Two Venetian Ladies

[RaizaKins]

So I've been reading here for a few years and almost all my questions have been answered. Bravo to you all. All of you are very talented.

Anyway, I'm beginning a new project and I've decided on recreating a popular favorite:  the red dress in Two Venetian Ladies.

What baffles me is the front of the bodice. At first it looks to be a typical Venetian bodice with the front opening. But the trim with pearls confuses me since it seems to be attached to the bodice and not the chemise. Does anyone have any ideas? That white bit in the front is throwing me off. :/ Thanks.

[gem]

Here's the painting (which I believe is thought to be only a portion of the original?):



It's been speculated that the classic Venetian V-front opening might actually be laced over a false camicia panel, in which case it would not be out of the realm of possibility to imagine adding trim all around the neckline. Obviously the Carpaccio gowns are a different style/era, but perhaps something similar is going on?

Another possibility is slashing, like that seen often in portraits of Henry VIII. I have a better example than that--a young woman in red with three or four vertical slashes across her bodice--but I'm drawing a blank on the artist & subject at the moment so can't look it up! ETA: It was Holbein's portrait of Dorothea Offenburg.

Lastly, although this seems unlikely... could that white at her chest actually represent the camicia from underneath her right arm? The perspective is off for that, though, which isn't characteristic of Carpaccio's attention to detail.

I'd look at more of Carpaccio's work and see if anything similar would have more clues!

[isabelladangelo]

It's a front lacing dress - you see similar ones from the same time period coming out of various Italian regions.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/operafantomet/renaissanceportraits/siena/benvenute1508siena.jpg From Anea's site; a lovely similar style but in green from 1508

The white in the front of the dress is the chemise sticking out.  You do some decorated chemise tops around this time as well.  They seem to go in and out of vogue pretty quickly but here is an additional example:

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/wardrobe/artgallery2b.htm - Bartolomeo Veneto, c1520s: Portrait of a Venetian Lady  (it's the second portrait down on the page)

[gem]

Raiza, have you seen this page at Realm of Venus: Analyzing the Style in the Carpaccio Era? She has a whole section, with sketches, explaining what she thinks is going on with your exact question.

[operafantomet]

Raiza, have you seen this page at Realm of Venus: Analyzing the Style in the Carpaccio Era? She has a whole section, with sketches, explaining what she thinks is going on with your exact question.

I think she is quite right. The ladies on the balcony are depicted in an exclusive, but informal setting, and this is reflected in their clothes. They're probably only wearing a camicia (shift) plus the main dress, but not the overdress. The overdress was the one which made the V shape in front. If the ladies on the balcony added an overdress it would look something like this:







The painting of the ladies on the balcony is indeed only a section of a larger painting. The original was probably 4 times as large. Today it's believed only half the painting survives, and in two pieces; the one with the ladies is in Venice being one, while the other is that of their (probably) husbands hunting in the lagoon, in Los Angeles. It was probably facing another such half which would complete both the size and the iconography. Together the motifs looks like this:




But obviously none of the museums are willing to give up their half to reunite the pieces.

[gem]

I still think the OP's question isn't quite answered yet. This sketch (the dress on the right) from that Realm of Venus page illustrates the confusing issue nicely:



ROV is proposing that the pearls are the neckline of an "undergown," with the chemise showing through the front opening bodice... but where's the opening in the neck? The pearls show an unbroken line along the top of the bodice, much like the side-back-lacing Tudor kirtles that allow the necklines to be completely trimmed out with bilaments, without breaking the line with an opening (as shown in this Ninya Mikhaila reproduction; 2 photos in white, third row from bottom).

What the painting, and this illustration, seems to show is a bodice that opens in the front, but not all the way up to/through the neckline? How does that work? In this portrait, Carpaccio depicts a much more typical--and logical--arrangement for a front-opening gown with the camicia visible.

Perhaps the lacing in "Two Venetian Ladies" is indeed similar to the Tudor kirtles--the front unlaces just loosely enough to allow you to pull the gown on over your head, and down over your bust, while still maintaining the unbroken line of trim. It seems awkward, but it could work.

I'm going to have to pull out my Birbari and see what (if anything) she has to say about this!

[isabelladangelo]

*repeating what I said earlier but with a pretty picture*

The red dress is a front opening gown.  The chemise is the one with the decorated (pearls) neckline - not the dress.  You can see a similar example here but fifteen years later:




Now, the other possibility is that it is a closed front dress and what we think is the chemise showing through the front is really the sleeve from the right arm- the right arm crossing the bust slightly making it look like a front opening dress from this angle.

[Wickedvox]

I want to play along, but the original picture is missing

[gem]

Wicked, you can't see the image in my first post? It's from Wikipedia, so it should come through for you. If not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Venetian_Ladies

[RaizaKins]

The picture I posted in the original post should be visible as well.

So, from what I've gathered. It is most likely that this woman is under dressed and is missing her overdress. But still, why would there be an opening in the main dress. Anyway, I guess it wouldn't be appropriate to walk around without a overdress. Thank everyone. Off to another portrait I suppose. Maybe we can figure out how the opening in the main dress would function anyway?

[gem]

Not "underdressed," just dressed for home. 

If you read back through all the posts, we've come up with a variety of options for you:
--Traditional front-opening gown, with the pearls on the camicia and not the dress
--A partial front-opening gown with the trim along the neckline (opens just enough for you to pull it over your head, kind of like a side zip in a modern dress)
--A false chemise puff from a slashed opening
--Skipping the center white bit altogether

I hope you DO continue with this project--it's a glorious painting, and I'd love to see what you come up with!!

[RaizaKins]

Thanks Gem.    I think I will make the dress as-is and then make an overdress to wear with it. That way I can have it be accurate and publicly appropriate. Haha. Thanks everyone!

[DonaCatalina]

So I've been reading here for a few years and almost all my questions have been answered. Bravo to you all. All of you are very talented.

Anyway, I'm beginning a new project and I've decided on recreating a popular favorite:  the red dress in Two Venetian Ladies.

What baffles me is the front of the bodice. At first it looks to be a typical Venetian bodice with the front opening. But the trim with pearls confuses me since it seems to be attached to the bodice and not the chemise. Does anyone have any ideas? That white bit in the front is throwing me off. :/ Thanks.

I agree that the overdress is missing.
The finished effect might be something like this.