Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
Every time this topic of authenticiy rolls around, My general response is to read Ann Hollander's Seeing through Clothes.? Her take on the issue is one of the most sensibile and reasonable that I have found...about 40 years ago when I was a very green newbie. Hundreds of costumes later, I am even more aware that we in the 21st Century can never (well, excepting Bjarne, perhaps) do aught but interpret our knowledge and understanding of what the original might really have looked like and to replicate it to the best of our own craft and other sewing abilities. Sometimes as we attempt tore-invent the wheelwe might have a personal epiphany to comprehend the secrets of treasure we are trying to gain for ourselves. Kathleen...who is still trying her hand at Historical Costume interpretation Cut Down to Size in miniature. we might -Original Message- From: Carol Kocian aqua...@patriot.net Sent 3/12/2011 5:08:34 PM To: Historical Costume h-cost...@indra.com Subject: [h-cost] Authenticity - Where do we draw the line between what is acceptable as historically accurate vs historically authentic? - With modern sewing skills and fads (such as zippers), where do we encorporate those skills to aid in construction of period garments, or do we insist on using the period methods? Historic activities run the gamut from immersion reenactment to a town's history days event, with different expectations and requirements for different events. Sometimes someone will ask a discussion list if something is OK, when really that decision is up to the event organizers or the leadership of a particular group. Where you draw the line is different than where I would draw it, and it could even be different for the garments in the same outfit. Absolute authenticity is a moving target, because the more we know, the more details there are that are harder t0 reach. That leads into the next question ? where to substitute modern skills. When more labor-intensive methods are used, for example hand stitching, custom weaving, hand-knitting and the like, the potential for clients gets smaller. Some of these methods become a labor of love, a desire to learn a technique for its own sake. All costume, including the broader sense that all clothing is costume, is a deliberate effort to communicate something to the rest of the world. Appearance is important, the outermost layer. Some groups have the standard of hand stitching for visible seams, but machine sewn is ok for interior construction ? for eras before the sewing machine was around. Underpinnings do make a difference in how the costume looks from the outside, but how much does it matter that the corset looks right, as long as it gives the right shaping. But once you have a reason to show the corset, its appearance becomes more important. Beyond that, as above, it starts to depend on personal interest in a particular technique or a desire to learn the techniques of a particular era. -Carol ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
Carol, We dont discuss the Great Authenticity Issue on this list anymore. All the nasty arguments bitter recriminations have been made. Find the old fights in the archives. Discuss it you'll see a wave of unsubscribes. --cin Cynthia Barnes cinbar...@gmail.com On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Carol Kocian aqua...@patriot.net wrote: - Where do we draw the line between what is acceptable as historically accurate vs historically authentic? - With modern sewing skills and fads (such as zippers), where do we encorporate those skills to aid in construction of period garments, or do we insist on using the period methods? Historic activities run the gamut from immersion reenactment to a town's history days event, with different expectations and requirements for different events. Sometimes someone will ask a discussion list if something is OK, when really that decision is up to the event organizers or the leadership of a particular group. Where you draw the line is different than where I would draw it, and it could even be different for the garments in the same outfit. Absolute authenticity is a moving target, because the more we know, the more details there are that are harder t0 reach. That leads into the next question — where to substitute modern skills. When more labor-intensive methods are used, for example hand stitching, custom weaving, hand-knitting and the like, the potential for clients gets smaller. Some of these methods become a labor of love, a desire to learn a technique for its own sake. All costume, including the broader sense that all clothing is costume, is a deliberate effort to communicate something to the rest of the world. Appearance is important, the outermost layer. Some groups have the standard of hand stitching for visible seams, but machine sewn is ok for interior construction — for eras before the sewing machine was around. Underpinnings do make a difference in how the costume looks from the outside, but how much does it matter that the corset looks right, as long as it gives the right shaping. But once you have a reason to show the corset, its appearance becomes more important. Beyond that, as above, it starts to depend on personal interest in a particular technique or a desire to learn the techniques of a particular era. -Carol ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
