How to Phrase the Buckskin Dress Question?

Last week I received an e-mail from a (potential?/not?) customer that was innocuous enough until today. What brought this to the forefront was seeing a stunning leather dress made by a new FB friend, and talking with a different customer about the very same issue, which made me remember all the other women who have gotten dragged out of my store by their guys because "it's not a leather dress," and before you say, "it can't be that many, Gail" trust me - it's a lot... If as many girls that get told to wear leather wore it, we'd see a lot more girls wearing it.
It's bothering me enough to put the situation & question to you, Dear Readers.

Note: I'm not taking any orders right now, so unless she's buying something I have in stock it's not an issue for me, and I don't make leather dresses anyway - so it's just a matter of who I send her on to. But how/who to send her to?

Situation: She is very interested in getting into living history/rendezvous/Rev War, and her husband has been in it for quite some time.
Issue: She wants to dress Colonial, he wants her to wear a leather dress (no indication of tribe/nation or time frame, and she says he dresses Skinner).

First: I'm not a fan of buckskin dresses. When done well, they are stunning - when done poorly, well...
I don't like wearing them - they are cold & damp when it's cold, hot & sticky when it's hot, they make funny noises when I walk; they chafe, rub & pull; they stay wet once they get wet and they smell funny. They leave little flecks of leather-sweat-slime all over me. I'm self-conscious about my hips and they showcase my worst attributes at all times, and I can't stand to wear a bra with the dress, but I'm physically uncomfortable going without. Let's not even discuss keeping all that fringe away from porta-potty water (OK, fine, it's similar to the paniers in the pee-bucket issue -- those things are just not made for pre-20th c. women)...
Overall I'm just not a fan. So it's really hard for me to play them up to anyone... though when they are done well they are stunning.

Second: I'm just stubborn enough to be irritated at one person telling another person what to wear, especially when the person doing the telling isn't the one doing the buying/selling. A gift is one thing, "because I said so" is a whole other ball of barbed wire.
Having duly noted the irony of the above statement (I'm in the business of telling people what to wear) and acknowledging that personality quirk; I'm not in the business of causing marital discord.
BUT... there are high points to buckskin dresses, namely "when done well, they are stunning."

Thinking about this issue, while sewing a lovely (yes, please turn out lovely) 1800-15 bib-front dress, I came to the conclusion that the symbolism associated with the Buckskin Dress can go one of two ways while our guy is holding up a smoky, dirty, clingy, sack-looking thing & smiling at us like a mad-man, while we're trying to read his mind (which we are terrible at, FYI) . He's either thinking...
1: You are my Sun, Moon & Stars; my one and only love, Treasure of my Heart and I want you to be my Indian Princess.
2: Burn this hunk of meat on a stick, Squaw.*
*1927-1993 definition - ick.
It could go either way, really. And us girls who aren't huge leather fans are always wondering if it's #2. There's a big difference between being your Lady Love and being your Old Lady.

In reenacting terms, a good portrayal is priceless.
OK, so you want me to wear a buckskin dress. Why? Who, when & what am I representing? What are the proper mannerisms, lodging, food, hairstyles and furnishings? What is the history of the people I'm representing? What special skills did they know? Are their descendants still around or have they died out/integrated? What goods were traded/produced by those people and with whom? Who were their allies/enemies? What is a plausible back story for this specific portrayal and at what types of events will I be portraying her and to what extent? You're not going to try to talk me into getting a facial tattoo, are you? I mean, you do know that's what eyeliner is for, right?

Is a buckskin dress the goal, and should we therefore build the character around the dress? (totally acceptable).
Or should we research & build the character first, then represent her faithfully even if she would have worn a linen shortgown & wrap skirt & wool leggings?

I could say more about humorously bad experiences with wet leather, but anyone who has ever worn a buckskin dress in a 40F rainstorm Knows.
I will say, buckskin dresses are remarkably easy to swim across a river in. Do not try that in Colonial clothes.


So I guess I have two questions:
1: Ladies, if you love/hate leather dresses - why?
2: Gents, if you love/hate leather dresses - why?

Gorgeous! Stunning! "This is how you do it!"
http://www.nationalcowboymuseum.org/research/cms/Exhibits/PhotographsbyGeorgeAAddison/tabid/410/Default.aspx

Umm.... notsomuch unless it's Halloween; then go for it... but not at a reenactment, please.
http://www.webnuggetz.com/indian-halloween-costumes-for-women/

Cloth Flowers

Real Quick, then I'll refine this later, but as I don't know when "later" will be - I'm info dumping on you Dear Readers. Forgive me.

