Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Patterns From The Past: Simplicity 9265 & 9276 - Versatile Dresses

Today's patterns from the past are two long dresses from Simplicity.
In the first photo, below, they are worn by Jill Twiddy (left),
 and Shelley Hack on the right.
From the pages of Simplicity Fashion News, circa 1971:
Here is the front of pattern number 9276, which depicts three different versions of the dress, with and without the bolero:
And the back of the pattern:
 And from the front of pattern number 9265, we have the dress below.
It is shown in the maxi-length version very similar to what Ms. Hack is wearing.
Only the pink belt is different:
The front of the pattern:
You can see how making three different versions of these dresses for yourself in different fabrics would have made these patterns extremely versatile.
At one dollar per pattern back in those days, you could really get your money's worth, right?
Of course, that's assuming your fabric wasn't too expensive.
The back of the pattern:
I think you can probably tell from a lot of the patterns I feature in this series that I have always loved the old-fashioned styles!

3 comments:

  1. Cute! Fabric was a lot cheaper back then too!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I really like this pattern. Wish I was young and thin again! It is really nice in the black calico. Love T

    ReplyDelete
  3. I had pattern #9276 and made a short dress minus the bolero and with a small floral print. The picture of #9265 view 2 reminds me of a picture of Susan Dey that was probably in a Seventeen magazine or a Simplicity home catalog. The dress, her pose and her hair looked so familiar as soon as I saw your photo. So I decided to see if I could find that picture online. I scrolled through the images and didn't find what I was looking for but I came upon a photo of Mona Grant wearing a dress very similar to #9276, white with a black bolero and floral trim. I remembered that picture from Seventeen and when I clicked on it I realized it was from one of your posts, Dec. 7, 2011! Another amazing coincidence!

    ReplyDelete