Edwardian Tea Time Costume, Boston

I think she wears a hat. I know in the 1860s if you went somewhere without a hat you weren't considered fully dress. Positive she would have worn gloves, and shoes and stockings. I believe the stockings are held up by ribbon, at least they were in the 1860s.

Garment closest to her skin would be her chemise. If she doesn't wear blooms I don't think she would be exposed-at least not that anyone could see-because the dresses go at least to the ankle if not the floor. But techincally she would be going comando.
However, some ladies-again in the 1860s-did have crotchless bloomers.

Sorry if that was too much information.

*Edit by bloomers do you mean pantalets. Pantalets were undergarments, while bloomers were pants that were worn under a short skirt.

Here is what she would be wearing underneath: http://www.agelesspatterns.com/images/1346-JUDY-PAHL-.gif

http://www.agelesspatterns.com/images/FW203.gif

Those are actually patterns for making Edwardian garmets. All the detail you could want.

Here are some great pics of Edwardian dresses.

http://www.victoriana.com/edwardianfashions/edwardiandresses.php

Was she inside or out? Outside, she would most certainly have a hat on. Inside, likely not. They weren't as big on gloves during this time period.

Perhaps she could be a devotee of the Rational Dress Society, dedicated to woman wearing simpler more practical clothing, especially for sporting or athletic pursuits. They were opposed to corsets, crinolines, and other restrictive clothing.

honeybaby said:

A young lady, not of high standing, wears a yellow chiffon tea gown to serve tea to a gentleman in Boston. What else is she wearing? Does she wear a hat? Does she wear gloves? Shoes? Stockings? How high? How are they held up? Are they embroidered? The more specific the better. (She happens to have some experience in millinery, so I can go to town on the hat, if she wears one.)

What is the garment closest to her skin? If she removes her bloomers will she be exposed?

Click to expand...

Is she serving tea at home? If she were having tea with a gentleman in a tea room, she would leave her hat on. She would always wear gloves at tea (they were removed only when eating dinner), her shoes would likely be slippers that matched her tea gown, and her stockings would be plain white silk and held up by garters at the knee or mid-thigh.

An Edwardian woman's typical undergarments were (in order):

Combinations
Chemise
Corset
Camisole
Knickers
Petticoats

She would probably wear a ribbon corset beneath a teagown, and most likely dispense with the petticoats, but a woman would never be naked beneath her garments (and for that matter, neither would men: they wore union suits or Jaeger suits beneath their shirts, trousers, waistcoats, and jackets/coats).

At some point she absolutely must wear a pair of over-the-knee red leather boots.

Click to expand...

The only over-the-knee boots a lady would find during the early 1900s would be fishing boots or old-style (i.e. 17th century) boots made for a costume ball. Otherwise, if your image is of a modern, sexy stripper type over-the-knee boot, it's historically inaccurate.

Gloves would have been up to the elbow and would have had tiny buttons where the wrist is. The buttons would be undone and the hand taken out of the glove bit and tucked up. This would mean that the lady still had her gloves on but she could pour tea and eat without soiling her gloves. Corsets were worn with most gowns as many women, at that time, started to wear corsets at a very young age. This had a detrimental effect on certain muscles which meant that the women could not go without them. Somewhere I have a pair of gloves that belonged to my grandmother which have the buttons - they fit me (I have small hands) but getting my hand in and out of the glove bit without looking as if I was having a fit needed a lot of practice. Might be a good bit of descriptive writing there!

Try this site: http://www.costumes.org/ one of the best! Well, in my opinion.

The tea gown was initially invented for very informal, indoor entertaining, and later took a sensual connotation when women realized they made having affairs easier (all that undressing and taking off of corsets was too much work!). There were lounging-type tea gowns, casual-type tea gowns which were a bit more formal, and evening tea gowns. I think that for propriety's sake, an unmarried woman having tea with a man would always wear a corset beneath her tea gown.

Also, gloves were of varying lengths, depending on the outfit, time of day, etc. Daytime gloves were usually just to the wrist, and they always remained on during afternoon tea.

honeybaby said:

Oh no, Evangeline! I already had her unbutton the gloves and make a show out of it. I just loved writing "her naked fingers" after stripping them bare. Now I need to think about editing.

I should say that my lady character is unorthodox and does not have marriage in mind with this gentleman. There is a moment when she is quite concerned about her gloves becoming ruined by certain indelicate handlings.

As for her corset, I went with an emancipation bodice. I couldn't resist the symbolism.

Click to expand...

Keep it--after all, it's your story, and your heroine is rather unconventional.

If she is at home, serving tea, then no she would not wear a hat. If she was visiting someone for tea or having tea in public, then yes she would wear a hat. Don't forget to add a veil to her hat if she is in a car. Sorry, I love those types of hats from the turn of the century. She would carry a purse to someone's house or out in public. She would wear gloves as well. Gloves may or may not be worn at home to serve tea and may depend upon who she is serving.

At the turn of the century, undergarments and clothing were in transition. By then, panalets/drawers were known as bloomers, so you are correct in that term. At this time she would wear those and a camisole, plus a corset, petticoats, and stockings. I'm not sure if corset covers were out by then since corsets were mass produced and readily available--protecting them was no longer a priority.

Even though this young lady is not of high standing, the lower classes took their cues from the upper classes. The main differences in dress would be that a young lady of lower standing would buy mass produced clothing, where as a lady of the upper class could still afford to have clothes made for her by a modiste (dressmaker).

I don't know where you are, but museums that house good costume collections are always fun to visit. I'm thinking specifically of the V&A in London which often has even the undergarments on display. Also the Met in NYC has a good collection as does the Smithsonian.

I have a lovely green silk evening gown from this period. It's trimmed in black lace and is shot through with gold thread. The detail always amazes me when I pull it out of storage!

Good luck!

honeybaby said:

A young lady, not of high standing, wears a yellow chiffon tea gown to serve tea to a gentleman in Boston. What else is she wearing? Does she wear a hat? Does she wear gloves? Shoes? Stockings? How high? How are they held up? Are they embroidered? The more specific the better. (She happens to have some experience in millinery, so I can go to town on the hat, if she wears one.)

What is the garment closest to her skin? If she removes her bloomers will she be exposed?

Click to expand...