Is 1973 retro?

by Charlotte Tilley on February 18, 2012 · 3 comments

in 1970s,Kids

This deceptively easy child’s pinafore still required some swear words and a go with the quick unpick to finish.

I let my little girl (aged nearly 4) pick out the fabric from my stash, some sort of cotton, only 1 yard needed. Of course, she wouldn’t model the finished dress, so here is a photo before it was finished when I was just seeing how much to hem it by.

What I really like about this pattern is that I am myself a child of the 70s and I know I wore this sort of thing myself……

This post was written by...

– who has written 1 posts on

Charlotte Tilley's posts / Charlotte Tilley's website

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

Nadia Lewis February 18, 2012 at 10:00 pm

I just bought a McQueen pattern from 1997 that was listed as “vintage”, so I guess it’s a pretty subjective thing. I personally think “vintage” is older than me because I don’t want to think of myself as “vintage”. ;)


Charlotte Tilley February 19, 2012 at 9:05 am

1997 – vintage? I have items in my larder older than that :)
I date from about the same time as my pattern so I don’t want to think of it as too old……


Little Black Car February 20, 2012 at 10:27 pm

Depends on the style. ;-)

But it’s vintage.

“Retro”spective means something that’s new but made in the style of an earlier decade. The pattern you posted was contemporary in style when it was new, so it’s vintage, but the dress you made from it is retro (new, but 1973 style).

Some are both: This one is vintage (1976) but the style was retrospective to the 1950′s even when the pattern was new . . .


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: