I learned through lots and lots of trial and error, and staring at extant
corsets and ads, magazines, etc until my eyes bled. For years. I don't
think you can really come up with a formula for drafting them, and that's
not how I do it, anyway. You get to know the shape the pattern pieces
should be, and how that shape changes when the hips are larger or smaller,
when the waist is high or low, and so on. I look at the measurements, build
a mental picture of the person's figure, and then just ... adjust. Kinda
but not exactly like those scary tailors who can take 2 measurements and
then make you a suit that fits like a glove. (If only I could do it with
other garments.)
It's been a long time since I glanced through the waisted efforts book, so I
won't really give a critique of it, but I'll say this: you do not fit a
corset to the wearer's skin. A corset reshapes, rather than matching, the
figure; therefore, you should instead fit the corset to the parts of the
wearer that are NOT reshapeable. In other words, you fit the muscle and the
bone, and let the fat fall where it may. I won't categorically reject the
possibility of drafting a well-fitting corset from a pattern block, but I
will dogmatically state that it's impossible unless you stop looking at it
as being like any other garment. The results I see from those who use the
pattern block approach are often beautifully designed and constructed, but
the fit is that of a skin-tight bodice with the shoulders cut off, which
misses the point entirely! One look at the sides of the waist gives the
show away, and my goodness, those things must be uncomfortable.
That sounded really, really, rude, so I'd like to apologize now and avoid
the rush. =} I'm passionate about the fit of corsets, and when I see people
wearing ill-fitting corsets and then going on and on about how uncomfortable
and torturous corsets are, it makes my teeth itch.
As to the Waugh corset, again, I'm not saying it's inaccurate; I'm saying
it's not representative. The straight front was technically invented in
1900, but there are corsets that provided a straight front from before then,
and corsets that didn't after then. In those first couple of years, there
was a LOT of experimentation with the general idea; the Waugh corset is
clearly from this era, and is one of the dead-end lines of experimentation.
It's really just not that well-designed a corset, since a horizontal seam
all the way across the side of the waist is a Bad Idea when it comes to this
sort of thing.
The early straight fronts were different in a lot of ways from what came
about after the experimental period, and while they would have been
considered real straight fronts in 1900 and 1901, by the latter half of 1902
they would have been completely out of step with the fashion and incapable
of producing the fashionable silhouette. To go back to the original
question, the silhouette desired was that of the middle of the decade, and
the corset desired was one that would enforce that forward-leaning pose
sometimes called an S-curve. The Waugh corset is not of the style used to
create this silhouette. When I first saw it 15 years ago, I thought, "Wow,
yep, that's a stereotypical Edwardian corset!" When I look at it now, I
think, "Wow! What a weird example of an Edwardian corset! It must be
from--yep, I knew it: 1901."
These are typical example of the seaming used to get that mid-decade
silhouette:
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/straightfrontcorsets/photos/view/3b35?b=7
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/straightfrontcorsets/photos/view/3b35?b=17
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/straightfrontcorsets/photos/view/3b35?b=15
(click large)
And for fun, this is from bizzaro-world (thank you, Lib of Congress):
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/straightfrontcorsets/photos/view/3b35?b=5
-E House
_______________________________________________
h-costume mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
