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

Re: [SCA-JML] authentic Kimono pattern?

Expand Messages
  • Solveig Throndardottir
    Baron Edward! Greetings from Solveig! ... As you well know, the Japanese love uniforms. So, uniforms were hardly unique to the clergy. At least one of the
    Message 1 of 30 , Sep 7, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Baron Edward!

      Greetings from Solveig!

      > I think you're conflating the issue of specialized uniforms (e.g.,
      > clerical "work clothes") with what the NORMAL person wore.

      As you well know, the Japanese love uniforms. So, uniforms were hardly
      unique to the clergy. At least one of the illustrations at the costume
      museum which I referenced would be better characterized as "ceremonial
      clothing" than "work clothes". Regardless, as I already mentioned to
      the unwitting and unfortunate instigator of this recent exchange
      between us, I was simply responding to what was phrased as a blanket
      statement. As for the high ranking clerics in question, they were most
      definitely "dignified men". If anything, high ranking clerics were
      frequently satirized for their attachment to splendid robes. As for the
      political status of some of these clerics, I refer you to "Heavenly
      Warriors" and other similar books about the Kamakura and Muromachi
      periods. Some of these clerics effectively held rank equivalent to that
      of a provincial governor.

      Your Humble Servant
      Solveig Throndardottir
      Amateur Scholar

      +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
      | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS, Fleur |
      | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
      | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:Solveig@... |
      +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
      | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
      | the trash by my email filters. |
      +----------------------------------------------------------------------+


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Anthony Bryant
      ... Again.... If you want to take that view, fine. But clerical types do NOT count as typical people in terms of dress or style when they are in their outfits.
      Message 2 of 30 , Sep 7, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Solveig Throndardottir wrote:

        > Baron Edward!
        >
        > Greetings from Solveig!
        >
        > > I think you're conflating the issue of specialized uniforms (e.g.,
        > > clerical "work clothes") with what the NORMAL person wore.
        >
        > As you well know, the Japanese love uniforms. So, uniforms were hardly
        > unique to the clergy. At least one of the illustrations at the costume
        > museum which I referenced would be better characterized as "ceremonial
        > clothing" than "work clothes". Regardless, as I already mentioned to
        > the unwitting and unfortunate instigator of this recent exchange
        > between us, I was simply responding to what was phrased as a blanket
        > statement. As for the high ranking clerics in question, they were most
        > definitely "dignified men". If anything, high ranking clerics were
        > frequently satirized for their attachment to splendid robes. As for the
        > political status of some of these clerics, I refer you to "Heavenly
        > Warriors" and other similar books about the Kamakura and Muromachi
        > periods. Some of these clerics effectively held rank equivalent to that
        > of a provincial governor.
        >
        Again....

        If you want to take that view, fine. But clerical types do NOT count as
        typical people in terms of dress or style when they are in their outfits.

        Normal people -- samurai, peasants, artisans, merchants, what have you
        -- did NOT as a rule go about without some semblance of pants until the
        early Edo or REALLY REALLY REALLY late in period. It. Was. Just. Not. Done.


        Effingham
      • Otagiri Tatsuzou
        ... Not. Done. ... Why did they stop wearing pants? Otagiri
        Message 3 of 30 , Sep 7, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          > Normal people -- samurai, peasants, artisans, merchants, what have you
          > -- did NOT as a rule go about without some semblance of pants until the
          > early Edo or REALLY REALLY REALLY late in period. It. Was. Just.
          Not. Done.
          >
          >


          Why did they stop wearing pants?


          Otagiri
        • Anthony Bryant
          ... Why did we stop wearing hats? Why did we stop dressing up to do anything? You didn t see people who weren t working the land wearing T-shirts in public
          Message 4 of 30 , Sep 7, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Otagiri Tatsuzou wrote:

            > Why did they stop wearing pants?


            Why did we stop wearing hats? Why did we stop "dressing up" to do
            anything? You didn't see people who weren't working the land wearing
            T-shirts in public in the 1940s and 1950s unless they were
            counter-culture elements (e.g., James Dean). Jeans were work clothes.
            Button down dress shirts (ties, jackets) were the social norm. Nowadays,
            we go to the theatre in jeans and a t-shirt and flip-flops. I've seen
            people on campus wearing what I would swear to have been pajamas.

