 President, fellows, and guests, thank you so much for the privilege of speaking today. Although I never met Janet Arnold, it was through her, patterns of fashion's books, that I came to learn about costume history. I'm sorry I'm having problems making it go forward. I taught myself how to replicate garments from her pattern books, and in my work at Ryerson University, I have used her method to teach others how to replicate historic garments. Her legacy is immense, and thus it is a great honor to be the 2014 recipient of the Janet Arnold Fund Award. This award facilitated the inclusion of 150 color images in the book The Dress Detective, and I would like to formally thank the society and its members for supporting this publication. Today I would like to share some highlights from The Dress Detective, especially the slow approach to seeing, as I believe that this approach can be used for the analysis of any type of artifact, whether that is a dress or a painting. It was with great eloquence that Susan Purse wrote, objects hang before the eyes of the imagination, continuously representing ourselves to ourselves, and telling the stories of our lives in ways which would be impossible otherwise. For me, every dress has a story that can be unpicked, whether it is the story of the designer, the maker, the person that wore the garment, or the person who donated it to a museum or study collection. The story of The Dress Detective is intimately related to my work to recollect the Ryerson Fashion Research Collection, a project that I began in 2012. This study collection at Ryerson University had become dormant, and I have attempted to bring it back to life. To recollect means to recall to mind or to remember. A study collection, like a museum, is both a storehouse and a repository of memory, and collective memory is derived from the relationship of the objects to each other through the act of selection by the curator in creating the collection. My intent was to rediscover and remember what is important in this collection, and in the process of doing so, refocus and rebuild it for the future. The objects that had been collected to that point represented a shared memory of what donors felt was important to save and to remember. Given a passive collections policy, the accumulated items in the collection reflected the attitudes and interests of the donors, most of whom were female. This group of donors chose to save women's special occasion dress. Many of the items in the collection were evening or bridal wear, emblems of the emotional ties that such special event clothing can have for the wear, who often desires to prolong the biography of that garment. Many designers, Christabel Balenciaga, Christian Dior, and Alexander McQueen, have visited archives and museum collections for inspiration, reinterpreting the past for the present. Seeing a dress in a photo is a very different experience from feeling the weight of the fabric in hand, examining the details of cut, construction and embellishment, considering the relationship of the garment to the body, or searching for evidence of how the garment was worn, used, or altered over time. Art historian Jules David Prown put it this way, artifacts are primary data for the study of material culture, and therefore they can be used actively as evidence, rather than passively as illustrations. And so, very early on, even when the collection was barely accessible and I was uncertain as to its viability, I began to visit classes and talk about object-based research. I would often begin my talks with this beautiful quote from Christian Dior. We invent nothing, we always start from something that has come before. In terms of discussing methodology with students, I would reference the seminal article on material culture written by Jules David Prown called Mind in Matter, an introduction to material culture, theory, and method. I would methodically work through the article, reviewing in detail his three key steps of description, deduction, and speculation. In spite of my best efforts and others on faculty, we found that many students would produce accurate descriptions of the garment or accessory, but seemed unable to go beyond that and ended their analysis at speculation with a string of unanswered questions. It did not seem to matter how much time or care I took to reinterpret Prown for them. The analysis was almost always superficial and few had any idea how to relate their findings to theory. From my perspective, using Prown seemed to discourage students from using artifacts in their research process. Another observation that I made was that students would often take a quick series of photos and think that they were done. Slowing down to look, to really look and interpret the evidence was not happening. As well, I noticed that many seemed to be anxious or uncertain what to do besides taking photos. It struck me then that there had to be a better way and that is when the checklists were born. In creating checklists, I was writing down steps that I would do without thinking, but probably would not be obvious to someone who had not worked in a museum before. It was in the fall of 2013 that I met Emily Artisone of Bloomsbury and after talking about my work at