I’ve been rereading Louisa May Alcott over the last few days, and I’ve come across several references to something she called “illusion” that had to do with women’s clothing. I’ve googled a few times over the years and have yet to find out what the hell it is.
I’m thinking it must be some sort of wispy fabric, but that’s not enough for me to figure out what she’s referring to.
I think this See-through clothing - Wikipedia
" See-through fabrics were fashionable in Europe in the eighteenth century. There was a “sheer fashion trend” starting with designer clothing from 2008.[1] See-through or sheer fabric, particularly in skintone (called “nude”) colours, is sometimes called illusion, as in ‘illusion bodice’ (or sleeve) due to giving the impression of exposed flesh.[2]"
which leads here Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Clothing and Textiles - K. K. Maitra - Google Books - see the definitions for “illusion bodice” etc
Four minutes to an answer on an obscure reference to late-nineteenth century women’s fashion.
God DAMN, I love the Dope.
Thanks, Andy L!
I’m glad to help out - I was lucky in my Google search terms so I found the information pretty quickly.
Huh. I was searching on “illusion clothing” and didn’t get anything like that. I wonder why.
I tried “illusion cloth meaning” (after trying “illusion clothing” which came up with a company name, I think).
D’oh! :smack:
Well-done, Andy L.
I went to Macy’s dot com and searched for “illusion.” I got 457 hits in women’s clothing:
Try searching on ‘Illusion tulle’. It’s still sold as a bridal veil fabric:
Though it’s made out of nylon now, it would have been made of silk or cotton in Alcott’s era. It was VERY flammable…it’s one of the hazards covered in Allison David’s fascinating book ‘Fashion Victims’.
I always guessed it was a sort of tulle/organza. Think pantyhose fabric, but much stiffer, so could be arranged in ruffles and furbelows. 
PS Love those books! I reread the first 3 every few years.
Amazon had a Kindle book that is everything Alcott ever wrote for real cheap, so I got it. Also Dickens, Austen, the Bronte’s, Thomas Paine, The Federalist Papers …
There’s a lot of reading to do. Not sure I’ll ever get it all done (or even begun), but at least it’s available.
I see illusion material frequently in pictures of red carpet gowns, where it looks like sequined and beaded swirls and patterns (almost looking like tattoos from a distance) wind around an actress’ body. Covering up her boobs and bits, leaving wide ‘naked’ spaces. If you look at a closeup, the pieces are sewn onto a transparent dress base, like pantyhose material, which ideally should exactly match her skin tone.
That reminded me of this dress that Cate Blanchett wore to the Oscars in 1999. And of course Halle Berry’s dress when she won the Oscar.,
Modern illusion netting tends to be nylon and is used a lot to keep your body covered when it isn’t covered (like holding together a deep v neckline without using boob tape).
Alcott would have been writing about a sheer silk, often used as an overdress or around the neckline. Victorians didn’t have a lot of use for boob tape substitutes.
As best I’ve been able to figure from the context of reading a lot of 100 or more year old novels, what the Civil War era women did with ‘illusion’ was take an old dress that was looking worn, and add a layer of this transparent cloth over the skirt and bodice and sleeves (if any). Thus giving the impression of a new dress without having to get a new dress. The new stuff would hide the fact that the dress fabric was getting worn, and would change the apparent color as well if you chose it wisely.
If you want to see how it was used, try googling for the Winterhalter portraits of Empress Elisabeth or the Princesse Metternich. Winterhalter was painting during the right era and the stuff appears on a lot of his subjects.
