Figure 1.--Here is the second best page offering dresses for younger children. These were white dresses, some with colored trim. They were especially styled for summer. They were for young children, age 1-3 years. Most were for girls, but some are identified as suitble for boys. Here the context is that both boys and girls could wear them. This is suggested both by the text and the illustrations showing both boy and girl models. |
Here is the second best page offering dresses for younger children. These were white dresses, some with colored trim. They were especially styled for summer. They were for young children, age 1-3 years. Most were for girls, but some are identified as suitble for boys. Here the context is that both boys and girls could wear them. This is suggested both by the text and the illustrations showing both boy and girl models. Only one of the dresses, however, is referred to as specifically boyish. We are not sure why fewer references were made to boy dresses on this page than the other Best dress page for younger children. Clearly several of the dresses hgere were meant for both boys and girls.
Here is the adcopy for the various dresses offered by Best with our assessment of the style.
The Best ad copy for many of these dresses, such as this one, does not indicate if they were suitable for boys or girls. The illustration here suggests a girl, but of course that does not mean thatit was only for girls. The ad copy read, "THIS HIGH-WAISTED DRESS of lawn has the same tucked trimming in the back that it has in the front. There is a ribbon run beading at the neck, sleeves and waist--dainty and charming. 1 to 3 years ... $1.25."
The model here suggests to us tht this dress might be worn by a boy and we note the trimming was done in blue or pink. The ad copy read, "Dress of lawn, ticked in the back as well as in the front; blue or pink collar and cuffs. 1 to 3 years ... $1.50."
Here we have a dress that looks more like a smock, but Best calls it a dress. It that might have been worn by a boy or girl. Note the blue and pink options. The model rather suggests a boy. The Best ad copy read, "FOR SUMMER PLAY this lawn dress with tucks and box pleat in yoke effect; collar, cuffs and pockets trimmed with pink, blue or corn chambray. Extra deep hem. 1 to 3 years ... $1.50."
We are not sure about this dress. The Best ad copy read, "A DRESS OF FINE LAWN with tucked yoke; turnover collar and cuffs finished with French dots. A new note in the smart broad tucked hem. 1 to 3 years ... $1.75."
The model here suggests a girl to us. We do note, however, a blue/pink option. The ad copy provides no indicatin about gender appropriatness. The ad copy read, "DAINTY LAWN hand smocking and stitching of pink, blue or corn. A large tuck is set in above the deep hem. 2 and 3 years ... $2.00"
This was clearly a dress styled for a boy, although girls may also have worn it. Note the pink option. The ad copy read, "A BOYISH DRESS of nainsook box pleated, with collar, cuffs and tie of pinkm blue or cirn chambray. Neat, serviceable, ractical. 1 to 3 years ... $2.00" Note the double strap sandals. Most of the other illustrations depict single bar strap shoes. The sandals may have been chosen to depict a boyish look.
We are not sure about this dress. The model is clearly a girl as she has a hair bow. I'm not sure about the collar, I think it might have been seen as girlish. We note, however, that Best uses the term "children" rather than specifically girls. The ad copy read, "DIMITY IS ALWAYS FINE and pretty for little children. White dress, hand smocked in a combination of blue and pink; collar and cuffs finished with French dots. Size 1 to 3 years ... $2.00"
This square collar dress looks more like a smock. We would say it was a dress more for a girl. The short sleeves, trim, and use of the term "dainty" suggest that it was for girl. The ad copy read, "FINE DAINTY EMBROIDERY has been combined with fine lawn in the making of this short sleeved and low necked tucked dress. 1 to 3 years ... $2.25."
This looks like a dress that could have been worn by a boy. Best tends to use box plear=ts in the boy dresses. We note that there was a blue/pink option. I'm not sure why it was considered quaint, but the front buttoning seens rather boyish. The term kiddies also suggest that boys as well as girls might have worn it. The ad copy read, "NAINSOOK, BOX PLEATED, makes this quaint little dress which buttons dwn the front. Collar and suffs and belt of pink or blue chambrayfinish an attractive little dress for kiddies from 1 to 3 years ... $2.25."
We would say that this dress was for a girl. The dress is done as a smock, but the ruffled trim give it a girlish look. The model seems to have been a girl. There was, however, a blue/pink option. This dress was only done in sizes up to 2 years. Girlish touches may have been more acceotable for 1 and 2 yearold boys. The ad copy read, "THIS NEW DRESS of fine lawn is trimmed with blue or pink hand stitching and narrow lace edge at the collar, sleeves and the pockets. Deep hem. 1 and 2 years. ... $2.50"
This clearly looks like a dress that would have been suitable for a boy. Best shows it bein worn with a boy model. The ad copy read, "THIS RUSSIAN MODEL dress of white percale with sailor collar and cuffs of navy, pink or corn. 1 to 3 years. ... $2.75.
This looks to us like a dress that would have been seen as suitable for a boy. The ad copy read, "FRENCH DOTS in pink or blue, fine tucks trim this smart belted Empire dress of fine lawn. 1 to 3 years ... $2.75." Other than the high waistline, we are not sured why this was referred to as an Empire dress."
A reader suggests that there may be something to the grouping in assessing the gender approptroateness of these dresses. "It seems to me that 561, 567 and 569 are boys and their outfits are a boyish and they are grouped together. The same can be said for 562, 573, 565, 566, 570 & 572. Whereas the group of 560, 563, 568, 571 and 574 appear more girlish to me. However, 564 to me could go either way although it is with the girl grouping."
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing catalog/magazine pages:
[Return to the Main Best 1918 younger child summer dress page]
[Return to the Main American mail order 1918 page]
[Return to the Main American mail order 1910s catalogs]
[Main photo/publishing page]
[Store catalogs]
[Fashion magazines]
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Cloth and textiles]
[Clothing styles]
[Countries]
[Topics]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Satellite sites]
[Tools]
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Flat caps]
[Sailor hats]
[Buster Brown suits]
[Eton suits]
[Rompers]
[Tunics]
[Smocks]
[Knickers]
[Sailor suits]
[Long stockings]
[Underwear]