Vogue and the older dressmaker - 1934 edition

Following on from last week's look at fashions for the older woman in the 16 May 1934 edition of Vogue, this week I'm looking at the attached Vogue Pattern Book. According to the article in Vogue, it "simply teems with good models for the older woman". Certainly, as I put this post together I realised that it was getting longer and longer; so grab a cuppa, make yourself comfortable, and let's investigate. Click on any of ther images to see a larger version.

Patterns for June-July 1934

Unlike Vogue itself, the Pattern Book has a table of contents. None of the features listed make any reference to older women: it is only the article in the parent magazine which suggests which models would be particularly suitable for 'matrons', and all the quotations in this post are taken from that. This is the first feature.

Fashions in evening and afternoon wear

Of these, S-3707 has "all the right points for the older woman", although there is no indication of what these points might be. This is case thoughout: no explanations are offered as to why certain models are suitable for older wearers and others are not. 6650 "would make an invaluable summer dress", and S-3713 "shows an idea the older woman should certainly make use of".

S-3707, 6650 and S-3713

Ingredients for summer wardrobes

Summer wardrobe suggestions include 6386 and 6527, "what could be better for mornings?", while 286 has "just the right softness and becoming lines", and 6553 and 6513 form "a classic suit good for any age".

Morning ensemble, dress, and classic suit

S-3685 is described just as "a printed silk suit", and 6663 as "for evenings". Although 6663 appears to have quite wide sleeves, I still can't help feeling that the ornate sleeves of 6617 (shown on the left) would suffer from being squashed inside them! Another view of 6663 is shown on the next page.

S-3685 and 6663

It's back to afternoon wear with S-2703, "a formal afternoon coat of the most becoming lines", and Couturier pattern 300 "a delightful tunic frock for afternoon wear". A rare explanation is provided for the inclusion of 293, another Couturier pattern; it is described as "a good choice for the older woman with too much weight at the hips, as the bulk of the sleeves would help to conterbalance it".

S-2703, 300 and 293

A printed dress with a matching jacket is described as "always a splendid idea for the older woman" - again with no explanation offered as to why this might be. 6611 had also appeared in a colour feature on new patterns in the 4 April issue of Vogue.

Different renditions of 6611

The two-page spread of suggestions for an 'inexpensive wardrobe' also includes yardage prices for various fabrics. (Please excuse my pattern weights holding the left page in place!)

Ideas for an inexpensive wardrobe

Of the patterns featured, 6627 and 6629 are both "suitable for the woman who is no longer young", while 6623 is described as "so good that it will be remarkable if every older woman does not want to carry it out in her own pet colours". The evening cape, 6502, "will appeal to the woman of any age".

6627, 6629, 6623 and 6502

There are a few pages printed in black, white and one other colour, but there are only four multi-colour pages in the 48-page magazine.

Only one dress on these four pages is deemed suitable for the older woman: a "good design for a silk crepe frock".

S-3708

"Jabot fronts are nearly always becoming to the not-so-young", and 6636 has "everything to recommend it".

6636 is second from right in the selection of 'little' dresses

Among the printed frocks and coats, the "older lady has still another choice in Ensemble No. S-3698".

Frocks, coats and ensembles

This is another pattern which appreared in the 4 April issue of Vogue.

S-3698 in black and white, and colour

Moving on to more formal fashions for afternoon and evening.

Afternoon and evening dresses

299 and 6633 "should be of special interest to the matron", while 6639 is a "specially good design for the many occasions when a formal evening dress is not required". However as it is described beside the illustration as having a "deep front décolletage", I was surprised to see it being recommended for the older woman.

From high neck to low: 299, 6633 and 6639

"The frocks on pages 26 and 27 and on 30 and 31 look charming on their youthful wearers, but a number of these would be equally good for the older woman".

Pages 26 and 27

Pages 30 and 31

6625 is another jabot-front dress, while S-3700 has "soft lines".

6625 and S-3700

6615 is a dress "of endless usefulness", and 6595 "with its crisp frilled front, will suit many women who are no longer young". (By now I am entirely confused. Are soft lines or crisp lines the look to go for?) 

6615 and 6595

6611 appears yet again, in the 'Easy to Make' section. Of these, all of the patterns on the left page, and the centre one on the right page, are deemed good for the older woman.

'Easy to Make', by 1934 standards

So there you have it. I must admit that at the end of this, I'm still not a lot clearer about what features the older dressmaker in 1934 should look for in a pattern. However, I'll leave the last word to the original article in Vogue, and the conclusion of its response to the reader who asked for suggestions on clothes for the middle-aged.

Avoid clothes for matrons!

It's been a while . . .

Since I posted about older women and sewing. Time to recify that.

I always enjoy reading Susan Young's excellent blog, but her latest post is particularly interesting. As some readers may know, Sue is involved with SewOver50, an online group which was initially set up to challenge the invisibility of older women in the online sewing world. Four years later, the group is thriving, both online with the @SewOver 50 Instagram account and in real life with meetups, but Sue asks the question - has representation of older sewists by pattern companies actually changed in this time?

The answers are mixed. Some brands have definitely made the effort to be more age-inclusive in the images they use. Others, however, have a firmly 'youthful' aesthetic and are sticking to it - despite being happy to use the expertise of older sewists in pattern testing, their websites don't include any pictures of these aged and therefore off-brand testers wearing their creations!

Most of the comments, both on Sue's blogpost and the SewOver50 IG post are about modern Big4 and indie patterns (although The Vogue Woman patterns from the 1990s do get an honourable mention), so mean very little to me, but seen from a vintage point of view, it does seem as though things are actually getting worse.

