Vintage pattern search: The teddy and where it came from

With women's jumpsuits becoming a 'thing' again in the last few years, I thought I'd look into the history (Western, at least) of the undergarment of similar shape. I've included lots of links here; bolded ones lead to patterns that are in (re)print at time of writing. Many of the others lead to the Vintage Patterns Wiki, which may have its own links if anyone happens to be selling that particular pattern.

There are two sorts of under-jumpsuits I'm not covering in detail here, for the reason that there were/are far fewer sewing patterns for them. Often they would be made of knitted fabrics and more easily produced in factories than at home. One is the long-sleeved, long-legged union suit, which started off associated with the dress reform movement and, to the best of my knowledge, was eventually sold mainly as menswear and/or thermal underwear, before it was largely replaced by two-piece long underwear. The second is women's shapewear that is currently being made in stretch fabrics like powernet.

Combinations, 1870s-1920s

Starting around the mid-1870s, there were fashionable 'combinations'. There had been pantalettes and drawers prior to these; this just combined them with the corset cover to reduce bulk under the fitted fashions of the mid- to late 1870s. A problem with jumpsuits in general is how you'd use the toilet; these early combinations solved it by not having a closed crotch seam. As they were buttoned and rather fitted, I would guess they were worn over the corset. I don't have any images of my own of these, but for the costumer, Truly Victorian and Mantua Maker sell patterns for the earliest silhouettes. They had relatively built-up necklines and sometimes even little sleeves.

For the purposes of this post, I'll use 'combinations' to refer to this relatively substantial, complicated type with longish, bloomer-like legs, cut on the straight grain. However, the term continued to be used at least until the 30s, sometimes on rather different styles, and by the 1920s or so, combinations were sometimes described as 'cami-knickers' or 'cami-bockers', or just an 'undergarment'. (I'm not sure just how long those terms were used, but the first seems to have been used in the UK at least through the 80s, judging by Style patterns like this one.)

Combinations of this sort continued to exist for several decades, just changing silhouette to match the fashions. Here are two examples from Past Patterns, from the Edwardian era and the early teens, the latter having interesting princess seaming. Slightly later on, you start to see ones with the option of shoulder straps instead of the built-up neckline:

 Butterick 6209, mid teens (at a guess). As this one is described as a combination chemise and drawers, maybe it was worn under the corset rather than over.

Ideal 8172, ca. mid to late teens (this was a Montgomery Ward house brand)

Past Patterns 501, which interestingly has its own overskirt, dispenses with the gathered neckline entirely. I tried this pattern myself years ago. As I recall, it was nicely constructed, although the perfectly straight bodice with no darts was not capable of fitting gracefully on me. I wish I'd kept it, since I'd have no problem adding darts now.

Butterick 1871 (ca. late 20s): This pattern's fitted bodice could be self-lined for more structure in some fabrics; as that pattern piece is called the 'brassiere', it seems it was meant to act as such—though what we'd recognize as anything like a modern bra didn't come along until the 30s.

Envelope chemises, 1910s-20s

A second general approach starting in the teens or so was the envelope chemise. Based on the name, I suspect it was worn under the corset.* It did have a closure, which is made rather obvious in the illustration of this pattern reproduced by the Vintage Pattern Lending Library — a flat tab connecting back to front. The style seems ungainly to me, but it would have the advantage of being easily ironed. Still, as far as I can tell, the very flat, unshaped style was mostly limited to the late teens and twenties; it just might not have worked very well with the shapelier fashions before and after. 

Nonetheless, the flat tab closure did continue into the early 30s at least; Ladies' Home Journal 6424 has a rather different shape but still the same tab closure, though it's called a step-in and may have been worn over rather than under a girdle or corset (if any).

(* Many overviews of fashion history imply that corsets were abruptly discarded by almost everyone, either on the say-so of Paul Poiret in the teens, or because of the flapper look in the twenties. Well, Ivy Leaf is here (possibly NSFW, depending on your W) to tell you that they were not—unless by 'corset' you're thinking only of the Victorian wasp-waisted shape, corsets in the 1910s being still quite formidable, though not as narrow in the waist. I suspect what happened was that the women who did stop wearing them then were the newsworthy ones, unlike those who continued wearing them as they always had done, if only in different shapes and materials. In fairness, there certainly was a trend toward more elastic, lighter fabrics, and less steel over time.)

A smoother fit, 1930s-40s

As the fashionable silhouette became less tubular at the end of the 20s, the step-in (as I'll call it here) followed suit. McCall 5818 and Vintage Pattern Lending Library T6629 are probably only a couple years apart in age (I suspect a date of 1932 for the latter) but the progression in waist shaping is noticeable. By the mid-to-late 30s, we start to have something that looks pretty much like what we'd call a teddy. Folkwear calls it this in their Intimacies pattern, which I've made, but that's probably an anachronism. In vintage patterns you'll still see 'combination', 'cami-knickers', or 'step-in', as on McCall 4022, which has the same sort of closure — similar to the envelope chemise in that it's still a tab connecting back to front, but with more shaping and therefore less bulk. (Mrs Depew appears to do a reprint of that pattern.)

