Mid 60s on this dress?

Fab dress, Deborah! And, LOL, my first thought was a solid cusper--very late 60s/very early 70s. That psychedelic-looking print would be just about right for that timeframe. I expect it's teeny-tiny, right?
 
This looks from the 1980's - square shoulders, shawl collar and just above the knee. A shirt-waister - not quite 'power dressing' but almost. The print is probably what's throwing people - it's not a 60's geometric print or a 70's colourway.
 
Originally posted by vertugarde
This looks from the 1980's - square shoulders, shawl collar and just above the knee. A shirt-waister - not quite 'power dressing' but almost. The print is probably what's throwing people - it's not a 60's geometric print or a 70's colourway.
Click to expand...
Totally Disagree !! This Is no way 1980's- not a smidgin of a chance! Sorry! Not a hint of 80's or late 70's around this Gem.
 
The print is probably what's throwing people - vertugarde
The Print is Catupulting me, not throwing. Do you really see the 80's in this dress? That Stumps me.
 
I'm going to go with mid to late '60s - I've seen a lot of those straight down styles, in nice silks. I think it was originally a little bit longer (the short hem length makes it look '80s IMHO) and had a belt in the same fabric, probably one of those thin ones that you tie. They often get lost.

Nicole
 
Hi Deborah - Does it have shoulder pads? It seems short for that style of dress and the 60's ... (my first thought was 70's) but ... I know mannequins are sometimes really tall.

And Vertugarde often knocks me out with her ("his"? you never know) knowledge and I could see understated 80's as well.
 
This dress is certainly eliciting some passionate responses!

The mannequin is tall and the dress would fall just at or below the knee and the sleeves would be true 3/4 - hence my thinking mid or earlier and the collar also looks earlier to me. There are no labels, no shoulder pads (never were) and it's not only short for the manni, but a tad small for her. And I'm sorry I didn't write all that initially!

Perhaps, it's an older pattern with a later print? It's most definitely 60s (possibly cusper). I don't see or feel 80s at all.

Sorry, Anne we cross-posted yesterday!

Thank you all for weighing in!!!
 
I think early 1970's, for some reason. And I think it should have had a coat, or something with it.

My two pence...

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