I know the Youthquake label employed Quant and Foale and Tuffin, but I'm guessing their names were always on the labels. Does anyone know which designer was behind the plain labelled pieces, or was it just a generic manufacturer? Thanks!! Liz
Liz, I've never seen a Youthquake label with the designer's name, but that really doesn't mean much. There were several divisions of Puritan (who owned the Youthquake label) and the designers worked under different labels. The information I have on this is at my studio, so I'll post more this evening after I refresh my memory
I thought I saw a 'Foale and Tuffin for Youthquake' label once, but thinking about it again - it may well have been Paraphernalia rather than YQ. I have two F&T dresses which I know were heavily promoted as part of the Youthquake tour, and they have a different F&T label (white on silver I think) and nothing to indicate Youthquake so perhaps they weren't sold under a label, per se. I'd love to hear any more information you might have! Liz
Okay. According to ads and editorial copy in the 1965 Seventeen magazine, Tuffin & Foale designed for Youthquake under the Daphne label. Mary Quant designs were under the Barnsville,USA and the Young Naturals labels. I've seen Barnsville labels (which actually was trademarked by Puritan in 1961), but not with Quant's name. The early Paraphernalia labels always have the designer's name on them, and since youthquake was hatched from the same nest, it stands to reason that the designer names would be on the labels. And Puritan was pretty savvy, cashing in on the trend when they did. But, I do have that red, white and blue label with no designer, and it is definitely a mid 60s dress, and I presume was designed by someone who really "knew" mod. So it's a real puzzle. Lizzie
Interesting and perplexing....thanks so much for the information Lizzie!! This is the dress I'm prepping for sale: Liz
That would be pretty darn short for 65-66ish in the US! It's possible that this label came more toward the end of the 60s? It really don't know. My dress has the same label.
That's true, I'm so used to seeing the teeny tiny dresses we had here from around '65-'66 - I'm always foxed by the US lengths.... Currently the shortest mini I've ever seen: The proportions are pretty much for Twiggy rather than my amazon mannequin. It's not a tunic, nor is it childrenswear, nor has it been shortened - John Bates really WAS doing the shortest ones around!! ;) Liz