The step-in with raised, often diagonal, waist seaming was evidently common in the 30s into the 40s, if we can judge by what's on the Vintage Patterns Wiki. Just two other examples are Advance 1939 and Practical 3279. These were often bias-cut, but that may have ended as of the 40s, perhaps to save fabric. Anne Adams A4852 of 1944 has fisheye darts, and Du Barry 5409 (1942) has a whole lot of darting in the bodice front—the most fitted teddy bodice I've seen in what I assume is meant to be a woven fabric.

Disappearance (?) and gradual reappearance, 1950s-70s

Then, for the 50s and most of the 60s, I find nothing of teddy shape in vintage patterns, nor in old ads. Why is that? Unless they're there and I've just missed them, I can only speculate. Maybe they were considered not sufficiently ladylike, too much a continuation of the styles worn during the depression and the war, and/or too hard to fit to the wasp-waist silhouette (though they had managed it in the 1870s). They also seem much less workable as maternity wear than most any other lingerie I can think of—among other things, they could very quickly cease to fit lengthwise if not widthwise—which could have been a major consideration during the baby boom.

At any rate, as far as I know, the first teddy to reappear on the Vintage Patterns Wiki is McCall's 9776, described as a 'bra-pant-slip'. Then there is Kwik-Sew 940, which I presume is from the 70s — and bingo, we have the word 'teddy'. Both of these look somewhat similar in cut to the 1930s-40s styles, though the first seems intended to be more supportive. I also doubt either is bias-cut, though I can't say for sure without seeing the backs of the patterns. Judging from the other Kwik-Sew patterns of similar age that I do have, it seems likely that 940 is intended for nylon tricot.

Resurgence and stretch fabrics, 1980s-90s

In the 80s teddies seem to have returned with a vengeance. Any number of them can be found on the Vintage Patterns Wiki. Some are still rather reminiscent of the 30s, such as Vogue 8219, though it has an even more fitted bra-style bodice.

A new style coming out around this time is the bodysuit, essentially the same in cut as a modern one-piece bathing suit. One example I have that is still available, though only from Sewingpatterns.com, is Neue Mode 21092; as it has a West German address on the back I presume it can be dated to no later than 1990.

A variation on this cut is the addition of a flounce or ruffle on each hip, as on Simplicity 8946—reprehensible, IMO, and there were several others like it.

Poofy blousons and sleepwear, 1980s-90s

Not all 80s teddies were so fitted. Neue Mode 22011, a bit newer than 21092 but not in print, has a bathing-suit-like but looser cut with an elasticized waist. The teddies in Kwik-Sew's Beautiful Lingerie have a similar look, a bit bulky perhaps, but they would fit just fine under some of the very loose tops of the 80s. Some have waist seams and short-style bottoms, while some are closer to the bathing-suit shape in the legs.

Then there are the even baggier and/or frillier ones that are clearly meant as sleepwear. Examples include the rather obnoxious Kwik-Sew 1790, along with the more tolerable Kwik-Sew 1327 and Butterick 3195. 

The present

I don't get the impression the teddy is quite as popular now, or at least so pushed by the pattern companies, as it seems to have been as recently as the 80s. Though I haven't kept up with all the indie pattern brands, you can find stretch bodysuit patterns from Merckwaerdigh, some with nice lace detailing. Kwik-Sew did put out a woven teddy pattern somewhat recently, but it's now out of print, except as a download on Sewingpatterns.com.

Conclusion

The teddy as we know it now seems more decorative than practical, so I thought it might be interesting to look back to old styles that were quite different. If we're due for a revival, my favorite of the past styles is probably the 30s bias cut, since it can be relatively smooth and comfortable if fitted well. Some of the modern stretch-fabric-and-lace types can look nice as well, though they might be too hot for summer, and really high-quality lightweight laces can be difficult to find (more on that later).

McCall's cardigan and one more tricot project

Here's the McCall's cardigan I've been meaning to photograph.
It's 6996 which, judging from Patternreview, wasn't as massively popular as another cardigan-with-peplum pattern they put out, but still got a good many reviews. I plan to add one, real soon now. These have both been over-flashed and the real color is closer to what you see in the mirror, but I guess the advantage is the heathered pattern shows up.

I'm pretty happy with the pattern. My only complaint is I might like the collar to be gathered and stayed on the sides as well as at CB, at least if it'd help keep the shoulder seams where they belong (though I'm not certain it would). They tend to slide outward; it isn't absolutely terrible, but when it happens, it can give more of an extended or drop-shoulder look than the pattern would've intended, judging from the sleeve cap height. I like the peplum more than I expected, but it won't go with everything, so it does need some careful planning to wear.

Oh, and the coverstitch worked very well on this fabric, though you can't really see it at all in the photos (which is kind of the point).

I've got maybe half a yard of the fabric left but I'm not sure what, if anything, I'll do with that.

As for the pink tricot, I had quite a bit left and decided I could use another half-slip with just a bit more length. Turns out one of my knee-length skirts sits lower on the waist than I remembered. So this one's 20". I used the last bit of lace I had left over, cut in half so I could get it all the way around the hem. That means it was serged on RS together, rather than applied to the outside, to hide the cut edge.

This time the elastic's serged on, flipped inside, and sewn on with a much narrower three-step zigzag. I like the look of this better than the wide three-step zigzag I used last time. A narrow coverstitch would've looked even more like RTW, but I lacked the motivation to rethread the machine. Anyway, I highly recommend Kwik-Sew 2467 or Beautiful Lingerie, both of which will tell you how to cut and make these. They don't need to take more than an hour or so, once you're used to them.

Tricot and oldish Kwik-Sews

I've finally had the chance to sew some of the Antron tricot I got from Bra-maker's Supply the other month. I got pink because it was the one color they've got that I don't already have in RTW slips (the others they have being white, ivory, and black — come to think of it, I don't think I have ivory, but I guess I figured it was so close to white, pink would be the more interesting choice). It isn't a color I typically wear, but eh.

So far I've made Kwik-Sew 2394 and 2467. Unfortunately, both of these are now out of print (and I figure it's a matter of time before that 2467 link dies). For what it's worth, occasionally I see Sewingpatterns.com selling these older patterns as downloads long after the printed versions are out of production. I've shortened both of them by 4", because the problem I currently have is that most of my RTW slips are too long for my knee-length skirts. Hey, I'm short.

The full slip has lace edging and ribbon shoulder straps from Dressew. I considered making the straps adjustable, but I think they may be a bit too thin (thickness, not width, if you know what I mean) to stay in place in the sliders I have.

 
The half-slip hem is done with my machine's "M" stitch, which sort of looks like its mock blindstitch; the technique is described in several Kwik-Sew patterns as well as their Beautiful Lingerie book.

I must admit my tricot-sewing skillset is far behind some of my other sewing abilities (such as they may be). Until fairly recently, I've avoided sewing many lightweight knits, for a few reasons:

• I feel like there are already too many lightweight knits in RTW. I can see why the industry would want to do this; they presumably save on costs and encourage the customer to buy more layers to wear.
• I don't especially like layering (takes more planning than I enjoy doing) and I try to avoid wearing very thin knits on their own.
• My sewing machine doesn't always sew thin knits well. There's no presser foot pressure adjustment, and I haven't got a straight-stitch throat plate (I don't know if one was ever manufactured for this model), so I tend to run into problems with the fabric being stretched as it's sewn, or being sucked down into the machine... and that's assuming I can find a needle that will consistently pierce the fabric rather than sort of bouncing off, or more precisely, getting through at the wrong time to form a stitch. Now that I've got a serger that does a better job, this is less of an issue, but in the past it's meant that I've avoided those fabrics and therefore I've had less experience with them.

That means I didn't enjoy sewing this fabric all that much, and I'm thinking I'll probably prefer to stick to Bemberg for my slips in the future, not least for the greater variety of colors. Also, I suspect only the black color comes very close to being opaque. Still, the Antron does work quite well as an anti-static layer, and there's a lot to be said for Bra-maker's standard colors: their tricot should match their other pink, white, ivory, or black fabrics and notions well.

The weekend's Sewaholic/Fabrics Etc. meetup, and a new project.

This past Saturday I went to the meetup at Fabrics Etc., where Tasia from Sewaholic Patterns was speaking. Well, that makes it sound all formal; I guess I should call it more of a friendly chat/Q&A. I'd heard of her patterns but hadn't really been familiar with them. Although they are available both printed and in PDF, while I was in Germany I put off buying any: I didn't want them to go through customs, as printed patterns would, and I didn't want to print the PDFs if I'd be able to buy the printed patterns once I got back to Canada (which was "any month now" much of the time I was there). I'm not a big printing-PDFs person, though it does have other advantages and I'll occasionally go for it especially if the pattern is small (lingerie, for example).

Anyway. I like her thought process: my understanding is she's more interested in the construction, and making fairly classic designs that work well in real life, rather than creating very avant-garde or over-the-top styles. The patterns are proportioned for the (so-called) pear shape, probably more of a pronounced one than I personally have, so I might have to size down the hip area for once, rather than sizing it up. I'm most interested in the Granville shirt with its back princess seams (I need either those or a waist seam to fit into the small of my back nicely) and the retractable hood on the Minoru jacket.

