|Finally we get to the next issue, in February.|
Monday, February 24, 2014
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
|Insert "Panty shot" jokes here, with Cécile.|
So a discussion came up on the AG Collectors board1 about the historical underwear--basically, if Addy and Caroline had the same underwear. And they do and don't. From that I decided that it would behoove us to have an ID post showing the slight--and the not so slight, in some major cases--differences among the historical panties, bloomers, and undergarments that the historicals came with. And so snapped pictures as I was changing everyone around. That way if your girl comes without her panties, you can--if you so choose--seek out her drawers and bloomers and cover her ass, as the case may be.
A little history before we start looking up skirts and down pants. Most of the historicals have white underwear. To modern eyes, white underwear might not seem to make sense, because white is traditionally harder to keep clean and shows dirt fast. But here's the sitch, Mitch: white can be sun bleached. As in laid out in the sun and allowed to fade. And in the days before Clorox2 this was was the best way to get out major staining without scrubbing the entire hell out of clothes. Other colors will and do fade (which is why old clothes can often look really pale, when they likely had vibrant bright colors.) So underwear were white because you wore those often and maybe had one or two sets (one to wear while the other got washed) and you had to get those stains out with vigorous abuse of the cloth. Sure they might get dingy and faded, but honestly no one was looking at your underwear most of the time anyways. Also, why would you waste expensive dyes on underwear? Again, no one was looking at your underwear.
Furthermore, the girls between the invention of pantaloons and the later shift to bloomers--from Caroline to Addy--have sealed drawers. That is, not split crotch. Split crotch drawers weren't wide open, but there was an opening front to back so that when you squatted down to attend to nature's call, you didn't have to pull down your pantaloons. Like elastic instead of tie strings, we're letting it go. I could go into historical underwear all day, but that's for review posts.
Listed in Reverse Historical--starting with Julie and going back to Kaya. Note that the petticoat Cécile is wearing under her meet dress isn't one that's made by AG. I have a Laylie3 who got out of all that frilly historical stuff and Cécile now wears her petticoat as ruffly cute under her dresses.
Thursday, February 13, 2014
Rambled Opinions and General Snarkiness: Feb 2014 Releases (Now with Historicals!) and a New Board of Messages!
|This can't be Seattle. We don't do umbrellas.1|
Monday, February 10, 2014
|Pink. Lots of pink on Nellie O'Malley.|
Yep, that's right, I've got a new member of the gang. A buddy of mine was looking to send Nellie O'Malley to a new place, and I do adore Nellie more than Samantha. Practical, bold Libra Irish girls who share my exact birth date are pretty awesome. She actually got here mid-January along with her meet dress and some accoutrements. Welcome, Nellie, to being a member of the AGGiB. She's still a historical girl from the 1900s--and will be getting and wearing stuff from the era along with Marisol. But like Kit and Kaya, she likes wearing modern stuff.1 And she's debuting here in the Pink Petal Outfit.
Like the Ice Blue Outfit I reviewed on Michi, the Petal Pink Outfit was an early Mattel set that came out in 2001 and was gone by 2003. The set has a pink angora style sweater, pink glitter skirt, pink stockings, and pink shoes (and a snowflake necklace) and sold for $24. AG later recycled the name in 2010 for a completely unrelated outfit that was more spring than winter, so you're going to have to filter for that in your searches, ask questions, and make sure you get this one. It actually goes for a sensible cost of about $15-25 on average. It's a little surprising how low some of the older outfits go--it's generally the "new" stuff people try to gouge you on. I got mine in a private purchase way back in 2010 or so, and can't remember precisely how much I paid but it was around retail costs. I don't have the necklace, so unless you're planning on getting me one as a gift, there's not going to be a review of it. But there is a bonus review: the Pink Tank and Brief Set2 that came out at the start of the year with Wonderbread. I had to put her in nice underwear that would fit with the modern clothes.