« July 2011 | Main | August 2012 »
Oh, Kwik Sew. How many times do we have to go through this? The purpose of a pattern illustration is to make us want to use your pattern. Not to evoke thoughts of a particularly gruesome CSI episode, Hannibal Lecter or childhood despair:
What woe troubles the little tyke of Kwik Sew 449? Is Mom getting into the rum again? Did Dad kick the puppy? Or are those little footie pajamas just not fitting the way they should?
Perfect with coffee and the Sunday paper in a nice heavy silk. I'm swooning!
Oh, Vogue. This time you've done it.
I moseyed over to the website yesterday, completely unaware that you'd posted your fall 2012 patterns. Ignoring the voice that said I wouldn't be getting back to work for at least half an hour, I clicked on "new sewing patterns" only to be confronted by THIS:
I don't know how long I just sat there, confused. Why were these women contorting themselves into pretzel shapes in high rise windows? When I finally got around to exploring the new designs further, I understood.
They make me want to jump out a window, too.
I can usually count on Vogue for a bunch of squee-inducing patterns and a couple of "what the hell is thats?!", but they changed things up on me this time. What isn't icky is just plain boring and/or made in the worst fabrics imaginable. Take a moment to remove any sharp implements from your reach -- I don't want to be responsible for you poking out your eyes -- and let's delve in further, shall we?
Let's start with 1312, the dress modeled by a woman squatting over the New York skyline. It's actually pretty tempting when you check out the line drawing:
That flared skirt looks really fun to wear...although the fact that it flares out from a raised waistline may make the whole thing too wide to be flattering for me. Would it make me look like a giant pastry? Oh, and did you know that the bodice is in a contrast fabric? No, neither did I -- because there's nothing like black silhouetted against a window to show details! GOOD ONE, VOGUE!
The real criminal in this lineup is 1323. Let's take a look:
The shirt is fine, but the pants -- oh, my. Elastic at the waist and the cuffs? Side pockets and a fly front? Made in a shiny black satin? Why why why? I suppose they're comfortable, but you can say the same thing about pajama jeans and snuggies. Perhaps someone will look adorable in them. That person will not be me.
In 1322 we have Donna Karan's Frankenstein creation: the blazer cape. Really, it looks like two men's suit jackets cut up and refashioned into one garment, and all I could think of was the time in high school when I put four-inch shoulder pads into a men's pajama top to emulate David Byrne in STOP MAKING SENSE. (Yes, four-inch shoulder pads. It was the 80s.) Why go to all that work tailoring to be asked, "Hey, did you cut up two coats and sew them together? Cool!"
As for the rest of the window jumpers...1315 and 1314 are perfectly serviceable knit dresses, though not that exciting, so I guess I see why Vogue decided to have the models contort themselves. 1324 is interesting, though I don't suggest making the blouse in a flesh tone -- unless you're going for the "I had spinal surgery and they didn't bother closing up" look:
Does it get better once we get out of the high rise windows? No. No, it does not. I present to you Vogue 8832:
That's -- what? Huh? Maybe it looks better from another angle.
No. It does not.
Who are you glaring at, Vogue model? The designer? Your agent? The manufacturer of that strange fabric?
She wasn't the only unhappy model. Look at the woman forced to wear 8830. The design itself isn't bad, but that FABRIC!
Unfortunately, making that face didn't help her any. They put her in equally hideous fabric for 8840. I like bright colors, but both the pants and shirt in this print are a bit much:
I'll skip the only slightly odd Sandra Betzina vest and coat and the baffling Katherine Tilton shirt pattern and end with 8843, the Marcy Tilton bag pattern:
All three views show a woman carrying a banana leaf above her bag. I have to say, I haven't seen this before.
New Yorkers: is this a thing the rest of us don't know about? I mean, here in L.A. there's a neighborhood where the hipsters are wearing top hats, so I suppose anything's possible.
Could someone please explain to me why the dogs are posed in the corner of a boxing ring?
I mean, I could understand if they were boxers -- but I'm pretty sure they're hounds.
This is going to bother me for the rest of the day.
They were right to call Orange "The Model Whisperer," Tan thought. She'd never seen Plaid listen like that. It was if Orange spoke her language.
Maybe there was something to this whole "be the pack leader" theory.
First of all...hello again! It's been too long (over a year since posting?! Bad blogger! Bad blogger!) I won't bore you with the story of lack of work, a plethora of work, etc. For too long patterns have gone unadmired and unmocked.
But first...a digression. To me one of the interesting questions artists who work for others face is how to put their own spin on work-for-hire projects. I grew up in Denver, and in the natural history museum there, you can find about eight elves hidden in the painted dioramas. According to museum lore, diorama Kent R. Pendleton wasn't allowed to sign his work -- so the hidden elves serve as his "signature." I love his solution to the work-for-hire dilemma.
What about pattern illustrators? How did they sneak bits of themselves into their work? Are the little quirks in illustrations -- like a random chair or a floating mini-helper -- actually an artists' way of saying "hey, this is me!"?
Or were the illustrators just drunk?
Imagine, if you will, the bar across from Simplicity headquarters. It's 1968 -- but while free love reigns outside, in here it's whiskey and cigars. Two grizzled pattern illustrators are delaying returning home.
"Joe," says the first. "I got one you'll never get past management."
The second chuckles. "You mean like 8806 when I made two of the girls float and lost one of their legs?"
"Child's play," Frank tells him. "This is even tougher than those girls we made look possessed."
"2971 and 2995, yeah. They never could figure out why those didn't sell well."
"They didn't sell 'cause those girls looked like they were gonna eat your soul. A pretty notched collar can't undo that."
"What's your challenge, Frank?"
"8190. The Jiffy pattern."
"I'm listening."
"Put one of the girls in brown. With a rope belt."
"Hood up or down?"
"Hood up."
"You want me to make her look like a Benedectine monk?"
"Yup. And no hiding her in the back. I want her right in the front."
"Why don't I just put her arms out to the side while I'm at it? Make her look like she's on a cross?"
"Nah, they'll catch that. Just tell them the kids these days are into it. Kids these days are into all kinds of weird shit."
"It'll never work."
"No, it won't. But it'll be worth it to see the look on their faces when we turn it in, won't it?"