As for what I'm starting at the moment, it's a slip from Kwik-Sew 2394. I got some Antron tricot from Bra-makers' Supply, plus some ribbon and lace from Dressew, and I'm making View B, but cutting 4" off the short length, my current problem being that most of my RTW slips are too long. I may do a tricot-vs.-Bemberg faceoff one of these days, but here are my thoughts on the tricot as of right now.

1. It only comes in a few colors, none of which are really to my taste. I'm guessing since the trend has been away from synthetics for the past several years, and it seems to be getting harder and harder to find even RTW slips, there's not enough money to be made by dyeing this in anything other than basic colors. They've got white, ivory, pink, and black. It's all nylon so it should dye well, but I'm very skittish about that, since I rent and my entire apartment is light colors.
2. If you're looking for opacity, you're not going to get much from the light colors (not that you necessarily would from Bemberg either).
3. It has some stretch. There are several older Kwik-Sew patterns designed for tricot that must make some use of that: they tend to also allow you to use wovens, but only if you cut them on the bias.
4. It should be anti-static. I'll need to give it a real-life test to know how it compares in that regard to Bemberg, but at least so far it's behaving well and doesn't seem to be sticking to itself at all.

Bra-makers Supply colorways

This is not related to anything I'm currently working on, but I've been meaning to write it up for a while.

Bra-makers Supply is a (the?) Canadian online vendor of lingerie supplies. I've yet to buy any large amount from them, but one of their main features is they have certain colors for which they sell matching fabrics, elastics, and notions.

This addresses a major problem with home sewing in general: we usually don't have our notions dyed to match; we just have to choose from whatever standardized, or miscellaneous, colors someone has decided to manufacture. This is an even worse problem with bras, because they have so many components made of different materials. It's easy to get stuck with near-miss color matches, plain black or white, or contrasting colors when you'd rather use only one.

Here is Bra-makers' Duoplex swatch set:

Duoplex is one of their nonstretch fabrics that you'd use for cups. They do swatch sets for other fabrics too; I just got this one because it had the widest range of colors available. (Unfortunately, this is photographed in artificial light, and the brightness and clarity of most of the colors doesn't come across.)

Keep in mind, the range of colors for which elastic and closures are available, at time of writing anyway, is much more limited: pink, a couple beige shades, dark brown, ivory, white, red, and black, and I think just recently they've added fuchsia and turquoise. I personally am not a big fan of all the brights and clear pastels, and wish they'd do more of the muted or dark colors (they've got a dark plum, dark green, two grays, and two sorts of navy, but no matching notions for them). Still, being able to get color-matched, more-or-less continuously available fabric and notions at all is a big deal.

Anyway, the other nice thing Bra-makers does is list Pantone numbers, at least for their standard fabrics and elastics (not so much for their laces). If you have the Fashion & Home deck, although matching fabric to paper is not ideal, you can look those up. And while I think they've tried their best to match colors to numbers, in some cases the Pantone deck just doesn't have a great match.

Here the Pink is a decent match for the Pantone color they chose (right below it). The Mid-tone Grey, not so much: the fabric definitely has more of a red-violet cast. But looking through the deck, I could see that was arguably the best match available. The White is a real optic white that is brighter than anything in the deck, though newer decks may have a better match than older ones, as they can yellow or dull with age. Anyway, my point is: this is good enough to get a general idea, but if you're going to try to match anything to Bra-makers' colors, and you're as picky about it as I am, you're best off getting a swatch set. The other advantage is it's much lighter and easier to carry around.

One of these days I want to write up a big comparison of several lingerie supply vendors. Generally speaking, I would say Bra-makers is good for relatively unadorned bras, and they consider a big range of sizes. In comparison, some of the European vendors have much prettier lace, but none of them do the custom-dye thing as far as I know, and their fabrics may need some backing to be supportive enough for the larger sizes. More on all this later.

Your Wardrobe Unlock'd / Foundations Revealed

I've subscribed to one or both of Your Wardrobe Unlock'd and Foundations Revealed for a while now. They each publish an article per week; generally they are tutorials on how to make a specific garment or detail, draft a pattern, or approach some aspect of sewing as a business. What they offer is unique, so I was sorry to learn that they're having trouble getting enough subscribers and might not be able to continue.

YWO focuses on historic clothing (medieval to early 20th century, so far) and FR on underclothing (mainly historic but also modern). Yes, they are rather specialized, but do have a look if you're interested; some of the articles are accessible to non-subscribers, to give you an idea of what they do. They're discounting the subscription price for the first month.