I've always been obsessed with Eleanor of Aquitaine, played her in The Lion in Winter, etc. She had something like 10 or 12 children (in the mid to late 1100's). I can't help but think about the gyno-implications of that. Poor families tended to have even more children! My older sister tore from hole to hole during her first child's birth - what the HELL did women back then do? Were they stitched? If they didn't necessarily "tear" would the skin heal or would they have vaginas that behaved more like purses? I know it's a morbid thing to think about, but I can't help it!
I am a costume designer and this is 100% true, especially for film, I imagine, where you are inches away and every stitch counts. Fabrics have changed so much...even in the last century. 1920's vintage silk velvet is completely unlike any silk velvet you can buy now. They just literally don't make it like that anymore.
Also, not to threadjack, but this stock photo is a really interesting example of why I thought Keira was so miscast for The Duchess. Keira is very slender, but compare how her gown fits as opposed to the girl to the right: the 18th-century silhouette looks a little awkward on her lean frame and much nicer on the softer girl.
Keira should stick to the 1860's-80's, 1920's, and 1930's. They're good for willowy types. Her 1790's contemporaries would sneer at her.
I love period costuming; everyone looks so elegant and sexy, even the peasants in their artfully torn rags. But no matter how gorgeous the people look, I can never really enjoy the love scenes in period/Elizabethan movies because I always imagine how bad they must smell. Yes, Joseph Fiennes, you're so yummy as Shakespeare in your collar ruff...but it's been four months since you last bathed, so why don't you jump in the Thames with some lye soap and then we'll talk. Never mind how gross the Thames was back then.
Huh. I always liked the BBC Pride and Prejudice because the clothing was so outrageously ugly. i just thought it seemed realistic, because the Bennetts were clearly not of means, and so how could they afford beautiful clothing?
I love Deadwood, and I heard on a DVD commentary that they didn't allow the women on the show to shave, because they didn't.
@HPgirl: The Bennets are of means. Not compared to Bingley or Darcy, but they're solidly upper middle class. Mr. Bennet is a gentleman and they have a full house of servants. People also spent a larger percentage of their income on clothing in the 19th century, and the Bennets would have have been well-dressed as a social requirement. Now taste is another issue; you can't buy that :)
@small-fox: Thanks for the correction of an often-made assumption. I've tried to explain over and over to passing-by fans of P&P that the Bennetts were NOT poor.
@KittyKittyCat: One of the many reasons I hated the 2005 P&P is it made the Bennets seem so downtrodden and kind of tacky. All of Austen's heroines inhabit a rarefied, privileged world and every main Austen heroine besides Elinor marries a guy who makes *at least* a half mil in modern terms. Not too shabby. They're not rags-to-riches stories, they're "(relative) riches to greater riches thereby evading the very real possibility of ending up destitute and at the mercy of extended family because, as a woman, your financial security was not your own to make" stories.
I wish someone would make me a gown that covered my arms and legs and left my glorious, milky breasts out for display. I'm not going to catch a husband with ten-THOUSAND a year in jeans and a tank top.
@rixatrix: Yes ma'am. I'm also vexed. Your costume sounds like a capital ideal. Mine must have ribbons as the officers will be in town. Whilst your goal is admirable of catching a husband of ten-thousand a year I'm aiming for one with twenty. (Come on Mr. Darcy!)
@pestified wants-a-Bush-tribunal: I think it's hard to tell fact from anti-corset campaigners' exaggerations. They didn't like wicked women tightlacing themselves to abortion and injury in order to appeal to men.
@Hana Maru, used up old slutbag on the pole: I think it's kinda unfair to call it an anachronism offender when the flagrant anachronisms were very deliberate and part of the overall conception of the series!
@clochette: I'm not talking about things happening in the series that didn't happen in history, I'm talking about things like clothing, haircuts, makeup, Kate's peroxide and over-tweezed eyebrows.
@Hana Maru, used up old slutbag on the pole: Yeah, so am I! The costumes, hair and make-up were deliberately made anachronistic - they're meant to be visual gags. For example, in the publicity shots for the show, the image of a hooded Robin is a reference to the current fashion for young 'outlaws' - or yobs, as the Daily Mail might say these days! - to wear their hoods up. 'Hoodies' is a common term used to refer to them in the UK (sorry if this is obvious, I'm not sure where you're writing from), and this is a tongue-in-cheek paralleling of a folk hero criminal with modern-day stereotypes about 'criminal appearances.' There are lots of fun things to look out for: the Sherrif's slippers, references to Westerns, Indiana Jones, Madonna... More widely, the wardrobe dept has obviously had fun throwing references to modern subcultures into the mix, such as goth, punk and hippie.
