Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

List Ettiquette Example #1

Expand Messages
  • wodeford
    MODERATOR NOTE. This is top posting. The reason we request that you do not top post is that it is very, VERY easy to forget to remove any part of the previous
    Message 1 of 6 , Dec 5, 2006
      MODERATOR NOTE. This is top posting. The reason we request that you do
      not top post is that it is very, VERY easy to forget to remove any
      part of the previous message, forcing everyone to read it over again.
      This is particularly a problem for our list members who receive their
      messages in digest form.

      --- In Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com, "Kelley" <kelley_rambo@...> wrote:
      >
      > Does anyone know whether the gown bodice was attached to the
      > overskirt? It looks like it to me in the pictures, but I'm not certain.
      > Thanks,
      > Cate
      >
      > PS To moderator - I'm sorry, but I don't know what top posting means.
      > Can you explain it to me? Thanks.
      >
    • wodeford
      MODERATOR NOTE APPEARS IN ALL CAPS IN BODY OF MESSAGE. ... THIS IS BOTTOM POSTING. IF YOU WILL COMPARE IT TO THE MESSAGE TITLED LIST ETTIQUETTE EXAMPLE #1
      Message 2 of 6 , Dec 5, 2006
        MODERATOR NOTE APPEARS IN ALL CAPS IN BODY OF MESSAGE.
        --- In Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com, "Kelley" <kelley_rambo@...> wrote:
        > PS To moderator - I'm sorry, but I don't know what top posting means.
        > Can you explain it to me? Thanks.

        THIS IS BOTTOM POSTING. IF YOU WILL COMPARE IT TO THE MESSAGE TITLED
        "LIST ETTIQUETTE EXAMPLE #1" YOU CAN SEE THAT I AM ANSWERING AT THE
        END OF CATE'S ORIGINAL MESSAGE. YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT I SNIPPED OUT
        THE PORTION OF HER MESSAGE THAT DID NOT APPLY TO THE QUESTION.

        THIS IS A VERY ACTIVE LIST WITH MORE THAN 1000 MEMBERS. PLEASE BE
        COURTEOUS AND EDIT YOUR POSTS SO THAT EXTRANEOUS INFORMATION ISN'T
        REPEATED UNNECESSARILY.

        THANK YOU.
      • Chris Laning
        ... I think the best answer is sometimes. If I remember correctly, the evidence seems to say that some bodice-skirt combinations were tied together with
        Message 3 of 6 , Dec 5, 2006
          At 4:54 PM +0000 12/5/06, Cate wrote:
          >Does anyone know whether the gown bodice was attached to the
          >overskirt? It looks like it to me in the pictures, but I'm not certain.

          I think the best answer is "sometimes." If I remember correctly, the
          evidence seems to say that some bodice-skirt combinations were tied
          together with laces (like shoelaces, sort of) while others were
          actually sewn together. I would not be surprised to hear of
          attachment by hooks and eyes, either.

          For practical purposes, since the bodice should overlap and hide the
          skirt waistband anyway, attaching the bodice to the waistband has
          some real advantages. It prevents "dreaded gap-osis" where the
          underlayers show between bodice and skirt when you stretch or raise
          your arms. (They shouldn't show, except at neckline and cuffs --
          shirts were UNDERWEAR <g>). This is a major plus if you don't want to
          be worrying about your clothes while wearing them.

          On the other hand, it's much easier to make each piece separately --
          bodice in one piece, skirt with waistband, and sleeve pieces. It's
          also easier to clean the whole thing if you can take it apart (and
          believe me, I've done it), especially for women's clothes, since the
          skirts have LOTS of yardage in them. My own gowns have usually had
          the pieces made separately, then hand-sewed together with big
          stitches and heavy thread -- it's easy then to take out the stitching
          for washing, and re-do it later.
          --
          ____________________________________________________________

          O (Lady) Christian de Holacombe , Shire of Windy Meads
          + Kingdom of the West - Chris Laning <claning@...>
          http://paternoster-row.org - http://paternosters.blogspot.com
          ____________________________________________________________
        • wodeford
          ... There s some discussion of the pros and cons of attached vs. unattached tops and bottoms on historical clothing at the Reconstructing History list going on
          Message 4 of 6 , Dec 5, 2006
            --- In Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com, "Kelley" <kelley_rambo@...> wrote:
            >
            > Does anyone know whether the gown bodice was attached to the
            > overskirt? It looks like it to me in the pictures, but I'm not certain.
            > Thanks,
            > Cate

            There's some discussion of the pros and cons of attached vs.
            unattached tops and bottoms on historical clothing at the
            Reconstructing History list going on currently. You can join it here:
            http://reconstructinghistory.com/mailman/listinfo/patterns_reconstructinghistory.com

            Cheers,
            Jehanne de Wodeford
            West Kingdom
          • Elizabeth Walpole
            ... certain. ... I think the vast weight of evidence points to yes, a lot of costumers use a waistband but I have not yet found any significant evidence to
            Message 5 of 6 , Dec 5, 2006
              --- In Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com, "Kelley" <kelley_rambo@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > Does anyone know whether the gown bodice was attached to the
              > overskirt? It looks like it to me in the pictures, but I'm not
              certain.
              > Thanks,
              > Cate
              >
              I think the vast weight of evidence points to yes, a lot of
              costumers use a waistband but I have not yet found any significant
              evidence to suggest that gowns were made in two separate pieces`this
              article has a pretty good set of evidence against waistbands
              http://www.sempstress.org/techniques/waistbands.shtml
              The one issue I see with waistbands that isn't covered in that
              article is the problem of the bodice point. When people wear a
              pointed bodice with a split front skirt there is a mismatch between
              the point of the bodice and the point where the two sides of the
              skirt meet. In period portraits the two sides of the split skirt
              meet at the bottom of the bodice point but if you wear a skirt on a
              separate waistband the two edges of the split meet a couple of
              inches above the point so by the time it's level with the bottom of
              the bodice the gap is already a few inches wide. so instead of
              seeing this:
              \/
              /\
              which you see in period portraits, you see this:
              \/
              / \
              does that make sense?
              Elizabeth
              --------------------------------------------
              Elizabeth Walpole | Elizabeth Beaumont
              Canberra, Australia | Politarchopolis, Lochac
              http://au.geocities.com/e_walpole/
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.