- Hmmm.... ... I agree period authentic embellishment can be a good thing. A lower or middle class outfit with masses of gold trim is not appropriate (if you areMessage 1 of 15 , Feb 1, 2007View SourceHmmm....
>If you get into the heads of the persone you are recreating then youI agree period authentic embellishment can be a good thing. A lower or
>will be more inclind to choose 'bling' appropriate to them.
middle class outfit with masses of gold trim is not appropriate (if you are
trying to be serious about your garb making).
and she said:
>If you remain embeded in the 21st century you are more likely toand Joane said:
>use 'bling' in a way that is described as 'TISCA' [typical SCA]
>TISCA is not to be encouraged at a competition level.
>Like Mr-T from the A Team. Lots of gold bling worn just to be worn.See, I think there are different definitions of bling. This is what I
consider 'bling', in most cases - the TISCA 21st century additions! Soooo
This is what is probably part of the percieved problem in A&S comps that
'TISCA' bling can win over period embellishment just 'cos it looks purdy!'
The way I have been understanding this topic thread and some conversations,
I have had with others, is that there is a trend to glitz and glitter (not
necessarily period correct) to look speccy and that this is getting noticed
more than period recreation, especially in A&S competitions.
Also, as I understand it, is that there is concern that people who do lots
of very good research, make some seriously gorgeous period garb (eg.
meticulously researched and embroidered viking) is not being recognised
against a less well made but flashy later period outfit.
I have also had conversations with fellow A&Sers in various Kingdoms of
their concern that these flashy (not so well made) 'costumes' do get noticed
more (the 'bling brigade') and are possilby more likely to get official
recognition because of being 'noticed' and having a higher profile - to the
detriment of those who do what they do very well and look very much the
Luckily here in Lochac we don't have much of the 'bling brigade'. There is a
growing trend, for those more serious in their craft, towards more research
and more accurate recreation of their clothing. For some that may mean
elaborate embellishment, for some it may mean simple clothing.
>> As far as A&S goes, bling goes in and out of style. In the generalI have long been an advocate of 'the total outfit' including accessories and
> populace, bling does tend to get noticed, but there are definite
> trends in A&S, the most current ones in the East Kingdom being hand-
> sewing, basic 14th century garb, and head-to-toe outfits that include
> shoes, underwear and accessories.
appropriate hairstyles. (Layers are a great thing!)
It is nice to see this is catching on. I consider this sort of
'embellishment' really good 'bling!' (by others definition).
>And man bling can be seductiveYep, that is what I was talking about.
I had someone recently tell me that I don't have enough 'bling' to get
noticed and get a high enought profile to be 'noticed' by the powers that
I will do what I want because I want to do it. I enjoy the research and the
sense of a job well done (corny I know). I want to look the part of the
Florentine (they preferred understated expense over flashy), not what the
modern eye usually sees as appropriate sparkle. If this means a lower
profile, then so be it.
If I get noticed, I will get noticed for what I do, not because I stand out
shining when the lights get turned on....
or words to that effect (but not so elegantly put at the time)
La Signora Onorata Katerina da Brescia
The Purplefiles http://katerina.purplefiles.net
"Life may not be the party we hoped for... but while we are here we might
as well dance!"
- ... get noticed and get a high enought profile to be noticed by the powers that be. ... You own a pirate ship! Doesn t that get noticed? Rosie CairnfellMessage 2 of 15 , Feb 1, 2007View Source
> I had someone recently tell me that I don't have enough 'bling' toget noticed and get a high enought profile to be 'noticed' by the
powers that be.
> KatYou own a pirate ship! Doesn't that get noticed?
- ... Is true. I wanted to introduce the ladies in my barony to a late-period style of clothing that didn t necessarily require a corset so we had workshops toMessage 3 of 15 , Feb 2, 2007View Source
>> "Period patterns make the dress sit properly and lookIs true. I wanted to introduce the ladies in my barony to a late-period
>> more like the real thing..."
> Except the bling dress was also to a period pattern, I believe.
style of clothing that didn't necessarily require a corset so we had
workshops to create the infamous :) "Venetian/Turkish cote/gown". Most of
the ladies chose, as I did, to go with the simplest cut (ala 'the green
gown') for our version. Mine was machine-sewn, a fairly rare thing for me,
as I was the Autocrat for the event (lack of time) and the fabric I bought,
a nice heavy 'fake silk' was so slinky that handsewing it would have driven
me crazy. So it was a fake-silk correct-to-period brocaded patterned fabric,
with appropriate trim applied... it just all happened to be of materials
that once were found in an oil well. I think. Even the trim, pretty much.
As opposed to hand-sewn linen and wool clothing with silk embroidery or
tablet-woven trims, which is my 'standard' style of clothing.
One is shiny and stands out as 'glitzy' while the other is quiet and does
not, for the most part, unless you are 'into' Viking-era clothing. I just
thought it was mildly amusing that folks who knew me and knew what I put
into my garb were so *happy* to see me in something flashy and plastic (more
likely, they were happy to see me in something 'not plain').
It just tickled my irony button, is all.
- You have documentation for Viking (which is a job description, not a people) outfit that is embroidered? I have seen evidence of Scandinavian clothing thatMessage 4 of 15 , Feb 3, 2007View SourceYou have documentation for Viking (which is a job description, not a people)
outfit that is embroidered? I have seen evidence of Scandinavian clothing
that has woven metallic trim, but not much if any for embroidery. The
embroidery I have seen on recreations are usually the type of things that
are found on carved stones, wooden implements, etc. Haven't seen proof that
these were actually used on garb.
There always seems to be the feeling that if it were carved, then the women
must have been busy with their bone needles embroidering away rather than
their inkle looms making trim. We have no pictures of them embroidering,
but we do have a few illuminations (later than the Viking period) of them
weaving narrow wares such as trim.
Now if you want Bling in serious amounts that is documentable how about this
Bling existed and was used with gay abandon by those of our ancestors who
could get their hands on it. They brought it back from Byzantium through
Russia (Serious Bling), they piled it on Italian Renaissance until high born
women could barely walk to their new husband's house, where it was promptly
put away with the jewelry.
I find the idea that plain and well made trumping glitzy and well made a
very Puritan one. The triumph (short lived, praise the Lord!) of Puritanism
was short lived, and mostly not within the SCA period.
Documentation and workmanship may be the key. A well documented and well
put together Elizabethan will get my vote as a costume judge over a "Viking"
embroidered gown with undocumented (wishful thinking) embroidery. Not to
mention that most of the "Viking" stuff I've seen usually is dripping with
masses of amber and chains from huge turtle broaches so the wearer can have
the "Bling" they crave.
> Also, as I understand it, is that there is concern that people
> who do lots
> of very good research, make some seriously gorgeous period garb (eg.
> meticulously researched and embroidered viking) is not being recognised
> against a less well made but flashy later period outfit.