Hi folks... good discussion here... thanks, > Just how many extant garments do we have to make that assumption on? I > > would personally think that gores varied ... some pointy, some not. > > I didn't say "no gores in the 13th century are sharp." I said it's a > mistake > to assume, from the evidence we have, that sharpness of gores was > considered an important workmanship issue, or that medieval methods would, > if properly done, necessarily produce sharp gores.
Excellent point - and one on which many re-creators, re-enactors get stuck. It's a point where the modern aesthetic conflicts with the medieval evidence. but I haven't seen evidence that they had any motivation to do this. Let me look through my resources... it'll be an interesting thing to go look for. One area that is a bit later than medieval is the Tudor and Elizabethan shirt, in these we tend to see very precise stitching and setting in of gores and godets. My point is this: <snip> hallelujah! Yes... it is true that many people assume that a flat or even tucked gore is wrong. And it is true that there are only a few of us out there that teach this alternative to the masses, but as you know education is a process... and I have faith that one day the balance will tip so that the "common wisdom" comes more in line with actual evidence. Until then, we keep teaching. But we have absolutely no reason to think that flat, sharp gore points were > valued, and what > little data we have seems to suggest otherwise. This I would point out is arguable, mainly because we do have so little data to work with. We do know that longevity and wearability would be valued... so if someone was to use a non-flat topped gore, it would be to their benefit, and help the life of the garment to make that insertion to the best of their ability. but I typically hear the "razor-sharp gore point" presented as a quality of > accurate or well-made garb, Well, it is a quality of well made clothing. If that is what you are going for. As to accuracy, I think we have a new question to investigate, just what type of gore/godet was used when? I wouldn't be surprised, for instance, to find out that some judges at SCA > costume competitions would grade people down for gores with rounded tops or > slight pleats, under the assumption that it's badworkmanship. I agree with you, and again that would be the triumph of the modern aesthetic over the actual. But it could also be for a lack of knowledge... so we have another place to educate. Now this crosses over into a far broader topic... one that I've been starting to address at my lectures. The battle between the modern aesthetic and period construction. It's been an interesting area of research. > "this is good sewing technique" without realizing that the garments *of > the period they're teaching* show no evidence of those methods (e.g. > gathered sleeve caps, French seam finishing, stay-stitching, facings, > pattern matching -- and other techniques that were valued in some periods > but not in others). In this instance, and in many others, ISTM that if you approach the > construction of a garment using the materials and techniques available to > the person of the period you're reconstructing and consistent with the known > evidence, you're likely to come to different conclusions about what > makes sense and what works well than you would if you use modern > techniques and materials. I'll take this one step further. Working with accurate methods and materials does indeed give you a better understanding of the process. I highly recommend it. BUT you also need to approach the process with an open mind and without preconceptions. For example with needle and thread I can produce "sharp" gores and I have also produced rounded gores (a chemise) and Flat topped gores (the infamous Kielbasa dress), and pleated gores (a different chemise). It's not only about familiarity with the media, but working towards mastery. On that line, I've been thinking about the small pleat in the top of the St. > Louis shirt gore. There's no question that the shirt is well-made by a > person highly skilled at sewing, so I would assume the pleat is intentional. > I wonder if that slight pleating would make the gore wear better and work > better, because it would allow you to spread the body of the shirt a little > wider before encountering resistance at the stress point. If the gore is > perfectly flat, you can't open the angle of the slash quite as far (unless > you make the bottom of the gore correspondingly wider). With a flat gore, if you need to allow for a sizable amount expansion over a > short vertical distance from waist to hip, you need to make a fairly wide > angle, which commits you to a certain degree of width at the bottom. Making > the top of the gore a little flatter and wider, and taking up that excess > width in a small pleat, lets you get the sides of the finished gore further > apart in those top few inches without as much stress, and without requiring > more width at the bottom. > > Something else to try in an experiment... Interesting thinking. I'll be interested to see the findings from your experiments. Please do let us know. Meanwhile I'll do a bit of looking into the gore/godet timeline. -- Mari / Bridgette _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