            It's a sign of the coursening of society, IMHO. Remember "Leave it to
            Beaver" where the June Cleaver vaccuumed and cooked in a dress and
            pearls, and Ward wore a tie and jacket at his own dinner table? That
            really was a societal norm. It certainly was in my home.

            Today, I walk around the house in sweatpants and a T-shirt, and it would
            kill my dad to have seen it. Those clothes, in his opinion, belong on
            the sports field or field house, not in public or as "daywear."


            Effingham
          • Ii Saburou Katsumori (Joshua B.)
            ... I m not certain we can say why, for certain, other than that fashion changed. I would hazard a guess that walking around in simply a kosode was just a way
            Message 5 of 30 , Sep 7, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              On 9/7/05, Otagiri Tatsuzou <ronbroberg@...> wrote:
              >
              > > Normal people -- samurai, peasants, artisans, merchants, what have you
              > > -- did NOT as a rule go about without some semblance of pants until the
              > > early Edo or REALLY REALLY REALLY late in period. It. Was. Just.
              > Not. Done.
              > >
              > >
              >
              >
              > Why did they stop wearing pants?
              >
              >
              > Otagiri

              I'm not certain we can say why, for certain, other than that fashion
              changed.
              I would hazard a guess that walking around in simply a kosode was just a
              way of 'bumming around' the house. It may have also been something that
              working stiffs did--especially if you are working in summer on a hot day. In
              some later Edo Period woodblock prints I also notice what appears to be
              another, fancy 'modesty' garment (looks like the front flap of a fundoshi
              that has been elaborately embroidered and tasseled, in one
              instance)--possibly the response to wearing no pants.
              I get the impression from the paintings that this is often similar to
              rolling down one's chausses in a European setting.
              In "Arrival of the 'Southern Barbarians'" (Anonymous, c. 1600, Leonard C.
              Hann Jr. Fund 1960.193.1-2) there is a mix of laymen with hakama and
              without. I'd say that hakama are definitely in the majority (well, the
              nanban's pantaloons are, but that's a different matter). In some instances,
              it may just be that the hakama are the same color as the kosode--it is hard
              to make out. Only one layman, that I can clearly make out definitely is not
              wearing hakama. I can't be sure if it is a bushi or a merchant.
              By the first half of the 17th century we have Kano Einou's "Views of Lake
              Biwa" (J. H. Wade Fund 1983.19.1-2). It shows several laymen without hakama,
              although they seem to often have kyahan (leg wraps) on.
              In the "Hikone Screen" (c. 1630-1645, Hikone Castle Museum, Shiga
              Prefecture) we see a samurai dandy leaning on his sword (like a cane), hips
              out, and relaxed, with what appears to be just a couple of layers of kosode.
              It is hard to tell, but others in the seen are wearing hakama, and the
              person in question appears to be quite young. Probably a youth, flirting
              witha couple of ladies.
              In "Ammusements in a Mansion" (c. 1640s, Private Collection), many of the
              men are shown in just kosode style garments--in fact, the style of dress
              between men and women is extremely unisex, including the medium-width obi.
              Some older gentlemen are wearing pants, as are many of the samurai about to
              enter, although two bushi appear to be wearing furisode--the long sleeved
              kosode often worn by unmarried women, modernly. The entire scene, I should
              note, seems to have something sexual, and in parts possibly homoerotic, to
              it.
              Add to this the ages old tradition of 'putting on the trousers' as a
              special day in a young boy's progression towards manhood, and the lack of
              hakama for many working classes, leads me to put forward the following
              hypothesis:
              As the lower classes were able to attain rank, they brought their clothes
              with them. Notice that this happened when the bushi first rose to
              prominence, with the hitatare becoming a rich garment. Likewise, the doubuku
              appears to have possibly come from the merchant class.
              Perhaps the lower ranks of the samurai--drawn from provincial farmer-bushi
              and ashigaru--brought this working style with them? On top of that, it seems
              that you see pictures of this style in brothels and 'the floating world',
              especially among youths. It definitely seems to emphasize the effeminate
              qualities. It may have been the equivalent of wearing your pants so low that
              your underwear is seen--only in this case, there are no pants at all.
              Just some thoughts.
              It should be noted that whenever I saw people dressed up for formal
              affairs, they still had hakama, and hakama are seen more often than not, so
              it definitely seems to be the more formal and respected outfit.
              -Ii
              -Ii


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Solveig Throndardottir
              Otagiri dono! Greetings from Solvieg! ... Why did ties become less popular in North America? Basically, there was a bit of a trend towards simplification in
              Message 6 of 30 , Sep 7, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Otagiri dono!