Ryerson, she suggested that I write a proposal for a book that would serve as a practical guide on object-based research and fashion. I promised Emily that I'd think about it in due course, being busy with other things. And then one night a few weeks later, the entire structure of the book came to me like a dream. I got up in the middle of the night and wrote the whole thing down. I decided to show the proposal to Alexandra Kim, a former curator at Kensington Palace. She had moved to Toronto and we had worked on a number of projects together. She liked the proposal very much and encouraged me to go forward with it. Having not written a scholarly book before, I thought it would be a good idea to ask her to be my co-author and she signed on. I must bow my hat to her for her willingness to take direction from me. I'm a hardcore perfectionist and I wanted the book to read as one voice to be accessible to a range of audiences, not only scholars. Although the dress detective is an academic text, I wrote it so that anyone, scholar and layperson alike, could learn something. One question that Alexandra Kim asked me very early on was how had I figured this out? I think the secret behind my ability to see what others might miss is in part due to my training in art. I believe it is in learning to draw that one learns to see. It was actually through art that I came to study costume history. When drawing, one is constantly having to establish relationships between parts. In figuring out the length of a ruffle on a shoe to the toe box, close attention is required. To draw with accuracy, one has to slow down and look, really look. For me, time slows down when I draw and that is the basis of my approach to studying artifacts. I call it this slow approach to seeing. I encourage researchers to draw even if they do it badly. It slows down the process and helps to reveal the subtle details that take time to be uncovered. I also believe anyone can draw and it is not about drawing but rather about the looking. I also have led groups of graduate students in drawing exercises, insisting that they draw, even in classes on such unrelated topics as oral history and ethnography. And with the rare exception, their skills of observation seem to improve quite dramatically. And even if there isn't time to draw, committing to careful and systematic looking makes the difference to the results. Last year, I knew I was really onto something when the Rijksmuseum introduced an initiative to encourage visitors to draw. And this was several months after I had submitted the book manuscript. This recent screen grab from the Rijksmuseum reads, in today's world of mobile phones and media, a visit to a museum is often a passive and superficial experience. Visitors are easily distracted and do not experience beauty, magic and wonder. That's why the Rijksmuseum wants to help visitors discover and appreciate the beauty of art and history through drawing. So start drawing. And that's my mantra as well. So let's dive deeper into the book. The dress detective is the first practical guide to analyzing fashion objects, clearly demonstrating how their close analysis can enhance and enrich interdisciplinary research. The book outlines a skill set that has, until now, typically been passed on informally. The process of studying a dress artifact can be divided into three main phases, including phase one of observation, just capturing the information from the dress artifact. Phase two, reflection, considering the embodied experience of engaging with the artifact to identify changes in cultural beliefs, uncover researcher bias, and locate contextual material. And the third phase is interpretation, which is linking the observations and reflections to theory, in other words, telling a scholarly story. The observation checklist in the dress detective is a way to systematically work through the analysis of a garment. There are six sections addressing aspects that are unique to dress artifacts, including construction details, textile characteristics, inclusion of labels, and elements of use and where. There are 40 questions in total. The checklist begins with a general section that encourages a student to think broadly and take note of initial impressions before becoming overly concerned with the details. Then the idea is to methodically work through the questions of each section with the most subtle and difficult parts of this detective work left closer to the end. Before the appointment is over, the checklist alerts the researcher to ask about other garments from the same donor or same designer, as well as request supporting material that may be available, such as provenance records or photos. Question 30 asks, is there a marking inside the garment that indicates the specific owner of the garment, such as an embroidered initial, name tag, or laundry mark? For example, this cotton petticoat from 1890 includes the embroidered signature of Elizabeth Hughes, created with a bold red thread that suggests a vibrant young woman. She did this through all the petticoats that were donated in her name. Where the need for slow looking is most critical is an examination of the garment for details of how it has been used and worn, which are questions 31 to 35. Question 31 asks, has this garment been structurally altered in any way? This 1860s dress has had an extra black silk panel at the front of the bodice, and the waistband of the skirt has been unpicked. These are clues that the wearer was likely trying to accommodate an expanding figure due to pregnancy at a time when maternity wear was uncommon. It is in the reflection stage that I ask researchers to consider their sensory and personal reactions to the object as well as their biases. The reflection checklist includes a list of 20 questions and is divided into three parts that address one, sensory reactions, which are sight, touch, sound, and smell. Two, emotional reactions, which are intended to unlock researcher bias, and three, contextual material. We might not be conscious of our personal and emotional involvement with the history of the object. It is there, implicitly coloring our observations and the results of our researcher. Since each of us has a cultural stance that reflects the age in which we live in. Unconsciously, we make assumptions and judgments about class, gender, religion, politics, occupation, age, ethnicity, and sexuality during the course of our day. And in order to be objective in our research, we must acknowledge these assumptions and work to overcome those distortions and biases. In terms of contextual material, this series of questions is designed to encourage the researcher to seek out imagery, written text, and other objects that can be linked to the artifact in some way. Question 15 of the reflection checklist asks researchers to identify similar garments in other collections. Many museum collections are now online and this step is relatively easy. For example, a search for Dior garments on the collection portal at the Metropolitan Museum of Art revealed that the Dior ensemble on the right was from 1955. Both of the garments that you see on the screen were likely from the same collection since they used the same tweed. And thus, in finding this image, we can visualize what the matching skirt to the jacket on the right might have looked like. Question 18 asks researchers to consider whether there are any photographs, paintings, or illustrations of the garment. Here we see the similarities between a Castle-Beijac Unisex tunic from the 1970s and a similar type of tunic was worn in this medieval portrait from the 15th century. Question 19 of the reflection checklist asks the researcher whether this garment or others like it has been referenced in documents such as letters or receipts, magazines or novels or other forms of written material. This wedding slipper is one of a few artifacts in the Ryerson collection that was accompanied by a letter from the donor. The letter revealed that the shoes were worn to the wedding of Miss Mary Lawson to Mr. Edward Dowling, a telegraph operator in 1889 or 1890. The shoes are relatively unworn, indicating that they were probably only worn once for the wedding. The dress that she mentions in the note, the pale gray long satin dress, did not survive. Interpretation is the process by which a researcher links together all the evidence gathered during the other phases of research and creates an analysis as to its meaning. As one of the most challenging steps of the object-based research project, it is difficult to articulate the course of action definitively since the goals of each researcher are different. And for that reason, this section does not include any checklists. This stage of the process is both imaginative and highly creative, requiring the researcher to assimilate the knowledge gathered in other phases of the process to find patterns, make conjectures, and draw conclusions. Dress artifacts are unique. They are complex composites of material and cultural values. Reading a dress is like reading a painting. Both can be undertaken with precision, but the interpretation is subjective. Ultimately, the researcher must be creative, but also vigorous in interpreting results. The dress detective includes seven case studies that offer examples of how this interpretation phase may work, providing evidence from a garment used to unlock the narratives and cultural beliefs that were embodied in those artifacts. The seven garments that were selected were meant to offer a representative sample of fashionable western dress that might be available to fashion scholars, as well as addressing a variety of research questions. These objects were sourced from private collections, as well as the Ryerson collection. This beautiful yellow wool police with lilac silk lining is dated to about 1820 and comes from a private collection in the UK. There were no details about the original wearer, but the garment can be used to consider the identity of the wearer. Since it is handmade, it can also be used to discuss the production of fashionable garments prior to the invention of the sewing machine. And it can be linked to similar garments seen in fashion plates of the time to consider the dissemination of fashion in the early 19th century. One of the artifacts that is most often requested for research appointments is the corset. This undergarment is considered one of the most controversial objects in fashion history and is a continued