Exactly, I thought when I read the piece. A bride is at once the most decorated item at a wedding and the least important. On one level, weddings are about property and prestige; they are commercial ventures. On another, they're about the gears of one family meshing, or not meshing, with the teeth of another.
There's not a lot that's strictly personal about a wedding. Visiting the Gunn Historical Museum last week to see antique wedding dresses worn in the rural town of Washington, Connecticut, over the past few centuries drove that point home to me. In "The Fabric of Marriage: Wedding Dresses," the dresses on display--everything from heavy beaded satins to gauzy homemade muslins--obviously outlived the women who wore them and survived to tell the history of the town.
More to my point, though, they were draped on headless mannequins that made the women themselves anonymous. Though the accompanying captions told the story of the town and the families who have populated it, they really said very little about the women themselves. Where vintage photos of the bride were placed near the dresses, the women seemed bemused by their own invisibility as they studied their gowns from a slight and airy distance. They seemed to know these fragile bits of fabric were doing the talking for them--or for the place in society they once occupied.
I left the exhibit wondering why mannequins don't have heads. Perhaps to make it easier for each of us to imagine ourselves in the costumes they wear? Perhaps their story is in some way ours? Must these stories always end in personal oblivion?
More at Weekend Snapshot
52 Comments
Maybe they don't have heads because it was thought that faces would detract from the focus: the dress. It made manequins cheaper and, for follks who transported costumes from one theater to another (folks like me!), it was easier without a head.
ReplyDeleteFinally, maybe it was a tribute to "the eighth old man named 'Enery, 'Enery the Eighth I am," who apparently had little time for heads.
Pretty gown!
I must get Jane to read this post. she now works in a 'Wedding Shop' and I'm sure this will be of interest. I think some of the manequins do have heads now.
ReplyDeleteThat's a thought provoking post. Depending on the wedding it's often as much for the parents as the bride. I wanted a small chapel wedding and it worked out great since one of my sisters had a large church wedding where my parents could invite all their friends, the same year as I had my small one.
ReplyDeleteSandy, I guess the story isn't in the women but in the designs and fabric of the dresses that change so drastically over time... :)
ReplyDeleteHave you noticed the price of the vintage mannequins these days? Thanks so much for visiting my blog and leaving a comment. I hope to continue with Friday Skywatch ~ Lynn
ReplyDeleteLike Mary said! Weddings this days are so much different from the past. Although, I got married with a lot of people and you can call it the same as what weddings are right now. But it is what me and the husband wanted! Our parents invited their friends and we are all happy...
ReplyDeleteAnyway, nice post as usual! Have a great week ahead!
Hello Sandy!
ReplyDeleteA very nice post as always.
That made me really think.
Yeah, we have the same stories as them sometimes.
Thanks for sharing and have a nice week ahead!
Is it true that during those days, it is customary to hand down the wedding dress to their marrying daughter?
ReplyDeleteYou gave a different insight about the women that wore those dress. The director of the movies and plays almost always stay at the back stage too. :)
This is interesting. I would love to see all the beautiful wedding dresses of the past.
ReplyDeleteWe Chinese do have the custom of passing down our wedding dress to the daughter and even daughter-in-law. Our traditional wedding dress is bright red with lots of embroidery! :)
Thats a nice post you have informative one. Happy WS!
ReplyDeleteDon't see these wedding gowns much anymore. They display great Victorian styles. Love the laces on them :)
ReplyDeleteIt's kind of disturbing that they have no heads. You're probably right though, it is easier to see yourself in something when your perception isn't clouded by something else, in this case a head different than your own.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing those old wedding dresses. Some manequins in the shop don't have heads though.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading this post very much, nice to see the wedding dresses, especially the slide show.
ReplyDeleteIndian wedding dresses are colorful and heavy.
yes thats a spot on, Sandy. as to why theres no head in the bride especially...i prefer a small wedding too, i beleive in the intimacy of such affair to me although i respect my frineds hwo did big ones...
ReplyDeletelots of beautiful wedding dress in here :D
ReplyDeletePlease visit mine also Thanks
interest story...
ReplyDeleteMy CC in here Thanks
Off with there heads lol! Nice shots Sandy!!
ReplyDeletethe photos made me think of the faces who wore those vintage gowns.. they must look really beautiful just like those dresses!
ReplyDeletehave a good week!
beautiful photos and interesting and parabolic story
ReplyDeleteI read somewhere that the original purpose of a 'wedding' was not so much about the couple, but a contract they would make with society.