I'm making a ball gown right now: The Daffodil Dress. A flight of fancy perhaps, and I've been keeping it in the back of my brain for a while, waiting for the right opportunity. This is it.

But I hit a snag... no good directions on how to make cloth flowers. Oh, plenty on the pansy-type things... just cut & sew. But nothing on the origami jobs that I wanted to make. So, here yea be. These are quick & dirty, cotton bias tape in 1" wide and 1 1/8" wide, but any width will do.
You can fray check or leave raw. If you are going to fray check, do it first, your life will be a lot easier.

Buds:

1: cutting bias tape lengths














2: Folding the "triangles"
(for whatever reason the directions photo is turned funny. Grumble - it's not fixing)









3: Tucking in the ends (really part of 2 because we are still folding)
if you don't tuck the ends in it puffs out like the ribbon flowers below & looks funny in bias tape.






4: gather & stitch buds
The first one here looks like I haven't tucked the end, but just wrap the thread around to the other side to get that to lay down.














5: cut "paper" wrappers out of tan/gray cloth, roll & stitch.

You could also glue them, but I think you'd still have to stitch it.









Ta-Da!



Oh, wait... but we aren't done! The flowers have to bloom!




Flowers:
(You will need 3 pieces of bias tape: 2 cut on an angle for the outer petals & 1 rectangle for the central tube)
6: cut pieces & fold
view from the top so hopefully that clears things up a bit.








7: pinch, gather & stitch petals & center tube together.
When you pinch them, try to pinch the tube first, then wrap the petals around it. It'll make a nicer flower than if you pinch it flat.








Ummm... pretty now.









8: Place & wrap the bias tape "paper" bit and stitch it closed. Leave more on the end than you will need. This is the same size as the one above.

Ummm... pretty. Maybe a bit like a crocus, but it'll work out.










Here is the unfinished dress (I'm waiting for the yellow silk to get here for the sash because the cotton is "blah"). I placed the flowers around the flounce, placed the wide grosgrain ribbon with them & then stitched it all together. Have to tack a few flowers in place, but otherwise the dress is done. It's not quite as over-the-top as it should be for 1815, but I'm very happy with it.

I have no idea how well or poorly it will wash.

I'll leave you with some links on silk flowers & ribbon flowers.
A fellow blogger: http://fashionribbonwear.blogspot.com/2011/01/silk-rose.html
HG t-v: http://www.hgtv.com/crafting/ribbon-photo-album/index.html scroll down for the flower part & ignore the picture frame.

Medieval Torso Control - or not?

So, really quick; a very short overview of medieval women & the use of body-shapers (or not) in my limited digital pictorial references.

I went on a whole tare about how you can pretty much tell when a woman (or man) is wearing a corset-like garment / form altering garment / supporting garment, and when they aren't as long as they aren't wrapped up in a blanket. This was inspired by an offhand comment in a book where the author said, "women didn't use support" and those always/never statements just send me over the edge especially when they aren't always true.
I fully admit that I'm just dipping my toes into this era, so I could be making quite a few mistakes - but this is how we learn... through analysis of existing information, interpreting that information based on what we know & adjusting that interpretation as new information becomes available. Yay history!

Let us start with my early images of corset/altered/supported figures, which may or may not be subject to artistic interpretation, and why I call it a corset (even if it's not a true corset)

1130-60 Angers Cathedral, sculpture at West Door.
Accounting for individual body type, the way the dress falls off the hip area suggests the end of a stiffer, body shaping garment over a natural form. The waist is clearly cinched in a bit & the rib cage has been smoothed by her corded belt??? The flattened shape of the chest leads me to believe it's either a cross-bound bust line or a cut corset type garment that divides & lifts the bust, as the elevation relative to her armpits is slightly higher than natural while being well within the range of what a corset is capable of producing.

I favor the idea that the corset aspect of the undergarment was built into a full-length dress and accomplished with stiffer linen fabric, cording etc.

1130-60 Chartres Cathedral, sculpture at ?? door.
This is a more natural form, but I believe that her breasts are bound in a straight wrap. The girdle serves a similar function as the one above in tucking in her waist from rib cage-belly, which is then clearly natural from belly-button to hip line. This look could be accomplished with a slender figure & heavy material without close-fitting support garments, but it's more easily accomplished with than without.






Now, let's talk about indeterminate figures. Maybe, maybe not?

1170-1199 Alfonso VIII, Queen Lenor of England (oddly enough one of Alfonso The Great's many-great grandson's is one of my friends, doesn't mean anything, but it's a fun factoid).
I have no idea if Queen Lenor of England is wearing torso support or not, but nice shoes!






