Date of Dress

[Dee Dee Hall]

I am having a hard time dating this. I want to say 50's 60's, 70's? but perhaps I am way off. There is no tag and the sleeves have a mesh material in them. See pic 6.

 

[Pinkcoke]

I suspect it is a dress made in the 70s from a 30s or 40s dressing gown or house robe (with the zip removed). The pointed collar was popular in all these eras, but the shorter length and revealing open bodice is a very 70's trait. The diamante accent pieces look like dress or fur clips from the original dress period that have been sewn on for decoration.

 

[Dee Dee Hall]

That's interesting. Thank you so much.

 

[Circa Vintage Clothing]

I agree with Melanie about it being a '40s dressing gown but think it's authentic, but has been shortened for wearing as a dress - originally I'd expect it to be quite long. This fabric shows needle marks quite easily and I can see no sign of a missing zipper but I also agree that the diamante pieces are an addition, they look wrong for this piece. It may have had a matching nightgown originally.

The sleeve lining looks like cotton tulle. Can you show how the front opening has been sewn eg, faced or just hemmed? There are more questions about this piece, but I think the construction is correct for a '40s home sewer.

 

[Jonathan]

It looks like a 1930s summer evening jacket - probably went over a simple slip type dress that you could wear while dancing and then you put this on at dinner or to arrive/leave. They were popular middly-late 30s 34-38ish

 

[Dee Dee Hall]

I have included a picture of the front opening. There has been no sewing to it. No frayed edges. Looks complete. Like that's how it is.

 

[Circa Vintage Clothing]

Thanks for the extra photo: you can see the selvedge so that confirms original.

Jonathan has a point about it being an overdress - I can see that but the fabric looks very lingerie to me.

Can you tell if the hem is original? When things have been shortened, it can change the way it looks quite a bit. Photo if it's not too much trouble please.

Also, that press stud is very sloppily sewn on - I really can't see that being done back in the '30s or '40s like that, but it might be a modern replacement. It's only fairly recently that sewers have stopped caring about detail like that and I still haven't.

 

[Linn]

I think Jonathon is correct - that it's a 1930's top meant to be worn over a dress. I think that the rhinestone fasteners are original. They are definitely 1930's. I have a book of 1930's copywright-free illustrations and there are similar dresses with toppers - one with similar fasteners at the collar and waist. I'll try to scan it later.

Linn

 

[Dee Dee Hall]

I've included three pictures of the hem.

 

[Linn]

This is not identical but the dress on the bottom right with the topper will give you some idea of what the original outfit might have looked like:

 

[Dee Dee Hall]

Oh gosh that was beautiful...but I see how now it would go with a nightgown or dress. Thank you so much...

 

[Circa Vintage Clothing]

Thanks Dee Dee: it looks to me like it's been shortened and was originally longer. How much longer it's hard to know of course.