ANST - Need some costuming advice

[Casey&Coni]

Aurorae wrote:


>Greetings.......
>
>I have been doing costuming and mundane fashion design for going on 10
years.
>But, I have yet to make a researched SCA re-creation garment for
competition
>purposes.  I would like to try my hand at researching and building a
>reproduction garment.


<snipped for brevity>

Hello, Ms Aurorae.... hope you don't mind input from one of us knuckle
dragging fighters.

Everyone seems to have a solid grasp on which books to use for your research
and what techniques to use... I'd like to address documentation of your
entry.

Regardless of what fabrics, tools, or techniques you use for this garment-
and so long as your end product *appears* to be of the same construction
(see the note in this thread about not using zig-zag topstitching) as an
original would have- there is a way for you to use time saving devices such
as your serger and your sewing machine without ever violating anyone's
accuracy issues.  The trick is in the set-up of your documentation.

A dear friend of mine showed this method to me and I find it most useful:

Heading- what this thing is supposed to be and from when it's supposed to
be.  (note: do NOT include your name in your documentation- this is not a
popularity contest)

Part the Firste-  A carefully documented (use footnotes) short dissertation
on how this entry fits into it's historical context:  where it was used, who
used it, and most importantly, *how THEY made it*.   This should be the
largest section of your documentation and should go the farthest to teach
the reader how some task was really done in period.  Use primary sources
here to support your views and use notes such as, "if you look in photo A
(Painting of Significance, Leonardo di Whoeverpaintedit)  attached to the
back of the documentation you can clearly see..." to stress your points.

Parte the Seconde- An exact and detailed account of how you reconstructed
this whatchamacallit to include materials, methods, and tools.  This is the
tell-on-yourself portion of the documentation.  In essence, when Ms
Authentic Nose-in-the-air comes by to look at your stuff and inform you on
how you made your left-handed-spam-opener with a modern squoozle, this
portion of your documentation will allow you the ability to reply, "Yes, I
know... I even said so right there in my documentation... and if you'll read
the documentation you'll see that in Parte the Thirde I explain just why I
did it..."

Parte the Third- I call this the justification.  If you haven't already
guessed, this will be the portion of your documentation that allows you to
tell the judge or reader your reasoning for errata betwixt the first and
second portions of your documentation...

*I used poly-rayon because it has the same weight and drape and color as the
silk and wasn't so bloody expensive.

*I used another pepper instead of grains of paradise because I couldn't find
the darned things.

*I used a serger because I intend to be a bit rough on this garment and
would like it to last longer... also, you can't see any of my serging so it
doesn't spoil the appearance of the garment.

*I used acrylic gesso rather than a period gesso because I am not yet
comfortable with the process to a degree that I would risk the entire piece
by utilizing it.

*I used my sewing machine because I work and don't have the time to do it by
hand... but you can't see any of the machine stitching- you can even see at
the cartridge pleats where I broke down and hand sewed them on because they
would be visible.

Parte the Fourth- Bibliography.  Now this may seem an easy thing to do- but
you wouldn't believe how badly it can be ruined.  Did you note how many
folks referred you to Janet Arnold in regards to Elizabethan costuming?  You
can guess from that response that if you left out Arnold, noted expert on
the subject, as a reference there had better be a good reason.  In a similar
vein, check your references with *other* references as there are some REALLY
inaccurate references out there in one form or another and a good judge in
your category will know it.  As an example, almost all my costuming friends
own Patterns for Theatrical Costumes, by Holkeboer because it's a lovely
'ideas' book for people new to the sca... but if any of us caught the others
using it as a serious historical reference it would be a disappointment.
And every single subject has it's books in the same vein so beware what you
list.

Now, all that said (and I'm sure others will follow on with more comments),
if you wish to be as competitive as you can be with the entry, then let
there be as little difference between your first portion of documentation
and your second... (nonono... don't *lie* about it... just do it right when
you make it).  The shorter your third paragraph needs to be, generally
speaking, the more authentic the piece will be and the higher your marks for
authenticity.  Keep in mind that even though what you have done may be very
authentic there are many other categories to be judged including complexity,
originality, attention to detail, and creativity (the 'C' in SCA) to name
some that I've seen.  Be sure also, to make your documentation less of a
labor to read by adding in a splash of wit where you can, people being what
they are.  I know I'm more likely to get through documentation if I get a
giggle out of it.

Hope this helps you along....

Ritter Dieterich

============================================================================
Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.