Need some Hat Help. Stanley Brown Label

cemetarian

cemetarian

Registered Guest
Need some date and style advice, please.

Is this a Slouch Hat, era, and is anyone familiar with the label?


Red_Stanley_Brown_Hat_1.jpg



Red_Stanley_Brown_Hat_2.jpg


Red_Stanley_Brown_Hat_4.jpg


Red_Stanley_Brown_Hat_5.jpg
 
Hi,

I would say this hat is from the latter half of the 1950's, leaning to 1957-1959. That "half lampshade cloche" style was quite popular then, and of course the little velvet covered prongs help to date it to 1950's also.

I have a few Stanley C. Brown hats in my permanent collection. I have not yet been able to find out much about this milliner. I only find references to him practicing circa 1950's. Rumor was that he was related to P.C. Brown the designer and author but I have not been able to substantiate this. I can tell you that the hats that I have by him are of the finest materials, very well made with hand finishing and hand sewn trimmings, and they sold for fairly high prices were they were new. The examples I have seen or own are very dressy, more evening styles. This hat is meant for day wear, and appears to be a nice quality straw braid (hard to tell in the photos), but I suspect with the department store label that it is not a custom made or top-of-the-line S.C. Brown. It is, however, a great hat by a scarce designer.

Thanks for showing this hat, as you don't see them too often.

B
 
Half Lamp Shade Cloche? I never would have thought of that particular phrasing. Thank you so much.

Yes it is a quality piece. And I don't know if you can see it or not, but the crown is formed in more of a triangle than a circle. The front is flatter than the back, due to the way the crown is stitched.

I have another one that is basically the same shape but with a smaller brim. The front of it is flattened also.......


Would you also call it a Half Lampshade Cloche?


Beige_Brocade.jpg
 
Hi,

This is actually not an easy answer! No, I wouldn't refer to that second hat as a half lampshade or lampshade cloche. It is too shallow and small in dimensions. However, you might see this second hat in an old millinery book referred to as a "cloche" even though it really isn't a cloche as most people think of one. Actually the term "half lampshade cloche" is a not a technical term for a hat, it is a sort of vague descriptive term used by hat makers and milliner's. But we know it when we see it!

This brings up an interesting subject for the forum. Hat terms are a bit hard to define, as different decades used the same terms, but each decades hats were decidedly different in dimensions and style. A cloche of the 1920s does not look anything like a "cloche" of the late 1950's. This is hard for me to get into here, as I could really write 100 pages on this subject.

It can be quite confusing for a novice. For example, the second hat might be described by the manufacturer in the 1950s as a "cloche" hat! And you might see small little swathed pillboxes termed as "turbans" when we would never call them that today. Also you see large oversized brimless hats called "turbans" in the Edwardian Era, but we would think of them as that today either. The hat may have elements of a particular style (cloche, turban, toque,sailor, etc), but we don't see it as that now. However, calling it that was correct!

This seems to be a confusing condition more with hats than other types of fashion. Boy Howdy! Because of this confusing decade's terminology with hats, sometimes it is best to avoid pigeon holing a hat by style, unless it fits what is our modern idea of that particular style. This can sure make it hard to describe a hat when you are describing for sale!

All I have done is confuse the issue..sorry!

Barbara
 
Barbara -

I hope you are working on a book and if you are not, you should be! Your comments and knowledge about hats are invaluable. Thank you so much for all you share!

Linn
 
Originally posted by Linn
Barbara -

I hope you are working on a book and if you are not, you should be! Your comments and knowledge about hats are invaluable. Thank you so much for all you share!

Linn
Click to expand...

my thoughts exactly. I would love to know more!:icon_dante:
 
LOL........I totally agree, Barbara. It's so confusing. I found an OLD reference for hats (and didn't realize it was 1920's) and labeled some hats from it ... named Bowl Turban..........then I realized that it was confusing, but I've left 'em that way, cause I don't have anything else to call 'em. LOL
 
i was just going to add that early 60s sprung to mind on the cute red one.

and actually, Barbara, i have a question for you, since you are such a hat expert ~ on hats like the second one where the veil or netting is damaged as such, is it better to leave a damaged net on a hat to sell it? or to remove it so it doesn't distract from the other detailing? do collectors have a preference for such damage?
 
Hi,

Why, thank you everyone for the compliments! Oh Mary, thank you also, but please don't think of me as an "expert"....I never want to refer to myself as that, as even though I have been researching for decades, a handful of days do not go by without my learning something new about millinery or hats. I spend hours in research every day and there is still more to find! think of myself as a "hat specialist" and that way I don't get bit in the A--- if I am wrong about something! Ha Ha!

I love to share.

Now....The question on the veiling. To remove or not to remove!! Again, not a clear answer, as that may be up to the individual dealer. For me, it depends on how far gone the damage is, the age of the hat, the historical importance of the hat and the designer and other factors. If it is an antique hat by an important milliner, I would leave the veiling as it is, maybe tuck it up so it does not look shabby in the photos, and let the new owner decide. This is also to help anyone doing research to see what the hat looked like when it was new, and what the designer intended. That keeps the integrity of the design intact as far as research or collectors go. Of course, on an valuable antique or important designer vintage hat, if the veil is really icky, and totally torn up and dirty or soiled, you can carefully remove it and save it in a labeled envelope for the new owner to keep. But don't throw it away!

For a hat like the second one you show, that is not of any real historical value, and if the veiling is really tattered or full of holes, I say remove it and be sure to clip it "clean" with tiny scissors. You can mention that it had a veil at one time. Folks can find vintage or new veiling to replace it if they wish. That's what I do. But do what you feel comfortable with.

I love to share, and this is great fun!

Thanks for showing the hats.

Barbara
 
Very informative thread.... Just as a comment on to remove or not remove veiling, what I've been doing is pretty much what I think you suggest, Barbara. If the veil is overall in great condition, with only a scattered break in it here and there, I leave it as is and disclose. I think some might be repaired, as one would mend lace on a dress, even though I've read that hat veils can't be repaired. I have a couple I'm going to try, though. I'll see how they come out! I think it might work if the breaks are in an inconspicuous place and also depending on how the netting is constructed.

Anyway, I digress. What I like to do with wide-brim hats whose veils are holey is arrange the veiling around the top of the brim and treat it as a trim detail. Fluffed up and neatly arranged, it looks great in photos. I do not tack it, in case the new owner wants to remove it entirely, but if I ever get one I want to keep for me, I will take some tacks to keep the veiling arranged "just so." These are not particularly valuable or significant hats, but I think it's a way to preserve their original integrity while making them look more presentable while selling....

I recently sold a hat whose veil was broken only near the bottom. I trimmed it north of the break, but it looked too short. So I took it off altogether, and, IMHO, the hat looked immensely better and so much more wearable..... Did not detract at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top