Why must they be nasty arguements? While it's unfortunate some people react that way, if there are valid arguements to be made which can be supported through either research or even experience, and we can remain civil - isn't that what constitutes a good discussion? Perhaps, if that topic is buried in the old archives, it would be worth reviving. After all, new research has been made, perhaps new technology. And there are new members on this list - that equals new viewpoints. Lastly, why would people unsubscribe just because others on the list are reviving a topic that not only is of interest to them, but is one of the key reasons this list exists? All they have to do is delete those emails if they don't want to participate. There have been several posts on here that either do not interest me, or are specific questions that I cannot add input on - so I read them, and archive or delete the email. Simple as that. And I think I might have to get my hands on a copy of that book! Michael On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Cin cinbar...@gmail.com wrote: Carol, We dont discuss the Great Authenticity Issue on this list anymore. All the nasty arguments bitter recriminations have been made. Find the old fights in the archives. Discuss it you'll see a wave of unsubscribes. --cin Cynthia Barnes cinbar...@gmail.com On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Carol Kocian aqua...@patriot.net wrote: - Where do we draw the line between what is acceptable as historically accurate vs historically authentic? - With modern sewing skills and fads (such as zippers), where do we encorporate those skills to aid in construction of period garments, or do we insist on using the period methods? Historic activities run the gamut from immersion reenactment to a town's history days event, with different expectations and requirements for different events. Sometimes someone will ask a discussion list if something is OK, when really that decision is up to the event organizers or the leadership of a particular group. Where you draw the line is different than where I would draw it, and it could even be different for the garments in the same outfit. Absolute authenticity is a moving target, because the more we know, the more details there are that are harder t0 reach. That leads into the next question — where to substitute modern skills. When more labor-intensive methods are used, for example hand stitching, custom weaving, hand-knitting and the like, the potential for clients gets smaller. Some of these methods become a labor of love, a desire to learn a technique for its own sake. All costume, including the broader sense that all clothing is costume, is a deliberate effort to communicate something to the rest of the world. Appearance is important, the outermost layer. Some groups have the standard of hand stitching for visible seams, but machine sewn is ok for interior construction — for eras before the sewing machine was around. Underpinnings do make a difference in how the costume looks from the outside, but how much does it matter that the corset looks right, as long as it gives the right shaping. But once you have a reason to show the corset, its appearance becomes more important. Beyond that, as above, it starts to depend on personal interest in a particular technique or a desire to learn the techniques of a particular era. -Carol ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
Delurking here: My take on this, from the point of view of someone who began in historical re-creating costumes by trying to accurate re-create my great-grandmother's marriage photo from c. 1895: It is exciting to learn about each period, and what was normal and average for them, by actually making the outfit, as closely as possible to techniques that could have been used, with equipment and notions known to exist then. So for me, now learning about the Civil War era, to recreate an actual person known to have lived (their clothing--I am NOT a re-enactor), the more I learn about the sewingmachines of hte time, what might have been done by hand, the history of the Industrial Age at that time, what dyes and colors were available, What undergarments were worn to shape the outside, what fabrics might have been available to a specific social class in a particular location, it's all a continuum. Context is, truly, everything. And re-inventing the wheel, as I had to with the Great-grandmother dress, in order to make the decorative soutache swirls accurately, definitely gave me a much stronger connection; as has making my collars and cuffs for my Civil War era dresses by hand. I would say that for many of us, personal interest is a very strong motivator. Yours in costuming, Lisa A On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 02:26:24 GMT R Lloyd Mitchell rmitch...@staff.washjeff.edu writes: Every time this topic of authenticiy rolls around,.. interpret our knowledge and understanding of what the original might really have looked like and to replicate it to the best of our own craft and other sewing abilities. Sometimes as we attempt tore-invent the wheelwe might have a personal epiphany to comprehend the secrets of treasure we are trying to gain for ourselves. Absolute authenticity is a moving target, because the more we know, the more details there are that are harder t0 reach. That leads into the next question ? where to substitute modern ... Some of these methods become a labor of love, a desire to learn a technique for its own sake. ... Beyond that, as above, it starts to depend on personal interest in a particular technique or a desire to learn the techniques of a particular era. ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
