On Size Charts in 1960s Knitting Magazines
For my upcoming book, I’ve been reading a lot of 1960s era knitting magazines, Since the book will be a pattern book of stranded colorwork patterns, I’m focusing mostly on the patterns, but I am noticing a lot of other interesting things, too. Today I’m discussing pattern sizing — were knitters smaller in 1962?
I refer to this photo of a size chart, from the Spring/Summer 1962 McCalls Needlework & crafts magazine:
Size Chart from Spring/Summer 1962 McCalls Needlework & crafts
The largest Misses size is for a 40″ bust!
This was surprising. I know people do weigh more now than in the past, but a 40″ bustline in 2013 a medium at most. The chart does list a Woman’s size range, for “full-figured gals”, but even here, the largest size is for a 48″ bust.
To compare, I’m using the LLBean size chart. I chose this one, because it is unlikely to be affected by vanity sizing. The smallest modern size is a 4, or 34-26 1/2-36 1/2, which is about the same as a 1962 size 14, in the middle of the range. A 1962 size 20 would be a modern Large, and the largest 1962 Woman’s size would be a 2X today.
Men’s sizes are the same as 51 years ago, but there were no sizes for XL, 2XL or 3XL.
To add to the difference, very few of the magazine’s patterns had sizes beyond a 36″ or 38″ bust.
McCall’s was not a high fashion magazine. The garments were intended to fit average people. Now, even the largest patterns would be a size Small. Makes you want to start that diet, huh?
My book will not be reproducing the tiny patterns from the 1960s. Instead, I’ll be giving you just the color patterns, plus instructions on how to add them to items that will fit you, whatever size you are.
