Hello

Indeed Threads seems to be returning to the needs of the advanced sewer.  I like most of the new changes: layout, type face etc.  Occasionally you interrupt an article with a “text box aside”  which annoys me to no end.  It disrupts the flow of the article and often makes it harder to visualize the goal of the article (whatever it may be). Often you write about some aspect and then have the photo a page or two away.  Couldn’t we get them together somehow? 

I used to subscribe, but I have been buying Threads issue by issue for at least three years now – since the changes began.  You have finally pubished a full issue of articles  that I have at least once in my library of back issues. The few other oddments were of no interest to me at all.  I did not buy it.  I do feel like something is missing from my life because of that though!  I have not wanted to complain about your couture articles being pulled from old back issues because that just seemed catty.  I knew you were working hard to improve the magazine. 

Thank you for printing photos of a “suit of lights” some issues back.  It was a great pleasure to see it.  I did think that Suits of Lights deserved quite a few more photos and a corresponding article.  I thank you nonetheless.

As you do reprint articles from past issues here is my biggest complaint: Not once since the early days of the magazine have you published an article about raising armholes.  It makes the garment much more wearable and comfortable.  It improves the visual impression by creating the illusion of a longer torso and gives greater wearing ease.

I made a suit for my mother some years ago and I tested differing armhole heights/(depths?) with that suit.  It constantly amazes me how fluid that suit jacket seems to be when she wears it; how effortlessly she wears it!  When I look at other jackets I am amazed how messy and constricted they appear and it is mostly due to the over-long armholes.  Raising the armscye took that suit from an (expensive) dowdy grandmotherly black suit to what it was -Couture!  It looks like a Paris original.  I also monogrammed each piece with mom’s intials – by hand.

It would also be so helpful to your Canadian readers to publish at least one Canadian source for materials as there are quite a few around. 

With respect to the back cover: It would be so very nice to print inset photos of any detail you deem noteworthy in the corresponding  text or better yet, make the back photo the focus of one of your couture sewing columns in that issue!  That would leave another column available to cover some other couture aspect.

Beyond that, keep up the good work and do try to reprint that article about reducing armhole scyes.   I’m still waiting to see  a photo of a finished undercollar that has been pad stitched to keep the various layers in place as well as adding structure.  I just want to see the underside of one done by the pros!  The underside, not the inside!

You might want to think about a featuring the Muesum of Textiles here in Toronto – or the textiles/clothing department of the Royal Ontario Museum here in Toronto.   The Bata shoe museum would be a fun article too, but truly it has little to do with garments.  Accessories do count too, I suppose.

Finally, I truly hope we will be treated to an excellent photo coverage of the Middleton wedding dress, with complimentary line drawings to highlight all of the features of the dress.  Now I would pay for a separate issue dedicated to taking that dress apart!  Don’t forget the Royal School of Needlework and a full description of the lace – and the shoes.  If you choose to cover the shoes as an item of interest to seamstresses, please keep it in the spirit of couture – leave off the suggestion to get a sateen shoe from Payless.  Try for a deeper insight into the making of the shoes.   I know money is tight but I can dream as well as any Trump – from there I can extrapolate to something within my budget.

Well I guess I have said my piece, but I am still buying the magazine!

Carry on with the high standards

Margaret