Expert Tip: To repurpose a vintage piece of apparel or not?
Anne Cook, Owner, VintageBaubles.com
That is truly a question to which the answer is: It depends. Generally I’m not in favor of reworking vintage apparel, but sometimes it is justified and even desirable. When an otherwise outstanding, high quality item is damaged, my first choice is always repair or restoration. Failing that, restructuring should be done with an eye to maintaining the designer’s original intent (overall style and lines). The same is true with alterations for size. If the sizing is so far off that it’s impossible, then the item should be left for someone who will fit into it better. Modifications that alter the designer’s intent often fail, and what’s left is a mish mash of a garment. Yet vintage is meant to be worn, and making something wearable may call for repurposing. Much depends on the item’s existing integrity, that is, the quality of construction and fabric, historical significance of the styling, and the designer or maker. The rarer an item and the more representative of its era, the less likely I would be to alter it. For example, I would never remove a hip swag on a Ceil Chapman dress or shorten a 1950s Emma Domb ball gown, but I might re-hem an adorable 1970s maxi dress to street length. Would I remove a bust bow from a 1960s sheath dress? Maybe. (It would depend on how large the bow was and whether I could carry off the look well.) Not all vintage is great vintage, and if changing a hemline, sleeve length, or other style component makes you want to wear it, do it and don’t feel guilty!
Examples of “important” vintage that should be preserved whenever possible:
1. Numbered couture
2. Iconic designer pieces, couture or ready-to-wear
3. Signature pieces by more obscure but fine designers whose work should be preserved due to its scarceness and quality (e.g., ’40s/’50s Ben Barrack, ’50s/’60s Bill Atkinson)
4. Quality pieces (labeled or not) that quintessentially represent a key style, era, or turning point in fashion (cutting-edge “New Look” pieces, early separates/sportswear)
5. Pieces that typify a style quirk or short-lived fad and may be difficult to find (e.g., a true late 1950s sack dress-not the shift dress that supposedly evolved from it and is omnipresent in vintage) But please, unless you’re an expert seamstress or tailor, have alterations done professionally. I’ve seen modifications that, had they been done well, could have really enhanced a garment. But being poorly executed, they merely ruined it. In short, repurposing should make sense and be well done!
