Tuesday, November 12, 2013

Shocking Pink . . . in the 1830s?

Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Isabella reporting,

I'm afraid I'm as guilty as anyone of imagining the late Romantics and early Victorians as dressing in nothing but the most fragile and languid of non-colors. It doesn't matter how much proof I've seen to the contrary in the fashion plates that Loretta has posted. My imagination says otherwise, and insists on picturing subdued colors for this era, with nothing more vivid than, oh, a maiden's blush.

This weekend my imagination received a firm slap of reality with these two dresses, left, from the collection of the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. This pair were so bright that they nearly glowed in luscious, vibrant shades of pink.

The American dress with the short sleeves is the earlier of the two, dating from about 1830. It's made of silk satin patterned with weft floats, and dyed with either madder or cochineal (the king of red-dyes and Starbuck's strawberry frappuccinos – more about it here). The lady who entered a room in this gown would have had every eye on her, and with good reason, too. Simple in style, it's the color that makes it such a beautiful stand-out.

The dress with the longer sleeves dates from 1868-70, and was also sewn in America, but of fabric made of pineapple leaf fiber from the Philippines and combined with a silk underdress trimmed with silk net. According to the museum's label, the dress has an interesting history: "This bright pink dress was originally worn by Mary Francis Cook of Hyde Park, Massachusetts, and was made of piña cloth brought home by her sea-captain father. By the second half of the 19th century, the port of Manila had a vibrant trade in pineapple fiber cloth, which was lauded for being strong, light-weight, and breathable. This fabric was dyed with fuchsine, an aniline dye color introduced in 1858 that became ultra-fashionable in the 1860s."

In other words, the color of the earlier dress came from naturally derived plant or animal dyes that had been in use for hundreds of years, while the later dress represents the latest in 19th c. color innovations, straight from the chemist's lab. Yet side by side, the two complement one another beautifully, like a pair of prize azaleas.

Both dresses are part of Think Pink, a charming interdisciplinary exhibition now showing (through May 26, 2014) at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. It's small - only a single gallery - and tucked away in a distant corner, but it's a delightful, thoughtful look at the color pink in fashion from the 18th c. to the present day. Pink girls (you know who you are) will love it, and if you're visiting the MFA for the blockbuster exhibition of John Singer Sargent watercolors, it's well worth the trip upstairs, away from the crowds.

Day dress, United States, c. 1830, silk satin patterned with weft floats, dyed with madder or cochineal.
Day dress of piña cloth, United States (fabric from Philippines), 1868-70, pineapple leaf fiber (piña) plain weave dyed with fuchsine; silk pain weave underdress trimmed with silk net.
Both from the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Photographs by Susan Holloway Scott.


Sassy Countess said...

I love that you found out about the color. I have been telling people for years, and have even shown them pictures. However, they think the ones that I have shown them are the minority because I only have pictures of two dresses in my phone. Most people still see the browns and blacks, and even grays. But, if you think about it, who wouldn't want to wear these beautiful colors?

Anonymous said...

What beautiful dresses. Almost fuschia. I agree that I would never have guessed them to be Victorian. The color is so bright, I'd think they were stage or film costumes.

Stephannie said...

I'd wear that short-sleeved one in a heartbeat! Wish I could see this show. Pink is totally my favorite color.

Lindsay said...

I am going to have to make a stop there the next time I venture to the mainland!


Isobel Carr said...

My costuming girlfriends and I recently set out to make some GARRISHLY colorful (ahistorical) Regencies for a party. So much for our plan, LOL!

Anonymous said...

I cannot say that I like pink very much, and those dresses are nice, style-wise, but I would not be seen dead in those colors. Historically, I believe that until the 1950's and 1960's pink was more appropriate for boys baby showers than girls. If you look at old catalogs, they say that pink (warm color) is for boys, and blue (subdued color) is for girls.

bubblegum casting said...

Looks great!

Two Nerdy History Girls. Design by Pocket