Despite the fact that I typically declare that I’m not athletic, the evidence almost certainly wouldn't acquit me of that charge. Since junior high I have committed the following sports and/or exercise activities: cross-country running (very slowly), throwing the discus and shotput (ineptly), playing soccer, both high-school indoor (hello, knee damage!) and college outdoor (position: benchwarmer), step aerobics (lots of fun but requires suspension of natural sense of the ridiculous), yoga (Iyengar, most fun ever, but really only with one specific teacher [YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE]), treadmill walking [only supportable by viewing of Dr. Who and Torchwood]. Oh, and weightlifting, either intermittently or concurrently with any or all of the above.

And, of course, roller-skating, despite the fact that anything done in a venue where you can also buy a corn dog is automatically suspect as exercise.

My biggest problem with exercise, of course, has always been the general crappitude of exercise WEAR. Tight pants? Tighter tops? After a certain age, a “Don't Mess With Texas” t-shirt and raggedy soccer shorts just don't cut it.

And then came these folks. They sent me an email and I grudgingly took a look at their site, but the grudging turned to grudging admiration. This skirt is GREEN! It has workout shorts under it! It has TWO pockets. It has something called “tummy-tuck” technology. And the best part? The style name is “Rollergirl.”

I don't like the logo (I don't like ANY logos) but hey, nothing's PERFECT.

I'm seriously tempted to get one of these; the weather's getting better, I could use more exercise, my outdoor roller skates have just been gathering dust … and this would solve my “what can I wear skating in the Skokie Sculpture Park and not feel like a very conspicuous idiot in the grocery store on the way home?” problem.

And if I got the black one maybe I'd even feel up to skating in Central Park. Certainly more up to it than skating in street clothes or in the ubiquitous (and too-tight) black lycra capri pants. You never know …

The skirt's $56, click on the image to visit their site. Their size chart goes up to XXL (22), but it looks like this skirt is only up to XL (about an 18).

As the majority of you’ve possibly figured out, I’m someone of random enthusiasms. Get stuck speaking to me for some minutes at a party or in an elevator and I will attempt to convince you of how wonderful roller-skating is, or that liverwurst sandwiches with spinach and mustard on wholegrain bread are underrated, or how you need to genuinely attempt my new stupidly-expensive-but-actually-worth-it preferred lip balm.

So I believed right now could be an incredible day for a random post about stuff I like (but sadly, although I reside in Chicago, I can't truly GIVE you all the stuff I like, the way Oprah would). Stuff such as Pearson Coffee Nips, which I can't in fact eat more than once or twice a year anymore because they genuinely do a number on your teeth:

I know, they are total grandma candy, and weird because I don't really like to drink liquid coffee in any form, but, oh, the deliciousness. Mmmm.

I also truly like Veronica Mars. Seriously, if you might have never watched this show, block out a week or two and sit yourself down on the couch. I've been rewatching (as I walk on my treadmill, another preferred thing) and I have been bowled over (again) by what an incredible show this is. (Also: LoVe 4eva!)

And has everyone here read Josephine Tey? I recently grabbed one of her books off the shelf — Brat Farrar, my preferred — to keep me from getting a cold (did you guys know this works? A preferred mystery novel, taken with either a hot bath or a bowl of popcorn, will usually pull me back from the brink if I feel like I'm coming down with something), and wondered if people even read Josephine Tey any more. And they need to.

I also truly like and sometimes people are shocked to hear this Wikipedia. I've worked on reference books professionally, and I know what kinds of shenanigans can go on with them, but I find that by and large, Wikipedians do an incredible job giving you the gist about anything you may care to look up. And if you can't trust an article unless you know that it was written by underpaid and overstressed professional reference book editors, well, you can always skim down to the bottom of any article and look for the source links, and then go read THEM. That alone is really worth the (free) price of admission! (Disclosure: I'm on an advisory board for Wikimedia Foundation, but they don't pay me anything.) If you’ve used Wikipedia this past year, please seriously consider donating to the Wikimedia foundation's fundraiser:

I could go on and on — I haven't even gotten to how fun it is to carry around a toy sonic screwdriver, or even expounded on the whole liverwurst thing — but I'm sure you all have work to do or other blogs to read. (Speaking of which, I did a top-ten list of blogs for Blogs.com this morning … it was kind of a stream of consciousness list and was, by necessity, inadequate. Ten?? I need a “Top 350″ list to represent all the blogs I genuinely love … Anyway, if you were on my list, you can pick up your fancy-shmancy blog badge here.)

