nuranar | Entries tagged with 1800s:footwear

Let's see... I got everything done for the picnic, yay! Dang, except food. Totally forgot that until just now. I guess I'll get something on the way home from church.

Anyway, I tried the ribbon bows on the Nankeen boots. By themselves, they just didn't look right. But the ribbon on the seam really punched it up. I glued it down very carefully on the edge of the seam, mimicking the double curve just right. And then the glue soaked through the thin ribbon and looked awful. So I got to hand-sew another layer of ribbon over it. Yay. But it's all the for the best, since it would have been terrible to sew it down in the first place.

I also finally got the bodice beading templates done. It was not easy! But they're done, with the seams decided, and motifs outlined. I also cut out the hunks of taffeta that each will be worked on. I still need to trace the actual working templates onto black tissue paper and tack them to the silk; then I can get started.

After church tomorrow I think I'll also hit Joann's. It would be nice to have an intermediate-sized embroidery hoop. I have a 6" and an 18". Something between would be helpful! I got a new sales flyer and a bonus card this week, so I'll make up a list now and then hit the sack. *yawn*

... and I am squealing over them. They are SO CUTE! And they look SO GOOD!

It's hard to show from still pictures why they work for me so well. I think it's just that there are so many subtle things that are right, so altogether the effect just sings. Like the opposite effect of even the best vintage-inspired shoes worn with vintage outfits: there's going to be subtle things, like the shape of the toe, the shape of the vamp, the shape and height of the heel, and the overall profile of the shoe, that keeps them from looking like they stepped out of a movie.

For the Nankeens, it's those same subtle details - some of which are significant design decisions - that give them a look that's so excellent. Like the shape of the toe. It's gently tapering and just slightly blunted, a shape that I don't recall seeing in any modern shoes. The angle of the seam is lovely, too, curving ever so slightly. The sewn eyelets are not obvious, but it's a totally different effect from metal eyelets. And the low spring heel is just right as well.

Most significantly, the lack of a toe box means that these boots have no stiffening except for what's necessary at the heel. The entire upper shapes itself to my foot, especially the toe, which is low without being flat. It hugs my ankle, tapering back in over the heel - a really lovely curve. And when worn, it almost gives the effect of being sole-less, since the upper overhangs the sole just a little bit all around, including the toe and heel. It's a very light, graceful look. They're VERY close to these, from the Powerhouse Museum.

I admit I've had qualms since I pre-ordered these, but they're gone now. I can't wait to wear them! I guess it'll be at the 1812 Overture concert in the Gardens in June. I feel I'm just going to have to make that yellow muslin dress for the occasion. :p

So yes, I really do like the new American Duchess boots, the "Nankeen." These are cloth boots, very commonly worn from 1800-1820. I've been longing for cloth boots so I can be just like the heroines of Georgette Heyer's books - they're all well-equipped with "jean" boots.

http://www.american-duchess.com/shoes-18th-century/nankeen-fabric-regency-boots

I particularly like the slimmer ankle on these, compared even to the Hartfield, the American Duchess leather Regency boots.

http://americanduchess.blogspot.com/2014/02/introducing-and-celebrating-nankeen.html

A famous pair of surviving original boots is trimmed with ribbon on the seams, and cute little bows.

Source: Museum of London. Dated 1815.

This post is partially made as a giveaway contest winner... but honestly, I've been hoping for these for quite a long time, and I'll probably end up ordering them anyway. Footwear, like millinery, is something I am NOT talented at creating, although so many of you are. So I'd rather save for a close-to-perfect pair. It makes me happy. :)

I'm still getting used to planning ALL details of an outfit ahead of time. I'm pretty good of thinking of everything for the dress itself, but I have a bad habit of forgetting little things like hair, hats, jewelry, and other accessories - including shoes! So here goes trying to fix this, easy to hard:

1. 1790s curtain-along dress

I'm not going to get any new shoes for this. I'm leaning toward my green Robert Land "Regency" shoes. The toe is very round instead of pointed and the sole very heavy for Regency, but I love the latchets. I might put pompoms or bows or something on them. Otherwise, it'll be my regular black B&T 18th century shoes.

Unless... would clearance Pemberlys actually work for mid-1790s? Or is that too early? I am definitely planning on more 1790s styles, so it's not a bad investment if they're appropriate. There are only two left in the size I should need.

2. Red wool/Regency

I'll wear the green shoes for the picnic this Saturday, because it looks like it'll be the one cool and wet weekend in March. :( But I saw American Duchess's teaser about new Regency flats (with pointy toe, spring heel, and inside lacing loops) and I am wildly excited. The Pemberlys didn't really excite me, I guess because I just want flats for Regency. But these, I want! I'm thinking bright yellow. It seems to have been such a popular color for accessories, and it'll go or pleasingly contrast with most of what I have and plan to make.

3. 1860s

Robert Land finally update his website for the first time since Christmas, and the cream and black side-lacers are back! So I think those will be coming to me. I have plain black Balmorals, so I really need something fancier, and I really want some side lacers. Both front- and side-lacing shoes are equally acceptable. (More acceptable would be cloth uppers instead of all leather, but I don't think he's offered those in over two years.)

4. 1692 court dress

This is the trouble one! As far as I can tell, the only option (other than Sarah Juniper) is the AD Pompadours. I'm hesitant, though, for a number of reasons:

(a) The cost. It's the same as a pair of Robert Land's boots, for something I will only use once or twice, three times at most.
(b) Are they really a good option? I remember some skepticism/criticism when they came out on how accurate they really were for the wide time span. Right now I'm interested in actual mantuas (early 1700s) and 1780s onward; I have very little interest in the middle part of the century anyway.

But again, there just doesn't seem to be any kind of compromise. I'd rather wear modern white dress shoes than my black leather 1700s, but even if they had pointy toes that's very little improvement. I'm just about ready to beg to borrow or rent somebody's white Pompadours! Anyone up for the offer? :(

Crossposts: http://nuranar.livejournal.com/280191.html

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30	31

Rejoicing with the Truth

reader, singer, seamstress, saint

Entries tagged with 1800s:footwear

Another long day.

The Nankeens arrived today...

Boots, boots, boots!

Shoes.

Profile

July 2017

Come, Follow Me

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags