On Sep 14, 2007, at 6:06 AM, Melanie Schuessler wrote:
On Sep 14, 2007, at 4:03 AM, Zuzana Kraemerova wrote:
It is surely interesting to think logically about such a problem,
but, just as you say, we can never rely on it, and, as we all
know, people didn't always act very logically and didn't choose
the most comfortable garments they could. Think of all those
corsets and hoop petticoats and cage crinolines - the latest being
worn even by lower-class working women that would surely need a
more practical dress than the bourgeoise and nobility.
While it's certainly true that some fashions are more inconvenient
than others on a purely practical level, I think that saying that
people acted illogically and chose uncomfortable garments is
misleading. We tend to think that our current fashion is the most
logical, comfortable, and lovely one, but people in the past
thought the same thing. Susan Vincent's _Dressing the Elite:
Clothes in Early Modern England_ has some wonderful information on
this. Every fashion has its own internal logic, supported by
cultural assumptions about what is healthful, beautiful,
appropriate, etc.
Comfort is what you're used to, and it's not synonymous with
practicality.
Having worn Elizabethan menswear (drafted from Arnold) for a season
of faire, I can say that over time the posture it encourages was
uncomfortable for me. That doesn't mean that someone who developed
that posture from childhood by wearing those clothes daily would find
it uncomfortable.
Having now worn 16th century Japanese, I have to say that while all
that yardage is hardly practical, it's incredibly comfortable (and a
great reminder of how hot a country Japan is in summer, in the hot
snap a few weeks ago I would have been comfortable even under more
layers).
andy
_______________________________________________
h-costume mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
