North and South costumes

[crazyapple]

Greetings to everyone,

I'm brand new to this board and a very avid seamstress but relatively new to period clothing/costumes.

I'm looking to re-make my wardrobe in period style (a few different periods) for everyday wear (more or less). My first question to all of you talented and marvelous folks is this....

Have you any recommendations for patterns to recreate the fashions worn my Margaret Hale in BBC's 'North and South'?
I'm particularly confused by how her gowns/skirts were supported. Multiple petticoats or a hoop?

Thanks
Crazyapple

[cosmoblue]

I do not know for sure about the costumes because I have only been researching Regency costume and not Victorian as that book seems to be. I would check to see if Truly Victorian has a pattern that would suit.

trulyvictorian.com/catalog/undies.html
www.simplicity.com/index.cfm?all=Y&cat=4&type=19&sec=37,40,43,45&browTypeId=&startrow=1

[modernmorland]

Hi Crazyapple!

I just made a gown from Simplicity pattern 2881 (top right of the Simplicity page for which Cosmo provided a link), and it turned out looking very Margaret Hale. I didn't use the shoulder straps, which simplified the bodice considerably, although it does mean that it's more off-the-shoulder than I intended. You might be able to fix that with a little anachronistic elastic. I also substituted hook and eye closures for the back lacing. I wear it with hoops, but I think multiple petticoats might be more correct for the period you want, as well as making it more workable for modern wear. Mine is taffeta, which isn't terribly practical either.

Here are some pictures of mine: img.photobucket.com/albums/v477/modernmorland/100_1250crop.jpg
img.photobucket.com/albums/v477/modernmorland/100_1253.jpg

As you can see, the skirt and bodice are separate, and the skirt works very well paired with a nice blouse, such as can be seen here (my "Margaret Hale" pose): img.photobucket.com/albums/v477/modernmorland/DSCN3282.jpg

BE AWARE that this pattern suggests something I considered completely crazy: sewing each piece of the bodice to the corresponding piece of lining separately, then sewing them together and leaving lots of raw edges on the inside of the garment. I didn't do this, but constructed the bodice in the usual way, losing about a half inch of fabric all the way around in the process. This also contributed to the off-shoulder look. If I'd had more foresight, I would have cut the bodice pieces that much bigger to make up for it, and that's what I'd suggest to anybody using this pattern.

Sincerely,
Modernmorland

[modernmorland]

On the other hand...there's pattern 4900. I know nothing about it, but it looks a lot like the sort of thing Margaret wears (in this picture, for instance: www.bbc.co.uk/drama/content/images/2006/11/03/northandsouth_396x222.jpg)

If you should, by any chance, end up trying that one, I'd love to know what you think.

[Val]

Aug 25, 2008 15:39:00 GMT -5 modernmorland said:

BE AWARE that this pattern suggests something I considered completely crazy: sewing each piece of the bodice to the corresponding piece of lining separately, then sewing them together and leaving lots of raw edges on the inside of the garment. I didn't do this, but constructed the bodice in the usual way, losing about a half inch of fabric all the way around in the process. This also contributed to the off-shoulder look.

**********
This is known as flatlining, and is very important to the fit of the bodice. It gives a smoother finish and strengthens the outside fabric. You won't see stretching or wrinkles as much if you use it. And historically, this is how it would have been sewn.
The more modern method, sewing right sides together and then turning it inside out, is called baglining. If you need to make size readjustments, it's a lot harder to get to the seams, or do the boning.
On my first gown I didn't do it because I thought it would make the costume too warm. Unfortunately it wasn't the nice smooth finish it should have had, and made no difference in the warmth factor.
I keep a big stash of twill just for the purpose of flatlining now.

[modernmorland]

Aha! I knew the pattern was taken from an original garment, so I figured it was accurate, but I hated the idea of all those raw edges messing up the fit on the inside. I figured they'd get bunched up when I moved. So Val, is the idea that you then cover up the raw edges with twill?

[dawnluckham]

Val’s got it right!

But no, they didn’t worry that much about finishing off the seams. They would hand overcast the raw edges and that would be it. If you were truly set on having a beautiful inside to the garment, you may flat fell the seams. I don't think I've ever seen an extent garment with seams finished in twill tape.

[Anna]

Clothes weren't laundered nearly as often back then (except for underthings, which had well-finished seams and were sturdily made). That's because the underwear kept the clothing clean of sweat and oil, and the fancy dresses weren't meant for hard use where they might get dirty. Dresses that were expected to get dirty were made of simpler, cheeper fabric, and made more simply, and an apron was worn over them to help protect.