1940's champagne satin wedding dress

K

Kara Stella

Registered Guest
I have a beautiful champagne satin 1940's wedding dress I got from a historical society. It is in good shape. The delicate loop for the button closure one the sheer fabric at the back of the neck needs a repair and it used to have a few small stitches to bunch up the fabric across the bust. Not stained. Enormous train. Pinked seams. hand stitched points over the knuckles and fabric covered buttons on the wrist. It needs to be steamed and smells of dry cleaning chemicals (I hear the sun and a few days will sort that). But so so lovely. The zipper works fine. Its small, like a 4 or 6.

From what I have gathered, it is very 40's. But it has a more elaborate train than any other I can find online. Anything fun you all could say about it?

I don't fit in it and I would like a bride to LOVE it. It is a fairytale dress. Anyone have a recommendation of how I could find someone to buy it or take it so it could get to someone that would love it?

IMG_2351.jpeg
IMG_2350.jpeg
IMG_2349.jpeg
IMG_2348.jpeg
IMG_2347.jpeg
IMG_2346.jpeg
68659647642__1FA8ADE0-A470-414A-9E89-C070855A42A1.jpeg
68659644483__0419614A-20A5-4859-833A-F6AAE53CB157.jpeg
 
I also have a 1940s wedding dress, also a very small size. I contacted a local vintage wedding dress boutique who informed me that she couldn't take it because it has a lace upper bodice and sleeves, and was at too much risk of damage from being tried on. Her suggestion was that I put it up for sale on Etsy or eBay at a low enough price that someone might be tempted to go for it, so you might want to try that. My understanding is that vintage wedding dresses are a bit of a hard sell.

Alternately, if you PM me I could send you the info of the boutique, as she does buy vintage dresses, and yours doesn't have the lace bodice issue. (Mods, not sure if this is acceptable, if not please let me know).
 
I agree that vintage wedding dresses, as you say, can be a hard sell. However yours seems to have a few things going for it such as that fabulous portrait collar, the seaming and simple beauty of the construction, (not a lot of lace and frou-frou) and the long cathedral train. While the sheer upper collar falls in line with the more modest 1940s and early 1950s, I think today's bride might want to remove the sheer upper portion and let her shoulders, collar bones and a tiny bit of cleavage show. It appears to be a stunning gown, not the typical ones seen on Ebay. If I were still young and a small size I wold snap that right up.

It is most likely a quality rayon satin but maybe you can determine if it is silk satin. I think it leans more to early to mid 1950s than late 1940s, but could be either.
 
Regarding the metal zipper, how do I know if it has been replaced? And regarding the material, how do I know it is rayon or silk? What makes you think it is 50's? I looked up "portrait collar" and it appears to be worn in a "v". Do you think this one was worn that way?
 
Kara Stella said:
Regarding the metal zipper, how do I know if it has been replaced? And regarding the material, how do I know it is rayon or silk? What makes you think it is 50's? I looked up "portrait collar" and it appears to be worn in a "v". Do you think this one was worn that way?
Click to expand...

If you can find a little snippet of fabric, in the hem or seam allowance maybe, to cut off. Then do a burn test by holding the fabric snippet to a flame (not a match), quickly blow it out and smell the smoke. If it smells like burning hair (pew!) it s silk and if it smells like paper it is rayon. I suspect yours is rayon which is fine. The amount of gorgeous satin is wonderful.

There are variations to a portrait collar. Best to put it on a dress form or person to see how it lays. The sheer part was for probably only for modesty during the ceremony. Brides did not show bare shoulders in church back then, (a scandal!) they had to be covered or if they were not, then a short jacket would be worn for the church ceremony and later taken off for the reception. I suspect the sheer part on your gown might have been tucked under after the ceremony, (or does it come off?) depending on the bride's sense of fashion.

As for the dating, I just get a sense of 1950s for the gown. Partly the "almost" off the shoulder neckline and wide portrait style collar, and the classic the simple lines of the gown. Others may have different opinions, but I am not seeing 1940s. Perhaps very late 1940s but I still lean to 1950s.
 
I can't see enough of the silhouette and construction to date properly but Barbara is right: these '40s-ish styles continued well into the '50s. Bridal fashion is more conservative and slower to respond to fashion trends.

1940s gowns (depending on location) are rarely this extravagant thanks to WW2 and fabric rationing. Similarly, they're more often rayon than silk which was a restricted fabric. If you were able to display on a mannequin or wearer, we could determine the silhouette and date better. For example, the bodice yoke was a late '40s style but they were often accompanied with a 'V' shaped waistline. I can't see the waist to determine. Photos of the metal zipper can also help date as styles change a lot during this time.

When it comes to selling vintage wedding dresses, I find that it helps if they're larger sizes (minimum waist 26 inches) and in near perfect condition. Most modern brides are older, and larger than our fore-mothers, who were getting married particularly young in the post-war period, often just teenagers. And they have a low tolerance for flaws in their special dress. So I always do what I can to restore to their original state.

Nicole
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top