more feathers! I need more feathers!!

[beetle_breath]

Comments

[farranger]

I don't think it's so bad. It's almost attractive in a retro-Ginger Rogers'y sort of way.

[loree]

Ditto. The feather boas are a little bunchy around the hips, but it's actually rather elegant in a 50's ballroom dance movie sense.

[farranger]

I was thinking more like the 1930s, but I could be off.

[loree]

It's hard to tell whether they're going for pre-war Great Depression distraction or post-war decadence. :)

[morgielefae]

This is gorgeous! I agree with the others. This is very old-hollywood.

[gully_moe]

I think the same.

[newlj]

gaga- oo lalaaa

[wut]

idc, it's ugly as fuck

[ladypeyton]

Oh god. My daughter is in love with that cartoon. I get Flapjacks quoted to me all the time.

[ornithoptercat]

It looks like it's decent enough material to me, but argh wrinkly. And even if it is supposed to be old Hollywood glamour, they look to be ACTUAL FEATHER BOAS and attached in a way which makes the hips as wide as possible, ugh.

[becoming_rachel]

It's probably not even satin, but it's cheap cousin, "sateen" (the article says satin, my eye says sateen). Often used to pass as satin in fancy lingerie and to make cheap ballgowns and wedding dresses, sadly it's often used in place of satin by charlatans looking to make a fast buck.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sateen

Just because it says c. 1935 doesn't mean it necessarily IS. It might be a dress "inspired" by that era. Best to check the fine print, not that most of us have the coin to be bidding anyway.