So, happy Stuff I Like Thursday! Let me know if you end up having liverwurst for lunch.

I know I don't usually talk about shoes here, because so many other bloggers do it so well, and also because I believe someone's shoes are like their children: you should only give praise and never criticism (that is, if you want them to remain your friend!). However, take a look at these! The top pair, are (as the Manolo would say) the shoes of the surpassing comeliness, from the Prada. The bottom pair are the very faithful … homages, shall we say, from Via Spiga. Guess which pair I bought yesterday?

I've been obsessed with the Prada ones since last Spring, when I saw them in the March Vogue (the shoot with Andre 3000 and Liya Kebede) and everyplace else, and I came very, very close to buying a pair until I discovered I am constitutionally unable to spend nearly $400 on a pair of shoes. (I broke out in hives contemplating it.) I am, however, perfectly well able to spend $80 on a pair of shoes, especially when they are on sale at Bloomingdales and are the only pair left in my size …

What does this have to do with dresses, you say? Merely that a little black loafer, with a low vamp and a low heel, is simply the perfect shoe for the day dress. Dressy enough to wear to work, yet nicely informal with bare legs in the spring and summer, comfortable enough to walk long blocks, feminine (it's the low vamp) but not frilly or girly … I've been wearing variations of this shoe for more than twenty years, which I figure makes it a personal classic. There is nothing more universally appropriate before 6 PM than a cotton dress worn with loafers like these and a little cardigan. If I have anything even approaching a uniform it would be this combination.

I've already put together an eBay search for this style name in my size; I'll probably try to buy another pair before spring. When you find a perfect pair of shoes and for one reason or another, can't buy another pair right then, hie yourself to eBay and set up a recurring search for them. Everything shows up on eBay eventually, and with any luck you'll be able to grab another pair, and cheaper, even after they've left the stores.

[pattern from Lanetz Living]

La BellaDonna left a truly valuable comment about slips and crinolines and petticoats on the Shirtwaist #2 post the other day, and on the off-chance a few of you missed it, I believed I really should elevate it to Complete Post Status. (You must truly study the comments in the event you can, they're always awesome, because you all rock!)

So, LBD writes:

For the ladies who are dubious about wearing a complete crinoline under their complete skirts, I would point out there is an Easy Cheat?:

Use the skirt part of the pattern you're making up to draft a petticoat. It's not as scary as “draft” makes it sound: just make sure the finished “petticoat” is a couple of inches shorter than the finished dress will be, and experiment with putting ruffles on the “petticoat” until you reach your desired degree of “pouf.” You don't even have to make yourself crazy with shortening the petticoat and then sewing the ruffle onto the hem; just topstitch the ruffle onto the finished “petticoat” so that the bottom of the ruffle is even with the “petticoat” hem. Should you want more fullness higher up, put another ruffle higher up on the “petticoat;” it need to overlap the lower ruffle, but not cover it completely. For a gathered skirt pattern being made into a petticoat, it is possible to make a casing and run the elastic through at the waist; for a gored skirt, or something fitted, it is possible to put in a placket and a hook and eye (or just overlap it a bit and put on the hook and eye!). Let the petticoat sit a little BELOW the waist of your skirt, to cut down on bulk at your waistline (this means the petticoat skirt waist will actually be BIGGER than the waist of the dress, so that the petticoat sits lower down on your torso than the dress waist does.) It is possible to experiment with making ruffles out of the “petticoat” fabric; you are able to try ruffling up some good stiff nylon net (about 7-9″ wide for a good finished ruffle), in which case you WILL want that petticoat fabric between you and the nylon of the ruffle; maybe another layer of fabric over that, to protect the skirt from the nylon. Dubious about nylon? Stitch a band of horsehair (woven nylon strip, made from nylon horses, designed to Stiffen Stuff) behind the hem of the ruffle. Horsehair is washable and is easy to work with; just top stitch it on the underside of the ruffle. If the dress fabric is lightweight, and you have enough, you could even make one ruffle out of the dress fabric! For instance, a yellow print dress might have a plain yellow “petticoat,” with: a plain yellow ruffle; or a nylon net ruffle; or a white eyelet ruffle; or a lace ruffle; or a yellow print ruffle. Or all of them, should you want a Truly Complete Petticoat (with a Actually Mixed Look). A print corduroy dress might have the petticoat in one color of the print, and the edge of the ruffle could be bound in the corduroy. (You might want to bind it using corduroy cut on the weft, since corduroy cut on the bias can get weird.) (N.B.: A Actually Complete Ruffle is generally considered to be the finished width times 3; if your skirt hem is 100 inches, that means a 300-inch strip of fabric gathered back down to 100 inches. A ruffle two and a half times the finished width, or 250 inches, is OK for a not-too-full ruffle that's been backed with horsehair. But I'd recommend the Three Times suggestion. My own preference for a finished ruffle length is 7-9″; your mileage, and your height, may vary. But it's a size to start with. And I completely agree with the zigzag-over-dental floss-or-buttonhole thread-method of gathering chunks of fabric. Mark your ruffle in quarters (that is, half-way, and half-way again) BEFORE gathering; mark your “petticoat” in quarters; match up the quarters to make sure you haven't gathered too much petticoat ruffle in one spot and not another. Don't take out the gathering thread! Leave it in! Topstitch the ruffle on a couple of times so it's nice and secure. DO remember to preshrink your petticoat fabric!!

Remember: YOU'RE IN CHARGE. You are able to do it ANY WAY YOU WANT. Red silk taffeta petticoat with black lace ruffles? Check. Plaid flannel petticoat with eyelet ruffles? Check. Pink gingham petticoat with dotted swiss ruffles? Check. It is a GREAT way to use up a few of those weird chunks of fabric that find their way into every stash. Nobody needs to know that you have a gold damask petticoat under that grey wool shirtdress. On the other hand, how cool should you do?

I'm sure none of you would be surprised that I spent my Saturday afternoon sewing. After all, that's what I'd spend all my free time doing, if I could. You might be surprised to learn that I was doing alterations (given how often I've loudly proclaimed how I hate to do alterations). However — this was for a very good cause. I spent Saturday afternoon taking up shoulder straps, putting in quick darts, and mending seams that had divorced themselves from zippers, all for The Glass Slipper Project, a Chicago nonprofit that connects gently used dresses, shoes, jewelry and accessories with girls who would otherwise not have a chance to go to their proms appropriately attired.

Yesterday, I was told, more than 500 girls came through the “boutique,” held in a disused school in Cabrini. 126 dresses came through the “alterations department”, where, when I arrived for my shift at noon, half a dozen cheerful women were seated behind machines in a giant metal cage. (When a fire alarm went off, none of us moved, and the Triangle Shirtwaist jokes came thick and fast …)

It was hard to decide what was more fun — sitting and joking with the other alterations volunteers, our laps full of satin and lace, or watching the girls try on their altered dresses and seeing their excitement and anticipation.

I really enjoyed talking with the other volunteers (and I'm not just saying that because I told them about this blog!). Two, Julie and Holly, run their own sewing business — Dame Couture, custom vintage-inspired bridal and party dresses, which is really worth checking out! They took off a whole Saturday, in the height of the bridal-planning season, to volunteer. Chris, one of the other volunteers, told me about a new sewing organization in Chicago, Haute Couture (although a cursory Google didn't turn it up, I'm sure I'll find it).

