I should think, by the way, that the most logical explanation for the seemingly random placement (and actually I don't believe it's random at all) of the "pink" feathers is that they are intentionally scattered precisely because that thread was "unknown" in its tarnishing or oxidizing, or at least too little known. And if all of the feathers couched on composed of that thread were in a cluster, and did something odd such as turn the core cord or thread pink, well, you'd have one big pink patch of feathers, h'm? But if they're scattered; if that batch of passing thread is distributed around the garment.... Hopefully less obvious.
And yes, I know and understand: there is also the possibility of it being perceived as odd that you'd end up with a different kind of tarnishing effect here and there, instead of in one spot, but you pays your money and you takes your chances in every decision made.
Hmm, using up an older/cheaper batch by dotting it around, yes, but it seems every tenth feather or so would not get rid of very much of it. It's a possibility - however, I don't think they would have been thinking too hard about the lifetime of the dress; it was for a very rich woman, for one event. I suspect that by dotting it around like that, even if it was a cheaper thread, that would indicate that it did look different from the rest on the night - even if the reason for the difference was not that it was deliberately different, but that it a was a cheaper thread (or a more expensive one!)
Yes! It could be a more expensive one... but I'd suspect it would still look different; Mary was very thrifty - letters to her businessman father boast about the necklace being fake. I don;t see why she would have shelled out for a more expensive thread on every tenth feather unless, again, it looked noticeably different.
Perhaps my comment focused too much on the tarnish aspect. And I wasn't thinking that the original might have looked different although since you bring up that point I can see it
( ... )
It's not absolutely regular, but then the feather pattern itself is maddenly irregular (because they appear to have been eyeballing it as they went) - it makes a mathematician twitch. I would have to look it up in my copious notes, but I believe you find one pink feather after nine feathers of silver and gold, then the next one is after fourteen, and so on. So not completely regular, but fairly regular.
I think it's the best conclusion that can be drawn from the evidence. It makes sense to me as an artist to vary the color just ever so slightly, to give the design motion and depth.
Nothing about it looks accidental. It was for a single event, which makes me think that it was for visual impact alone. What exactly was done is open to debate -- type of metal, type of thread, etc. -- but for me, the reason for it is really, really obvious. It looked awesome.
And because I'm not a professional, I can have Very Firm Opinions. :)
:D Thank you for weighing in; I think that is, ultimately, the casting vote, as much as we try to be terribly detached and professional about it. It's going to be awesome with copper feathers. End of story.
I agree that it's probably not a defective batch of materials or it wouldn't be sprinkled in specifics places across the gown.
Have you considered it might be rose gold? That was coming into vogue, as well as lots of mixed metals and mixed gold shades in jewelry of that era. It seems a very Worth thing to do to throw in some rose-gold feathers here and there.
Ah! That's a very interesting thought. I wonder whether rose gold can be obtained now in this context (ie wrapping tiny strips of it around white thread)... do you have any specific references for rose gold becoming popular at that time?
Although.... I wonder whether rose gold would have deteriorated that much in comparison to the gold gold? Gold is pretty strong stuff... more research required!
Rose gold has had cycles or periods of vogue since the latter part of the 19th century in this country, if I recall its history correctly. It was known for coming from the Black Hills of the Dakotas, and it was the high copper content in "rose" gold that gave it its warmer, pink blush. Copper oxide is a blue-green (and it was the copper element in yellow gold alloy jewelry such as wedding bands which typically "turned one's finger green"---often thought of as one way to be sure your wedding band really was genuine gold!)
That raises a different question. Is it possible the original difference isn't in the gold wrapping of the passing thread, but in the cotton cord core, that it has aged into pink? I can't begin to think how that would come about, but now I'm wondering.
I think the core of the thread is silk - what I do know is that it looks the same as the core of the silver and gold passing thread on the other feathers... which hasn't deteriorated. It's got to be the alloy doing it, and rose gold makes instinctive sense now over out-and-out copper. I can imagine M. Worth getting far more excited about "Rrrrose Gooold, Madame" than about abrupt old copper!
Just lovely to have some news of this fascinating project and to hear about what happens next with it. Have you thought of approaching Boucheron about the jewellery - is it still extant and if so can you inveigle the owners to get it out of the bank and look at it...and maybe once the dress, wig etc are finished have a photoshoot wearing it? If you don't ask.... Also where the shoes are concerned going to a Durbar is a bit like singing Isolde, the most important thing for six hours on your feet is comfortable shoes. Given the sheer splendour of the dress, I wonder if Lady Curzon had a favourite pair of well broken in plain dull gold evening shoes for that kind of occasion.
Comments 39
But if they're scattered; if that batch of passing thread is distributed around the garment....
Hopefully less obvious.
And yes, I know and understand: there is also the possibility of it being perceived as odd that you'd end up with a different kind of tarnishing effect here and there, instead of in one spot, but you pays your money and you takes your chances in every decision made.
Reply
Yes! It could be a more expensive one... but I'd suspect it would still look different; Mary was very thrifty - letters to her businessman father boast about the necklace being fake. I don;t see why she would have shelled out for a more expensive thread on every tenth feather unless, again, it looked noticeably different.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Nothing about it looks accidental. It was for a single event, which makes me think that it was for visual impact alone. What exactly was done is open to debate -- type of metal, type of thread, etc. -- but for me, the reason for it is really, really obvious. It looked awesome.
And because I'm not a professional, I can have Very Firm Opinions. :)
It's going to look amazing.
Reply
Reply
Have you considered it might be rose gold? That was coming into vogue, as well as lots of mixed metals and mixed gold shades in jewelry of that era. It seems a very Worth thing to do to throw in some rose-gold feathers here and there.
Reply
Although.... I wonder whether rose gold would have deteriorated that much in comparison to the gold gold? Gold is pretty strong stuff... more research required!
Reply
Copper oxide is a blue-green (and it was the copper element in yellow gold alloy jewelry such as wedding bands which typically "turned one's finger green"---often thought of as one way to be sure your wedding band really was genuine gold!)
That raises a different question.
Is it possible the original difference isn't in the gold wrapping of the passing thread, but in the cotton cord core, that it has aged into pink? I can't begin to think how that would come about, but now I'm wondering.
Reply
Reply
Congratulations on finding and working with the right embroiderers. This whole project is so wonderfully epic!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment