I'm going to hold off on this pattern and hope for it to show up in the next size up, even though I think it's pure genius and I could certainly go up from a B34 to a B36.

It's from FuzzyLizzie's Vintage Patterns, and even if you aren't a fan of Halston, go there right now. Seriously. She has tons of Mary Quant! She has older Dior! She has Betsey Johnson! And all at very, very reasonable prices (under $20, for the most part). There's a 50s dress in particular with a scalloped detail that goes across the front and *over onto the back shoulder* that I think is worth three times what's she's charging.

Anyway, back to Mr. Halston. In a weak moment (aren't they all?) I bought some bright magenta knit fabric that just screams for a minimally-seamed 1970's dress to set it off (although how I'd do the facings that must be required for this neckline in knit I'm not sure … maybe it's self-lined? That would work …). I think this one would be excellent. You can control the plunge of the neckline and the length of the skirt and there are no goddamn Bishop sleeves to deal with. (I hate Bishop sleeves, what a lot of trouble for something so unpleasant to wear and look at!)

The only thing I don't like about this dress is that there are no side seams, so there is nowhere to put a pocket unless I put it in the underbust seam, and if I'm going to put a pocket there I might as well carry money around in my bra. And the knit I'm thinking about won't support a patch pocket (which would also ruin the line of the dress). Ah, well, on to the next candidate.

Isn't this a cute dress from Revamp Vintage? Thank La Bella Donna for pointing us all toward their site.

This dress, from their 1930s collection, is really adorable, and I say this as an avowed opponent of puff sleeves. Not that I haven't worn them myself, it's just I always regret it later, much like eating Cool Ranch Doritos.

Anyway, it's $150, they make them in limited runs, click on the picture, blah blah blah.

Now for the rant, which the Revamp site reminded me of. Revamp, helpfully, has sections on vintage makeup and hairstyles, so you can get the complete look. I have nothing against the complete look, but I personally prefer to wear my vintage in a completely ahistorical manner. (Not to mention that achieving a totally vintage look is HARD.)

In addition to the 'how-to-do-you-get-a-finger-wave" stuff, Revamp also provides little histories of each era for which they make clothes, thumbnail overviews, really, just in case someone can't quite remember when WWII was. From their 1950s overview: "Certainly some women [giving up work outside the home after the war] were reluctant to give up their newly found sense of independence, but many women were happy to take up their traditional roles again. … The main image for women was of demure femininity suitable for the sober role of motherhood." Now, there are certain arguments that can be made about how the role of homemaker and full-time mother was one that was not really possible for any but a very limited class of women before the 1950s, and, of course, whenever you see the word "many," the natural reaction is to say "HOW many, and how do you know?" But it's (I remind myself) just a quick sketch of a complicated era, put up to sell clothes.

All that aside, I get tremendously irked (here's the rant coming, fair warning) when someone thinks that just because I'm wearing a 1950s dress, I have 1950s thoughts, and espouse the values that are (usually erroneously) attributed to that era. Anyway, excuse my language, but fuck that noise.

I wear 1950s styles for aesthetic reasons, not ideological ones. I just like the way they look. I don't think that a full skirt correlates at all with a desire for women not to work outside the home, for instance. Or that my fondness for little cardigan sweaters, with or without pearls, should be taken as an indication that I disapprove of premarital sex, or that a Peter Pan collar signals "Hey, love those Jim Crow laws!" I know that some people wear vintage as part of a greater push toward recapturing what they consider to be some golden age, but, really, the past mostly sucked. So I don't really understand idealizing that time, no matter how aesthetically pleasing the clothes and cars were.

This correlation of clothes and ideology seems to be tighter for the 1950s, by the way. If you show up in some 1930s silk bias evening gown, nobody assumes that you're pro-Hitler. A cloche hat doesn't signify any opinion, either way, on Prohibition. A 1940s dress isn't read as a silent vote for internment camps. But put on a June Cleaver-ish dress, and all of a sudden you're a sergeant in the June Cleaver Attitude Readjustment & Nostalgia Army.

Thanks but no thanks. I don't want to return to some supposedly more genteel era (all my time-machine fantasies involve me going back, buying out a few department stores after betting on the Kentucky Derby winner, and returning hot-foot to the present day with my trophies). I like it here just fine, thanks, what with the Internet and stay-at-home dads and contraception and cell phones and integration and jetpacks and all. Oh, wait, I forgot that we don't have jetpacks yet. But when we do I'm gonna be wearing a nice full skirt with mine. And possibly pearls.

I suggest you add this eBay seller your favorites list, because … look at this scan! Perfect, high-res, great detail — AND she scans the backs of the patterns so you can see the pattern pieces and the fabric requirements! ::love::

I adore the bodice on this one. Those gathers aren't as hard to sew as you might think, because (next suggestion) you can brute-force the flat piece over the gathers with the topstitching.

I also (and does this even warrant mentioning?) love the pockets. I do not, however, love the skirt, which requires you (in the mode of the times) to have dispensed with such trivial things as hips. (If you are naturally tall and slender, though, instead of shortish and roundish as I am, this is the dress for you!)

If this weren't B32 I would be strongly tempted to buy it and (another suggestion) change the skirt to a more forgiving A-line. In fact, (last few suggestions I promise) think of an A-line skirt with a center gore mirroring the triangle of the bodice … think of that bodice in handkerchief linen … (absolutely, positively last suggestion) click on the image to see the eBay auction — it only has a day or two to run. And it's a Canadian seller, so … cheap!

Isn't this amazing? (Thanks, Mary Beth!) It's not for sale, but click on the image to read the story behind its acquisition and a long train of admiring comments.