                Greetings from Solvieg!

                > Why did they stop wearing pants?

                Why did ties become less popular in North America? Basically, there was
                a bit of a trend towards simplification in costume over the centuries
                in Japan. Further, as Baron Edward pointed out in one of his Pennsic
                classes, lower classes tended to adopt the leisure wear of the upper
                classes as their own formal wear.

                Your Humble Servant
                Solveig Throndardottir
                Amateur Scholar

                +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS, Fleur |
                | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
                | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:Solveig@... |
                +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
                | the trash by my email filters. |
                +----------------------------------------------------------------------+


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Solveig Throndardottir
                Baron Edward! Greetings from Solveig! June Cleaver wearing pearls while vacuming was a bit over the top even for the mid-50 s. My mother wore a house dress
                Message 7 of 30 , Sep 7, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Baron Edward!

                  Greetings from Solveig! June Cleaver wearing pearls while vacuming was
                  a bit over the top even for the mid-50's. My mother wore a "house
                  dress" which you would never ever see June Cleaver wear while vacuming
                  and did not generally wear pearls while doing housework. Also, I do not
                  recall my father wearing a jacket while we ate dinner although he did
                  wear one to work. The big dress code revolution was pretty pervasive in
                  the 60's. Men started wearing coloured shirts and even short sleaved
                  shirts to work.

                  As for today, I have seen people wearing both nightwear and underwear
                  as outerwear on campus. I was very startled by the idea of people
                  wandering around their own houses naked until fairly recently.

                  All of that said, the notion that you do dress properly for things was
                  well enough ingrained in my psyche that after summoning the ambulance
                  which was soon to transport me unconscious to the hospital, I decided
                  that I needed to change from night clothes into outside clothes. This
                  led to rather unfortunate results when the rescue squad showed up.

                  > Jeans were work clothes.

                  Jeans were rather specialized work clothes or sportwear. Most workers
                  wore rather different clothing. People were wearing jeans as sportswear
                  by the 1940's or earlier. Actually one of the things that changed is
                  the general disappearance of uniforms. In the days of June Cleaver,
                  service station attendants, milk truck drivers, railroad engineers,
                  painters, and many other occupations had distinctive uniforms.

                  Your Humble Servant
                  Solveig Throndardottir
                  Amateur Scholar

                  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                  | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS, Fleur |
                  | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
                  | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:Solveig@... |
                  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                  | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
                  | the trash by my email filters. |
                  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • James Eckman
                  ... People dress up, just not the way your re used to. ... The concept of dress flip-flops seems like an oxymoron, but I ve heard serious discussions about it,
                  Message 8 of 30 , Sep 8, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > From: Anthony Bryant <anthony_bryant@...>
                    >
                    >
                    > From: Anthony Bryant <anthony_bryant@...>
                    >
                    >
                    >Why did we stop wearing hats? Why did we stop "dressing up" to do
                    >anything?
                    >
                    People dress up, just not the way your're used to.

