Dating Irene for Bullock's Wilshire gown

[violentpink]

I have a fabulous Irene for Bullock's Wilshire gown that I'm curious to learn more about. From what I believe, Irene had her own boutique in Bullock's Wilshire from 1935 until 1942 when she worked as a costume designer at MGM (which I found out here and more info here), though I was confused by seeing the label in the label resource stating that it was from the 1950s. There are several garment listings online also with Irene for Bullock's Wilshire labels that claim (and look) to be from the 1950s, though I haven't found anything online about the boutique continuing past 1942. Maybe I'm missing something! I'm going to continue my search but would appreciate if anyone else could chime in.

About my particular gown...I purchased it for next to nothing and must note that someone who owned it in the past unfortunately glued two plastic flowers on with E6000 glue. I've been very carefully removing them, along with the glue, with a razor and tweezers. It's coming off better than I expected but there's no way those spots will ever go away. The gown is gorgeous otherwise and I intend to wear it for photoshoots where I can easily remove those spots in Photoshop so it could live in some form of it's original glory and nobody could ever know! Until then, the damage is visible in the photos below...



A few more details: The only closure is a metal side zipper (as seen in the hanging photo.) The bottom of the skirt has four slits (front, back, then left and right sides) with tulle lined inside that peeks out (see the second to last photo.) The shoulders aren't padded. The material is heavy and stiff in a way...it seems to catch easily on little things and I assumed it's silk given how similar it is to a robe I have but am not certain.

The shoulders and low bust seem a little unusual (also why I adore it so much) and I'm not quite sure how to date it because of them...I'd love to hear when you all think this gown is from and if you have any info, photos or illustrations of similar gowns by Irene! Let me know if you need more photos or info.

 

[Rue_de_la_Paix]

What a lovely find, how fortunate for you. Right now I can only add that to me, your dress appears to be from the 1930s.

Where is the label sewn to the dress? Also, your label is different than the one dated as 1950s in the VFG Label Resource.

 

[violentpink]

Thank you! The label is in the right side of the waist - if you were to peek inside the zipper opening, it'd be right across from you. Here's a photo (which looks a little weird because it's flat):

 

[poppysvintageclothing]

Lovely find and it fits you beautifully. What a shame about the plastic flowers being glued on there. I keep wondering what you could do to camouflage the spots.

 

[violentpink]

Thanks! I've been thinking the same thing...they're in such awkward places though. I thought about a kinda loose belt that hangs down in the front, like how this recent Gucci dress has a trompe l'oeil bow.

 

[Circa Vintage Clothing]

Stunning gown. The silhouette is late '30s; are there any sleeve headers holding that distinctive shape up?

I'm suspicious of the plunging front and wonder if it's at all possible that the dress is on back to front? Plunging backs were a popular feature in the '30s.

Can you tell me a little about the tulle, please: is it nylon or silk or rayon? Nylon is quite scratchy and wasn't used in fashion pre-WW2 so if it is nylon it might be an addition. Perhaps to compensate for that very low neckline?

More thoughts: the zipper looks rather long for a '30s and may be an addition or replacement. If the dress is back to front, it should be on the other side. Also, it's very pleasant looking for 1930s Irene dresses on google search but I failed to find anything similar. The fabric looks like delustered silk satin.

 

[violentpink]

Thank you for your expertise and bringing up these points! They're exactly the details I need to consider that I wouldn't have come up with on my own. There isn't anything else inside holding the shoulders up. They're like hollow shells. I tried the dress on the other way and here are some photos:

It'd make a lot of sense if it had a plunging back given the era, but it feels backwards when worn this way, like very flat / not accommodating for a bust (even though I don't have much of one) and the waist seems too low. The open side seems designed to give more shape for a bust, which makes me believe it's the front.

I'm not the best at identifying materials...the tulle doesn't feel scratchy, it seems more on the pliable, softer side of tulles. Both sections seem to be the same tulle. However, it definitely seems possible the tulle in the skirt area could've been modified because the way it's sewn in doesn't compare to the rest of the dress. The way the tulle is sewn into the top part seems very discreet in a way and doesn't seem to have the same quality of sewing or thread as the skirt, except in small areas where someone obviously attempted to repair it. But there may be more than one person who had modified it for all I know! It's confusing to look at as someone with an untrained eye.

The zipper looks like it could be a longer replacement, there are areas that look like they could've been part of a seam. I also examined the other side and the seam looks untouched except for a small repair.

 

[yumyumvintage]

Thought on the glue. You can try nail polish remover with a q-tip to see if the glue will loosen up. The dress is black and may be easy to touch up.

The flower was in a really unfortunate place. I would replace with a black fabric flower. I think it will look pretty.

 

[Jen S]

I wonder if it's possible someone altered the bust area to update it, and if those two sort of flap-like pieces in the front were originally fastened higher up so as to cover more of the bust. The way they're hanging down to the side looks a bit strange to me.

 

[violentpink]

I'll have to test out the nail polish remover tip in a discreet spot, thanks!

The flaps themselves don't seem to be modified. They look very well done and have comparable craftsmanship to the seams and such, unlike the other areas of the dress which are a bit more questionable. However, this actually reminds me of something I completely forgot about! When I first tried on the dress at the shop, the flaps were flattened upwards and one of them was sewn (poorly, with only a few stitches in one spot) to the other. I didn't think much of it until I got home and realized there was tulle inside, which made me see what it looked like with the flaps down and the tulle visible.

Since the search for 1930s Irene gowns through Google hasn't been the most helpful, I've been looking at screenshots and publicity photos of the movies she worked on. While I highly doubt I'll find anything that close to my dress (and it wasn't made for a movie), I've been keeping an eye out for similar elements and learning more about her work in general. Here are some of my finds which might not be the most relevant to my dress but nonetheless helpful references of her fabulous work in the 1930s:

Goldie Gets Along (1933)


Shall We Dance (1937)

Vogues of 1938 (1937)


Midnight (1939)


I've started looking beyond her 1930s stuff as well but it's quite the task since she did costume work for nearly 200 movies! I'd like to make a goal to see them all some day.

 

[Jen S]

Yes, what you described goes along with what I was trying to suggest -- what if those flaps were folded up a bit and there were a concealed hook and eye, or some such, to create a higher neckline? Perhaps the loose stitches you saw indicate something like this, and were maybe even a crude repair for a missing fastener.

In fact as I look at it again I want to reach out and pick up the flaps and arrange them a bit higher up! You can even sort of see a crease on the flaps where it should be folded. And it would create a nice half-collar effect. I think that's it.

 

[violentpink]

That sounds like a possibility but oddly there's nothing in those areas that looks like there were fasteners, only in the top corner. I think the crease may be a coincidence, there are creases all over the dress where they shouldn't be and I'd imagine the other flap would also have one. When the flaps were still connected, I was able to put it on properly as well...I think if it were meant to be higher, it might've been constructed a different way. Then I wonder why the tulle would be there. Ah, the mystery of the weird bust flaps!