From: Gretchen Miller Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 17:48:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: H-Costume Digest, Volume 252, 3/8/95 The Historic Costume List Digest, Volume 253, March 8, 1995 Send items for the list to h-costume@andrew.cmu.edu (or reply to this message). Send subscription/deletion requests and inquiries to h-costume-request@andrew.cmu.edu Enjoy! --------------------------------------------------------------- Topics: Pantyhose/girdle history Dying with coffee History of the bra Fitting elizabethan bodices/peascodded doublets The nature of silk in the middle ages/renaissance Using a color wheel when dying Ordering procion dye Experiments with natural dyes Cordwainers and cobblers Costume Con 13 and the Greater Bay Area ICG Who is Harold Pinter? Felting/Fulling wool Dying tips ----------------------- From: Tiepolo2@aol.com Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 23:57:21 -0500 Subject: Re: More on underwear I don't have any idea when pantyhose may have been invented, but I do have very clear memories of the period during which they were widely adopted, at least by my peer group, high school and college girls in the Northeast. I first heard of pantyhose in the Fall of 1967, when I was a senior in high school. I remember having, at this time, a lengthy discussion with some girlfriends about whether or not they should be worn. We all wore skirts about one-half inch longer than our panty girdles, so there was definitely an appeal to pantyhose. But I, and several others, doubted that pantyhose would actually stay up, and I was reluctant to give up wearing girdles, which my mother had taught me were essential for a ladylike impression and posture. During the school year of 1967-8, very few of my friends adopted pantyhose, no more than 10%, I would guess. During the school year of 1968-9, however, my freshman year in college, at least half of the women I knew gave up their girdles for pantyhose. By the end of 1969-70, nearly all had. I remember this vividly because I was a very late hold-out and was self-conscious about the fact. In any event, whenever they may have been invented, 1967-70 was, I think, the period during which they were adopted. This all brings up a significant question for costumers. I am convinced that the general replacement of girdles by pantyhose in the period 1967-70 was, after the abandonment of the corset by young women in the late 1910's, the most significant change that has taken place in feminine underdressing in this century. Wearing pantyhose instead of girdles radically changed the way in which women moved, sat, and walked. Whatever one may think of my mother's observation, she was undoubtedly right that what was understood to be ladylike comportment in the period from about 1930 to 1967 was in large part due to the influence of the girdle. The few times I have costumed college or community theatre plays set in this period, I have found it necessary to put the actresses in girdles, because if they just wear pantyhose, they don't create the right period impression. They just look and act like modern women in vintage clothes. Putting them in girdles, however, poses a problem, because it's not practically possible to make girdles in the way in which it's possible to make corsets. So, unless they can all borrow girdles from their mothers, it can run into money. I'm curious to know what other costumers think about having actresses wear girdles for plays set in this period. Do you agree that it's necessary? And if so, what do you do to furnish actresses with them, without placing undue demands on the costume budget of a college or community theatre production? Suzanne ----------------------- Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 23:35:19 -0800 (PST) From: Kelly Keith Subject: Re: dyeing white to ivory You might also want to think about using coffee. It has a pleasing ivory tone--not orange at all. Instructions: 1. wet fabric, laces, etc. 2. dip wet items into a coffee mixture (1 cup strong coffee and 2 tablespoons of vinegar) 3. Rinse in cold water to set the colour 4. repeat steps 1 & 2 if you want a darker colour. 5. Air dry. **Kelly Keith** e-mail kkeith@u.washington.edu ----------------------- From: Mrs C S Yeldham Date: 06 Mar 95 09:12:00 GMT Subject: Bras and Bodices Just a point on Howard Hughes' influence on the bra. There was an interview with Rita Hayworth published not long ago, in which she said that although HH had 'invented' a new bra to get the outline he wanted, it was so uncomfortable she had only pretended to wear it, and gone back to her previous underwear - and HH hadn't noticed! Re: chris Laning's question about Bodices I suspect your bodice is still too long at the back - I find my bodice's always seem at least an inch or two too short when making them, and sit above my natural waistline. As for your second question - if you *can* slump in an Elizabethan bodice then it is far too loose, not too tight! When I did needlework in costume (I've now moved on to cookery, and a whole new range of problems) I found I had to bring the needlework up to my eyes and keep the fabric around bust level (I am short-sighted), not in my lap. I wouldn't have thought the weight of the skirts should affect the bodice - surely most of the weight is being carried by the farthingale? I am working on the theory (not too quickly since I'm not gentry anymore) that the deep V of the late Elizabethan ladies dress should be constructed like the peascod belly of the Elizabethan man (European as well as English). Ie we should not try to run the V straight down from the waist, whjich is impossible on any woman with a tummy. Looking, particularly at European woodcuts, it would seem that the V actually comes out in front of the stomach (even leaving room for early pregnancy) - so there is a straight line down from the bust line, as in all the pictures, but that instead of going down towards the woman, it arches out. I suspect the way to construct this would be to have a bodice fitting to the upper body (thus keeping the back neat and close fitting) with extra piece(s) on the front creating the V. This is the best way (only?) to create the peascod belly of the fashionable Elizabethan man. Any thoughts? Caroline ----------------------- From: Mrs C S Yeldham Date: 06 Mar 95 11:18:00 GMT Subject: Silk Just a side comment on Kathleen's interesting email about silk. The problem with the English silk wasn't the climate. The problem was the type of mulberry planted. James I was keen on the idea and he encouraged the planting of mulberry, specificaly the black mulberry, which is also edible. Unfortunately the silk worm much prefers the white mulberry (I don't know whether the fruit of the white mulberry is edible) and turned up its nose (?) at the black. There are still a few surviving trees (or descendents) from this effort, but unfortunately most were uprooted because the fruit of the black mulberry *stains* dreadfully. It is also very fragile when ripe, so no use commercially. Cookery books recommend spreading a *old* sheet on the ground and gently knocking the fruit down, asa the only practical way to pick them. Caroline ----------------------- From: Title-L@smtpgw.nctsw.navy.mil Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 08:41:02 -0500 Subject: Re[2]: Dyeing book I also find that color wheel invaluable - but I bought a second set, which I left out on the roof for a week, to assess how fast the colors were. The original colors were supersaturated in many cases (near-international orange; a rich royal purple-blue - amazing stuff; about the only colors missing were kelly-type true greens and electric-type/periwinkle/non-indigo blues) and faded by about a third after just a week in the sun. As might be expected, the golds and reds were more stable than the blue/greens, and magentas held up best. Lynn mice, beef jerky and fabric do mix, but not in the same drawer... ----------------------- Date: Mon 06 Mar 1995 08:34 CT From: UDSD007@DSIBM.OKLADOT.STATE.OK.US (Mike.Andrews ) Subject: Re: Origin of Bra Speaking about Howard Hughes, wrote > My understanding is that he IMPROVED UPON the existing bras > for Miss Russell, not invented them as a form of support. He utilized > his background in aeronautics engineering--streamlining, aerodynamics, > etc. I believe reference is made to this in that Life issue to which > someone referred earlier (but my copy is at home, so I'm not sure). > > Debbie B. (dbarlow@clemson.edu) I don't know about the streamlining and aerodynamics aspects of Hughes' work on bras, but he did an article for the "Journal of Irreproducible Results" titled "A Stress Analysis of a Strapless Evening Gown", complete with free-body diagrams, etc., etc. It's worth finding. -- Mike Andrews Mgr., Tech. Support, Okla. Dept. of Transportation udsd007@ibm.okladot.state.ok.us ----------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 11:00:59 -0500 (EST) From: "K.C. Kozminski" Subject: re: dyeing and dyeing book You may wish to order procion dyes directly from the company that manufactures them, Pro Dye and Chemical, they are very helpful and can give you the best advice on using their products. Their number is 1-800-2-buy-dye. They also make fabric paints and marbling supplies. KC "Simba, it's to dye for!" - The Lion King Don't think of it as aging, think of it as "Attaining Mythic Stature" kc/Roen who is, herself ----------------------- Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 18:43:10 -0800 (PST) From: samhainsghost Subject: Natural Dyes Here's a great dye that I discovered as a child that worked so well it had my mom tearing her hair out =:O For a brown color ranging from a very light beige to a sort of tea color try the ubiquitous black walnut husks and nuts. For the neatest eye popping fuschia deepening to a dark purple try Polk berries. ( this probably won't be of a lot of use to everyone, but for those of you in southern climates thier everywhere in early summer through early fall) These dye so well that they dye almost on contact..no water bath required..nor anything else for that matter. You should have seen my pretty blonde little sisters hair when I got done. ;) --------------------------------------------------------- If Voltaire could look down on the world today, I believe he would say, " Don't you people have lives!?" Samhain@mail.pacificrim.net --------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- From: KATHLEEN@ANSTEC.COM Date: Mon, 06 Mar 95 12:04:15 EST Subject: Re[2]: Cordwainers That's because cobblers apparently were the people who REPAIRED shoes, rather than MADE them. Al Saguto, the cordwainer at Williamsburg also bristles at being called a cobbler. Kathleen kathleen@anstec.com ----------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 95 08:47:46 PST From: Kat@grendal.rain.com (June Russell) Subject: Re: Elizabethan Bodice Question Chris Lang wrote: :However, after all that, the bodice (and its underlying corset; they're tied :together) STILL rides up. It fits just fine when I'm standing, but after I've :been moving around in it, standing, sitting, bending & so forth for a while, I :notice that it's been creeping up, that the front neckline is too high and that :the tops of the bodice armholes are standing in mid-air as much as an inch :above my shoulders. AArrrrgggghhhhh! Shortening the bodice back waist has :helped considerably, but it hasn't solved the whole problem. : :I think that part of the trouble is that I didn't fit the bodice, or the corset I :wear under it (Standard Elizabethan Model with spring-steel bones) :correctly to my waistline in the first place. I think I fitted them to what I :*feel* is my waistline, i.e. just above the tops of my hip bones, when my :*real*, functional waistline (i.e. the place where I bend) is actually about :half an inch higher. : :It's also possible that, since I am the classic Pear Shaped Female (and, to :my embarrassment, about twenty pounds overweight), that the extra, um, :"fluff" in my hips or stomach is pushing the corset up when I sit down. I've noticed this a lot in people's corsets. It isn't just the "Pear Shaped Female" type either. What happens is that the *side* of the corset waist is too low, so the hips (even skinny hips) push it up when sitting or walking. When I fit people for corsets, I have them bend as far to the side as they can, then mark where the highest point of their hip touches the corset. It usually means cutting up about 1" higher than the person's usual waist. Leave the front long, as that is what gives it the Elizabethan look. Later, they seem to put corseted tabs with slits that flair out over the hips (slit high enough for them to spread enough for the hips). If you look at the waistline on such paintings as the Holbein portrait of Jane Seymour, you will notice that although it is straight in front, the waistline itself is higher than you would expect. In later portraits the point comes down, but at the sides the waist is still that high. Some with really long points look like the waist is lower, but is an optical illusion which makes you thing the waist is lower and *smaller* than the real one. Don't alter the top of your corset. The problem is at the bottom, which is usually easier to alter anyway. I hope this helps. Kat Kateryne of Hindscroft ( June Russell ) pacifier.rain.com!grendal!kat kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! ----------------------- Date: Mon, 06 Mar 95 09:13:21 PST From: Eleanor Farrell Subject: Costume Cons and GBACG Costume Con 13 will be held in Toronto, Ontario. For information, I have two e-mail addresses: Compuserve 76437,1712 Genie: C.Lyon4 (I personally haven't gotten any response using the Compuserve address, though...) [This is the 1995 convention] Costume Con 14 (1996) will be held in Seattle, Washington. Costume Con 15 (1997) will be held in Baltimore, Maryland. All of these will be held Memorial Day weekend in late May. In response to Gwen Carnegi who posted about these, the Greater Bay Area Costumer's Guild in Northern California sponsored and organized Costume Con 12, which was held last year (1994). The address for the GBACG is: 5214-F Diamond Heights, Suite 320 San Francisco, CA 94131 Voice Mail: 415/974-9333 Send a 32-cent stamp to receive a copy of our newsletter with infor mation on memberships and subscriptions. If you have further questions, you can e-mail me directly. Ellie Farrell Vice President and Publications Editor, GBACG eleanor@ucsfvm.ucsf.edu ----------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 12:27:47 -0600 (CST) From: Deb Subject: RE: Elizabethan Bodice Question Some replies, which are based on RevWar (1779) corset experience, but should mostly apply anyway: >Another possibility is that I need to develop different posture habits for >this clothing. I tend to slump forward when I'm sitting and concentrating on >something (needlework for instance), and it's possible that that's pulling the >bodice up. But it's tied to my skirt both back and front, so I'd think it would >move back down again when I straighten up. Is it laced too tight? DON'T slump. The correct posture is ramrod straight back (or nearly). You raise your arms and the needlework, you don't lower the head. I find that a footstool can help me raise the work without putting ALL the strain on the shoulders. My corset isn't tied to the skirt, but there is no way that a skirt would be able to pull it down. It is too tight for that -- if/when it rides up a little, I have to apply moderate force to pull it back down. I am inclined to suggest that your main problem is in the fitting. Rather than pull it apart and cutting (tin snips, file, plastic dip, etc.) maybe