Monthly Archives: March 2015

The Lilliputian Bazaar

On Facebook, I follow Old Images of New York (a super awesome page, BTW, go check it out), mostly because I love the history of the city and because it’s nice to see it again – I lived there for a year and a half.

This morning, I was excited to see this photograph on the page, ca. 1905 – I don’t know where it’s from, so I have no provenance. It’s of West 23rd street, and I lived on West 21st – so I was geeking out a little over that. I have walked down 23rd hundreds of times, so I’m sure I passed either these buildings, or where they stood.

11043180_10206311999623420_6518547183998743040_n

Then I saw this …

11058402_10206311988583144_7620236953781438336_n 2

Best & Co! The Lilliputian Bazaar! The one that advertised in my New York Daily Tribune from November 9, 1887!1

How to Clothe the Children. BEST & CO LILLIPUTIAN BAZAAR. Considering the Assortment, Styles, and our Low Prices, there is no other place where BOYS and GIRLS can be fitted out as well with everything from HATS to SHOES. Our Stock of OVERCOATS FOR BOYS and CLOAKS FOR GIRLS AND INFANTS is particularly attractive. We include Youth’s and Misses’ Sizes up to 18 Years. 60 & 62 West 23d-st.

Yay! Feels like I just matched two puzzle pieces together.

Advertisements

On My Bookshelf: The Dresses of the First Ladies of the White House

DSCN9169

Or, the Fancy Dresses of Somebody …

Not really sure who wore these clothes, but they’re pretty, right?

This small book was written by Margaret W. Brown, associate curator of the Department of History at the Smithsonian Institute, and published in 1952. Portraits of many first ladies, some first daughters, and some assorted female hangers-on are expanded with a mannequin dressed in something owned/worn by them/another woman from the same century they lived in.

See where I’m going with this?

Let’s take a look.

DSCN9170

A dress purportedly worn by Abigail Adams, who died in 1818. I’m assuming she wore this dress on All Hallows Eve at least two decades later. Whoooooo spooky.

DSCN9172

This “saque period” dress shows the worst of this poor outdated book. The book claims the dress was worn by Elizabeth Kortright Monroe, who died in 1830. What we’re looking at here is an interesting example of a re-made gown. I think the original gown dates to the 1760s, but look at the added gathered bit at the front chest. That’s probably a late Victorian addition for Centennial wear – along with the contrasting robings and whatever’s going on with the petticoat. Anyway, since Mrs. Monroe was born in 1768 she probably never wore this gown in either incarnation.

DSCN9173

This gown is said to be Maria Gouverneur’s, who is said have worn it before 1850 … unless she too wore it for her yearly haunting … yeah, more likely. It’s got a “Watteau” back, and a narrow skirt. It’s probably a fancy dress/costume piece for the Centennial in 1876. In addition to the “Watteau”-ness, note the long V-style front – a take-off from 18th century stomachers. Many 18th century aesthetics (and gowns, as above!) were repurposed for the Centennial, and I’m assuming this dress is a result.

DSCN9175

This is said to be the wedding dress of Sarah Yorke Jackson, who married in 1831. I’m not too sold on the 1831 date … I’d feel more comfortable with 1841 … but wow, what a pretty dress. Put a real corded petticoat underneath, and it’ll be all fluffy and frothy and gorgeous … I want one …

DSCN9177

Now here’s where the book really shines. This gorgeous dress, worn by Mary Harrison McKee, was worn for a photograph and her presidential father’s inaugural ball in 1889. It’s olive, ivory, orange and silver … the last four colors I’d think go well together, perhaps. And it’s so beautiful! I want this one too.

So … yeah, lots of cons to this book. It’s of its time, I suppose, and seems to rely only on family/owner say-so for dress provenance, instead of research. Some of the pieces in this book don’t seem to be anywhere online, so it’s interesting for that. That being said, none of the gowns are displayed particularly well, and many are really, reeeaaalllyyy off.

Buy it? Yeah, if you find it for a few dollars. It’s an interesting if kind of cringe-worthy read. It’s got a few gems in it, though, so for that, it’s worth it.

Happy reading!