Month: November 2012

Fashion Plates & Subject Headings

On By kittycalashIn Museums1 Comment

Women_17901799_Plate_009Ah, the Met. You have to love them, so much wonderful material available online, and free. Collections of immeasurable depth and wealth, an incredible professional staff–this is the pinnacle, right? And yet…

They have a weakness. It’s a weakness shared by many places, but it is a major one, for the online user. It’s the lack of subject headings or dates assigned to their Library’s Digital Collections. They use OCLC’s ContentDM which has a pleasant enough interface, and fields that, in the Met’s Costume Institute Fashion Plate Collection, include Thumbnail, Title, Subject, Description, and Date.

They’re only putting data in Thumbnail (see image; I love that dress), Title, and Description. Description is what I would call Credit Line, and contains the donor name.

Title is a trifle vague. The image above is “Women 1790-1799, Plate 009.” No date, no subjects. The date is October, 1791, right there in the image, but not searchable, not sortable.

Women_17901799_Plate_049 Catalogers, I implore you: subject headings. If not subject headings, the date, please, when it is on the item. That makes the collections not only sortable, but searchable.

Enough with my lunch-too-late commentary! I’ve been immensely grateful to have a new digital plaything while waiting for the lunch room to clear, and this plate is delightful: April 1797, which was certainly blustery, if not cruel.

Mens_Wear_17901829_Plate_002And, since we’ve been on the topic of men’s wear, here’s a well-dressed gentleman and his lady in Morning Walking Dress for April 1807.

This weekend, I am off to the Farm for the Christmas Sale. Not such a pretty dress as these, but one I am pleased with nonetheless, and which (with wool petticoat, stockings, and cloak) should keep me warm–I do expect to be quite busy.

The Line of Beauty

On By kittycalashIn Clothing, History4 Comments

In considering menswear, I found this suit at the Met. Incredibly plain, it reminds me of classic Balenciaga: all about fabric and drape. It also reminded me of Hogarth’s Analysis of Beauty, and the serpentine line.

You could also call it the Ogee curve, and it’s found in the serpentine legs of 18th century tables, and does not come from, “Oh gee, that soldier’s got nice legs.”

In this variation on the theme, the contrasting lining emphasizes the lapel line, but the overall effect is less elegant. It’s about materials, too, not just cut. There’s so much to learn just by looking, really looking, at clothes and paintings from the past. There are subtleties we miss as we rush past, and miss because we haven’t read enough to understand what we’re being told.

So much hides in plain sight, because we don’t see the world the way the tailors and painters and engravers saw it. I don’t pretend to have the key to that world, but it’s worth looking for, mostly just by looking.

Veterans and Votes

On By kittycalashIn History, Reenacting

20121127-080442.jpg
On Wednesday last, I met with two fantastic colleagues, one from my own house, and the other from the local living history farm/museum. We went over topics and themes and ideas about history, and we tried to stay focused…but it was hard, because really, all three of us think the 18th century is hot stuff, and the thing we most want to share with the rest of the world.

At one point, our farm based colleague reminded us that his people (tenant farmers) would not have been able to vote. And I realized, as the conversation quickly hopped to the westward migration of Rhode Islanders–some to take occupation and ownership of Western Reserve lands given as bounty for Revolutionary War service–that there were plenty of men who served in the Continental Army who, at war’s end could not vote.

Let that one sink in for a moment: in Rhode Island, only property owners could vote. A man who served with the Rhode Island Regiments who did not own property fought, in some cases for eight years, but at war’s end, could not vote. They could not participate in the democracy they might have sacrificed not only time and profit but their own bodies to achieve.

One man, one vote was not the law in Rhode Island until after the Dorr Rebellion of 1841, when white male property owners AND men who could pay a $1 poll tax were granted suffrage.

Universal suffrage rights aside, what did voting mean to the men who fought in the Revolutionary War? How did the people of the late 18th century understand their rights, and they role in democracy? It was far different from what we take for granted in America now, which is different from how democracy was understood just 100 years ago.

Again, we could delve into how Senators were formerly not chosen by popular vote or argue about the electoral college, but what I wonder now, as I ponder the men who portray Rev War units, is to what degree those men understand how very different the men of the past were from the men they are today. It is not just breeches and “Good Days” that make us different. The way we think– how we see the world and how we see ourselves– is fundamentally different.

I Love a Man in a Uniform

On By kittycalashIn Clothing, History, Reenacting8 Comments
Maybe it’s about the musket?

But that’s not my man, that’s Brian. Nice uniform, though, right? Blue broadcloth with white facings and pewter buttons, a cap with a red cockade, fitted white overalls: what’s not to like? (Making one, that’s what, and one is in my future.)

After getting Mr S’s workman’s jacket to the brink of buttons and buttonholes, we looked at it and said, “It’s so…plain. Where are the contrast facings? The tape and the lace? Should it be so much, well, one color?” Peacocks suddenly made sense.

It’s not about the musket. It’s about the buttons. And the breeches.

I spend my 18th century time with men in uniforms, and I forget the role of line, fit, and color in determining style. I see it in paintings, and in lovely coats in museums, but one thing we don’t have a lot of are paintings of middling and lower men who look stylish. Of course not! They couldn’t afford paintings, and style–refinement at least–was associated with class and gentility. There was a coded language, and clothes said a lot about the wearer.

So what did uniforms say about men, and how much could civilians, especially women, read the symbols? Hessians, with their tall brass hats, and grenadiers, with bearskins, are dressed not just to impress, but to overwhelm, visually. At Fort Lee last year, my mother was distinctly impressed by, and a little frighted of, the Hessians and Jaegers: the uniforms worked as intended.

Facings and frocks: Rhode Island stands out

Light Infantry troops wanted to set themselves apart, and used their cut-down caps and short jackets to achieve immediate visual distinction.

Working men used what they had: checkered or printed handkerchiefs, patterned waistcoats, and better buttons were some of the ways they dressed up their clothes. I know brass buttons will be in my sewing box soon, the sooner the better, say the men I sew for.