1170 Hunterian Psalter, Eve Spinning
I could go either way with this one. She could be wearing a lightly supportive under-dress that helps the outer cote lay well, or she could be loose for ease of breast feeding... though my friends who have done so tell me it's not really so nice to be "free" at that time because you leak all over, so considering the value of clothing in that era, I'd lean towards some kind of absorbent binding to protect the outer garment from milk stains.





1170 Hunterian Psalter, Women
Lady in the blue cloak, no clue. The yellow/cream cote could very well be something similar to the Chartres sculpture. The ridge at the hip line could be a natural result of her pose or a belt hidden in a fold of cloth. As the bustline is hidden by her hands, it's difficult to tell if it's natural or higher.







1180 Hortus Deliciarum, Grammatica
HOLY WONDER BRA, woman!
I put this in the "I don't know" category because her torso is semi-natural, but the bustline is quite high up there. Easily accomplished with an over-the-shoulder bra type garment or a supporting under-dress similar to what many scholars suspect was worn in the late 1300's. She is wearing a cote underneath the pink surcote, you can see the blue/white at her wrists.
While this could be artist interpretation, I seriously doubt it... there is another image from the Hortus Delicaiarum that I don't have in digital form that shows a much more natural bustline.
BTW, I love the standing collar on this, but I can't imagine fighting with those sleeves all the time.

1220-25 Peterborough Psalter, Mercy & Truth
I'd actually put these in the "no support" category. The forms move naturally, the underdress is clearly loose at the armhole, but the reality is, I just can't tell.








1230 Villard de Honnecourt Sketchbook
Again, simply too many over-clothes to tell. It could go either way. But I'm a fan of the wedge-shaped sleeves that are fitted in the forearm. From what I've been reading, these were often whip-stitched on for the day & then un-stitched at night.
Also, that cloak with the "choke you" rope if you don't hold on to it? Annoying, but pretty.





1270-1322 The Temptation, A Dancing Couple by Master Ermengault
Again, could go either way, but it may surprise you to know that I lean toward a fitted bodice on the under-dress or some form of support. Reason being is the way the folds fall off her chest.. just a touch high for a natural form and the placement leads me to say a straight horizontal binding that creates a sports-bra effect. Could be artistic license, but I'm thinking body-shaper.
Oh, and I want to make these outfits for me & my husband. They are cute & we'd look good in them.


1321 The Book of the Laws of Ancient Kings, detail of The Wreck of the White Ship, English (wish I remembered what site I got this from, it was a fantastic article).
I lean towards bound/supported only because I know exactly what a bust that size looks & feels like when swinging free on a moving boat - NOT fun. Not that anyone here looks like they are having any fun. But I'm also going for support garment due to the horizontal strain across the outer garment that would be created by a tighter bound under-dress.

PS, this is what happens when you drink & "drive." Don't drink & drive - not on land or at sea.



Now, Let's look at unsupported figures:

1250 Maciejowski Bible, Jephath's daughter laments
While these are quite similar to some of the images above, I put these in the "unsupported" category because the girl's torsos are quite natural & their bustlines are at the mid-chest level where a young A-C would naturally fall. Bellies are quite natural, and the way the cloth bags out above the belt says "unsupported torso" to me.
This is not saying they aren't wearing under dresses & smocks under the cotes.





1250 Maciejowski Bible, Woman
I've put this woman in the "unsupported" category because of the way her chest falls into her waist with little or no wrinkles in the dress, which then curves naturally around her belly. It's a lined dress, but loose enough that it doesn't provide any support of it's own.








1250 Maciejowsik Bible, Levite (lady in the pink)
Again, I'd say "unsupported" due to the natural level of her chest. The fullness is under her armpit, where it would be without support. However, I think she's wearing an underdress to help smooth the line of the pink outer garment.



Wasn't that fun?
And now, I must go.


Edit: 8/17/12 - yes, I'm going to refer you to the later bra article again, but it's a perfect example of "never say never."  http://www.historyextra.com/lingerie

Oh boy... I bought a Great Wheel...

For those of you on FB, you already know (yeah, yeah; groan)...
I bought a Great Wheel! EEEEE!!!! (and OMG, what was I thinking???)
I was sure Mom would kill me, the thing is huge. She said, "if you didn't buy it I'd have killed you." Whew.

So, without further ado, meet my new toy. It's not in working order yet, so no name. Apparently it's a "thing" to name your spinning wheel. Go figure.

