--- In SCA-Garb@y..., "Stella" <hecaba@i...> wrote:
> >Side gores yes, massive semicircle side pannels that take
> >about 2-3 metres each, I dont think so.
> >This pattern is an obscene overuse of material ;P
> I reckon!!
> Surely Simplicity know that people are restricted by finances and would
rather have a pattern that requires a lesser amount of fabric? And why are
they not interested in putting out an authentic pattern? There seem to be lots
of people looking for such patterns and there are so many sites on the net
saying how weird these patterns are and how they need to be changed.
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Well, considering that I worked at Jo-Ann Fabrics and Crafts as an advertising
writer at the time that these patterns were drafted and was called in to "take
a look" and render my opinion on this and a coulple of other patterns when
Simplicity brought them for evaluation...I TOLD them that the way the surcote
was put together was butt-ugly and a waste of fabric. But they didn't really
want to know what was period--or easier. I dunno why. I don't even want to
get into the conversation we had about the garment underneath--that thing
that masques about as a cotehardie...
It's not like they weren't told or shown plenty of period portraits. I even sent
them shots of my four-panel surocotes, a couple of which have pretty hefty
skirts with the addition of gores. And I'm not exactly a master seamstress. (I
can't set in a sleeve, for instance.)
The best answer I got was "we're doing this for the home sewing person, not
Oh, yeah. Like the average seamstress has an unlimited budget. Go figure.