It was freeing to do alterations “commando-style” — since speed was of the essence, we didn't bother with undoing facings or seams. We just made it fit, double-stitched so the fixes would hold through a night of energetic dancing, and grabbed the next dress off the rack. “Who's got the blue thread?” “I need to do some darts, is there a machine free?” “How would you fix this?” “Is there any Fray-Chek?” “Can somebody slip-stitch this closed?” we would call, as Marilyn and Maureen, the fitters, flitted back and forth, pinning the girls, taking up hems, and double-checking the alterations. It was like Habitat for Humanity, only with dresses.

Unfortunately, I can't make next weekend's boutique (I'm out of town), but I'll definitely be back next year. There are similar organizations in most major cities — Google “prom donation [your city here]” and you'll track them down. You'll be glad you did.

Stephanie Waddell, from the internet site Agnes & Hoss, designs fabrics that press my “instant covet” button, and turns them into pillows, handbags, and scarves that are perfect foils for the textiles. She agreed to answer five questions for A Dress A Day …

1. How did you get into fabric design? Was there an “aha!” moment where you knew this was what you wanted to do?

Ten years ago I had no idea this is where I would end up. I graduated from college with a degree in studio arts, specifically painting and drawing, and moved to Chicago. For several years I worked in the Chicago gallery scene as an administrator while always taking classes of some sort (art history, languages, sewing) in the evenings to keep myself alert and stimulated beyond my job. Sewing was the one that really stuck with me and as my skill level increased I started experimenting with some of my own designs and patterns … and this led to the handbags. While still working other jobs full-time and then soon only part-time, I launched Lily Starr, a hand-made handbag line using printed and woven silks (at this point store bought). I was just completely drawn to silk because with the material's ability to receive a print and reflect color so well. Because I was hand-making this line I kept distribution down to about 3-4 stores, but it only took about 6 months of slaving away at my sewing machine before I realized that what I was really passionate about were the fabrics themselves, and not the making of a handbag. This, combined with a lifelong obsession with mixing color and pattern in both my clothing and my home, made me realize that I should really pursue the textile angle, which in turn could open doors to a enormous range or products and ideas … from clothing and accessories to rugs, wallpaper, lighting and so on. This felt so much more freeing to me and so I just dove into it head first. Fortunately I had an art background, which really comes in handy, but I had no textile design experience and just taught myself how to develop repeats, work with mills, etc., on my own. I really wanted my first line of fabrics (and likewise the first range of products … handbags, scarves, pillows and lighting) to be something special so I took my time developing them. I think in the end that paid off. I officially launched Agnes & Hoss at the New York International Gift Fair in January 2006.

2. The patterns in your collection seem to straddle the line between abstraction and naturalism — did you find it hard to get to that “sweet spot”? Were you trying for that feeling?

I suppose I was trying for that feeling but hadn't thought about it in those exact words. I always respond to and am drawn to create natural and organic imagery, but also enjoy seeing the artist's hand in a design. I like that you don't necessarily see the imagery in my work right away for what it really is. For example, most people are not able to recognize my Seaweed as it actually is…they see trees or flowers. Likewise, upon first viewing the Starlings print, most people do not see the hundreds of little birds perched on the branches … they just see a jumble of branches or who knows what. And maybe that's all they ever see … it doesn't actually really matter to me … because it is what you want it to be. If you respond to the pattern you respond to it in your own way, like a Rorschach test, and that says something about you and how you see the world. But then there is a secret “truth” behind each design which always brings a smile to people's faces when they hear it. I always include a tag with each of my products telling the “story” from the corresponding print … what it actually is and how it came to be. It gives a little insight into the print as well as myself and what I'm inspired by.

