Pattern Stash Confessions, Part 2 + Pass the Pie!

Readers, I was stunned -- stunned -- to discover how many MPB readers are simply nuts about pie!

And speaking of pie, many of you are probably wondering what kind of pie I like.  I'll be brief(ish):  While I enjoy a savory shepherd's pie from time to time (I am fortunate to live near the extraordinary Myers of Keswick grocery store, which offers a vast selection of fresh, savory English pies daily), pie to me remains primarily a sweet dessert.

A homemade pie made with fresh ingredients is almost always a pleasure to eat.  I loathe artificial sugar substitutes and prefer my pie served alone rather than laden with whipped cream, swimming in melted ice cream or dripping with molten cheddar cheese.  A lemon meringue pie, not too sweet, is a marvelous thing, especially if the meringue is mile high and slightly toasted on top.

I love cherry pie, especially with sour cherries, but I find this kind of pie is often made with inferior canned cherries and has a soggy crust.  Whole Foods makes a decent cherry pie, not to-die-for but not bad for store bought.  Nothing beats a delicious slice of fresh apple pie, but I've found that apple pies often have thick, leaden crusts, and the apple filling is not sufficiently baked (I don't want applesauce, but I like my apple pie juicy), or there is too much cinnamon.  Less is more.  Same goes with sugar -- not too sweet, please.  While I do like pecan pie, it's usually too sweet, or too full of Karo syrup and not enough pecans.

Finally, in autumn, nothing is more delicious to me than pumpkin or squash pie.  I prefer mine light, not too sweet, and slightly chilled.

My goodness, what a pie snob I've become!  Come to think of it, I prefer cake.  Let's move on.  You have till midnight EST tonight to throw your hat in the ring for the Vintage Vogue pattern I'm giving away, and you don't have to mention pie at all.   

Today, I finally documented my men's pattern stash!  Readers, I own roughly one hundred men's patterns (every time I count I come up with a slightly different number).  Scary.





Here's a bit of pattern shopping advice: never buy a "lot" on eBay.  You will always end up with many more patterns than you want and/or need.  (There's a reason why they call it a lot.  Maybe they should call it too much.)  I made this mistake just once and ended up with a boxful of roughly thirty patterns, half of which were the wrong size and should be given away -- but to whom?





Men's patterns are, of course, much less varied than women's patterns and frankly, less fun.  I've used a pretty wide variety considering how similar my finished projects ended up looking.  I don't think anyone needs more than one pajama pattern, for example, provided it includes a nightshirt.  There are slight differences in men's patterns: princess seams on a shirt, unusual pocket placement, epaulets, bell bottoms instead of straight leg, Western style shirt yokes, etc., but it's still mostly pants and shirts.





I've created a Picasa file of my men's patterns as I did for my women's patterns, and have included shots of my completed projects immediately after the pattern used.  In some cases, you'll see more than one project if I used a particular pattern multiple times.  I won't say this is everything I've sewn for me and Michael, but almost.  It's a biggish file so you might want to save it for after dinner, perhaps accompanied by pie!

As always, you can view these pics full size by clicking on any one, which will take you directly to Picasa, where you can scroll through at your own pace or watch it as a slide show.



I love having an archive I can access easily, and I'll be adding to it as I continue to sew. 

I'll bet many of you have at least a few of these patterns, am I right?  As you can see, I have all the Seventies patterns anyone could possibly want, in a wide variety of sizes just in case I puff up in the next few decades.  I think as far as men's patterns are concerned, I am done. 

Question: Why would anyone bother to sew a man's tie?  Good gracious, the thrift stores can hardly give them away.  Am I missing something?

Have a great day everybody!

Read More

Whither the Chorus Girl? + ASSIGNMENT

Friends, to say that the chorus girl was a popular stock character in old Hollywood movies (by which I mean the pre-Sixties studio days) is to state the obvious.  But have you ever wondered whatever happened to her?  Look around: she's nowhere to be found.

Showgirls, chorus girls, burlesque queens -- how many thousands of them danced across the screen in the golden days of Hollywood?  They all had one thing in common: curves.  The chorus girl represented sex, pure and simple, in the days when graphic sexuality wasn't just a mouse click away.

While there were chorus girls even back in the silent era, it really took sound to put the movie chorus girl front and center. With sound came the movie musical, and musicals started out as little more than an excuse to display beautiful, leggy young women in skimpy costumes.  Later, when "book" musicals became popular (whose songs were integral to the plot) movies that took place in a show business milieu grew scarcer, and we didn't really need quite so many chorus girls.  There weren't any in Gigi but there were plenty in backstagers like Forty-Second Street or Ziegfeld Girl.

Nearly every actress with the exception of Marjorie Main ended up cast as a showgirl at one time or other, even actresses better known for dramatic roles, like Barbara Stanwyck (in Ball of Fire) or Joan Crawford (in Dancing Lady or Flamingo Road).