it's time to wear the first, while you make a second, taking the time to make a muslin and fit it to your waist line. (Mine is rather a bit larger than the patterns, too). This way you'll have a "spare" (the old one) when you are done. I think I can safely say: if you get it properly fitted to YOUR waist (real waist!) and then lace it rather tightly (but not uncomfortably) your rib cage will prevent it from riding up more than a smidge. Deb Baddorf baddorf@fnal.gov ----------------------- From: "2Lt Aryeh J.S. Nusbacher" Subject: Re: H-Costume Digest, Volume 245, 3/3/95 Date: Mon, 6 Mar 95 14:03:51 EST > From: "Pamela C. Rowe" > Subject: Re: Antonia Fraser, husband of > Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 16:21:40 -0600 (CST) > I'm probably showing my ignorance, but who is Harold Pinter? He seemed > to be cited as someone of importance, so I'd like to amend my ignorant > state. Please email if he has nothing to do with the study of historical > costume. Harold Pinter is a British playwright, known for his laconic, understated writing style (he wrote the screenplay for _Turtle Diary_, for example), for his liberal politics (he, John Mortimer, John Cleese, and others are limousine liberals who were prominent supporters of the SDP, back when there was an SDP), and for being married to Lady Antonia Fraser. Aryk Nusbacher | Bombs away, Pretzel Boy! Post-Graduate War Studies Programme | Royal Military College of Canada | -Lloyd Bridges Kingston, Ontario ----------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 14:23:56 -0500 (EST) From: Elizabeth McMahon Subject: Re: More on underwear On Sun, 5 Mar 1995 Tiepolo2@aol.com wrote: > They just look and act like modern women in vintage clothes. Putting them > in girdles, however, poses a problem, because it's not practically possible > to make girdles in the way in which it's possible to make corsets. So, > unless they can all borrow girdles from their mothers, it can run into money. > I'm curious to know what other costumers think about having actresses wear > girdles for plays set in this period. Do you agree that it's necessary? And > if so, what do you do to furnish actresses with them, without placing undue > demands on the costume budget of a college or community theatre production? I have to second this opinion. I was in "The Subject Was Roses", which is a play that takes place just after WW2. My costumes included hats, girdles, and high heeled platform shoes. I was a different person! In deed, it is my opinion that the motion of pulling off gloves when taking off a coat (or whatever) is one of the most feminine and sexy motions ever shaped by dress. Although I am a very big fan of jeans and tshirts, I think a great deal of , er, atmosphere has been lost by the increasing casualness of women's dress, even that of professionals. -*-*- Beth in the office 212-741-4400 ----------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 14:53:57 -0400 (EST) From: dbrowne Subject: Felting You can use comercially aviable wool(Yarn & stuff), but you wont get the same type of results as if you felt from the fleece. As far as to the types of wool that you want you are looking for a type of sheep that produces a long-staple hair strand. This means that you want a wool sheep as apposed to a meat sheep. Currently in the USA it is difficult to find pure bred wool sheep. Look in the back of spinning and weaving magazines, they want the same type of wool that we felters do. Or check at your local weaving shop(if your lucky enough to have one of those aviable). If you don't live close to a shop there are many that will ship. One of the best that I know of is in Lubbock, Texas and is called Beck's Warp-n-Weave, They have almost any type of weaving supplies that you can think of and are very helpful people over the phone.(I dont have there address any more but you should be able to get it over the phone from directory assitance). If all this fails check with your local extension service agency or the Local 4-h club. Even in large cities they are out there but you may have to do some looking. I got one of the finest fleeces I ever worked with from a 4-h'er who said you really want this stuff and gave it to me for free. I hope that this helps --Kathy B --Katrinn ----------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 15:04:43 -0400 (EST) From: dbrowne Subject: Dye Please make sure that you throughly wash and rince any fabric that you are dying befopre you starte the process. Also start with wet fabric to ensure the the fibres are already swollen and that the dye will take more evenly. I have done extensive amounts of dying using both "Natural" dyes and Procion as well as the toxic Analyn(sp?) dye. Even if you do the exact measure and formule for each dye batch you are likely to come out with uneven colors per batch. One of the ways that I have found to remidy this is to dye my smallar batches in lots of the primary color I want then to "top-dye" them all at the same time with a secondary color. That will even out the dyebatches to the point that the color differences are almost non exsistent (Purple with a over bath of red or blue, Forrest green with an over bath of blue, robins egg with a straight blue) You see the