Princess Seamy!
By FrancescaFrancesca is so very tempted by this blouse, so wonderful for the Apple-shaped woman, with it’s princess seams and sleek-ening lines and availability up to size 3X. And it costs only 65 of the American dollars!
It is available here, at the site which never ceases to amaze with its surprising plethora of choices for the Big Girl.
August 12th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Sorry, but this is way too 80’s for me. My mother still has a blouse just like it in her closet from 1987.
August 12th, 2008 at 10:46 am
I’m with Dawn, thinking this is FIERCELY ugly.
August 12th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Nix the shoulder pads and put it in all one color and it’d be good for work… but that’s about it.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Bad retro.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Eeep. Hate.
August 12th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
It would be overpriced at 15 of the American dollars.
August 12th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Francesca, I like it!
August 12th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
I’d like to see it on a plus-size model. This poor woman comes out looking wasp-like. (and I don’t mean WASP-like, I mean like the insect.) But it could look good on the right person.
The comments of those who have purchased it are generally positive, with the exception of “cut the shoulder pads out.”
August 12th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Wow. Hideous!
August 12th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
that’s horrific.
August 13th, 2008 at 6:52 am
Isn’t that exactly opposite of the shape an apple would want? It seems to me it would only accentuate a protruding stomach.
August 13th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Space – the final frontier. These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise…to boldly go where no man has gone before…
Am I right, or am I right?
August 13th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Well…maybe in a finer fabric and more current color combos…Nah
August 13th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
From a purely practical, how-would-it-fit standpoint, I found it troublesome that it is noted that this is “designed to be very fitted”, but there is no way to determine what the waist size on it is. It doesn’t look like it would fit an “apple”, since that’s generally defined as something like: “waist the same size as, or bigger than bust.” This is clearly much narrower in the waist than the bust. But How Much Narrower?
August 13th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Francesca, no more late-night Designing Women marathons!
But seriously, I love you. And that blouse is terrible.
August 13th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
Star Trek! That’s why I like it! I always wanted to be an officer aboard the Starship Enterprise.
August 14th, 2008 at 12:51 am
you know, it’s not for me, but i can really see it on the right person. I think it could be great on an apple. I think the big problem here is that the model is so not a big girl that it’s hard to even imagine it. I guess this really goes back to having models that people can relate to, and models that the companies think will “sell” may not always be ones that sell to us.
August 14th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Oh, bad call. Horrible fabric, shoulder pads (SHOULDER PADS?) cheap buttons, and princess seams really, really don’t work on apples. On hourglasses, hell yeah, but apples? Not so much.
August 14th, 2008 at 7:58 am
Uh no. I used to work with a very apple shaped woman and she had a top that looked very much like this. It was not in the least bit flattering. It made her look like a giant beach ball.
August 14th, 2008 at 10:28 am
yes! i’d be afraid with that shape of seaming that an apple would look like a basketball
August 14th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
There’s nothing inherently wrong with shoulder pads, ladies. They’re not a sin – neither mortal nor even venial. Shoulder pads in moderation have been recommended by dressmaking manuals for decades for helping to balance out a figure, and for making shoulders even, and for making garments hang properly. They’re a dressmaking tool – no more, no less. Zippers and buttons aren’t sinful, either.
And this blouse is a perfectly nice design, in its own right. I don’t think the pads chosen are the right ones for this fabric, and the fabric itself doesn’t appeal to me, but the additional seams make it easier to fit, and the colour division emphasizes the feminine shape – nothing wrong with that, either.
August 15th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
I have to simply say Honey, NO
August 17th, 2008 at 10:54 am
I have to side with the crowd on this one. I had a skirt that would have matched this, back in the 80’s, and it’s probably the garment I look back on with the most shame. This jacket looks extremely cheap to me. It would not be worth $0.50 of the American dollars. To me. Sorry.