3. What's your process from going from idea to finished fabric?

I spend a lot of time collecting natural material like shells, flowers, weeds, leaves, etc. I've trained my mind to be extremely alert to these things and particularly to unusual ones. I also look at a lot of books and online images. Often the images are a result of something I became interested in for completely inexplicable reasons … could be an article I read, a story someone told me, or something I found. The seaweed design, for example, is derived from a piece of seaweed I found on the beach in Cape Cod. On the beach, it was one of a million pieces of seaweed that had washed ashore, but for some unknown reason it just completely jumped out at me. There was something about its winding stem and flowery leaves (if that's what you call them) that seemed almost poetic. Then, once I really glom onto something (currently it's aerial images of river systems) I move into the pattern development phase by working on different drawings, bringing them into my computer and playing around with possible repeat systems, and color combinations. Once I've got the design nailed down, I send it off to one of a few domestic fabric companies I work with that farm the printing out to mills in China and Korea. The rest from the process takes about 8-10 weeks — 4 weeks to see and approve 1 yard strikeoffs from the mill, and another four weeks to make corrections and receive the production yardage. I'm very particular about color, so if a color isn't right the first time around and they have to adjust it, that could end up adding another 2-4 weeks onto the process.

4. Are there fibers or materials you'd like to work with but that aren't practical now? What's your dream fabric?

I would love to do a line of woven fabrics, where my designs are woven into the fabric. These could be used for upholstery or fashion. I would also love to do a line of rugs, made in Tibet or Nepal, because it supports the weavers and would also allow me to travel there! Regarding my dream fabric — I may already be working with it! Silk charmeuse (and I use a particuarly heavy weight charmeuse) will always seem special to me. I could invent a dream fabric, it would be a silk charmeuse that doesn't wrinkle.

5. What advice would you give the hobbyist or “prosumer” who wants to start out making fabric in smaller quantities?

If you want to start out making fabric in small quantities the best solution is to hand-print it yourself or hire a hand-printing studio to do it. If you work with a large print mill, as I do, you have to meet their minimums, which can occasionally be as low as 100-200 yards per design but are often much higher. This is a big upfront cost to take on. While I do love the look of hand-printed material and may eventually produce a line myself, I currently have my designs mill-printed overseas because I like the crispness they can achieve with line and repeats.

Can I just say, to begin with, which you all are totally, flabbergastingly, heart-warmingly Fantastic? You can find now much more than 4 THOUSAND patterns on the sewing-patterns wiki. 4 THOUSAND. Back in early December we'd only hoped for THREE thousand! And there's a lot more being uploaded every day!

And, thanks to generosity of some fantastic online pattern sellers, we have PRIZES!

Using the “random page” feature (so convenient) to pick 'em, our winners are:

The $100 gift certificate to Lanetz Living goes to wiki contributor Tarna, who uploaded the dress above (and many, many a lot more). Isn't it gorgeous? I especially like the writing on the envelope.

The $50 gift certificate from Cemetarian goes to Neefer (who uploaded this gem, Simplicity 1046).

The $50 gift certificate from Patterns from the Past goes to Susanfrom, who uploaded this spiffy Jackie-O style dress and jacket, Butterick 9970.

The $25 gift certificate from What-I-Found! Sewing Patterns goes to Klynn, whose contributions included this breathtaking Vogue evening gown, Vogue 927.

Jen at MOMsPatterns donated TWO $25 gift certificates, of which the very first will go to Ruvimbo (check out Butterick 9200, which Ruvimbo uploaded — so adorable)! The second one, I have decided, is going to Petite Main, who has done an enormous amount of categorizing & tidying work, which makes the wiki even much more usable!

If you're a winner, please email me so that I can put you in touch with the pattern sellers … and please, readers, go check out those pattern sites to help support their generosity, both for the prizes and for allowing their pictures & scans to be uploaded to the wiki!

One a lot more thing: the Vintage Sewing Patterns Wiki would never have gotten off the ground without the help of Wikia staffer sannse, who answered all my dumb questions and worked very hard to help make using the wiki easier. Thanks also go to Jimbo, who helped get the project fast-tracked for full Wikia-hood, and also to JSharp, who has just coded a magnificent new feature for us … if you go to any pattern page in the wiki, check up at the top, right by the page title: there's now a link that will take you to the next pattern, in alphabetical order!