ReplyDeleteThe 'reason' seems to change so often with marriage. We tend to place all our current cultural baggage upon it.
A very thoughtful post, this! Loved it.
Thanks for sharing the story behind it, I enjoyed reading it.
ReplyDeleteHave a great week ahead, Sandy :)
I guess it depends on the objective of the display. If it's to focus more on the dress than on the face, a headless mannequin will give more exposure to the dress. But then again, isn't it that we want to see a complete look? Especially if it's a wedding gown.
ReplyDeleteNowadays, weddings have taken more of a "fashion show" kind of air. You know how everyone gasps and gawks at the bride and her gown as soon as she show up. Doesn't mean that the whole essence of the ceremony is lost though.
ReplyDeleteLove your headless bride :D
Cookie
http://scroochchronicles.blogspot.com/
my sister in law owns a bridal shops, making me used to seeing gowns on headless mannequins :)
ReplyDeleteNice photos!Thanks for sharing the glimpse story of all time. hehe
ReplyDeleteAnyway, thanks for stopping by and for leaving a comment.
That's a lovely wedding gown.
ReplyDeleteWhen my SIL got married a few months ago, she also put her gown on a mannequin like that. I never thought about it before but I agree with you. Perhaps it's easier to imagine oneself wearing the gown that way.
Thanku for always giving more then u get. All of us in time are face less but our works live on.
ReplyDeletenow you made me think, sandy! now I wonder why?
ReplyDeletehave a great week!
Hmm... something to ponder... for us its traditional sarees for our wedding :)
ReplyDeleteThat's amazing! Thanks for writing about it.
ReplyDeleteI love dresses - those are lovely.
ReplyDeletei never thought of that. why are some mannequins headless. maybe to reduce the cost of making it.
ReplyDeleteBeautiful! Maybe it's because they really wanna emphasize the dresses/gowns.
ReplyDeletethese wedding dresses are elegant and very much different fron today's modern wedding dresses.
ReplyDeletenice post and pictures Sandy!
thanks for sharing
It does seem odd that they had no heads. Poor things. Lovely dresses you saw though!
ReplyDeletei guess no one is making mannequins with heads nowadays, most of the weddings we cover have mannequins with no heads.
ReplyDeleteNice wedding dresses. Manequins have always scared me.
ReplyDeletei kept my dress so that hopefully one day my daughter will choose to wear it as she lives her own wedding day. :)
ReplyDeletethe dresses are so pretty, it would probably cost so much now to make one with the same intricate details. :)
The details on these dresses are amazing to see. The quality of the fabrics was so much better, and the work that went into them was remarkable.
ReplyDeleteI bet the headless mannequins are used for the same reason they tell models not to smile. They want the clothes to be noticed, and not have people distracted by the models themselves. I'm more distracted by the lack of heads though. ;-)
what a lovely vintage wedding dress...
ReplyDeletemine is up. hope you can check it out.
Standing Tall
I agree it is so we can put ourselves in it but it is still a little disturbing to have no head --- You know I love Brides we take lots of shots
ReplyDeleteMy ex wife looks into the mirror and sees no reflection at all. Either this has profound spiritual significance or else she's a vampire.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting post, Sandy. I was a bride only for civil purposes. Love weddings, though, only everybody else's. Just like birthdays :)
ReplyDeleteHappy WS :)
interesting post...
ReplyDeletethanks! those wedding gowns really looks very old...but i think beads, laces, sequence and pearls are still very much in.
ReplyDeleteohhh thank you for sharing that lovely slideshow... :)
ReplyDeletei think the reason why the mannequins are headless is to present an image of uniformity.
ReplyDeleteSo much to learn from exhibits. :)
ReplyDeleteMannequins do hv heads. But those in the muzeum doesn't have because [maybe] they wanted to showcase the garment only. It was a pretty gown, tho' a bit out of fashion! :)
ReplyDeletei'm always fascinated with wedding dresses. it's amazing how it has evolved from the olden times to the ones we have at present. :) thanks for sharing the pics and your thoughts.
ReplyDeletePersonal oblivion....is that the same thing as personal anonymity? Isn't that what's its like when people die? In the 17 and 1800s, we might have got a clue as to what someone did for a living by what was on their tombstones...but not today...we just get names and numbers...is that the same thing?
ReplyDeleteThanks for being here.