Let’s Put Art Back in Pattern Engineering

And keep extreme, creative unwearables separate from fashion, because their promotions are killing the American fashion industry, especially for the Middle Class

“Wall Between Design & Manufacturing” illustrates how parts of the American fashion industry has been working separately since the 1970s

The “Wall Between Design and Manufacturing” in my engineering grant award from the National Science Foundation in 1989, illustrates how the fashion apparel industry worked in the second half of the 20th century. Most “fashion designers” connected only with showrooms and marketing to retail stores. And most fashion schools and colleges taught only this side of education. The pattern side was taught by books and drafting of rules — which is not true of pattern engineers. Any quality pattern maker learned their trade from apprenticing with others in the industry, and gradually some were called “pattern engineers”. The unfortunate result from the separation is that the pattern and manufacturing side of the industry has produced boring sameness to keep their fashion clothing products profitable, because pattern makers can no longer work with creative ideas from young fashion designers. I have a protégé that makes patterns for some firms with these young designers. She frustratingly says, “They don’t know anything”.

In the early days of the Garment Industry (first half of 20th century), those who made patterns for many people, were called pattern designers because the work used both technical skills and creative artistry — especially in Boston. Meanwhile, dressmakers made patterns for one person and corrected them while fitting the garment. This was continued from 19th century dressmaking in which there was aesthetics, but no engineering.

I learned this when stitching in garment factories, as a teenager, in the late 1940s and 1950s. I worked with that belief (both art and technical in patterns) and it became my thesis when graduating MassArt in 1955. I used pattern engineering in my dressmaking business and later when developing Mass-Produced Custom in my engineering design grants from National Science Foundation; and as CEO of my creative design, pattern engineering and manufacturing business; to teaching both in fashion education, and writing two books on creative fashion design and pattern engineering. I hired others to do marketing, sales and promotion in a showroom in New York, while I did the creative design, pattern engineering and production engineering.

However, the fashion apparel industry and fashion design education did not follow this belief, and separated the work in technical pattern engineering and the creative art of fashion design. And we must work to change that. Media is also responsible by blaming fashion apparel firms as going overseas for cheap labor. It was seldom for cheaper production. I could not find good stitchers because immigration from foreign countries, with good stitching abilities, was fading. So, I had to train them myself. Media and unions talked of the industry as a horrible place to work, and I personally knew that stitching was a great job and well paying with piece-work.

After graduating MassArt in 1955 I went to New York. I easily got a job in a NY design room as a samplehand from my background as a factory stitcher. My experimenting on flat pattern making as a teenager and being a keen observer, helped me to bluff my way in “draping first patterns” in order to help the assistant designer. Later I developed my own system of “draping”, which I used and taught.

The “pattern designers”, back at the factories, laughed at the pattern shapes of most assistant designers, considering them not usable patterns. Pattern designers started over, just using the rough “idea” of the style. And the fashion teachers, with backgrounds in dressmaking, continued the adoration of couture and frowned on pattern engineering and production. America used to be known as the best in the fashion industry, as I found out when teaching fashion design in Florence, Italy, the summer of 1967. Italian designers showed off their oak tag patterns they copied from Americans. But this prestige in America has seriously faded.

The solution starts with education: teaching quality and aesthetics in the pattern making of affordable clothing for the middle class, with promotion of Pattern Engineering.

What does “quality and art” in pattern engineering mean?

1.Not letting the stretch of the fabric do the work of fitting and shaping. The model here with good shoulders makes it look OK. But it can never be worn by average women.

2.Not letting stretch fabric take the place of garment shaping and fitting. Imagine how bad on average women! Bad wrinkles at points of arm motion instead of “pattern engineering” that shapes.

3.Another useless draping. Good for photography where it can be pinned into place, but not wearable by most women.

9.Some examples of nonwearable creativity with no Pattern Engineering.

1. Who will wear plastic just because it can be 3D Printed?

2. Shirt-tails could be nice if aesthetically engineered.

3. Neckline of jacket is nice if the rest of jacket was aesthetically engineered.

4. Detail is creative and nice, but wrongly placed on a woman’s shoulder.

Let’s Put Art Back in Pattern Engineering. And Not Leave Pattern Engineering Out of Fashion Design

Thank you for reading. I hope to hear from others who feel the same way.