Modern clothing tends to be designed to catch the eye while on the hanger with less emphasis on how it looks on the body. Of course there are exceptions but this is often the case. Not so with vintage. I doubt that Chanel was thinking hanger appeal when she insisted all of her garments be cut to perfection. Her garments had to be cut just right.. Chanel insited the arms be allowed to move freely without straining or raising the rest of the outfit. As fitted as a Chanel suit looks it is probably one of the most comfortable outfits a woman can wear. Even the modest vintage design houses created design seams so the garment could be altered to fit the unique shape of it’s wearer. Things like bust darts and princess seams were incorporated into the design to allow for fitting. In modern clothing even if there are fitting lines they are often overlocked so alteration is difficult if not impossible. The best way to assess a well-cut vintage garment is to try it on the body or see it on a dress form. Is it flattering to the body? Does it allow for ease of movement? Do the lines of the dress fight or flow with the body? Keep in mind that a well-designed garment will not necessarily work on ALL body types however they do tend to look well on a wide range.
Harmony in clothing design is a bit abstract but very important. To define harmony lets think of some of it’s opposites. Words like chaotic, confusing, jarring and dull come to mind. A design can be exciting and stimulating visually without appearing chaotic or confusing. A harmonious design DELIBERATLY leads the eye where the designer wants it to go. You may not know how, but you will know IF the designer is successful. A Pucci print dress from the 1960s is wild and exciting, but Pucci prints with their flowing abstract shapes and precise well placed borders take you on a well calculated visual ride. Pucci dresses are never jarring or confusing. They may not be everyone’s taste but they are beautifully designed!
Harmony is never dull either. So many of the classics in Vintage are quiet and simple but not dull. Sheath dresses from the 1960s are a great example. On the hanger they can appear dumpy or limp. When they are worn, the transformation is miraculous. If designed well they echo the body with subtle shaping in the seam lines. The fabric will hold its shape but not fight movement. I don’t think I have ever come across a modern sheath dress that equals the vintage. Yes there are some nice ones out there but the vintage is superior. Pauline Trigere did my favorite sheaths. Her house virtually sculpted fabric to be in harmony with the body.
Finally, a few words on balance. Whether you know it or not your eye is always calculating balance. The vase is too small for the bouquet or the cake is lopsided. This stuff bothers most of us to some degree. I can guarantee that many times you just don’t like a garment but can’t explain why, it is out of balance. We DO like asymmetry (one shoulder gowns.. off center bows etc.) but we want them in balance. Here I have to say vintage has it hands down over modern clothing. Even schoolgirls taking home economics were taught principles of balance and harmony in clothing. When modern designers try to re-interpret vintage they will borrow the details without paying closer attention to their use in the whole design. There ARE design geniuses out there today. I am not saying there are not but I do think the quality of design in clothing has diminished over the years.
Return to table of contents