@Hana Maru, used up old slutbag on the pole: It is probably harder to pick up on things like that outside a contemporary British context, so how well the show travels - and ages - is up for debate. But I just think of it as fiction - all of it - and if the plot isn't historically accurate, there's no need for the costumes to be, either! I am usually such a pedant for these things so I totally see where you're coming from, but I suppose I don't even see it as a realistic attempt to create an accurate historical portrayal, so I can let go of my pedantry.
@clochette: I appreciate that it's purposeful; it's just dissonant enough to me that it takes me out of the story, kind of like the Elizabethan dialogue in modern day SoCal from Romeo+Juliet.
From what I know of the Robin Hood legends, there are many versions that don't really line up, and of course there are a lot of patches in our current knowledge of medieval history. Any Robin Hood story is going to have to take liberties, so that's easy for me to accept.
Weirdly enough I find the same is true with hair design. Modern conditioners and hair treatments make trying to get good old fashioned hair styles (even 80's ones) really hard.
@Sunshineyness: You can take classes for retro hair and styles. I did one a few years ago at this place in Chicago and can now finger wave/victory roll/etc like a confident amateur.
@Sunshineyness: Apparently it helps if you follow old-timey hygiene--dirty hair is best. Once you remove the fleas and nits, you can be the Gibson Girl you've always dreamed of.
Alas, movies just use wigmakers. And as far as I can tell, they make hairstyles look much, much more awesome than in photos from back when women folk were compelled to twist their hair into buoyant coifs. Oh fine, men folk too--mutton chops look like a pain in the ass to maintain.
[I just read your post on hair pins and hair collecting below, which was fascinating! I second that you write a book. I just love this stuff.]
@duckwise: That seems to be the consensus on what I've read/been told by older women. Dirty hair is more pliable to hairstyling.
Yeah, I figured on the wig front. It's kind of disapointing. I love John Water's original Hairspray BECAUSE the hair stylist actually used Rikki Lake's real hair and didn't go for a wig. (I'm fairly sure most of the hair was natural in that movie and sans wigs other than the obvious/intentional one) And her hair in that movie looked great and totally natural and cool.
Haha, yes, I really should one day. I love the social history of how women did their hair, makeup, and fashion in different times and regions. It's fascinating to see how these changes intersected with cultural changes at large.
@duckwise: Yea and most of the styles are wet-set or need to dry overnight. Dryers weren't widely used until the '60s. The woman who taught the class had also helped with the hair on Public Enemies (which was filming in Chicago then), and just imagining the sheer amount of time they spent doing finger waves on extras made me a bit faint.
I was in a vintage clothing store recently, and this beautiful peach silk negligee from the 1920s was the softest thing I have ever felt in my life !! I had to ask about it, and the lady said that silk used to be made much thicker than it is now and was therefore much more valuable and rare...
Edited by JerkoftheMonth is changing her name! at 12/08/09 7:53 PM
JerkoftheMonth is changing her name! was starred
JerkoftheMonth is changing her name! was unstarred
@JerkoftheMonth: It seems like there have been an awful lot of posts today about vintage clothing shops and I am absolutely dyiiiiing for my finals to be over so I can go home and hit up my local spot. A nice little shopping trip would be so lovely, and guilt-free, too, since I finished my Christmas shopping early this year and you can get so much more for your money at a vintage shop, both quality and quantity-wise.
@Nun Shall Pass: Oh, unfortunately this particular shop is not in my price range. I just go in to fondle the fabric until they start to give me the stink-eye. I think the negligee was 140 euros.
@Nun Shall Pass: Best find I have had in the vintage department was not in a store.
We have a lot of old Victorian buildings here (Oil Boom did my area well), and the ones that are still standing were usually fairly well to do families. A lot of times when houses go on the market or when someone dies, instead of sorting though the masses of things in the nooks and crannies they just sell in lots.
Best finds: A whole box full of objects from the 1900s, 1910s, and 1920s that no one had paid attention to because at the top of the boz\x were what looked like scraps. Turned out to be a set of half pinned together leg-o-Mutton Sleeves in a thick black velvet (think wealthy widow)! Also in the box were a couple of silk blouses that were late 1910s, a pair of (absurdly tiny) white kidskin boots, some sadly damaged beyond repair gloves to match the boots, and Jewelry from the 1920s.
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs. Sarah.of.a.Lesser.Hobbit): @JerkoftheMonth: It wasn't the greatest movie in the world, but did you see Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day? The fabrics, silks and satins, were to die. Slash dye.
