Vintage sewing - interfacing and facings

Every time I sew a vintage pattern from the mid 1960s or earlier I am always surprised and perplexed that interfacing is NEVER called for, unless it is serious tailoring.  Some people I've talked to about this have surmised that most people knew how to sew at that time and just knew where and how to use interfacing. I'm not so sure.

I own a fair number of old patterns and a lot of old sewing books. So I decided to do some research and share my findings with you!

Here is a group of Simplicity patterns from very early 30s through mid 40s. You can tell the very early patterns because the envelopes are so small. Simplicity was founded in 1927 and for the first few years they used this small envelope.

None of the patterns I have from this time use interfacing. Even the big turn back collar on this bathrobe is sewn without it.

But I do like the floating scissors in this illustration. So clear!

Remember these two patterns from the 1940s I compared a few weeks ago? Link to this blog.

Still no interfacing used, even though they both tell you to make bound buttonholes down the front. I found that so hard to believe ... BOUND BUTTONHOLES in one layer of cotton fabric???

But then, I found this 1950s sew along film. It is really interesting to watch, but fairly long, about 20 minutes. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, go to a bit past the 7 minute mark. There she demonstrates sewing neck facings without any interfacing.
​PROOF!

Although, it seems Vogue and McCalls, at least, were using interfacing by the 50s.

But it was applied differently than we do it now a days. LOOK.
The interfacing was assembled separately, basted to the garment pieces, then the facing (which had no interfacing) was sewn on. The reason it was done this way was to prevent the shadow of the seam allowance showing to the outside. The interfacing sewn this way gives an extra layer of fabric between the outer fabric and the seam. When the interfacing is applied to the facing instead, the seam allowance is right next to the outer fabric and therefore it is more likely that a shadow or ridge of that seam allowance will show on the outside, especially after pressing.

These two patterns were published in the late 1960s, right before and right after Simplicity started using interfacing in all the places we use it today. If you notice they both are for a 34" bust, but the one on the left is a size 14 and the one on the right is a size 12. This was the last time the major pattern companies updated their size measurements to be in line with ready to wear.

This seems to be the be change over. The one on the left ... no interfacing. The one on right INTERFACING! But done this way.

This is when I was learning to sew. I was taught to sew the interfacing to the garment first, then sew the facing on, trim and understitch. This was, of course, sew-in (non-fusible) interfacing. Fusible interfacing was being made available to the home sewer at around this time, too. But, not many people used it. Fusible can actually make things look worse, if you don't know how to use it. 

It became clear that, if you are going to use fusible interfacing for a neckline or armhole, it needs to be fused to the interfacing NOT the garment, because there will be a clear ridge visible from the outside where the edge of the interface stops.

​So, that is how we got to where we are today. I believe pattern companies were trying to keep home sewing simple at first without interfacing.  Simplicity holding on the the simpler method for the longest. Then, to give more professional results, they introduced interfacing using the custom sewing method, applying it to the garment first. But, then when fusible interfacing appeared on the scene, the interfacing needed to be applied to the facing instead to avoid an interfacing "shadow". 

---

This is my collection of vintage brand named sewing books. I mostly have Simplicity going back to 1935, the one on top. The facing instructions in yellow above are from the "Let yourself sew" from 1972 on the far right. I also have several Singer sewing books back to the 1920s, a very old Butterick, one McCall's and a couple published by the Coats and Clark thread company.

The 1935 Simplicity book has "Helps for Troubled Sewers". So reassuring!

Simplicity had the best company slogan, too!

But you have to check out the cover from this McCalls book from the 60s.

Please tell me who this man is? 

She is not in a professional sewing studio. This is supposed to be her home. So, is he her husband?? The next door neighbor? The mail man??? WHO? What man from this time would sit on the floor and pin a hem, anyway!

​OK ... this is an update to this blog I'm writing on Sunday, 4 days after the original posting and ...
Well, I stand corrected!! after reading the comments below ...
See, my father would NEVER have sat on the floor and hemmed any of our skirts. But I had 3 sisters, so there was never a shortage of people who could and would make a hem in my home!
​Thanks for all the comments!

If you are interested in knowing more about pattern company history, check out these three books. I own them all. They are full of such interesting stuff!

And now ... look what I found! The original and the reissued version of the same pattern. They are SO, SO different. This will take a whole blog on its own to talk about. Stay tuned.