Exquisite Creations. Everyday Romanticism. Timeless elegance. The Embodiment of the Arts & Crafts.
19 June 2008
Going Pear-Shaped
I am making a sloper for a dear friend of mine, for some yummy scrummy 1920s garments. Among the questions I have asked (after securing measurements in 72 different places) are the following, which she probably has never considered before (most people wearing RTW and taking what they get):
1) Ease -There is, now, at least 2" of 'ease' in patterns, if not more. This is too much for my taste (the vintage Laura Ashley I am wearing at the mo has 1" and that's plenty). How much ease do you like in your clothing?
2) Armscyes (holes) -they are cut very big now (I liked Tom Wolfe's comment that on mens' suits they were the size of the Holland Tunnel!)I like a smaller armscye for ease of movement and line (everything before about 1968 had smaller armscyes.) What do you prefer? (NB, if they are too big, they restrict arm movement, unless the garment is VERY loose-fitting.)
3) Shoulder pads -From the 1940s to now, I hate them, and remove them from patterns or garments (where possible). Do you like them? If so, what size?
4) Fastenings -personally, I HATE zippers, and prefer buttons, hooks and eyes, snaps, or ties. How do you feel about them? If you like them where do you prefer them - back or side?
Of buttoning garments - almost any back-fastening garment can be changed to fasten
in the front, side front or shoulder/side. Do you like back buttoning things? If you like back buttoning things and they are a pain, a zip or hooks or snaps can be put in the side (the LA I am wearing right now has this.)
Because I also have some - ahem - middle aged figure changes, I am making a new sloper for myself. Some problems remain: I have a 'classic British figure' and have always been short-waisted (2 full inches from commercial patterns and RTW!) and had a short waist to full hip ratio; I have always had narrower shoulders and a smaller upper chest than patterns and RTW. But now everything sits (or falls) differently, and unless I wear my half-boned corset, I am hopelessly squashy, which I hate. Ah Collagen! No amount of exercise will bring that back.... But I digress.
Anyway, in remeasuring self, I have come to the unfortunate conclusion that I am pear-shaped. Now, when I weighted 105 pounds this was not noticeable. 30 years and pounds and three children later, it is. 'Hourglass' I can deal with. 'Edwardian' is preferable. But 'pear-shaped' has terrible connotations; it means something really rather hopelessly bad across the Pond in Blighty. I am not 'zaftig' and probaby never will be, but my ancestors (Scots-Irish and 'five-feet tall' Welsh) are showing. If I could I would simply wear period clothing, which solves most of these problems, but I have to function in the workaday world. I can get away with 1920s-40s (and do) but by 'period' I mean anything before that.
I realised, in writing the questions to my friend, that all of my clothing preferences come from period clothing. All of them. I suppose that could be charming, but it certainly makes me an odd duck.
Nothing else to do but waddle along, pear-shaped and glory in being a femme Celtic lass.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment