jennylafleur (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
jennylafleur) wrote2006-09-04 07:09 pm
jennylafleur) wrote2006-09-04 07:09 pm
Entry tags:
Art & Mystery of the Mantua Maker
I was reviewing my very scanty notes from the Sally Queen 18th Century Clothing review luncheon at Costume College and thought I should put down some of my thoughts... while I can still remember them. :>
The thing that made the biggest impact on me was Sally's emphasis on what she called "the art and mystery of the mantua maker".
She felt that as costumers we tend to try and copy extant garments too exactly – "Arnold has a seam there so I must have a seam there too". I’ve noticed living history people are the worst at this, feeling the need to document everything that is done.
We also want to standardize everything – "pocket hoops were this many inches wide" or "pleats were always done this width". In fact there is nothing so standard about extent garments & other primary sources. Sally showed us pics of several examples of un-evenness, imperfections and things that would cause a failing grade if you turned it in to a home ecc teacher. One of my favorites was a en fourreau back were the pleats were not even on each side, they didn't even match the pattern of the fabric - actually that was in![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
demodekvc's class I think. Still my favorite though. :>
As Sally pointed out, infact the key to reproducing clothing is learning the "art and mystery of the mantua maker". These garments were draped and made for individuals by individual seamstresses with varying levels of skill and education. The goal was always the same though: to look balanced and proportional. The Baroque period was obsessed about balance and it was reflecting in the ideal for clothes as well.
She suggested finding an extent dress your size and study it for the correct proportions. But beyond that to simply use common sense, physics and proportions when fitting, fudging and altering. All within the restraints of the technology and techniques of the time of course. (Something Hunnisett talks about in her book.)
Most of you probably already figured this out but for me it blew my mind. It makes so much sense, especially as she was showing garments that had solved fitting problems the same way I had (when the "documented" solution didn’t work for me) by just applying some common sense. It also makes sense to me in way some period patterns work for me others never do - some of those straps, sleeves, pleats or darts just don't work wit my proportions.
It’s also a very freeing approach to costuming. I walked in very nervous about how I would go about making a robe à la française, or even if I could and feeling the need to know lots of details before I could start. I walked out knowing I could do it with the skills I have now and moreover have fun in the process. I mean I'd already come the same conclusions as the above but I felt guilty about not being as accurate as I wanted. It was a relief to find out, in fact my thoughts are a period approach to the art of the mantua maker!! *does happy dance*
The thing that made the biggest impact on me was Sally's emphasis on what she called "the art and mystery of the mantua maker".
She felt that as costumers we tend to try and copy extant garments too exactly – "Arnold has a seam there so I must have a seam there too". I’ve noticed living history people are the worst at this, feeling the need to document everything that is done.
We also want to standardize everything – "pocket hoops were this many inches wide" or "pleats were always done this width". In fact there is nothing so standard about extent garments & other primary sources. Sally showed us pics of several examples of un-evenness, imperfections and things that would cause a failing grade if you turned it in to a home ecc teacher. One of my favorites was a en fourreau back were the pleats were not even on each side, they didn't even match the pattern of the fabric - actually that was in
demodekvc's class I think. Still my favorite though. :>As Sally pointed out, infact the key to reproducing clothing is learning the "art and mystery of the mantua maker". These garments were draped and made for individuals by individual seamstresses with varying levels of skill and education. The goal was always the same though: to look balanced and proportional. The Baroque period was obsessed about balance and it was reflecting in the ideal for clothes as well.
She suggested finding an extent dress your size and study it for the correct proportions. But beyond that to simply use common sense, physics and proportions when fitting, fudging and altering. All within the restraints of the technology and techniques of the time of course. (Something Hunnisett talks about in her book.)
Most of you probably already figured this out but for me it blew my mind. It makes so much sense, especially as she was showing garments that had solved fitting problems the same way I had (when the "documented" solution didn’t work for me) by just applying some common sense. It also makes sense to me in way some period patterns work for me others never do - some of those straps, sleeves, pleats or darts just don't work wit my proportions.
It’s also a very freeing approach to costuming. I walked in very nervous about how I would go about making a robe à la française, or even if I could and feeling the need to know lots of details before I could start. I walked out knowing I could do it with the skills I have now and moreover have fun in the process. I mean I'd already come the same conclusions as the above but I felt guilty about not being as accurate as I wanted. It was a relief to find out, in fact my thoughts are a period approach to the art of the mantua maker!! *does happy dance*
no subject