It's beaded, so I can't even imagine how much it weighs. Or how many hours it took to make … I think I am content to admire it from afar, instead of wanting to wear it (or even have one) myself. Everything I've ever had that was beaded started shedding beads the moment it crossed my threshold. I evidently have some special bead-loosening power. Don't worry, I only use it for good, not for evil.

I adore that color (as I think I've mentioned before). In fact, today I am wearing not only a teal sweater but teal tights. With an A-line skirt that is a Liberty print of orange dots and red stars. (I am demented, yes, I am. Thanks for noticing.) But somehow it works … at least, I think it works. I'm still waiting on the independent verification team.

Just a quick note for any Oak Park, Illinois peeps — if you are free tonight, I can't imagine why you wouldn't go see Mary Beth Klatt talk about vintage wedding dresses at the Historical Society of Oak Park and River Forest. Details here.

I'd be there but I'm out of town.

This dress is from Isadoras.com and is, sadly, already sold. They have a couple more, though, if orange blossoms are in your future.

Another wonderful dress from Madelene (thanks!) who helpfully points out it has no pockets. Sigh. However, the skirt is full enough that you could reverse-engineer some in, if you were so inclined.

From Robin Clayton Vintage, it's only $70, and is B36. There's a ton of other stuff on that site — great stuff! — and I had a hard time making up my mind which dress to post from there and will probably be returning to that well.

I'm not sure why I'm so obsessed with teal lately. I know it's the color of the season and all, but I'm not usually so in tune with our Pantone Overlords. All I know is that lately anything teal (sweaters, scarves, tights, ducks) catches my eye and holds on to it, hard. Which is probably why I have roughly ten (possibly fifteen) yards of teal fabric in varying weights and prints waiting to be sewn up. It's akin to the great Candy-Pink Reign of Terror I experienced in 2003 …

Now I just need to find teal eyeglasses, and I'll be all set to be the teal equivalent of the crazy purple-wearing lady. [warning, link to FARK, not safe for work, keyboards, or faith in mankind.]

Check out this incredible 1930s abstract-plaid dress at TangerineBoutique.com. Now, that's what I call plaid. None of your sissy "Black Watch" or "Campbell," nosirree. This is a plaid that is expending all its considerable energy giving a big "oh yeah?" to the Depression.

It's only $68, and it's a "generous medium" according to the proprietor: "The bust measures 38" the waist 31" and the hips 40". The length of the skirt is just over 27" and the back bodice measures 16" from neck to waist." Tangerine Boutique goes on to say "It would work very well on a tall frame." To which I say, "Well, yeah! It's from the 1930s! They euthanized short people then."

It's got (you can't really see it in the picture) a cute little sailor tie around the neck, too. And, of course, pockets. Go get it before the bank comes to take the farm.

Okay. Remember the Milly dress in this same print that was just a waste of this excellent fabric? Well, obviously, this dress was the main event and that other one was just something to use up the leftover fabric (which explains why it was so skimpy). I still wish they had just given the leftover fabric to ME, but evidently the Milly designers don't read Dress A Day.

This one is available at Shoptwigs.com for $345, but only in size six. (Another reason why I need a couple yards of this fabric for my very own.)

It has, according to the description, "ruched cap sleeves, sweetheart neckline, satin bow detail and front slit pockets." Two out of three isn't bad! (Why "they" feel sleeves have to be ruched this season, I have no clue.) However, I forgive much for pockets. Yay, pockets.

You know, I haven't really made fun of anything here in a while, so my snark has gotten a bit rusty. I thought I'd start up again with something easy, like … I dunno, latex stripper dresses? Yeah. That easy. Like, the training wheels of dress snark. Not just training wheels, training wheels AND your dad running next to you. While you are wearing a helmet and elbow pads. Anyway.

I'm pretty sure you've figured it out by now, but clicking on that image will take you to a site that is very unsafe for work, unless you work at the Badda-Bing.

Here's the description of this dress. My comments are in italics. Dripping italics.

This latex rubber dress is perfect for any event. I'm glad, because Grandma's funeral is tomorrow and I need a black dress. A very, very shiny black dress. It has fabulous long sleeve dress that is not even English! with zip up full front & buckle neck with silver clasp. This is named for my girlfreind Trixie I worked in town with & used to slide down stripped poles. They were firefighters! Who knew! It gives cleavage and it taketh away? & it the best in sexiest latex clothing. something else is the best in "sexier latex clothing," or perhaps just clothing, full stop. Meduim Weight rubber to curve every hug. that is so good it needs no comment.

I especially like that, even though the dress is named "Trixie," the image file is named "Melissa." Everybody say hi to Melissa, now!

I also like that, on this page, they tell us that "Corsets date back to the 1940's when glam was what it was all about. You would NEVER see a lady in anything except high heels." Wait. I don't get it! If you'd never see a lady in anything but high heels, what did they do with the corsets? And if corsets don't predate the '40s, what was that thing I saw in Gone With The Wind?

Okay, whew. Now I feel the need to make some sex-positive, whatever-floats-your-boat, happy-happy disclaimer. Consider it disclaimed, and don't flame me just because you wear stuff like this every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

All right. That was a good warmup. Maybe, tomorrow, if I feel like it, I'll snark on Stella McCartney.

Anyway, aside from the hysterically funny point of this comic book image, look at the dress Lois is wearing. I've been looking for that thirties-style pattern for a while now. A collared dress WITHOUT a front placket, with kimono sleeves. Isn't it cute?

I have no idea where this scan came from (other than from my friend Thad, hi Thad!) so I can't go find out how the rest of the dress was drawn in other panels, but I'm fairly certain it has a high curved midriff band and a narrow skirt with a pleated kickpanel in the back. Don't ask me how I know, I just do. Why do you think Superman loves Lois, anyway? It's the dresses!

The matching gloves and beret and the bumblebee tie are just icing.