possiablities. You never mentioned the reason that you where dying or the purpose that the cloth would be used for. If you could share this with us maybe we could help better. Good Luck --Kathy B --Katrinn ----------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 15:12:34 -0400 (EST) From: dbrowne Subject: Silk I have a beautiful piece of silk that closely matches the silk gause that is so often mentioned for pre-1600's veils. It is a soft dove gray and it is warped with a charcoal grey silk but it is wifted with a metalic that gives an allusion of being made of silver. It is the most wonderful fabric that I have ever owned and I bought it aat an SCA event last summer(Border Raids) for 13.50 a yard. I bought 1/2 yard and i am making an Itlian vail. It is incrediable to work with. I have also found that silk velvet can be reproduced by using a good cotton velvet, it gives the body but not the luster. Oh Well you can't have everything. Spaeking of cotton velvet does anyone out there remember "Velvet bedspreads". Does anyone know where they can still be gotten? --Kathy B --Katrinn ----------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 15:15:09 -0500 (EST) From: Elizabeth McMahon Subject: Re: Silk On 6 Mar 1995, Mrs C S Yeldham wrote: > Just a side comment on Kathleen's interesting email about silk. The > problem with the English silk wasn't the climate. The problem was the > type of mulberry planted. James I was keen on the idea and he encouraged > the planting of mulberry, specificaly the black mulberry, which is also > edible. Unfortunately the silk worm much prefers the white mulberry (I > don't know whether the fruit of the white mulberry is edible) and turned up > its nose (?) at the black. Haven't seen the posting on the silk, and I'm hoping its in the remaining 50 msgs in my mailbox today... But I can comment on mulberry trees, since I have one in my tiny Queens, NYC front yard. Its the white kind, and the berries are edible. My landlord uses the below mentioned sheet gathering method. He also mixes the berries with milk and sugar to make a nice early summer drink. > > There are still a few surviving trees (or descendents) from this effort, > but unfortunately most were uprooted because the fruit of the black > mulberry *stains* dreadfully. It is also very fragile when ripe, so no use > commercially. Cookery books recommend spreading a *old* sheet on the > ground and gently knocking the fruit down, asa the only practical way to > pick them. Must have been a popular decorative tree to plant in the 30's, when my neighborhood was laid out, because these are everywhere, and the sidewalk is black under them for 3 or so weeks when the berries are in season. I know they're healthy in our New York climate, which is harsher than that of England, as I understand it. If I thought I had the energy for the feeding month, I'd get a few silkworms. Thought about it, but don't have time for other hobbies as is, and I can buy the silk cheaper than my time doing it would be worth. Still, it would be interesting... -*-*- Beth in the office 212-741-4400 ----------------------- From: DGC3%Rates%FAR@bangate.pge.com Date: Mon, 6 Mar 95 12:28:19 PST Subject: re:Re: More on underwear Suzanne wrote: ..I am convinced that the general replacement of girdles by pantyhose in the period 1967-70 was, after the abandonment of the corset by young women in the late 1910's, the most significant change that has taken place in feminine underdressing in this century. Wearing pantyhose instead of girdles radically changed the way in which women moved, sat, and walked.... ======================================================== Danine comments: I agree! Having lived through all these social changes, I think it's important to stress to the younger, post-liberated generation that the way people moved in past eras was very different from the freedom we express today. A somewhat rigid body posture showed that you were a refined person, not a laborer. Girdles and pantyhose are part of the story of ladylike comportment, a concept that has probabaly dropped out of the general vocabulary everywhere except this list :). I suspect that cost was a factor in adoption of pantyhose. If pantyhose in 1962 were $5 a pair, as someone posted, that would have made a serious dent in my monthly allowance of $40 (which I thought was pretty lavish). Perhaps lower-cost pantyhose may have become available in 1967? One anecdote about movement: I recall one dean of girls saying membership in Job's Daughters at the least taught girls to sit still with legs uncrossed for 90 minutes at a time, a trait she considered desirable. Nice girls (in 1962) did not cross their legs at the knee, or smoke while walking on the street, or wear pants except to or from activities requiring them, and we would have been reprimanded in college for these infractions (at University of the Pacific in Stockton, California). The Victorians may have died out, but their shadow extended beyond the 1950s. Danine ------------------------------------------------------- Danine Cozzens Internet: dgc3@pge.com Pacific Gas and Electric Company San Francisco, CA -------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- End of Volume 252 -----------------------