Oh, absolutely. It's just interesting to trace the evolution because the crinolines that have the open fronts are so much more comfortable / wearable / danceable than the earlier hooped petticoat style.
LuAnn ----- Original Message ----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 7:21 PM Subject: Re: [h-cost] wedding in historical costumes In a message dated 10/6/2007 1:40:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Actually, a lot of the maneuverability issues depend on whether you're using a modern substitute hoop that has circular hoops all the way around suspended in a drawstring petticoat, or if you have a more accurate cage crinoline which a) shifts the weight of the skirts to the back and b) more importantly, has a "break" in the hooping along the front. That "gap" (for lack of a better word) is the key to maneuverability in a hoop--you can sit, you can dance, you can do LOTS of things when the gap is there that become cumbersome when it isn't. ************** True. But still, even though cage crinolines were numerous, there are also examples of hooped petticoats, and hoops start out being circular before moving into that trained, elongated form you see near the end of the period. So there was still a whole lotta waltzing going on in circular, hooped petticoats. Of course no one said it was easy! ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com<http://www.aol.com/> _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume<http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume> _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected] http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
