sheepfilms
noise dept.
cherry valley forever
Peter Solarz

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
Xuebing Du

#extradirty
todays bird
trying on a metaphor
Jules of Nature
Mike Driver
One Nice Bug Per Day
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

blake kathryn

@theartofmadeline
Cosimo Galluzzi

PR's Tumblrdome
ojovivo

⁂

No title available
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Armenia
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States

seen from France
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from South Korea
seen from India
seen from Oman
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@self-made-dandy
Something I Wish Fashion History People Would Stop Doing:
“It’s fine, I guess”.
This is a phrase I see come up a LOT in one particular format of fashion history posts/videos/etc, which is that intersection of historical research and media criticism where people review (usually) movies or TV shows and critique how historically accurate the costuming is.
This isn’t actually a problem in and of itself because sometimes the costuming generally is middling-accuracy, it’s not fantastic or egregious to a trained eye, so it really does just come off to the critic as “meh”.
Where this annoys me is when people use “it’s fine” as an alternative for “I don’t know”.
I usually see this with people who focus their study mostly on women’s fashion from a given time period: they’ll nitpick the tiniest details of gowns and hairstyles, and then look at the men and say “The men are fine, I guess”. And the reason is because they don’t know enough to do that kind of nitpick with men’s clothing.
It’s more questionable, and increasingly common due to the growing awareness of how Eurocentric & USAmerican centric lots of online fashion history spaces can be, when people whose focus is on a specific country or region do it with other countries whose history they know basically nothing about. Usually that looks more like the person made some probably good-faith but minor effort to look into the country’s style and said “I mean it looks fine to me”. This is often paired with, if not an overt “I don’t know about it,” then a disclaimer along the lines of “You can find more info from people who focus on it though” (though I only think I’ve actually seen someone point to said external sources once).
Here’s the thing:
NOT KNOWING STUFF IS OKAY.
Literally everyone has specializations. It’s what happens when you get into a thing.
It’s inevitable that if you read a bunch of books on 1500s Italy with a focus on women, you’ll end up knowing more about women’s clothes than men’s, more about Italy than France, and more about the 1500s than the 1800s. That happens to everyone.
But I think that especially because the critique format can come with a certain… sense of superiority, in terms of not just being excited about sharing but wanting to flex about knowing stuff (which is fine, honestly!), and on the worse side the critiques can run very negative in terms of an overwhelming focus on errors that turns into trashing the subject matter, there’s a really high premium on both Knowing Everything and Being Right that’s unrealistic.
And there is another I think usually good impulse here: not wanting to trash something you don’t know about, particularly another place’s culture and history, and especially if the reasons you don’t know about it come from a place like a personal history of Eurocentric study. The people I have the least patience for are the ones who will go off about how something they know jack shit about is awful and manage to be racist or exoticist about it too. Trying to Not Be That Person is again understandable.
But it’s still extremely reductive and a bit disingenuous to claim knowledge you don’t have and THEN functionally brush off an entire thing in that one sentence — “it’s fine” — because you did a bit of cursory research. I think most people who do this know they haven’t gotten anything in-depth. If you study something for three years you know full well another person can’t pick that up in an hour. However, I think doing that hour of research and then pronouncing yourself qualified is a problem if your audience doesn’t know the different time investment there.
It’s not fair to be That Person who responds to any mention of the Victorian Era with “Well do you mean the 1840s or the 1890s?” and then turn around and say something is “accurate” to the Mughal Empire or the Tang Dynasty as if those are monoliths and not periods hundreds of years longer than the Victorian era (and that in and of itself can have racist implications, flattening other countries’ cultures as if they’re frozen in time).
In that case…
PLEASE just say you don’t know.