I've posted before about half-size patterns. They were designed for the older figure: shorter, and with a lower bust point and wider waist than standard patterns. I had a few half-size patterns at the time I wrote the post, but have since acquired more. My oldest one dates from 1946, but most of them are from the 1960s and 1970s. The concept of half sizes doesn't seem to have lasted into the 1980s and, among the Big4 at least, Misses sizing now reigns supreme.

Simplicity 1749, 1946

Simplicity 4489, 1953

I assume that the sizing information section in pattern books provided an explanation of how half-sizes differed from other patterns, because there is usually no information on the pattern envelopes themselves. Butterick 9765 uses the familiar trope of grey hair with a youthful face to indicate an older wearer, but then so does Butterick 9796, which is a Misses size.

Butterick 9765 and 9796, both 1961

Simplicity's 'Slenderette' line ran for several years, and included both half-size and Miss patterns. The illustrations don't show any obvious difference in body shape.

Simplicity 3758 and 3789, both 1960

Half-size patterns may have been intended for more mature figures, but that didn't always mean more conservative styles.

Short skirts in 1968, Simplicity 7696

By 1970 Simplicity were describing half-sizes on the pattern envelope as being for shorter women. Only by comparing the standard measurements with those of a Miss pattern does the more generous waist fitting become apparent.

Simplicity 8890 and 9003, both 1970

Standard body measurements on 8890 (top) and 9003

Style seems to have taken a different approach. The earliest half-size Style pattern I have dates from 1972. (Obviously, this doesn't prove that there were no half-size patterns any earlier, but I have a number of 1950s and 1960s Style patterns, and none of them are half sizes.) Before expanding into half-sizes, Style did appear to show older women on the pattern envelopes more often than other brands. This was not achieved by drawing older faces, but instead with more mature figures.

Different ages on Style patterns

When Style did finally expand into half sizes, the older women vanished from the envelope artwork.

Style 3675, 1972

I don't have any Vogue half-size patterns, but what I have acquired since 2019 are the remaining 1975 issues of Vogue Patterns. For several issues in 1975 and early 1976 Vogue Patterns ran a feature called "The Clothes You've Always Wanted . . . In Your Size". The same design was offered as two separate patterns, one in standard sizes and one in half sizes. When I first posted about this, I didn’t have the Spring, Summer, and Early Autumn 1975 issues, but now I do. There is nothing in the Summer issue, but the other two follow the example of Early Spring issue by showing the clothes on an older model. Scandalous, I know.

Vogue Patterns, Spring 1975

The second (and final) double-page spread of the feature

Early Autumn 1975

Older women looking stylish - who knew?

And longer hair as well - shocking!

It's depressing to think that almost 50 years we are struggling to get even that level of representation of older women. But on the other hand, it's been done before (and clearly didn't drive Vogue patterns into bankruptcy!) so can be done again.

Yet more of the same

By 'the same' I mean two of my recent topics: 1970s fashions, and the (in)visibility of older women on dress patterns.

Yesterday I was looking for an advertisement in some 1970s copies of 'Vogue Patterns'. I didn't find it, but I did find this in the Early Spring 1975 issue:

It's an actual, bona fide, older woman!

There were three more double-page spreads in the feature.

The feature was entitled, "The Clothes You've Always Wanted . . . In Your Size", and its purpose was to highlight Vogue half-size patterns. However, there was no description of what half-size patterns were, and how they differed from other patterns. In fact, bizarrely, the previous four pages were devoted to an explanation of misses petite patterns! Clearly the reader was expected to know about half sizes already.

I'm indebted to Juliana of Urban Simplicity for explaining half-size patterns to me. They were designed for the older figure: shorter, and with a lower bust point and wider waist than standard patterns. And unlike the patterns which Vogue had previously designated as suitable for Mrs Exeter, some of them were now actually being shown on an older figure. Progress!

The way the half-size patterns were marketed was that the same garment was available in two different patterns. For example the checked suit on the left in the picture above was pattern number 9037 in sizes 10-18, and 9038 in sizes 14½-22½. The artwork on the two envelopes was the same (thanks to the ever-wonderful Commercial Patterns Archive website for confirming this), and did not depict an older woman.

The next issue of 'Vogue Patterns' which I have is Autumn 1975 (I really want to get hold of Spring, Summer, and Early Autumn 1975 now, out of curiosity), and it has a feature of the same name. Whereas there had been a lot of beige in the Early Spring pictures, judging from the Autumn feature Vogue Patterns did not endorse the older-women-shouldn't-wear-bright-colours trope.

Winter 1975 sees our older women in party mood, and even (gasp) showing some bare arm.

The Early Spring 1976 issue marked the American Bicentennial, with lots of red, white and blue clothing. I love the byline on the first image: "All the Fashion That's Fit to Print".

The model used is clearly an older woman but blonde rather than grey-haired, a trend which carried on into the Spring 1976 issue. I wonder why: had there been negative feedback about the grey hair?

Spring 1976 was the last "The Clothes You've Always Wanted . . . In Your Size" feature. Early Spring 1977 included a feature with a grey-haired woman; again it concerned half-size patterns.

The Summer 1977 issue carried the news that some Diane von Furstenberg designs were now available in half-sizes. These were however shown on a conventional young, slim model.

I need to check properly, but I suspect that this marked the end of 'Vogue Patterns' featuring older women. Airbrushing and/or the routine use of younger models are so much the norm nowadays that there is something almost shocking about some of these images. I can't think when I last (ever?) saw someone of that age in a modern sewing magazine - it is depressing to think that we have gone so far backwards from that brief period in the 1970s when patterns shaped for older women could actually be shown on older women.