SNARK WEEK: That Damned Split-Top Bodice

Support Frock Flicks with a small donation! During Snark Week and beyond, we’re grateful for your monthly pledges for exclusive content via Patreon or your one-time contributions via Ko-fi or PayPal to offset the costs of running this site. You can even buy our T-shirts and merch. Think of this like supporting public broadcasting, but with swearing and no tax deductions!

 

Let me be clear: the 1569 portrait of (possibly) Helena Snakenborg (fabulous name because she was Swedish, but came to England with a Swedish princess on an official visit to England and ended up a maid of honor to Queen Elizabeth I) is FABULOUS. There is so much to love here, from the embroidered chemise to the gold-edged ruffs to the amazing silhouette. And probably the pièce de resistance is the cut of the bodice, with its split at the top:

Let’s look in detail at that bodice construction, because as you’re about to see, MANY MANY costume designers/makers have agreed that it’s fabulous and so have used it in numerous 16th-century films and TV series:

Looking at the closeup above, we can see that the bodice is made of a red check-woven fabric, and has wide bands of trim along the top, down the center, and also at the side front. The line of the neckline angles up towards the center. Under it she’s wearing a beautifully multicolor embroidered chemise, and under THAT there’s a stomacher or kirtle (i.e., underdress); see the horizontal line of gold trim higher up from the bodice?

The embroidered chemise is open center front, and trimmed at its edges with a gold trim. Whether that open front continues down past where the bodice begins is unclear; I THINK so, but the gold necklace obscures things.

Next thing to notice is the black and gold twisted trim along the edges of the bodice. You see it across the neckline, then turning the corner and going down the front edges of the bodice, all the way to the waist:

That means that whether or not the bodice opens functionally all the way down the front — and it probably does, because it would be wasted effort to create a center-front opening only to replicate it in back or side back — the bodice is made to APPEAR as though it does.

Beautiful! Chef’s kiss!

How much of a “thing” was this in the period? I reached out to costume friends who found a few other sources with a similar treatment:

So what problem could I possibly have with seeing this style of bodice reproduced on screen? Not much, IF IT WERE DONE CORRECTLY. However, SO many productions have attempted to reproduce this style and done it shittily, so now it’s a pavlovian response for me to twitch when I see it on screen.

Let’s take a look at this bodice style done right and done badly on screen! Because it’s not Snark Week if we’re not hyper focusing on the things that annoy us.

 

Side Note: 18th Century

It’s important to note that there’s another iteration of this bodice style that happens in early- to mid-18th century formal dress, famously reproduced on Outlander:

 

But that’s another deep dive, and we’re going to focus on the 16th century today!

 

16th C. Split-Top Bodices Done Well

I got nothing. Let me know in the comments if I’ve missed some amazing execution on screen!

 

16th C. Split-Top Bodices Done Acceptably

In Elizabeth (1998), several ladies-in-waiting get iterations of this dress. None of them are god’s gift to Elizabethan costuming, but I’m okay with these, because they have actual trim all the way down the front, implying that they close center front, and one even shows a stomacher/underbodice/kirtle:

Queen Elizabeth I gets a dress that’s SORT of like this style, although it is actually open all the way down the front:

Now, you may be shocked, but I’m actually giving this mishmash of late 14th/early 15th century Italian and mid-late 16th century from The Spanish Princess (2019-20) a pass, because:

My Lady Jane (2024) gets a similar not-awful pass:

And now, the shit that irritates me!

 

16th C. Split-Top Bodices Done Badly

Raquel Welch in Crossed Swords / The Prince and the Pauper (1977) gets not ONE but TWO bodices that: 1) have a random V-shaped cutout in front, but without a front closure; 2) not only have no contrast underlayer, but not even a chemise, and use the opportunity as an excuse to show us her overly tanned boobage floating in her bodice:

Elizabeth (1998) also has a lady-in-waiting who just has the random cut-out at the neckline:

Gunpowder, Treason & Plot (2004) has many issues that will be detailed later this Snark Week. One of them is using the stupid-cut-out, first with a fashion-fabric underlayer that at least has a chemise, but looks so dumb because of the bad fitting:

I love that Trystan messaged me to say she’d found this example for me, and all she had to say was “the backpack dress!”

In the James I episode, this chick gets a no-chemise, floating boob cleavage version:

With DEEPLY shitty trim:

I’m not sure if this gown from The White Princess (2017) counts, but it’s along these lines. It does have the fashion-fabric underlayer, but that randomly curves WAY up; and the split itself is extra swoopy:

Now, The Spanish Princess went CRAZY and did this effect on one of Henry VIII’s doublets and it’s SO bad:

I would be surprised if Blood Sex and Royalty (2022) had managed to avoid ANY of the period’s pitfalls. It predictably includes several “randomly cutout here are my bewbs” dresses, like:

The King’s Favorite aka Diane de Poitiers (2022) has Diane wear what may be the same black dress with neckline cut-out REPEATEDLY:

Better, because there’s a fashion-fabric layer filling things in, but somehow worse because of that shade of green, is this minimum-effort extravaganza:

So, if you’re going to do a split-top bodice, DO IT WELL!

 

What repetitive styles done badly drive you crazy?