For a June (2010) Bride


Vogue 884

I was just at a wedding where the bride's dress was *slightly* prettier and more elegant than this, but it's a close call. :-)

This is definitely a wedding dress for grown-ups; I wouldn't put this on someone in her early twenties. Or on someone who was getting married at noon; this is an evening dress. I might even consider making the front ruching and back swag in organza, and putting a few — VERY SUBTLE — tiny sparkly bits in it. Possibly. They'd have to be very subtle, though, or you'd go from Grown-Up Bride to Glinda The Good Witch in an eyeblink.

(The best part, though, is that I think you could just possibly hide a pocket in that back swag. I'd have to see the pattern, but I don't think it's entirely out of the question.)

This is listed by Michelle here, and it's sized at bust 34, hips 37 — very reasonable. (It's listed for $150, but when you think of what wedding dresses go for, that's not out of line, either).

If you are a June 2010 bride and think this is your wedding dress, congratulations! And mazel tov! And hurry up, you've only got a year to get this thing made!

38 thoughts on “For a June (2010) Bride

  1. Lovely pattern and the idea of a hidden pocket is great. (With that much of a swag, you might even be able to store something in it that would go completely unnoticed.) Hope the wedding was really fun! I love evening weddings.

    Like

  2. Wedding dresses should definitely have a hidden pocket – tissues, lipstick, and a compact close at hand, without a bag to worry about.

    Like

  3. This is so dang beautiful, and it would obviously be perfect as an evening gown in a color, not just a wedding gown. Elegant, elegant, elegant! (and love the pocket-in-the-back idea — kind of like a reverse marsupial . . . .)

    Like

  4. Love, love, love this gown. The back gores and swag could easily be incorporated into a number of current patterns. And the echo of that drape in the front ruching is brilliant!

    Like

  5. the best part: it’s not strapless like the majority of today’s wedding dresses so the bride can wear a regular bra!

    Like

  6. Wow, that reeks of elegance. Love the quasi-bustle look of the swag.Re: Bridal Pockets – I knew one girl who wore a sort of leg-holster thing under her skirt for essentials.

    Like

  7. I love love love this dress…. but I can’t afford to buy the pattern, and I’m not getting married anytime soon. And it might not work on someone as short as me.But oh my goodness, I’d love to own that pattern, not to mention that dress. It’s so beautiful.Chantelle

    Like

  8. It is stunning! I like the sparkle idea as well. Did you see the light-up wedding gown? Now that was a bit much.I have mine already- for Spring ’10! Vintage, of course.

    Like

  9. I’m making mine for my October ’09 wedding, but it’s not nearly as fancy as this beautiful number. A backyard barbecue wedding wouldn’t deserve a piece this pretty. Mine will be a Vogue Vintage pattern, 2902

    Like

  10. DROOL. Makes me wanna get married again! Erin, please stop showing these TO DIE FOR Couturier patterns.. you’re making me have severe pattern envy!! hahaha

    Like

  11. This is gorgeous — and the best part is that you could discreetly conceal some truly massive pockets in or under the back swag. Lovely.

    Like

  12. Ah that is *so* beautiful! Just looking at it makes you feel so elegant. I had intended to make my wedding dress, from a vintage pattern of course, (getting married in 17 days – ah!), but ran out of time and confidence.Instead, I have a Vivienne Westwood dress – *that has pockets*!Dilly

    Like

  13. There’s something sort of futuristic about this dress. It reminds me of something Uma Thurman might wear in Gattaca. Hmmmmmmm!PS: My Massachusetts friend did NOT get back to me, so I wasn’t able to advise Theresa about what thrift shops to hit while she was a Boston bridesmaid! Is she okay????? Did she get back safely???????

    Like

  14. A friend of mine was in a wedding and they were all given fabric and a Vogue pattern. She asked me to make it, but I was in Ohio, she was in Chicago and the pattern was Vogue plus difficile (no way)! I have a dress pattern in reserve that I bought 15 years ago (just in case), but I’ve changed sizes multiple times, and I’m not sure it’s going to work now.

    Like

  15. *sigh* How perfect. I would love to have that exact dress, except with corset top and tiny ruffles edging the top of the bodice. *sigh*

    Like

  16. yes, i made it to and back safely, cookie. thank you! turns out there was no time to shop anyway. The wedding was beautiful and the bride was radiant. All the bridesmaids looked wonderful — everyone got to pick the dress they liked in “victorian lilac” from David’s Bridal, so no one had to wear anything inappropriate for their shape or personal style. Nothing as pretty as this stunner!

    Like

  17. It’s wonderful. Not for me, as I don’t have the money, am not going to get married anytime soon and would not look as smashing in this type of dress anyway. But still, wow! And yes, I too love that it’s not strapless, vespabelle! I’m fed up with strapless formal gowns everywhere!

    Like

  18. @ whitewashasian: I have worn long tulle tutus under the skirts of dresses to give them volume.They add a satisfying amount of floof to the skirt experience.I suppose the one thing to consider is if a uniformly voluminous tutu will mess up the line of the dress, or if you need a crinoline with more structured volume that is graduated or something.I have also come across those fantastic vintage petticoats with oodles of netalicious volume that are, in effect, a tutu, in vintage stores around where I live.

    Like

  19. I am happy to report that a wonderful young lady is now the proud owner of this pattern. Thank you all for your great comments on this design!Michelle LeeownerPatterns from the Past

    Like

  20. Love the style of this gown!=) So simple but look so elegant.Hope to see more of this.Have a great day.=)A Writers DenThe Brown Mestizo

    Like

  21. I am thinking of uses for the back bustle pocket. At some weddings (as seen in Goodfellas and the underrated Mortal Thoughts) guests put envelopes of cash in a bag for the happy couple. In this dress, people could slip their envelopes directly into the bridal gown. Or if it were lined with plastic and given a spritz of water, the back pocket could act as a big vase, holding the bride’s bouquet while she stands in the receiving line. So many possibilities! Why, it could practically be a Honeymoon suitcase!

    Like

  22. lol! I can’t imagine putting the boquet in the back, but it’s quite an amusing mental image. What happens when you sit down if you have a pocket like that in the back? I would be more inclined to put on in the side seam which would be axcessed from behing and under the swag. :-)

    Like

  23. That is such a stunning gown! I wish I could a) afford and b) fit that pattern! My mum and I discussed this and decided that your no early 20s caveat needs to apply to a state of mind rather than actual age, since we know some young women (me for example) who could totally pull it off, and some others in their 30s who still couldnt.

    Like

  24. Oh I sooooo need that pattern! See I have 2 more wedding dresses to make. 2.5 girls married and dresses made, 2 to go!

    Like

  25. How Grace Kelly can you get? Ive seen that pattern a couple of times over the past few years and its always gone for over $200. It seems like something that wouldnt be too hard to replicate with a modern pattern and a bit of playing–but I may be too optomistic!

    Like

  26. nah, its listed high. what they want for mass produced wedding dresses is terrible. and now thats being used to justify all kinds of gouging. i dont think $150 is gouging. i just think its high – and its only high because it contains the W word.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s