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

Corsets

Expand Messages
  • mhmillns
    1) When comparing the 18th century stays to the Lord and Taylor catalogue there were many differences, but the goal was the same. The 18th century stays were
    Message 1 of 32 , Mar 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      1) When comparing the 18th century stays to the Lord and Taylor
      catalogue there were many differences, but the goal was the same.
      The 18th century stays were an integral part of the wardrobe,
      everyday wear. The ones pictured were hand woven wool, linen and
      whalebone. They were sculpted to look and feel like armour. The Lord
      and Taylor examples definitly looked more decrotave. They were
      curvier, and allowed room for the bust, to push and lift as opposed
      to keeping in. I did notice that the catalog ones looked like they
      were actually going for a tighter fit than the stays were.

      2)For the most part, when I think of modern day corsets, I think of
      lingerie. They seem to be used only for decorative purposes, they
      have the ties and every aspect of an 18th century corset, but aren't
      as tight. They hold the stomach in and the breasts up, but not in a
      harmful way. They are more decorative, and some can be almost
      dominatrix like. The other uses, which are very common, are for
      wedding dresses (having a lace up back, like a corset is very
      attractive, as well as it saves on alteration costs!), over business
      shirts, and as part of an evening gown- so I guess a big difference
      now is that they are shown on the outside, rather than hiding
      underneath.
      I have worn corsets, playfully, as part of a lingerie set. I like
      the fact that it seems like dress up, and flatters many body types.
      I also had a prom dress a while back that was based on a corset- the
      boning helped me stand up straight, but wasn't annoying.
    • mhmillns
      1) When comparing the 18th century stays to the Lord and Taylor catalogue there were many differences, but the goal was the same. The 18th century stays were
      Message 32 of 32 , Mar 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        1) When comparing the 18th century stays to the Lord and Taylor
        catalogue there were many differences, but the goal was the same.
        The 18th century stays were an integral part of the wardrobe,
        everyday wear. The ones pictured were hand woven wool, linen and
        whalebone. They were sculpted to look and feel like armour. The Lord
        and Taylor examples definitly looked more decrotave. They were
        curvier, and allowed room for the bust, to push and lift as opposed
        to keeping in. I did notice that the catalog ones looked like they
        were actually going for a tighter fit than the stays were.

        2)For the most part, when I think of modern day corsets, I think of
        lingerie. They seem to be used only for decorative purposes, they
        have the ties and every aspect of an 18th century corset, but aren't
        as tight. They hold the stomach in and the breasts up, but not in a
        harmful way. They are more decorative, and some can be almost
        dominatrix like. The other uses, which are very common, are for
        wedding dresses (having a lace up back, like a corset is very
        attractive, as well as it saves on alteration costs!), over business
        shirts, and as part of an evening gown- so I guess a big difference
        now is that they are shown on the outside, rather than hiding
        underneath.
        I have worn corsets, playfully, as part of a lingerie set. I like
        the fact that it seems like dress up, and flatters many body types.
        I also had a prom dress a while back that was based on a corset- the
        boning helped me stand up straight, but wasn't annoying.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.