On 3/14/2011 11:58 AM, Michael Deibert wrote: Why must they be nasty arguements? While it's unfortunate some people react that way, if there are valid arguements to be made which can be supported through either research or even experience, and we can remain civil - isn't that what constitutes a good discussion? There are many different degrees of authenticity. Different list members need and desire different degrees of authenticity, and have very diverse levels of control over what they can achieve for a variety of good reasons. The problem with the authenticity wars is that everyone was dictating to other people what _they_ should achieve, even though the people being dictated to had different needs, desires, etc. Finally, we reached a level of maturity where we realized, Hey, not everyone else's situation, needs, skills, desires, etc., are identical to mine. And that's OK. If someone asks me for advice I'll try to help, but I won't march around telling everybody else they have to start out their woolen garment by raising the sheep. I want to stay at that level of maturity. Perhaps, if that topic is buried in the old archives, it would be worth reviving. After all, new research has been made, perhaps new technology. And there are new members on this list - that equals new viewpoints. People discuss new discoveries on this list all the time. They give each other practical advice all the time. That is not the same as flame wars over the level of authenticity. Lastly, why would people unsubscribe just because others on the list are reviving a topic that not only is of interest to them, but is one of the key reasons this list exists? Have you ever been on a list that flamed for weeks on end? I suppose not. Look, I'm not one to shy away from a controversial topic of interest to me. I do not think the point of an e-list is for everyone to sit around and reach consensus. It's not a committee meeting. But I think the agreement we all reached, that we do not all have identical needs, goals, skills, values, and constraints, is a really, really good agreement. it has enabled us to do things like _tell_ someone how to put a zipper in a theatrical costume for King Lear without everyone jumping all over the person who asked the question and telling them they shouldn't do it. Fran Lavolta Press www.lavoltapress.com ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
I agree. That level of maturity is what needs to be kept. It's all about meta-cognition. You have to always consider where someone is coming from - and usually it's not the same. Also, if we had no variety... things would get rather boring and we'd stop sharing information because there'd be nothing different to share. Perhaps thankfuly, I have not been on a list-serve where things flamed on for weeks. But if I was, I would either be actively involved in the debate or I'd just ignore it and delete the emails. I never tried to start another flame war or tried dictating what it should be. I stated that I was going off-topic from the start. Nor was I on this list during those flame wars - so was unaware that those questions would start a huge fight instead of an educational discussion and debate. Michael ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
I never tried to start another flame war or tried dictating what it should be. I stated that I was going off-topic from the start. Nor was I on this list during those flame wars - so was unaware that those questions would start a huge fight instead of an educational discussion and debate. M Yes, well, this is a lesson on finding out what the purpose of a list is, its culture, and its history before you start posting, and especially before you start telling everyone else what to discuss. Fran Lavolta Press www.lavoltapress.com ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
Cin, I remember, I've been on the list since the 90s. I think it is possible to discuss authenticity issues without arguments. It does not have to go in that direction. So far everyone seems to be in agreement that it will vary. I enjoy stories like Lisa's about her great grandmother's dress. I disagree with Kathleen only in that I think Bjarne is subject to the same compromises and decisions as anyone else. ;-) With such broad interests included in the scope of the list, it's important to give some context to the question... or the reply. Some questions are best asked of a particular group or event management. Some groups actively work to improve the level of authenticity of their membership, so that is a definite possibility, too. One experience of mine that might be closer to Michael's intended discussion: I was learning about mid-18thC French women's clothing, particularly the corset which is more like English jumps: a shaping upper-body garment not as firm as stays. The information was that paper was used as an inner layer, but the instructor recommended heavy weight Pellon. I decided to try paper, using a card-weight parchment. It held the shape ok, but crinkled a bit. I don't know if there are extant corsets where you can see the type of paper used. Sometimes experiments are necessary to understand the process. -Carol On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Cin wrote: Carol, We dont discuss the Great Authenticity Issue on this list anymore. All the nasty arguments bitter recriminations have been made. Find the old fights in the archives. Discuss it you'll see a wave of unsubscribes. --cin Cynthia Barnes cinbar...@gmail.com On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Carol Kocian aqua...@patriot.net wrote: - Where do we draw the line between what is acceptable as historically accurate vs historically authentic? - With modern sewing skills and fads (such as zippers), where do we encorporate those skills to aid in construction of period garments, or do we insist on using the period methods? Historic activities run the gamut from immersion reenactment to a town's history days event, with different expectations and requirements for different events. Sometimes someone will ask a discussion list if something is OK, when really that decision is up to the event organizers or the leadership of a particular group. Where you draw the line is different than where I would draw it, and it could even be different for the garments in the same outfit. Absolute authenticity is a moving target, because the more we know, the more details there are that are harder t0 reach. That leads into the next question — where to substitute modern skills. When more labor-intensive methods are used, for example hand stitching, custom weaving, hand-knitting and the like, the potential for clients gets smaller. Some of these methods become a labor of love, a desire to learn a technique for its own sake. All costume, including the broader sense that all clothing is costume, is a deliberate effort to communicate something to the rest of the world. Appearance is important, the outermost layer. Some groups have the standard of hand stitching for visible seams, but machine sewn is ok for interior construction — for eras before the sewing machine was around. Underpinnings do make a difference in how the costume looks from the outside, but how much does it matter that the corset looks right, as long as it gives the right shaping. But once you have a reason to show the corset, its appearance becomes more important. Beyond that, as above, it starts to depend on personal interest in a particular technique or a desire to learn the techniques of a particular era. -Carol ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