The showgirl story usually told the tale of a poor girl getting plucked from obscurity (Rita Hayworth in Cover Girl), or rubbing up against social class distinctions (Ginger Rogers in Vivacious Lady), or both. Naturally, there were plenty of musical numbers thrown in just to keep it real.

Showgirls and chorus girls were beloved, not only because they were glamorous and sexy, but also because, like most movie audiences, they were working class -- invariably from Brooklyn or the Barbary Coast or Tenth Avenue or some other location associated with "low-down" living.  Showgirls were "good" and showgirls were "bad" but there's no question they were everywhere, especially during World War II, when leggy stars like Grable and Hayworth were at their peak of popularity.

Movies that revolved around chorus girls allowed Hollywood costume designers like William Travilla, Jean Louis, Orry Kelly, Irene Sharaff, Adrian and so many others, to indulge their wildest showbiz fantasies in sequins, feathers, fur, lace -- the works -- though sometimes there was dangerously little of these on display!

After the major studios broke up in the Nineteen-Fifties, there was television, and well into the Eighties designers like Bob Mackie were still creating spectacular showgirl creations for musical variety shows starring Mitzi Gaynor, Cher, or Ann-Margret -- the last of the true "showgirl" types.

Today we still have shows (on Broadway, in Vegas) and occasionally there's still a chorus of "girls," but the chorus girl as pop culture icon is as dated a type as the screwball heiress, the shopgirl Cinderella, and the teenage soprano.

Sadly, for the home sewer, there never were any commerical chorus girl or showgirl-type patterns, even back in the Nineteen-Forties.  A few costume patterns can be found for the occasional community theater production of Annie Get Your Gun or Best Little Whorehouse in Texas, but that's about it.  It's a little sad, really.

What or who killed the chorus girl?  So many things, readers!  Before she died as a film icon, the chorus girl had faded away in real life.  The popularity of television meant that more people were staying home rather than seeking out the nightclubs, stage shows, and burlesque venues that gave work to so many showgirls.  (This echoes what happened to theater when motion pictures became popular decades earlier, and it's not a coincidence that so many movie musicals took place in the Gay Nineties or early decades of the Twentieth Century when most forms of entertainment were live.)

A slow loosening of censorship after WWII and more openness about sexuality in American culture meant that men could get their share of scantily clad ladies on the pages of Playboy or in porno theaters -- they didn't have to sit through The Dolly Sisters, waiting for Betty Grable to show a little leg.  Today, when images of graphic sexuality are a keyboard click away, a low-cut bodice or tightly fitted dance costume may be alluring, but it's not the stuff of most contemporary straight male fantasies.  A "burlesque" performer like Dita Von Teese is a sentimental throwback to an earlier era, but it's more homage than a true resurrection, even if it's meant to elicit a frisson.  Judging by what I read on the vintage sewing blogs, performers like Dita Von Teese are more of interest to straight women of an intellectual bent than to men.

Dita Von Teese

Finally, the Pill meant that there were flesh-and-blood women to engage with, rather than just a celluloid or print fantasy.

Meanwhile, in the movies, films like the much-hyped Christina Aguilera vehicle Burlesque or the infamous cult classic Showgirls have ended up feeling dated, exploitative, or just plain embarrassing. 

We're about as far from the risque charms of Gold Diggers of 1933 as we could be.  Joan Blondell never gave a lap dance and Marilyn Monroe never licked a pole.

Finally, the demise of the showgirl reflects a culture in which it is no longer officially acceptable to objectify women.  Most women don't want to be considered objects and would probably judge the role of the showgirl as she was depicted in movies of the past to be demeaning.  We don't "glorify the American girl" anymore, even if we still have beauty pageants and the leggy-but-wholesome Rockettes.

 

Lindsay Lohan may be in this month's Playboy, in an homage to Marilyn, but the whole thing feels forced and joyless.

I had the privilege of watching a most fascinating film about chorus girls last night, Ladies of the Chorus from 1948.  Cheaply made and just one hour long, it's nevertheless fascinating, hilarious, and highly entertaining, not the least because it's Marilyn Monroe's first starring role and we get to see her before she'd developed her dumb blonde persona.  Here she seems like a normal young woman, or as normal as a woman can be playing a character who's the "Queen of Burlesque."

The entire film can be viewed on YouTube, and if you have an hour to spare today, please do take a look, if only to hear such hilarious showgirl pearls as "Why you gray-haired old hag, shut your mouth or I'll slap it shut!" and "I'm quittin' -- this turkey can fold for all I care!"  

Your assignment, friends, is to watch Ladies of the Chorus (it's in roughly seven parts) and report back.  Anything seem strange about this film, which occasionally has the feel of a high school health film and the production values to match?  

What do you think of Marilyn, or "old hag" Adele Jergens, the woman who plays her mother (Jergens was just nine years older than Marilyn)?