And if you’re thinking, but doesn’t that ALSO serve to brush off whatever unfamiliar thing I’m being asked to explore, I want to address it, good! That’s awesome.
So here’s a thought for what to do with the hour of research:
If you don’t know, find someone who does.
Instead of saying “But I’m sure there are people who blog about that”, FIND THEM.
Look up people who’ve studied the topic. Do some digging, check peer reviews, but link to bloggers and YouTubers and such whose expertise lies in places other than yours, whose focus is on the fashions of Renaissance Italian men or the early Mughal Empire or whatever the topic (for that matter, academics and books and articles are great too if you’re wanting to go beyond media analysis). They’re often out there even if you haven’t gone looking for them because you don’t study the same things! They may even have explored the exact topic you’re new to.
Include that in your answer/review.
This is a great way to introduce yourself and others to these topics instead of having what you’re unfamiliar with as your end point. And besides that - it’s really fun!
TL;DR:
If you don’t know something about a piece you’re reviewing for historical accuracy, it’s better to admit your knowledge gaps, look up people who do have expertise in that area, and direct people to those sources than it is to misrepresent yourself as a qualified source.
YES, THIS BUGS ME SO MUCH!! My focus is 18th century menswear (and I lean more towards the fancy stuff, I know less about workmen’s clothing and nothing at all about military) and when it comes to critiques of movie costumes I practically never see good in-depth ones of the men’s costumes, just a lot of “yeah they look ok I guess” and 99% of the time they don’t. They almost never cut the coats right, the breeches are usually too loose, there’s a whole assortment of bafflingly bad hair choices, and the shitty stacked lace bibs of 19th century rococo inspired fantasy paintings still plague us to this day.
I can nitpick the excessive use of metal buttons and underrepresentation of thread and fabric covered ones, the tongues on the shoes being too long, the fact that they keep buttoning the waistcoats all the way up to the top in decades when it was fashionable to leave them mostly unbuttoned, but I can’t go into that much detail on the women’s costumes because they’re not the ones I’ve been obsessed with for 10 years. So it’s pretty upsetting to see people whose work I admire and respect say that the men’s costumes are more accurate than the women’s when the fact is they just don’t know enough to say that. I think all the “it’s fine I guess”’s have been taken too seriously and led to this misconception, and what with the costuming community being at least 90% women there are hardly any costumers who have researched men’s clothing that much, and even fewer who have any sort of sizeable platform to post their costume complaints on.
(Someday I will make my own complaining about movie costumes video and put it on the you tubes. Not sure when, but someday!)
Somewhat related - it also bugs me when people say 19th and early 20th century suits are “boring, all the same, and basically the same as modern suits” because they very much are NOT. I don’t know much about them and am not personally very interested in them, but I do know that menswear 100 years ago is different from today’s clothing. Plus, it’s just very rude to dismiss something as boring simply because you’re not personally interested in it. I’ve seen this multiple times, including one young girl who went so far as to make a whole blog post about how she doesn’t post about menswear because it’s all sooo boring and only comes in a few bland colours, which is very obviously wrong if you look at even a few images of fashionable pre-1800 men. Heck, even 19th century suits had their fair share of loud and colourful plaid, and brightly patterned waistcoats.
She seemed to think that the reason men’s costuming is less prevalent is because it’s inherently less valuable and interesting, instead of, y’know, the fact that we live in a society where anyone assigned male at birth is actively discouraged from showing any interest in sewing or fashion.
I want more men to sew and to study fashion history, and to make resources and information for it easier to find, so it’s terrible to think that statements like that could be putting off potential new costumers!
I’ve gotten a bit off topic but yes, never trust a historian who says everything with 100% certainty.
Before the Beast became a Beast, he was a handsome prince: proud, clever, and disdainful. Bedecked in velvets and satins with a jewel dripping from one ear, he exuded all the pageantry of virtue while masking the hollowness of his heart.