One experience of mine that might be closer to Michael's intended discussion: I was learning about mid-18thC French women's clothing, particularly the corset which is more like English jumps: a shaping upper-body garment not as firm as stays. The information was that paper was used as an inner layer, but the instructor recommended heavy weight Pellon. I decided to try paper, using a card-weight parchment. It held the shape ok, but crinkled a bit. I don't know if there are extant corsets where you can see the type of paper used. Sometimes experiments are necessary to understand the process. I don't think that's a meta-discussion about authenticity. I think it's a discussion about 18th-century French corsets. Fran Lavolta Press www.lavoltapress.com ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
YES!!! Sometimes experiments are necessary to understand the process--this kind of sums it up for me--I am all about the process. The fact that I compete my costumes at SF cons and my county fair and Costume Con--those are secondary to the actual PROCESS. Yours i n costumign,Lisa A One experience of mine that might be closer to Michael's intended discussion: I was learning about mid-18thC French women's clothing, particularly the corset which is more like English jumps: a shaping upper-body garment not as firm as stays. The information was that paper was used as an inner layer, but the instructor recommended heavy weight Pellon. I decided to try paper, using a card-weight parchment. It held the shape ok, but crinkled a bit. I don't know if there are extant corsets where you can see the type of paper used. Sometimes experiments are necessary to understand the process. -Carol ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Authenticity
On 03/14/2011 02:58 PM, Lisa A Ashton wrote: Delurking here: [snip] So for me, now learning about the Civil War era, to recreate an actual person known to have lived (their clothing--I am NOT a re-enactor), the more I learn about the sewingmachines of hte time, what might have been done by hand, the history of the Industrial Age at that time, what dyes and colors were available, What undergarments were worn to shape the outside, what fabrics might have been available to a specific social class in a particular location, it's all a continuum. Context is, truly, everything. And re-inventing the wheel, as I had to with the Great-grandmother dress, in order to make the decorative soutache swirls accurately, definitely gave me a much stronger connection; as has making my collars and cuffs for my Civil War era dresses by hand. I would say that for many of us, personal interest is a very strong motivator. The same is very much true for me. I don't really enjoy sewing, but I have taught myself enough skills to be able to sew an early Medieval style shift and tunic, and have learned much thereby. Thanks, Lisa, for your comment. -- Cathy Raymond ca...@thyrsus.com Beware how you take away hope from another human being. --Oliver Wendell Holmes ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] Authenticity
- Where do we draw the line between what is acceptable as historically accurate vs historically authentic? - With modern sewing skills and fads (such as zippers), where do we encorporate those skills to aid in construction of period garments, or do we insist on using the period methods? Historic activities run the gamut from immersion reenactment to a town's history days event, with different expectations and requirements for different events. Sometimes someone will ask a discussion list if something is OK, when really that decision is up to the event organizers or the leadership of a particular group. Where you draw the line is different than where I would draw it, and it could even be different for the garments in the same outfit. Absolute authenticity is a moving target, because the more we know, the more details there are that are harder t0 reach. That leads into the next question — where to substitute modern skills. When more labor-intensive methods are used, for example hand stitching, custom weaving, hand-knitting and the like, the potential for clients gets smaller. Some of these methods become a labor of love, a desire to learn a technique for its own sake. All costume, including the broader sense that all clothing is costume, is a deliberate effort to communicate something to the rest of the world. Appearance is important, the outermost layer. Some groups have the standard of hand stitching for visible seams, but machine sewn is ok for interior construction — for eras before the sewing machine was around. Underpinnings do make a difference in how the costume looks from the outside, but how much does it matter that the corset looks right, as long as it gives the right shaping. But once you have a reason to show the corset, its appearance becomes more important. Beyond that, as above, it starts to depend on personal interest in a particular technique or a desire to learn the techniques of a particular era. -Carol ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