                    >You didn't see people who weren't working the land wearing
                    >T-shirts in public in the 1940s and 1950s unless they were
                    >counter-culture elements (e.g., James Dean). Jeans were work clothes.
                    >Button down dress shirts (ties, jackets) were the social norm. Nowadays,
                    >we go to the theatre in jeans and a t-shirt and flip-flops. I've seen
                    >people on campus wearing what I would swear to have been pajamas.
                    >
                    >
                    The concept of dress flip-flops seems like an oxymoron, but I've heard
                    serious discussions about it, and of course there's always the dress
                    t-shirt, the one with the pocket ;)

                    >It's a sign of the coursening of society, IMHO.
                    >
                    ROTFL

                    >Remember "Leave it to
                    >Beaver" where the June Cleaver vaccuumed and cooked in a dress and
                    >pearls, and Ward wore a tie and jacket at his own dinner table? That
                    >really was a societal norm. It certainly was in my home.
                    >
                    >
                    Most people in the 60's and 70's drank more than they do nowadays, 100
                    years ago a bottle a day man was not an uncommon person. Is this part of
                    the refinement we are missing along with lynchings, women forced to stay
                    home, etc? Fashion is one of those transient things and really doesn't
                    have any real long term impact on society. Also the days of no SCA :(
                    Give me the good new days.

                    >Today, I walk around the house in sweatpants and a T-shirt, and it would
                    >kill my dad to have seen it. Those clothes, in his opinion, belong on
                    >the sports field or field house, not in public or as "daywear."
                    >
                    >
                    Lucky I had counter culture parents then...

                    > From: Solveig Throndardottir <nostrand@...>
                    >
                    >
                    >Why did ties become less popular in North America?
                    >
                    Because they are uncomfortable, dangerous and a pain in the ass? Just
                    the opinion of the fashion god of the nerds.

                    >Basically, there was
                    >a bit of a trend towards simplification in costume over the centuries
                    >in Japan. Further, as Baron Edward pointed out in one of his Pennsic
                    >classes, lower classes tended to adopt the leisure wear of the upper
                    >classes as their own formal wear.
                    >
                    >
                    Tuxedos come to mind.

                    >As for today, I have seen people wearing both nightwear and underwear
                    >as outerwear on campus. I was very startled by the idea of people
                    >wandering around their own houses naked until fairly recently.
                    >
                    >
                    Some of our Scandinavian neighbors were doing that in the late 50's,
                    welcome to the land of the Puritans.

                    Jim Eckman
                  • Solveig Throndardottir
                    Noble Cousin! Greetings from Solveig! ... I was once told that in the 19th century, the floor of the U.S. Senate was generously equipped with a punch bowl full
                    Message 9 of 30 , Sep 8, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Noble Cousin!

                      Greetings from Solveig!

                      > Most people in the 60's and 70's drank more than they do nowadays, 100
                      > years ago a bottle a day man was not an uncommon person. Is this part
                      > of
                      > the refinement we are missing along with lynchings, women forced to
                      > stay
                      > home, etc? Fashion is one of those transient things and really doesn't
                      > have any real long term impact on society. Also the days of no SCA :(
                      > Give me the good new days.

                      I was once told that in the 19th century, the floor of the U.S. Senate
                      was generously equipped with a punch bowl full of whisky. At one time,
                      spittoons were common. Some nineteenth judges and other lawmen had the
                      habit of taking trophies from those apprehended in some case making
                      items of apparel or satchels out of body parts taken from those
                      executed. (This I have seen in a museum.) In nineteenth century
                      Montana, one town decided to steal the county seat from another town.
                      They succeeded, and the original county seat is now a ghost town. Then
                      again, there were those lovely battles between the Pinkertons and all
                      sorts of other groups including, in at least one incident in Ohio if I
                      recall correctly, the local constabulary.

                      > Some of our Scandinavian neighbors were doing that in the late 50's,
                      > welcome to the land of the Puritans.

                      I know not how reliable this story of the Puritans is, but I was once
                      told that the Puritans were tossed out of England for being obnoxious
                      in a variety of ways including apparently demonstrating their supposed
                      purity by parading around London in the buff. One thing that is pretty
                      certain about New England colonists is that they did not all live in
                      white houses. There are amusing cases of the boards of "historical"
                      societies in Lexington and Concord forbidding their owners from
                      painting their houses the colours which they were actually painted at
                      the time of the revolution instead mandating that they must be painted
                      "colonial white".

                      Your Humble Servant
                      Solveig Throndardottir
                      Amateur Scholar

                      +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                      | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS, Fleur |
                      | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
                      | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:Solveig@... |
                      +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                      | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
                      | the trash by my email filters. |
                      +----------------------------------------------------------------------+


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.