source of fascination and inspiration. Although this corset from a private collection is relatively plain, it features a number of technological features that allowed greater ease in fastening and adjusting them, including the metal eyelets at the back and the slot and stud fastenings at the front. As a case study, the corset is made in a multitude of ways, some of which are shown above. Although most museum study collections privilege the dress of the elite, examining working class dress also offers insight into the dissemination of fashion and dressmaking practices. This brown velveteen and wool bodice is modest, but is stylish with its high, tight collar and full sleeve heads in the 1890s. This bodice illustrates both complexity in care and its construction and could also be used to consider the realities of making and wearing fashionable dress by the working class as compared to the idealized version presented in women's fashion magazines of the period. Men's wear is often underrepresented in museum collections. This case study uses a man's tailcoat and trousers from the Ryerson Fashion Research Collection that came without any provenance information. The tailcoat and trousers are made from a fine black wool woven with a delicate stripe that have been dated to about 1912 to 1922. There is no surviving vest accompanying the suit. This ensemble offers a range of possibilities for interpretation. The very fine wool of the suit suggests that it was a bespoke suit and as such could be used to consider how concepts of formality in class are expressed through the subtleties of men's clothing. The emotional poignancy associated with wedding dresses accounts for their very high survival rate in museum and study collections. However, in the case of the wedding dress and headpiece by Lamvam, someone did not know the significance of the Lamvam label and the dress was substantially altered. In fact, it was such a dramatic alteration that it was very difficult to date and authenticate the dress. The degree of alterations limited the interpretation range somewhat, but it was a dress detective challenge that I enjoyed very much, especially as it involved visiting the storage facilities of the Musee Galliera to compare early Lamvam wedding dresses in their collection. This ruby red jacket by Dior has a very distinctive pocket detail that made it very easy to date to Dior's collection for fall, winter, 1949. This stunning photo by Louise Dahl-Wolf was published in Harbour's Bazaar in September 1949 and with the help of this society I was able to secure the very expensive rights to include this photo in the book. Without this image it would be impossible to convey the effect of the ensemble as a whole, since Ryerson does not have the bone-thin pencil skirt that was designed to accompany the jacket. But even without the skirt the jacket offered a range of possibilities for interpretation, including the historical referencing of fashion as seen in the cuffs which mirror the 18th century as well as consideration of Bourdieu's Theory of Habitus with the embodied experience of wearing couture. The final case study in the book is of a jacket designed by Kenzo for fall, winter, 2004. This jacket with its widely sleeved and unfitted shape adopts elements of the kimono and uses a mixture of fabrics which is a distinctive signature of the Kenzo label. This jacket, which is one of several hundred items that were donated to Ryerson by the family of the late Kathleen Kubash offers the chance to interpret her sartorial choices and this was a runway photo that I was able to purchase with this society's help. Now I suspect Mrs. Kubash would not have worn her jacket or her breast exposed as it was styled on the runway but having this photo gives an impression of the designer's intention. As well the designer's eclectic mixing of fabrics and the spirited blending of stylistic and cultural references could be used to articulate the concept of post-modernity in fashion. What the dress detective aims to accomplish is to minimize the anxiety and confusion by articulating a systematic approach to examining dress artifacts. Since the book was published I've also tested the checklist on costume artifacts such as a ballet tutu and it works equally as well. Next month an article in the American Journal Dress will document my dress detective analysis of a ballet tutu from 1953 which was worn in an obscure ballet by Anthony Tudor called Gala Performance. In closing my talk today I'm happy to report that the book has had a very positive reception from readers since it was released in November of last year. Yesterday I gave a workshop on object based research and a public talk at the London College of Fashion and it had a very positive response. And I believe that the book has recently been added to the bookstore at the Victoria and Albert Museum. I've also heard from Bloomsbury that the book has sold through Europe and into Japan Singapore and Australia and if Amy Dillehay's prediction comes true it shall become a seminal text. I'd like to express my deep gratitude to the society for facilitating the publication of the dress detective. Members will feel that this book project was worthy of the Janet Arnold Award. Thank you.