In closing, do you have a favorite film featuring or focused on chorus girls?  Do you find the chorus girl/showgirl of yore entertaining, demeaning, or a little of both!

Ever sewn a chorus girl outfit -- or wanted to?

Jump in!

Read More

Am I ready? or Revisiting the Men's Suit Project

Readers, as 2011 draws to a close, I find myself wanting to choose one last big project to finish off the year with a bang.  I have four weeks.

Longtime readers will know that I've tackled suit jackets before.  I made this green/gray thing my first year of sewing.  This polyester blazer wasn't nearly as nice as it looks in this photo and I never wore it out of the house.  I'm pretty sure I've since dumped it.



I also made this eye-catching blazer.  Alas, I never lined it and never wore it out of the house either.  I do wear the matching pants, however.



Last year, I tried my hand at a corduroy jacket.  I went overboard purchasing tailoring books, however, ended up intimidated, and never finished it.  I'm not excited about it anymore.



In all the above cases, I used vintage Seventies jacket and suit patterns.  For some reason, at that time there was an explosion of men's tailored garment patterns, heavens knows why.  I've never seen a suit pattern from, say, the Forties, with the occasional blazer pattern turning up in the late Fifties.  Then all of a sudden, suits and blazers everywhere!  I own many such patterns.







Anyway, I'm considering taking the plunge once again.  This time, however, I'm going to limit myself to just one book, Simplicity's Sewing for Men and Boys.



Is it the definitive tailoring book?  Probably not, but it's straight forward and it's good enough for my current level of sewing.  If I complete the project and I'm ready for something more complex, I can move on to something like this.



I was looking at suiting fabric yesterday, and then I remembered I already have two different blue wool suitings in my stash, one a gift from my friend Melody, who owns Fashionista Fabrics, and another something I found in the trash (!), albeit in a clean plastic storage box full of sewing and knitting supplies.  (This happened before I started blogging.)

The trash suiting is Italian cashmere, and I have more than three yards.  The dog hair was my contribution.



Melody's gift is lighter weight pinstripe, and I have more than four yards.



So the question now is, am I up for this?  The pink blanket topper coat built my confidence somewhat, and I think I'd be more inclined to sew Michael a suit down the line (for which I already have the fabric) if I'd already made one for myself.  Plus, let's face it, knowing it's for me will give me a little more motivation.

So that's the story.  I'd likely start with pants, just to get acquainted with working with the wool.  If those turn out well, I'll be more excited about doing the jacket.

How do you feel about tackling tailoring projects, friends?  Do you generally avoid these kind of things or are you willing to deal with notched collars, pad stitching, and sleeve heads?

Wish me luck -- or talk me out of it!

Have a great day, everybody!

Read More

Michael's new (vintage) Butterick shirt!

Readers, has this ever happened to you?

I wasn't feeling much like sewing yesterday so I decided I'd do some ironing instead.   I started with the vintage cotton floral fabric, freshly laundered, that I intended to use (eventually) to make Michael a shirt, most likely from Butterick 3995, one of the patterns I featured yesterday.



Since the iron was already hot, I decided to press my pattern pieces flat too.



Then, seeing as there weren't that many pieces, I decided to cut them out (the pattern, from 1957, was unused).  Then I figured I might as well cut my fabric out too.   I also replaced my rotary cutter blade -- second time ever.



Long story short, approximately ten hours later, I'd basically finished the shirt.  (I hemmed it this morning.)  Sometimes it really does help to "just put one foot in front of the other," like on Santa Claus is Coming to Town.

Compared to many shirt patterns, this one was easy, especially if you skip the front welt pocket (Are they kidding?).  I generally don't put pockets on men's shirts, but if I did, I'd use a patch pocket and save myself a few precious hours.

This pattern is for a short-sleeved shirt, so there were no sleeve plackets.  Furthermore, there's no front button placket (the shirt has fold-back facings), and no collar stand.  In many ways it is similar to Colette's Negroni pattern.  There's simply not that much that can go wrong.



Like Negroni, it even has a little button loop at the collar.



For a novelty cotton shirt like this, I skipped true flat-felled seams and serged or overcast my side and shoulder seams and stitched them down from the outside, to create the same look.  The result is just as strong and way faster.  I'll only fuss for a fancy dress shirt at this point.







This shirt has some cute vintage details you don't see anymore.  I'm particularly fond of the shape of the back collar, which buttons down.



By the way, those buttons are vintage too, picked out by Michael from my button stash.



At the hemline, the front facings were stitched down before turning, and then the entire bottom hem simply pressed up.  I then turned the top edge under 1/4" and edgestitched.





And that, friends, is the story of how I made Michael a shirt in just one day.  Well, one day plus a half hour this morning.



I admit that unanticipated sewing success really does put me in a better mood; it shouldn't.  It also earns me some points with Michael, so the next time we have a sink full of dirty dishes....

You get the idea!

Happy Wednesday, everybody, and happy sewing.

More shirt project photos here.

Read More