Dress 1875 - 1885

Curator: Standing before us is an artifact from a bygone era: simply titled "Dress," it's a creation dating from 1875 to 1885, currently residing here at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Editor: My first thought? Melancholy. It feels…drained. Like faded memories clinging to aged fabric, even in gray. It almost makes one think the story behind the clothing is somehow more interesting than the clothing itself. Curator: Ah, melancholy… yes, that's interesting. You immediately pick up on the very tactile and almost stoic presentation that these dresses have when placed behind glass. Let’s talk about the making, the labor—look at all that ruching. Think of the hours upon hours! Editor: Absolutely. That's what stands out: labor and production. I see more than just a dress. I see the process, the materiality itself. It's textile, sure, but how were the textiles sourced? Who did this incredibly detailed work? What kind of spaces were the textiles made in? Curator: Such excellent and crucial questions. The artist of this dress, Mon. Vignon, certainly labored meticulously to create a fashionable, yet subtly dramatic silhouette of the era, however the nature of textiles makes it tough to say if the garment’s artist had help. Does it change the meaning for you? Editor: It underscores the very real and unromantic realities of consumption. I bet the textile mill and garment shop conditions during that period would frighten anyone wearing dresses similar to this, but they shouldn’t because, ethically, a very similar thing still happens now! The question of authorship—lone artist versus collective work—complicates, rather than detracts. It connects “high art” to global issues about value of craft and textile creation, whether “art” or utilitarian. Curator: Precisely. Thinking about the collective stories woven into a garment, especially one like this dress—that embodies a world of constraints, ambitions and of class. Even that pale trim and the carefully chosen buttons tell a story... It really sparks the imagination, you know? Editor: Agreed, though I think what the “Dress” signifies about class continues to drive the need to challenge consumption practices within both “art” and “fashion”. It forces us to consider the cost for garment production historically, and even now. Curator: I agree with your call. It really asks viewers and patrons to consider, what’s changed? Editor: Well said, yes. An eerily beautiful, complex reminder to keep considering what has changed in fashion, if anything, today.