About the Look

Charles James’ “Butterfly” dress is perhaps one of his most notable garments since it embodies his exquisite attention to detail and architectural capabilities (Figs. 1-2). In order to display his expertise in the relationship between form, color, and texture, James often utilized similar fabrics in different colors, or different fabrics in similar colors. By taking advantage of the different textural qualities of varying fabrics and colors, James was able to create extraordinary dimension in his garments. “Butterfly” features a cream and brown color palette however, its neutral shades do not compromise the luxurious drama the dress exudes (“Butterfly,” Metropolitan Museum of Art). James also included unexpected pops of color by including purple tulle in the billowing skirt fabric which could be revealed when the dress was in movement (Fig. 3).

Made from silk chiffon, silk satin, and twenty-five yards of nylon tulle, the dress wrapped the wearer’s body in sensual femininity and extravagance. Weighing a total of eighteen pounds, the enormous bustle skirt moved swiftly with the wearer’s body and its satin side flanges emulate the beauty of a butterfly’s wings. In fact, this dress was so extravagant that an owner of the gown claimed to have bought two opera seat tickets, one for her skirt and the other for the burst of tulle, or “wings,” of her butterfly dress (Coleman). Additionally, James often implemented quite complex and innovative construction techniques in order to achieve his desired silhouette.

To create detail on the body-conscious sheath of the “Butterfly” James used a labor-intensive tucking treatment also featured in his “Swan” gown. A wide satin band was utilized to control the volume and drama of the tulle bustle skirt, as well as seamlessly disguising the structural components of the dress. His use of architectural treatment, labor-intensive design techniques, and training as a milliner all contributed to James’ spirit of experimentation and zest for unconventional design approaches, including that seen in the “Butterfly” (Koda).

The “Butterfly” gown’s body-conscious sculpted sheath and large bustle skirt is reminiscent of the late Victorian tightly fitted bustle dresses of the early 1880s like those seen on James Tissot’s Provincial Women (Fig. 4). James often utilized similar voluminous shapes and construction methods, especially drapery, to achieve an elegant design that highlighted the feminine form of the wearer. Cinching the waist and featuring an explosion of tulle “wings” this garment transforms the wearer into a beautiful butterfly, which is similar to Dior’s infatuation with depicting women as flowers. James’ use of silk chiffon, silk satin, and nylon tulle textiles in variations of cream and brown reflected the technological advancements and popularity of experimenting with different fabrics at the time.

About the wearer

In 1957, the “Butterfly” gown was donated by Mrs. Dominique de Menil, renowned art collector, and patron of Charles James. Although this garment came from de Menil’s personal collection, the “Butterfly” gown was originally designed by James for Mrs. Austine Randolph Hearst in 1955. The gown made its very first appearance at the March of Dimes luncheon in 1955 and was modeled by Austine Hearst herself (Fig. 9). Charles James also designed his famous 1953 “Clover Leaf” dress for Mrs. Hearst to wear to President Eisenhower’s inauguration, which shows her influence and high status in society. With Mrs. Hearst wearing the “Butterfly” gown for the first time to a public event, the dress was meant to make an impact on viewers. Also, James held a fashion show at the convention of dry cleaners where a pale, yellow satin version of the “Butterfly” was modeled (Koda 45).

Charles James creations, like the “Butterfly”, evoked exuberant luxury and a high social status; however, this dress was also manufactured to be sold at Lord & Taylor (Fig. 10). This shows the importance of creating beautiful designs for wealthy society women while simultaneously providing garments at a more accessible location and price point (Koda 222).

Additionally, the “Butterfly” gown was photographed being worn by his wife, Nancy James (Fig. 11), and received news coverage in the ​Chicago American​ after being featured at the dry cleaners convention of 1955 (Fig. 12). It was featured in an article entitled “Night in Monte Carlo: The Imperial Ball,” in the March 1956 issue of ​Vogue​ in, where an attendee wore a black version of the “Butterfly” (Daves 184).

In the postwar world, consumption in all segments of society skyrocketed leading to the birth of “suburban style;” however, the 1950s were also emblematic of couture opulence, decadence, and luxury. Government aided programs, like America’s G.I. Bill of Rights, led to the redeployment of technology advancements, like television sets, into the homes of Americans. By 1950, over one million homes in the U.S. had television sets which led to an increase in the promotion of consumer goods. While France remained the leader in couture, America was very influential in terms of its pop culture, including films and music. Because of this, fashion was examined closely and took on an even more aspirational quality than it had previously. With Charles James designing evening wear for his fashionable celebrity clientele (Fig. 13), his garments gained visibility on a global scale by way of television, film, and the fashion press (Deihl & Cole).

Considering fashion journalism publications, such as ​Vogue​, were at their peak, fashion photography and rules-driven social codes of dress impacted the practice fashionable dress. Time of day, location, age, and occasion dictated the appropriate garment to wear for any occasion, and evening wear played a significant role in the 1950s phenomenon of cocktail hour. A gown as extravagant as “Butterfly” embodied the idea of a separate dress code applicable only to couture garments which represented a select clientele, as opposed to the masses (Deihl & Cole 239).

Although similar to the fuller figure of the 1940s, the ideal body of the 1950s was reminiscent of the hourglass silhouette from the 19th century. A curvaceous figure that accentuated hyper-femininity and an extremely narrow waistline was deemed the fashionable silhouette throughout this decade (Fig. 14). The ideal body placed emphasis on lavishness, glamour, and shapeliness, which highlighted female sensibility as well as sensuality (Martin 51).

Following the arrival of Christian Dior’s “New Look” (Fig. 15) in February of 1947, nipped-in waists and voluminous skirts remained popular throughout the 1950s, and soon morphed into a straighter and slimmer silhouette (Reddy). When looking at James’ “Butterfly,” the waist remains the focal point with voluminous tulle evoking contrast between the narrowness of the wearer’s body and the drama of the bustle skirt. Indeed, this James garment emphasizes the feminine form with a sculpted sheath and exaggerated full skirt, showing his own opulent interpretation of the 1950s ideal body (“Butterfly”).

In order to create this fashionable silhouette, women wore highly structured shapewear to create a pointy bust, cinched waist, and defined hips. It is possible that a “corselet” or strapless bra was required for the “Butterfly” dress to define the bust as well as the waistline of the wearer, thus creating a tightly fitted form (Deihl & Cole 239).