someone in the Far East grabbed when it was no longer trademarked for use by the original company. Valentina is one of those labels - and there are others I can't think of at the moment...

 

[thespectrum]

The red woven stripes don't look right, no other Claire McCardell label has anything like that at all.

 

[No Accounting For Taste]

Okay, as promised, a few pics - I apologize for the poor quality, it's the best I could do at work. I agree the label is wonky, but it looks like it's sewn in nicely on one side and clearly reattached on the other. So, at first I thought it was either a super early mockup (think 1939 World's Fair or something) or a later copy, and with everything else added up (black metal hook and eye instead of brass, no pockets), I'm leaning strongly toward a later copy. On the outside, the fabric looks and feels like a lightweight wool jersey, but the underside looks more like a synthetic to me (and I know next to nothing about fabric). I didn't pay a lot of money for it, and it fits me well and is comfortable, so I'm not heartbroken - interesting to know that at least one of these exists!

 

[No Accounting For Taste]

Some pics of the construction... The back of the bodice is one piece, and the front wraps, secured by three internal hidden snaps on the right and black metal hooks on the left. The skirt is slightly gathered only in the front. The sleeves are also slightly gathered at the shoulder.

 

[Jonathan]

Hmmm.... well it's certainly a wartime dress but Claire is firmly re-established at Townley by the time wartime dresses like this come along, which looks 42-45 to me because of the frugal seam allowance and hooks and eyes closure but McCardell used corset hook and eye closures, not regular hooks and eyes. Something doesn't look right about this to me. The label doesn't match up to anything I have seen at that period.

 

[No Accounting For Taste]

Thanks Jonathan, so interesting! So it's possibly a contemporary copy, done at the time? I found newspaper ads/photos from 1941 displaying some of her garments with these elements - the wrap top, the drop waist - but I'm guessing that pre-war they would have zipped up the side, and been full-skirted all the way around perhaps (in addition to a more generous seam allowance)?

 

[Jonathan]

The style is McCardellish, but she used corset hooks and eyes - they were her trademark - not those steel dress hooks and eyes. What really bothers me is the label - it doesn't look like anything I have ever seen before. You would have to compare it to known McCardell dresses to be sure one way or the other.

 

[No Accounting For Taste]

I do have several of her dresses with the typical hooks, that's why I was initially so confused by the garment (that and the tag, obviously). It doesn't look like the usual hooks were ever there and replaced, either. On the inside, it looks very similar to the 40s McCardells I have that I know are legit, but ... yeah. Mystery!

Just for fun, a few ads from 1941-1942 that show similar dresses... three are hers and one sort of copy.

 

[denisebrain]

Wow, the hooks on your dress really appear similar to the ones in that last ad.

Dialing I for Ikranieri...

 

[No Accounting For Taste]

Don't they, Maggie? Though I wonder if that was some artistic license on the artist's part, to get across the idea of hooks. Not sure when she started using the brass lacing hooks, if that was all she ever used or something she came to use a couple years later.

Also, if anyone knows where to find replacement hooks (ha), I would love to restore a couple dresses!

 

[Pinkcoke]

You can get corset hooks & eyes from your haberdahery/sewing supply store. We stock the Hemline range which makes them. Prym do too. Hemline are cheaper because they are made in the east. Prym products still come from Germany but the shapes are often nicer, a bit more refined.

 

[No Accounting For Taste]

Thanks Melanie - do you mean the gilt hooks that McCardell used, with the round gold eyes? I haven't been able to find them anywhere. Not hooks like above, but the brass/gold/gilt ones she typically used.

Also, I found this image from 1943 - the caption reads "For Sunday or a day when you’re taking a breather—a dress that’s meant for sun-bathing in your garden and/or dining coolly at home. Of chocolate Ameritex rayon in a linen-like weave; $11. A Claire McCardell dress." The hooks are similar in size/design to those on my dress–except, of course, mine aren't pink. So she used hooks other than the small gold ones, at least at one point.

 

[denisebrain]

Wow, isn't that an interesting dress with pink hooks.

I don't want to hijack this thread so I'll start a different one on a similar subject, because I have a very McCardell-like unlabeled dress.