When is a bedgown not a
bed gown? When it is a bedgown of course! Shortgown or "Manteau
de Lit", or occasionally a casaquin or caraco ( still haven't
sorted out the names of things).
1741 Hogarth painting of Elizabeth Betts. Just what is she wearing? It looks to be a silk crossover gown, simple straight neckline, odd creases at the shoulder and worn over a chemise. The sleeves are folded back, unlined, showing the lace on the chemise cuffs. I posted this in a couple of facebook groups and the consensus was either a deshabille garment, an old robe a la francaise being used for lounging-around-at-home, or a length of fabric draped on her by the artist.
We went for the
deshabille option. What a mistake! Life would have been so much
easier if the artist drapery came out on top!
So research.... in
trying to find deshabille examples I came across the bedgown, such a
general term that all sorts of garments, functions and fabrics came
into range, and the crossover was one of the fastening options.
 |
| Both from Phillip Mercier |
The definitions I have
found agree that it is an informal loose coat/bodice very simply
made out of one block of fabric. Diderot describes them as a "kind
of short clothing which the women wear to the bed, and which they
keep in the morning in the fashions of 'deshabille'. " This was the
posher version, silk, fine cotton or linen, often lined and pretty.
(What I would know as a dressing gown?)
Just to confuse me, the
name was also being used for the common practical work clothing of
most women, the shortgowns. These are everywhere in the images showing the working classes - the print after J Collett has the old hag in one. I guess the same structure of garment was
used but made from hard wearing fabric, even wool for warmth. These
were not so pretty, often crossed at the front and held in place by
tying the apron over the top as in the Sandby sketch.
This seems to be a
very versatile garment, adaptable enough not to be out of place in
any company; it could be worn by all, made of any fabric, plain or
embellished, work wear or for casual home wear. The extant ones
labelled “bedgown” seem to be a motley lot, some are more
complex, some have drawstring waists and the neckline appears to be
personal choice. The problem 
may be that the name started as a description
of the function and then broadened to cover any similar garment.
may be that the name started as a description
of the function and then broadened to cover any similar garment.
Like all the best
things the design is logical and economical and adaptable enough to
be long lived – think maybe of 18th century denims or
tee-shirts? The KCI cites the influence of imported of Japanese kimonos. These had been in demand as men's wear but were in short supply so other sources were found – like the banyan from India, popular in England. Made from one length of fabric folded and cut into a
'T', with a centre front cut for the opening. There are no set in
sleeves, and only the minimum of seams and fuss.
There are several
patterns, modern interpretations and original versions, available.
Most have the fabric folded at the shoulderline and the basic shapes
cut out of the front and back together, some show it folded side to
side as well so the complete garment was cut in one go- half the
measuring and quick. The shape was modified with pleats at the back
and hip, or flaring skirts, with some having underarm gussets as
well. Necklines could be left as the single cut or shaped as desired,
and the off cuts used to extend the sleeve or as a cuff.
I even tried imagining the next part of the painting as if it was a bedgown - seems feasible. (why does she look so worried?)
Now being utterly frustrated
and made cross eyed by the circular and warm fuzzy nature of the research,
it was time to make....
My starting point will be instructions and illustrations from the classic document - Garsault's L'art du tailleur, published in 1769. ( the whole book is online courtesy of Bunka Gakuen Library.) I followed it as fig 10- the cutting outline, fig 7 - the cut fabric, fig 8 - the inside back showing centre pleat and side pleats in place, fig 9 - the front assembled, fig 11 - creating the collar and 12 shows the completed coat.
Fortunately, having
tried to read a little of the original I found a real life line - it does everything I wanted to, does it clearly and with pictures! and it's called " Making a Bedgown".
She has set out her interpretation alongside a translation of
Garsault, phew indeed. Mine will be based on his description but not
try to follow it exactly. Even the initial layout is a slight
variation, he begins with his shoulder fold above half way –
cuts the front opening up beyond the half way point to the back of the neck
opening, then re folds on the half way mark to cut the sleeve and
bodice shapes. I cheated - marked halfway up the fabric length and
then simply cut the opening to 2 or 3 centimetres beyond it, did the
back neck cut and then folded.
Construction was very
straightforward – a back box pleat from neck to waist - would allow for ease and arm movement ( if Gwen moved, or had arms) – one line of
stitching. The neck had to be widened again to allow for this and
the extra cuts back to the shoulder line were made then.
The most evil part was next – gussets under the armpits- Garsault calls the wedges?- I have lived most of my life in blissful ignorance of these things but no more. What was worse I wrestled them into submission and then decided to undo and reduce in size. To try to develop some empathy they are now called Horace (been reading Pratchett again).
There is one in there somewhere - the new game of spot the Horace.
I left the full width
of the fabric on the skirt to make the hip pleats, so having sewn the
skirt seams then folded the excess into double box pleats and sewed
them in place. Fairly standard practice. The front edge was folded back on itself to make a
false robing ( G says pleats) and a small section added across the back of the neck to
complete the shawl collar. The offcuts from under the sleeve were pieced and added to extend the sleeve.
Hemmed it and it is done! At its most simple this is a very easy and quick sew. Nothing fancy at all, and it gives a robust, useful short robe. No exceptional skills or precise fitting were required so no wonder that it was so popular as workwear. The cutting layout is so straightforward and economical it would appeal to anyone on a budget. But.... Then added
cuffs. Then played with fastenings, and removed them again. Then
thought about aprons. Then set up a la Hogarth. Why does finishing take as long as starting? It should all be downhill by now.
The gown feels quite
alien in a way. Everything else has had to be fitted – even the
sack backed pet en l'air had a tightly laced bodice lining
underneath. I think mine is just a bit too long (stand Gwen on a
box was the first response to that one). The fabric mix is a bit off
– they are both from the pillowcase stash- but actually work very
well together in black and white, hence the pencil study ( a la Ingres).
In most of the photos it is pinned or belted - and does look a bit like maternity wear, so when trying to match Hogarth's I pinned some ties at the waist and pulled hard. Surprisingly the pulls and creases are very alike.
Key questions of the
week – what was a bedgown ? and could this have been the garment
in the Hogarth painting?
Well I could hazard an answer to the first one but
with all the usual quibbles about there being no single definitive answer that covers all eras, countries, functions.
As for the second -1741- were these around then? Garsault published in 1769 so they must predate then. One site
said not before the 1760s, and a couple of the American ones point
out how difficult it is to date or attribute accurately. These were
not the kind of garments that were preserved or documented
extensively. I like the practical evidence though - the pulls at the waist are horizontal and follow the same pattern as in the painting without any tweaking.
The honest answer to
the second question will have to be – maybe.
Hogarth - BBC paintings- http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings/
http://digital.bunka.ac.jp/kichosho/file/No.225/225-0000-048.jpg 
No comments:
Post a Comment