Model and description: Valtinen (me! www.instagram.com/valtinenofficial)
Image 1 Photog: Victoria Wooten
Images 2-5 Photog: Erin Tate Schmerr
I made the doublet and cape too (find my stuff at Grave Glavour on both FB and Insta)!
Sailors Needlework
Due to the fact that sailors had to mend their own clothes and there was always a sailmaker with his mates, many on board were very talented sewers. Therefore, many of them went beyond simple mending and created their own clothes. Or began to embellish their pieces with embroidery or make presents for their loved ones. Or earning some money on the side with their skills.
Sailor doing needlework, c. 1850 by unknown in: Jack Tar a Sailors Life, by J. Welles Henderson
It is not possible to pinpoint the exact origins, as many pieces have been lost over time.
A knitted wool hat and handsewn pants, from HMS Invincible, 1758, in: The First HMS Invincible (1747-58): Her Excavations (1980-1991), by John M Bingeman
Some pieces date from the 18th century, while most seem to date from the 19th or 20th century. However, it can be assumed that there are also much older examples.
Embroideries
This type of decoration was embroidered with coloured silk or wool threads on the shirts or duffle bags. But also ribbons, bags or money belts were decorated.
Sailor blouse and poke bag, made by George W.W. Dove, c. 1860 - Sailor’s Hats, c. 1850-1900 in: Jack Tar a Sailors Life, by J. Welles Henderson
Then names, mottos, stars, figures, ships, flags or anchors were embroidered on them.
Money belt, c. 1850 in: Jack Tar a Sailors Life, by J. Welles Henderson
Often the work was done in simple chain-stitch and the material was either taken from home or bought in a harbour.
Wollies
This type of embroidery is a very special form of embroidery, the embroidered woolen pictures, called woolies, which have been around since the 1840s. Most of the materials used to make woolies were found on board ships. Sailcloth, duck cloth from sailor’s trousers or a simple linen or cotton fabric served as the backing. The runner was usually made from surplus wood with simple mortise and tenon joints, without wedges.
Theatrical curtains, often depicting trade union banners, suggest the artist was a merchant sailor. c. 1875 - HMS Trafalgar, c. 1865 (x)
Only the Berlin wool, cotton or silk had to be brought from home or purchased in a foreign port. The sailors mainly chose vivid colours - especially white, blue, red, brown and various shades of green. Early Woolies are made from naturally dyed wool. After the development of chemical dyes in the mid-1850s, sailors could obtain a wider range of colours at a cheaper price.
HMS Cumberland, c. 1842 - A third rate together with a paddle steamer, c. 1860-1880 (x)
When making a woolie, the sailor sometimes first sketched the outline of the ship and rigging in ink. With only these schematic designs, he then sewed these images freehand directly onto the canvas, using both rudimentary and refined stitches. Indeed, many Woolies show charming liberties taken with the appearance of elements other than the ship.
Multiple ships raise the value of a piece. This one showcases a second-rate ship, fourth-rate ship, frigate, and smaller ship, 1875 - HMS Queen a present from my son, c. 1855 (x) in: Jack Tar a Sailors Life,by J. Welles Henderson
The sailors used a wide variety of stitches, such as cross stitch, chain stitch, darning and the quilting technique called trapunto. Many of these pictures were appropriately made for the dearest ones at home. As the Victorians liked to collect, the pictures quickly became very popular and were often sold.
Knitting
The men on board also did this. Even though it’s hard to imagine how old salts sat there and knitted. But for the cold days, the men needed warm clothes and so they knit socks, gloves and scarves.
British sailors knitting or crocheting (and looking like they enjoy it!) during WWI (x)
(Those who have read the Hornblower novels by CS Forester will perhaps remember that in some books it is mentioned that the men sat there and knitted.) It is verifiable that the Sailors knitted from the 18th century onwards, but since this art had also been known since the 13th century, it must have come on board earlier.
Historical Trans Men
1. Dr. James Barry, 1789-1865, military surgeon
2. "One-Eyed" Charley Parkhurst, 1812-1879, stagecoach driver
3. Ralph Kerwineo, 1876-1932, clerk
4. Harry Allen, 1882-1922, vagrant and criminal
5. Amelio Robles Ávila, 1889-1984, military commander during the Mexican Revolution
6. Victor Barker, 1895-1960, restaurant proprietor
7. Zdeněk Koubek, 1913-1986, track athlete
8. Billy Tipton, 1914-1989, jazz musician
9. Willmer "Little Ax" M. Broadnax, 1916-1992, jazz musician
10. Jim McHarris, 1924-?, auto mechanic