So, what should our next target be? 7K by April Fool's Day? …

Okay, does every person agree with me that these had been the worst dresses ever worn in the Oscars? C'mon, people! It's like you weren't even TRYING.

Look at this one, for instance. Charlize Theron is so beautiful, most days, that it takes an army of makeup artists and serious prosthetics to make her look *ordinary*. But in this dress she looks as if the one role she really wanted last year was that of Zaphod Beeblebrox. (Matt Dillon was pissed to be seated behind her, he couldn't see a damn thing.) And origami, I might add, while a beautiful and worthwhile art form, should be limited to paper. Those big foldy X's across the front make her look like a railroad crossing sign. Or some kind of cryptic pirate “Here Be Treasure” X. (I'm sure none of you will be surprised that this is Galliano for Dior.) And she couldn't get her roots touched up for the big night?

Of course, at least you could tell Ms. Theron was there. A large group of other gown-wearers decided that it was “pretend to be invisible and/or naked” night, and trotted out the whitey-beigey-nude skin-tone dresses. Reese, Uma, Jennifer Garner, Naomi Watts … it didn't work, guys! We can still see you! I'm not even linking to your pictures, the dresses had been so boring.

The black-dress brigade was okay. Rachel Weisz's was the best of the lot, which is no mean feat when you're seven months pregnant. (Although I suppose it's easier when you can call Narcisco Rodriguez and say “hey, I have this thing, would you mind whipping me up a little something? Ta ever so …”) Hillary Swank did not need a train; Felicity Huffman needed quite a bit of double-sided tape.

And then, of course, had been the colors. I loved the yellow of Michelle Williams's dress; I just wasn't sure it should have been worn by her. But the cut was adorable. Helena Bonham Carter was in a very fitting electrified-corpse blue; too bad the cut of the dress was pure “Prom Night 1988″–perhaps that was part of the horror theme? Works for me. Jennifer Lopez … I love that color green. Unfortunately, when you wear it in a dress that is styled like a theater curtain over your hips, it loses nearly all of its charm. All it wanted was a drop-down banner that said “Coming Attractions!” Maggie Gyllenhaal was definitely channeling Slave-Girl Leia. And not in the good way, if there is in fact any good way to do that. (And if there is a good way to do that, please don't tell me. Tell Maggie. Not that it will do her any good NOW, but maybe she'll pass the message along in case Chloe Sevigny gets any ideas.)

The folks who had been trying looked pretty good — Amy Adams's dress was super-cute, and it had pockets! (Carolina Herrera, of course.) Too bad she was mugging like crazy. I know it gets boring making the same “I'm so glad to be here!” face a gazillion times, but that doesn't mean you get to amuse yourself by practicing your “manic” and “hysterical giggling” faces. Keira Knightley was a little too matronly (one-shoulder, heavy jewels, dark color), but at least it was pretty. The best dress of the night, though, had to be Salma Hayek. That color! That alone did it.

(By the way, am I the only one who has a “if I ever go to the Oscars” dress planned in her head? Mine would have a huge portrait collar around a sweetheart neckline, and be form-fitting to the knees, then bell out (to balance the collar). I just go back and forth on the color. It would have to be something odd, of course. Because the only way I'd ever be there would be for something odd, like being the subject of the Best Documentary Feature, so I'd have to do a weird color just to get photographed at all! Please spill your own personal imaginary Oscar dresses in the comments, okay?)

In the event you know an individual who loves to sew and are stumped for a appropriate vacation present, this list may assist …

Books: Sewing books are constantly a great concept, and also you truly can't have too many. There's constantly more than one way to accomplish any given task or technique, and the more sewing instruction you read, the better the odds of you finding the way that 'clicks' with you.

First on the list this year is a lovely new book from Ruth Singer (whose blog you may know):

It's called, in full, The Sewing Bible: A Modern Manual of Practical and Decorative Sewing Techniques and it's actually a lovely book. Clear, well-illustrated, and helpful, with a range of projects from the very simple (envelope-back pillow) to the more elaborate (handbag with pockets, circle skirt).

