1940s Adjustable Dress - Butterick 6485 Review

I started this dress back in February, and then lost the motivation to sew. Well, a week of sickness and a bunch of crochet deadlines may have contributed...It took me a whole month before I finally got it finished up and could move on!

 

This pattern was one recently re-released by Butterick for their Retro line, as a reissue of a 1944 pattern. What struck my eye was the possibility for color blocking (shown in view B) and the fact that the back waist was adjustable. I had a hunch it would work for maternity as a result, and picked it up the next time I was at JoAnn and they had a $2 sale on their Butterick patterns.

 

I laid it aside then in order to do non-maternity dresses while I had the chance, but once Baby Two was coming, wanted to give it a try (even though I still fit in most of my regular clothes). 

 

After my last pregnancy, I have a much better idea of what styles I will like best for myself - especially preferring the ones that are not intentionally maternity, since they can be worn afterwards without looking "maternity". This pattern seemed like a good bet, and I'm happy to say I'm pleased with how it turned out. 

 

I used a thrifted piece of floral rayon for the front, since there wasn't enough for a whole dress, and paired it with a solid navy rayon for the rest. Between the floral and the dark color, I think I could wear it year-round. Certainly it's appropriate for this mild early spring weather that is still pre-Easter, so I haven't switched to my spring wardrobe yet. I like how the color blocking accentuates the way the dress is put together, because otherwise I think the shoulder yoke detail would be lost in a dark solid color. 

 

The waist is truly adjustable and when fully extended has quite a bit of room, and while I'm not sure I will be able to wear it all the way at the end of this pregnancy, that remains to be seen. Certainly it will last through most of the pregnancy, and yet should be perfectly fine to wear afterwards.

 

With that in mind, I altered it to open down the front instead of the back with a short zipper, since the wide waist doesn't need a side zipper. That caused a bit of fitting issue because of the soft rayon, since the zipper tends to make it bulge a little. That shouldn't be an issue in a sturdier fabric like cotton, but cotton was not one of the suggested fabrics, so I'm not sure how well the dress design will work in cotton...

 

The pattern illustration shows the dress tied in the back, and while I liked how that looks in the front, I didn't like how it looked in the back. Maybe the sash is too wide and looks too school-girly?? Anyway, the ties are long enough that I could cross them in the back and tie them in the front as in most of these photos.

BUT I can also cross them in the front and tie them in the back, which gives a really cute empire-waist different look (quite pregnancy friendly) and also a very period correct 1940s look with the way it adds additional color blocking.

 

I originally put the ties where the pattern said to, and they were inches too low. Definitely not for short waisted gals! The fit was terrible and I was worried I wouldn't be able to salvage it. Thankfully since there is no waist seam all I had to do was move them up on each side and suddenly the fit was perfect.

 

I'm not sure I like how the neckline fits...another time I might trim it down. A brooch and a stiffish interfacing helps hold it in place, but even still it seems to be too wide. I think I would like a plain V neck version better. I wish this pattern included more sleeve and neckline options - I wonder if the original did? Most of the patterns from that era at least included 2 sleeve length options. But it would be easy enough to substitute another sleeve pattern if I wish.

I omitted the yoke facing. It would make a neater inside finish, but is not necessary to the dress structure.  Otherwise I followed the pattern - which is super easy, since it's just a few seams and darts. The yoke detail isn't difficult either. I used one of the decorative stitches on my Rocketeer for the first time, in finishing the sleeve hems.

 

Comfortable, adjustable, and still stylish, I would call it a success. I have at least one more version planned, and may also have to try it in cotton for everyday, maybe switching it up a bit by doing a different neck and sleeve.

 

I definitely recommend it for a maternity-friendly dress that you can wear at other times, for you vintage-loving moms!

 

Comments

[Carol]

Very nice.

[Dee]

This looks great! I have seen this pattern many times but didn't realize how well it would work for color blocking until now. The envelope pic is too subtle to see. At first, I thought you had on a bolero. It looks very slimming too.

[Lisa]

Very beautiful! I have often been curious about maternity clothing pre-sixties.
I believe we have a common friend in April who's family has a business with some similar interest as this blog. I live right between you.

[Kristen Stoltzfus Clay]

Well, I can't be sure someone from the era would have worn this pattern as maternity, but it works for me! Many actual maternity styles (especially the ones most popular in the 50s) are not flattering for me, so I get creative.

And yes, I met April through my husband and enjoy her very much! Do you live in Riggins?

[Klára Váradi]

Hi Kristen,

you look very lovely in the dress:)

I decided to purchase the pattern a while ago but did not make to make it until recently. AND, do I struggle:) It seemed quite easy to make but the yoke bit with the gathering? I gave up:) So, my respect to you, I love how yours turned out!

All the best and greeting from Prague!

Klara

[Jennifer]

This dress looks very elegant & should do well for you. The front shoulder/bodice looks very classy. I love the way you stiffened it & used a brooch. It looks like something HRM The Queen would wear, at that time.
I didn't know Jo-Ann carried retro patterns. Will have to look!
Mom was very stylish, although she preferred pants suits. She thought her ankles weren't pretty enough. I look at photos & I most certainly do not agree!