Sharon Tate, the tragic ingénue who epitomized the breezy Hollywood style of the late 1960s, has been gone for nearly five decades, but these days she seems anything but dead.
With the approach of the 50th anniversary of her gruesome 1969 murder at the hands of the Manson family, which to many symbolized the end of the ’60s, Ms. Tate is the subject of three coming films, including Quentin Tarantino’s star-studded “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,” with Margot Robbie as Ms. Tate.
But fans who cannot wait for the screen bonanza can get their own piece of the Tate legacy on Nov. 17, in an auction of a vast trove of designer clothing and personal possessions at Julien’s Auctions in Beverly Hills, Calif. (Online and telephone bids will also be accepted.)
The artifacts, which have been in the Tate family for five decades, are a boutique’s worth of period fashion collectibles: Betsey Johnson minidresses (estimate: $600 to $800), a black Christian Dior minidress Ms. Tate wore to a film premiere in 1966 ($15,000 to $30,000) and the ivory silk moire minidress from her 1968 wedding to Roman Polanski ($25,000 to $50,000), as well as mod-era sunglasses, scarves and jewelry.
The auction also includes personal items: a set of false eyelashes, a sleep mask, an antique coffee grinder, a bottle of Chanel No. 5, inscribed books on acting, and even her father’s old Army officer uniform.
Her younger sister Debra Tate, the only living member of Ms. Tate’s immediate family, discussed why she has decided to part with heirlooms that the family kept close for decades.
Ms. Tate wearing her ivory silk minidress at her 1968 wedding to the film director Roman Polanski.CreditEvening Standard, via Getty Images
This a huge collection. Does it represent basically everything Sharon owned at the time of her death?
Pretty much. I had it in my home for the longest time, and my home was broken into. Three pieces were stolen — the wedding dress, the mink coat and then a mink that Sharon had made for my mother, which is in the sale. The police apprehended the culprits, and I got the items back. But that put me on high alert, and I went and rented a cold storage facility to store everything properly.
Why did your family decide to keep so much of her stuff in the first place?
There are people that cherish and almost worship and revere the circumstances of her death, so any of her possessions are extremely valuable to those kinds of people. This is why the family guarded them literally with our lives for all these years.
So why give them up now?
I prefer to call it “re-homing” her possessions. I was diagnosed with breast cancer, which also took the life of my younger sister at 42 years old. That was the first time I ever faced the reality that I wasn’t going to be here forever, and what would I do with all of this stuff?
I toyed with the idea of doing a museum so her fans could come, but as I looked into those type of things, they fail rapidly. So I decided it was much better to re-home the collection to people that will love and adore and cherish these things as much as I have. It’s time to share, right?
Do you worry about pushback from the public over selling this treasured collection?
I take a lot of guff from the trolls, people trying to blame my motivations. They are extremely insensitive. Honestly, I want it to go to people that will be in a better position to love it and cherish it as my family has, as Sharon did, and see it go into the future as far as possible.
A lot of these designer clothes would look utterly on-trend today. Do you think anyone might actually buy these items to wear, not just collect?
If they have the right dimensions they might. But the fact of the matter is, it’s all over 50 years old, so they’re very delicate. I don’t know if I should tell you this, but I had one of the best patternmakers in the industry look at the garments, take measurements, and I made patterns on everything in the collection. So if I have the energy after all of this is done, I would like to do a little Sharon line for the everyday gal.
Sifting through all these personal effects must have brought back a flood of memories for you.
Just about everything did. Sharon and I had a unique relationship, because we were military brats — my dad set up missile stations for the NATO nations — so we were always traveling, often into a different country, and that makes it hard on keeping friends. So the only thing that you have really is each other. I was at the house [in Los Angeles, where the pregnant Ms. Tate was murdered] most of the summer. I actually wore some of these things. When they would go out to a private club, I’d often dress in one of her minis to go to the Candy Store, or the Daisy, or the Factory.
In recent years, Sharon has been resurrected as a ’60s fashion icon by the Instagram generation. What made her such a perfect style setter for that period?
I think that she was custom-made for that era, because she was truly a natural beauty. That particular era was all about freedom of spirit, and you were just coming out of the buttoned-up ’50s and early ’60s, where undergarments were what I refer to as industrial. Everything was hemmed in and sewn up.
And then fashion took a huge swing, and it was freestyle, and minimalistic. They needed a face and a body that was equally free-spirited and un-coifed, but yet beautiful and gentle, which is what the ’60s were all about, right?
I know your old brother-in-law Roman Polanski long ago signed over these items to your family. Are you still in touch with him?
I have a great relationship with Roman. When we get together, it’s like time stood still. I can see Sharon in Roman’s eyes, and he evidently said the same thing about my eyes — he could see her as well.
Aside from his legal troubles, there have been allegations over the years that Roman lured Sharon into a seamy Hollywood scene. What was your view of their marriage?
Sharon absolutely adored Roman. She was head over heels in love with Roman. There are a whole lot of people that have said things, but it’s pure fabrication. Roman and Sharon were a true love story, that’s what I observed. And I was there, the first person to meet him when she brought him to Sausalito to meet my mom and dad.
Apparently you endorsed the Tarantino film after some initial doubts. Why?
I had reservations about it at first. It’s what I said to Quentin: “Given your name and your style and the name Manson, people are going to have a natural assumption.” Which I did as well. But he gave me the script to read. I did not have to sign an NDA. He trusted me, and I trusted him, and I think it’s a wonderful story. I gave him my word that I would not discuss it.
The only thing I can say is, it’s a love story to the Los Angeles of that era. He’s gone to great lengths to recreate entire streets of the period. I mean, everything about this movie is going to blow your mind.
Back to the auction: Is there anything you are keeping for yourself?
There are a few things that I just couldn’t give up, so they will live with me, like her Chanel bag and a coverlet that was on her bed. When I go, I will pass those things to my daughter. Everything that I do with victims’ rights, and my mother did before me, and my little sister, is not something that I want to pass on to the next generation. I don’t want the burden to be passed on, you know what I mean?
This interview has been edited and condensed.