A book that is probably on a lot of internet-enabled sewists' list this year is Diana Eng's Fashion Geek: Clothes Accessories Tech. I know that there are projects in this book that I've been eyeballing for some time …

And it's not quite in the “books” category, but either a subscription to Threads Magazine, or, if you're feeling genuinely Santa-like, the new giant all-the-issues Threads DVD.

Fabric: It is a truth universally acknowledged that a sewist in possession of some fabric is constantly in want of MORE fabric. However, in the event you don't sew, buying fabric for somebody else can be a bit tricky. What do you buy? How much do you buy? I think you can never go wrong with high-quality natural fibers (or, of course, Liberty). My advice? Either buy four yards of something gorgeous, or try a gift certificate to one of the posher online fabric shops.

Notions: Go. Nuts. Seriously. Wander into a chain sewing store and hit the notions aisle with a basket and an open mind. Don't know what a bodkin is? Dump it in the basket. Throw in whatever little tools or gadgets or thingamagigs take your fancy, put them all in a nice covered basket, and call it a day. If your recipient already has one of whatever it is you picked up, she could probably use another, newer, sharper one, and if she doesn't, she'll have fun figuring out how to use it. Wandering in a store is more fun, but in case you don't know where to go (or, cough, have ridiculous problems with going to a “girly store”), try Clotilde's or Nancy's online or even Amazon.

Patterns: This, surprisingly, is much less fraught than buying fabric, In case you already feel confident when buying clothes for the same person. You just choose a pattern that looks like something your recipient would wear, IN THE RIGHT SIZE. Remember, pattern sizing is different from “normal” sizing, so go by measurements and not the size number. A better strategy is to get a fancy vintage pattern in an approximate size (or even a couple of patterns) so that you have some redundancy in the system. Bonus points for saying “These were so beautiful, they reminded me of you,” when you give them.

And if your budget is tight this year (and whose isn't?) one of the best gifts you can give to a person who loves to sew is time. Offer to run a weekend's worth of errands, make dinner, answer the phone, watch the baby, walk the dog, or anything else that would allow for a four- or five-hour uninterrupted block of time. (And make the sewing time real time — no interruptions, in the event you please, unless somebody is bleeding or on fire.)

Do you sew and have a gift wishlist of your own? Leave a comment!

I was genuinely impressed by Constructed by Wendy Dresses: The Sew U Guide to Generating a Girl's Best Frock. I genuinely liked her Sew U book that came out back in 2006, so I was excited to see that she had a new one, concentrating exclusively on DRESSES. Whoo-hoo!

There are three dress patterns (sheath, shift, and dirndl) and twenty-five variations, most of which are cute (although they skew a little young). And the pattern sizing has changed from the first book, with the new book including an XL size (up to a 41″ bust).

This would be a good book for a dedicated beginner. By “dedicated beginner,” I mean someone who is slightly more patient than average (or maybe just slightly more patient than ME), who is thoughtful and careful, and who has sufficient motivation to spend more than one weekend putting a dress together. I estimate that it would take one weekend's worth of time (for a beginner) just to get the patterns traced and altered, one weekend to cut out the pattern and begin construction, and one weekend (or long evening) to do the finishing work. This is definitely a book for someone who will enjoy the planning and the process as much as the finished item.

However, if you worked your way carefully through the projects in this book, there would be very little that would faze you at the end. She covers pattern alterations, collars, clipping curves, sewing on buttons, seam finishing, facings and linings … and of course, pockets, although welt pockets are not included — even Wendy says they're on the difficult side, so she left them out. Zippers are given a slightly hand-wavy treatment, but since there are roughly one gazillion zipper tutorials floating around the web, I don't think that's a problem.

I get a lot of emails that basically read “I bought a sewing machine NOW WHAT??” I think this book is the new answer to “NOW WHAT??”