Thursday, April 30, 2015

Wedding Party



Today's picture shows a wedding party from the 1920's. I notice the very long trail on the dress, and the rather interesting veil.

5 comments:

  1. There is so much work in those dresses. The bride must of been well from a well to do family.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have a family photo of a bride with a similar head dress, but the sides are pointing up instead of out to the sides. someday, our grandkids will look at our wedding pictures and laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I guess the fashion trends of the day were influenced by the King Tut Tomb discovery in 1922 or thereabouts.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Fascinating. I love the bridesmaids' dresses. My grandmother had those long ribbons on her wedding bouquet as well.
    -Anne K.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Fascinating mix of styles in these dresses, with the maid/matron of honor and the bridesmaid not dressed like the bride, or like the adorable flower girl. I agree, there would have to be money in the bride's family, for a dress/veil/and train like this. The fabric seems to be a beautiful soft satin, of a sort we don't usually see today except in expensive dresses. It drapes so beautifully, and shimmers. The veil with wings seem to have a Dutch provenance--it would take a lot of starch to keep them where they belonged. The other two attendants' dresses don't seem to belong in the same wedding--or maybe it's just that they have very different kinds of hems, and their hats are totally different. Reminds me of a wedding I was in during the 1960s, where the bride just told me and her other attendant to "make a short dress in some shade of pink. I'll provide a feathered hat." They were different hats, and the two dresses didn't look at all good with each other or with her home made short dress. Back to this picture, the attendant closest to the bride, traditionally the maid/matron of honor, is wearing a dress with a full skirt and a natural waistline, a style not usually found in the 1920s. It seems to be taffeta, again not a 1920s fabric, as it did't cling to the body. Her hat tied under the chin, also not typical of a formal hat. However, this is a pretty outfit. She holds a larger bouquet than that of the third woman, on the left, which is appropriate. This woman's dress is different yet again, with a skirt which is longer and narrower, and comes in at the bottom. She carries the small bouquet with ribbons that Anne K. already commented on. There is nothing at all in style, not even the hats, to tie the dresses worn by these two women to how the bride is dressed or the flowers they carry. I wonder why? Then there's the flower girl, who could be in a wedding any time from before the Civil War to today. Her dress is simple, except for tiers of ruffles, as is her hat. All in all, it's an interesting picture that makes me want to know more about why they're all dressed the way they are, because the richness of the bride's down doesn't seem to be matched with appropriate richness in her attendants' clothing. She may simply be honoring their own circumstances. But there seems to be a story here that I'd like to know. So it's a great story behind the picture.

    ReplyDelete