(please forgive the blankets, you couldn't see the wheel for all the other wooden furniture in the basement)

It has a double drive head, also known as a Miner / Minor, (I'm not 100% on the spelling, I've seen it both ways in different books & as it's the guy's name, I don't know which one is right). That head can be replaced with a direct drive head, which suits me fine as I can use that at earlier events should I ever be so insane as to tote this thing on the road with me - and we all know I'll do it someday. Need to find some replacement spindles though.

Everything seems to be in good working order - I had to replace one spoke on the drive wheel, reinforce one leg socket with wood filler & sand rough edges on the wheel itself and the base to reduce the likelihood of splinters (which I got the moment I picked it up).
I reconditioned & re-stained the bits of newly raw wood with a nice walnut stain that matches the original very well.

Next is getting out the wax to give everything a nice buffing, then oiling the various movable bits & replacing the drive bands/strings - which I've learned to do just today - in theory.

The bearings that hold the spindle on also need replacing, these are made of braided corn husks or leather (hear Gail parrot what she's learned) - nothing was there when I bought it. I'm going with leather as I have lots on hand. The ties that hold the Miner wheel in place also need replacing, which you can see here. Fortunately, I have plenty of linen thread as well.

The truly lovely thing about this wheel is that everything comes apart except the drive wheel, so if need be, I can pack it to an event.

There is some minor damage like chips out of wooden bits, but so far, everything works. We will see how things go once I get the drive bands on & start trying to align everything. Unfortunately for me, the paper label on the drive head has mostly fallen off. There are a few tiny & very dingy letters showing at the very bottom which I have carefully avoided when cleaning.

From what little I understand about this monstrously huge piece of equipment, you can spin anything on it except warp yarn due to the tension necessary to make that strong yarn. I don't know if this is true, but I don't really care, the drop spindle can handle that - no problem, should it ever become necessary.

Speaking of the drop spindle, I'm down to fairly consistent thread-thickness yarn from the Finn fleece. I'm learning a lot, no longer doing the park & draft thing except when I have to splice, I'm finally spinning at a decent clip. Adding hand cream to my finger tips did wonders for the yarn. Lots of carding and pre-drafting made an amazing difference. My poor little dog slicker brush is about dead.

Once I get a good bit of thinner yarn, I'll measure it out & dye up various colors, probably this spring. Most of the dyestuffs I have now are yellow, green, gray, brown or red.

So if you were wondering how I was spending my Winter Holiday, it's being covered in sawdust, wood glue, stain & wax in the basement with my Moon-cat who is totally in love with "her" fleece and has hidden a sizable chunk in a chair cave, which she spends all day guarding... like a furry little black dragon with some stinky, greasy treasure. Seriously, I've had to deliver breakfast to her 3 days in a row just so she'll eat something before we give her her medicine. I'm a bit jealous right now.
And poor Shadow, he can't find a lap to sit in because when I finally sit down for the night I'm leaning forward with the spinny-thing & always telling him "not now BugHead." At first he thought it was fun to watch, now he gives it dirty looks. I've had to put it down & pay attention to him several times to avoid the Punishment of Puke.

On that note, I'm going to go socialize with my family & kidnap my cat from her Treasure Cave because I'm feeling the need for some quality time with the people I love.
-Never mind, it's t-v time...

Happy Holidays Everyone!


(sorry I'm a bit late, internet issues).
Drive safe & sober, or drink then have someone who is sober drive safely for you!

Early 1800's stays

Here's some info on early 1800's stays & corsets, a bit of "how to," a few originals from the Met to drool over & my most recent finished products.
(pictured left, 1810 corded corset that I just finished & still have to wash the pencil markings off).

Basic Observations:
1: Most stays / corsets from this era were made from cotton or linen, were simple fabrics in white, brown, cream or neutral colors. Embroidery, threadwork & cording as decoration were common. Cording also serves as a structural element.
2: They were genuinely underwear. Never intended to be seen by anyone other than the person assisting you to dress or undress.
3: Surviving examples of front & back lacing stays/corsets seem to be about equal.
4: While this style lifts the bust up it does not constrict the waist - some cuts & construction can smooth the torso.
5: Wide spaced shoulder straps have a tendency to slip off the arms - very annoying.
6: Separate busk pockets (sewn on separately) are as common as built-in busk pockets (between the 2 layers).
7: Single layer corsets were very common.
8: Divorce corsets (with busk separating the bustline) were as common as shelf-style corsets (single bust with cleavage), at least in surviving examples. Fashion commentary says the divorce corset was most popular.
9: Short Stays were more common 1790-1815... Long stays/corsets were more common 1810-1840, but both seem to have been worn throughout 1790-1840.
10: Adjustable drawstrings at the bustline seem equally common as a fixed band.

