Tuesday, February 11, 2014

The Monthly Stitch March Challenge: Miss Bossy!





In real life, I am the epitome of Miss Bossy--so much so that a friend once sent me a photo of a Little Miss Bossy book with the caption, "I found your biography."  But the flip side of that coin is that, when it comes to hobbies, I am sometimes paralyzed by indecision. Maybe that's why I have such a huge stash of patterns and fabric (yes, even after last week's purge).

I have "plans" for much of the goodies in my stash--in fact, there is a spreadsheet in my computer associating most of my fabrics with either a pattern or, at the least, a general style. But I decided to let go of the reigns a little and jump into The Monthly Stitch's new challenge for March--the Miss Bossy Challenge!  I have selected 3 of the orphans from the back of my pattern drawer--all things I would love to make "someday," and you, my lovely readers, have control.  I will absolutely make one of these garments in March.

Please use the comments to vote for your favorite. As I mentioned, I have a meticulous catalog of fabrics on hand, but I would love to see your recommendations for material as well.


McCall 4528
Originally published in 1958, this pattern is a slim-fitting sheath with a little surprise action: the buttons on the back are functional, and open to show a nearly-scandalous sliver of upper back. I have had this pattern for about a hundred years (or about 5, depending on how you count), and it also bears the distinction of being the most expensive pattern I've ever bought--it's hard to track down, and once I saw it, I wanted it so badly that I eventually paid $85 for it on a vintage trading site.  Yet, once it came into my possession, it was stashed away.  Is this the button dress's moment to climb out of the shadows and finally be sewn?

 
Butterick 5281
I have a huge soft spot for Butterick's vintage reproduction patterns. They have all the things I love about 1940s and 1950s patterns, minus all the things that drive me crazy. I get the classic, clean lines without struggling with brittle paper, missing construction directions, or weird stains. Plus, I can always get it in something approximating my true size, which, any plus-sized or curvily-proportioned seamstress can tell you, is not always easy when it comes to true vintage patterns.  I have a few textile options in mind for this dress, but nothing has ever leapt out at me. Do you think this is the dress that could make me the shortest, curviest Kate Hepburn ever?

Colette Nutmeg (1011)
It wouldn't be a Remnant Raider challenge without at least one lingerie pattern--they just lend themselves so well to those little one- and two-yard bits of material! Plus, I love to use Colette patterns. The instructions are so nicely printed (one step per page) and the sizing is based on a body much more similar to the one I live in than whoever modeled for the Big 3's patterns. This cute little bra-lette is another one that has been in the stash a long time--it's been with me through more than one move, and actually I once got as far as cutting out the paper in my size, but it's never made it all the way to the point of fabric or construction. Will the nutmeg bra and knicker set finally have its day?

15 comments:

  1. I vote for the shortest, curviest Kate Hepburn! Butterick 5281 would be awesome for a 1940's reproduction in a swing-y silk jersey (Carey Grant strictly optional.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Definitely McCall 4528 - I loved it too and picked it even before I saw how much it cost you! It would be too sad for that not to get made up

    ReplyDelete
  3. McCall's 4528 definitely. Maybe You can use a solid for the dress and a floral for the facings of those backpieces with some fabric covered buttons in that same floral...

    ReplyDelete
  4. McCall 4528 - that back detail is gorgeous!! :-)

    (I've made up Butterick 5281, twice in fact. It's a great pattern. So, you know, if you have enough time, I vote you make that one second. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is a hard choice between McCall 4528 and Butterick 5281, they are both divine, but at $85 it has to be McCall 4528 so you finally get your money's worth :) Hope it wins, can't wait to see it made up

    ReplyDelete
  6. McCall 4528 is a must. I really want to be sure you get your money's worth.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It has to be McCalls 4528 because it's business in the front and party in the back - gorgeous!

    ReplyDelete
  8. McCalls 4528 - after spending that much you NEED to sew it up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Though I would love to see you make the Butterick, as I have it in my stash, too, and it might encourage me to try it out, I have to go with McCalls 4528 for all the reasons other commenters have given! (not least its gorgeousness)

    ReplyDelete
  10. McCalls 4528. It's elegant and just so stunning. Please, please!

    ReplyDelete
  11. McCalls 4528. Looks like it would be fun to wear.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I vote for Butterick 5281, it has lovely lines, but I would not be sad to see the McCalls sewn up. It just looks special, even without the price tag.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Definitely the McCalls 4528. Something that pretty should be made.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I vote for 5281 they're all sweet patterns!

    Helen

    ReplyDelete