Near 75 plates of illustrated Edwardian menswear
Check out the base website for a FANTASTIC and extremely complete database of everything patterns, cutting guides and more historical fashion!
The Black Cat, 1899, Leon V. Solon
Risu just sent me this and I am SO DELIGHTED
Archeologists say they have found the world's oldest piece of yarn or cord, making it the earliest known evidence of textile and cord making
Ahhhhhhh!!! Go read it! Go read it!! The cording was plied by Neanderthals!!! The article talks about how we can’t keep thinking about them as being stupid it’s so delightful! In these trying times, let’s read about some joyful anthropological and archaeological discoveries!!!
Read it! The fact that it’s plied is so exciting! For plied cord, you first spin your fibers in one direction (they did it clockwise) and then take that collection of singles and twist them in the opposite direction (in this case counterclockwise). So it’s a process that requires planning and experience. You spin your first bit, you set it aside, you spin your second and third, you ply them. You can’t do it all in one go. And unless this piece happens to be the work of the very first person to spin fibers, and that person was a super genius who not only invented the idea of spinning but the technique for plying, it shows that the Neanderthals were communicating technological skills amongst each other. Which I mean isn’t news in and of itself, but this is just one more piece of evidence.
The Pattern Project is an online resource produced by the Costume and Textiles department at LACMA which publishes free downloadable garment
I don’t know who needs to see this.... @d--t ? @inthroughthesunroof? @vinceaddams?
I kinda want to make the 1913 lounging pajamas, as if I didn’t already have a project...
I’ve had that 1790′s coat pattern on my to-do list for years! And I made the waistcoat from the green suit a couple years ago, though it isn’t included in the pattern.
There’s also a free pdf of The Cut of Men’s Clothes 1600-19000 on the internet, which has so many patterns.
just because this deserves its own post:
dressmakers, tailors, cosplayers, historical costumers, and generally any people who sew are artists
people who work with fiber (knitting, crocheting, etc.) are artists
embroiderers are artists
weavers are artists
lacemakers are artists
shoemakers are artists
leatherworkers are artists
textile, clothing, and fiber arts are still art forms, even though they’ve historically been devalued in many societies
credit. all. artists.
Moth Soft Sculptures
Larysa Bernhardt on Etsy
𝙴𝚡𝚙𝚕𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚛'𝚜 𝚁𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚜𝚜 - 𝚜𝚎𝚕𝚏 𝚙𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚒𝚝 2020
Main | IG: iridessence | artist support
Cape. 1912, French.
House of Worth.
Source: Met Museum.
"Cyclists Are Advised to Dismount", c. 1940's.
Stylist Andrew Richardson caressed by a Russian circus performer, photographed by Steven Meisel as part of the Madonna photo essay ‘Flesh + Fantasy’ for Rolling Stone magazine, 1991.
you’re an adolescent playing in the forest near dusk when a woman appears, acting as a candlelit guide. She quietly ensures you explore it safely and sees you to the edge when you head home, and she is there each time you return. you realize you never see her in the rest of town. Years pass, you stop exploring and move away to pursue life. One day you return as an established adult, deciding to visit for old times sake and learn she’s delighted to see you... but she hasn’t aged a day. 🕯
IG: iridessence | main | support
The Cloth that Changed the World: India’s Painted and Printed Cottons
Now open at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, ON and running through September 6, 2021 is a show that reminds us that global trade is nothing new although its latest developments often surprise us. This show traces cotton cloth made in India and traded around the world all over Asia, Europe, and the Americas. You see here a photograph of a woman’s jacket which made in southeast India and worn in Hindeloopen, Friesland in Holland in the 18th Century. Such a lively pattern and such a long way to travel.
The curators tell us that the show “explores how over thousands of years India’s artisans have created, perfected and innovated these printed and painted multicoloured cotton fabrics to fashion the body, honour divinities, and beautify palaces and homes.” And they come all the way up to the present day.
If you can’t make it, there is a book, plus multiple features on line for you to enjoy with images and more.
For more information and tickets, go here: https://www.rom.on.ca/en/exhibitions-galleries/exhibitions/the-cloth-that-changed-the-world-indias-painted-and-printed