Sources:
The Metropolitan Museum of Art has a fantastic collection of stays & corsets - worth browsing.
http://www.metmuseum.org/collections/search-the-collections?rpp=20&ft=corsets&pg=1&when=A.D.+1800-1900
Interestingly enough, my great grandmother used to make her living (a good living) by making corset covers. She would crochet the most beautiful designs, tat lace & sew it all on the fine linen base.

This is a great example of a nursing corset? with squared off gussets
it's listed as 1810-50, American.

http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/80037324?rpp=20&pg=2&ft=Corset&when=A.D.+1800-1900&pos=27

(if anyone can tell me how to make a link of a picture, that would be fantastic).






Speaking of squared off gussets, here's how...
1: cut Y slit.
2: lay triangular gusset to align bottom stitching line with the base of the Y, stitch across leaving the side seam allowance open.
3. Flip gusset up.
4. Flip gusset over so right sides of fabric are together & first side of slit is aligned with side of gusset. Stitch that side.
5. Open up & flip to other side, stitch
6. Press open & top-stitch to outer fabric (not gusset) for maximum strength.




Most Awesome American Corset Ever... if you like folk art, which I do.
http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/80003157?rpp=20&pg=3&ft=Corset&when=A.D.+1800-1900&pos=43

I love this one for so many reasons, not least of which is the simplicity of the cut. But that embroidery is just fantastic!






Anyway, you get the idea... after perusing that site - now go make something.



Here are some that I just finished making, which are currently listed on my For Sale page.

1790-1820 Transitional Stays / Short Stays
Double layer of cotton twill (it's coutil or as close to it as I've seen recently - though it wasn't sold as that). Some cording, lightly boned, laces in front. Bound with brown cotton.
Measures 34.5 bust, 30 underbust.




1810-40 Corded Corset
Double layer of cotton twill, lightly boned with cane, some cording in the front. Spiral laces in back. Adjustable front with a separate busk pocket that buttons closed.
Measures 42 bust, 32 waist, 42 hips. There should be a 2"-4" gap in back between the laces.


1810-40 Simple Corded Corset
Same as above, but it's single layer, unreinforced except for the back. It has a wooden busk in a separate pocket, adjustable top & 2 bones at center back for stability.
Measures 37" bust, 28" waist, 37" hips




1810-40 Simple Corded Corset
Same as above, but has pink binding & a waistband reinforcement. This was a fun addition that gives it just a touch of "extra."
The bustline on this is quit low, so it's suitable for the 1798-1808 era with the "I'm falling out" look.
Measures 40" Bust, 31" waist 46" hips



The nice thing about this style of stays is that the hips don't have to be "filled out" for the stays to fit.

Here's a quick how-to adjust the top of this particular style. (It's pretty self-explanatory, but I took the photos, so why not?)

1: Lace stays up the back.












2: Tighten bust drawstrings to fit.












3: Adjust shoulder straps & re-adjust bust drawstring.
Button busk pocket flap.

At this point, the only thing you may have to re-adjust are the shoulder straps as you take the garment off & on... but probably not.

Personally, I like the shoulder straps to be placed "in" just a bit farther than what is historically accurate, they don't slide down quite as much & I have full arm movement. I also prefer the adjustable vs. fixed straps because I gain & lose weight from my shoulders most often.
I also like the over-bust cut more than the 1/2 bust. It limits my evening-dress options, but I feel a bit better that I'm not going to flash anyone if I bend over the fire. My Regency Era dresses also tend to be high-necked day-dresses & informal wear, so the low-cut isn't as much of an issue... but if you attend Jane Austin balls, you may want to consider the lower cut.

I'm torn between the full length stays with the busk & the shorter Transitional Stays. I like both for different reasons. The full-length stays/corset provide nice support & structure beneath the dress for my full-figure build... but the short stays are divine on hot days.

ATT: Items Stolen from Lord Nelson's Gallery, PA

Dear Readers, Friends & Fellow Living Historians,

Several items have been stolen from Lord Nelson's Gallery in Gettysburg, PA. Knives, quill work sheaths, warclubs and a pipe tomahawk.

Please take a look at his blog post & keep your eyes out for the items on e-bay, or even on a trade blanket.
Be sure to check back to his blog to stay updated.
Let's help Mr. Lower recover his items.


http://contemporarymakers.blogspot.com/2011/12/stolen-items-from-lord-nelsons-gallery.html