@Nico Coer: Wowww, excellent find! I've never gotten THAT lucky with clothes that old but my mom did some modeling back in her day so I'm fortunate to have a small collection of really nice stuff from the 70's an 80's. It's also really convenient that I'm basically her clone ^_^
@JerkoftheMonth: I wore my mother's wedding dress when I got married. 1956 vintage peau de soie silk that is the stuff that dreams are made of. We reworked the bodice which was a bit tricky trying to match it, eventually we did a lace overlay and I couldn't have asked for anything better the silk was that heavy and beautiful. Gorgeous stuff.
@AndPreciousLittleofThat: I wore my mother's going away outfit to my folk's 25th anniversary party. I even fit into her shoes. This great brown heather 50's wool suit, with the most fantastic pumps ever! I loved it and Mom got a kick out of seeing me wear it.
Your grandmother sounds like the bomb! I had one of those, damn I miss her.
@JerkoftheMonth:
Yes! Why dont they have all have mouths from the Big British Book of Smiles?
Also, did they have bobby pins in the 17th century? How did they get such big elaborate hairdos to stay without a litre of hairspray?
@JerkoftheMonth: There was a BBC miniseries (I think) called Lost in Austen (I Netflixed it), and this modern girl gets mixed up in the Bennett's household. I just remember there was a scene where one girl shows her where she can brush her teeth, with a twig and some powder, and it made me laugh. We've come a long way.
Also, did they remove hair? Because my mustache would quickly have disqualified me from a husband back then.
@rixatrix: The Ancient Egyptians removed body hair. So, even if it wasn't the custom to remove hair in Austen's time, that technology was plausibly available to humanity.
Yes, there were many hair pins of different sizes readily available either plain or extravagantly adorned. Depending on how much money you had. Like with anything else in any period, the more money you had the better your hair was dressed. If you had money you probably had a maid to do your hair every morning and most lady maids were highly sought after for their ability to do hair. If you didn't have a maid you probably got your sister or mother to do your hair when it needed to be really nice and made do by themselves on a day to day basis. (Much like women of today)
Also, hair wasn't the same consistency as it is now. Modern shampoo and conditioners have made hair more soft and supple. A woman's hair in that time period would have been naturally more coarse and more malleable. (And more frizzy. Movies never get the frizz thing right)
Also, fun fact, women of more modest means frequently collected their own hair from their combs and often made hair pieces out of them to help fill in their elaborate styles when they weren't big enough for their taste. (Women with money just bought it or wigs) And, yes, many different greases, elixirs, and more natural methods were used to give hair shine in all periods, some of which are still used today.
Women were doing crazy shit with their hair looooong before hair dryers, hair sprays, curling irons, or any modern hair instruments were invented.
@Sunshineyness: That's right; there are a couple of references even in the Little House books to switches. Laura embroiders a "hair receiver" for Ma one Christmas, out of perforated cardboard, for Ma to save hair combings for a switch she was making. And when Laura, Almanzo, and Mary Power were out riding in the buggy one Sunday with Cap Garland, Cap was pulling out Mary's hairpins and Mary was desperate to have him stop so that he wouldn't know--apparently only Laura knew--that Mary wore a switch. It must have been a point of privacy, the way it is now for some women who wear wigs out of necessity. Seeing a woman without her hair would be a great intimacy.
@Sunshineyness: You mentioned the frizz, it is particularly noticeable if you look at early publicity photos of Ziegfeld girls. The girls' hair might be waist length, but set very crisply around the face -and the hair cascading down the back having a case of frizz no self-respecting 21st century girl would leave the house with.
I love period dress, but I am forever grateful that I live in a time where I don't have to wear several unwashed layers of heavy fabric and underwear that's trying to kill me.
I'm in deep awe of the spinning/weaving process and how long it took to make dresses and other clothing we take for granted back in the day.
12/09/09
12/09/09
Also, not to threadjack, but this stock photo is a really interesting example of why I thought Keira was so miscast for The Duchess. Keira is very slender, but compare how her gown fits as opposed to the girl to the right: the 18th-century silhouette looks a little awkward on her lean frame and much nicer on the softer girl.
Keira should stick to the 1860's-80's, 1920's, and 1930's. They're good for willowy types. Her 1790's contemporaries would sneer at her.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
I love Deadwood, and I heard on a DVD commentary that they didn't allow the women on the show to shave, because they didn't.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/09/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
(rixatrix: hearted)
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/08/09
Just don't burn them. It's not pretty at all.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
If that's historically inaccurate, I don't want to be accurate!
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
From what I know of the Robin Hood legends, there are many versions that don't really line up, and of course there are a lot of patches in our current knowledge of medieval history. Any Robin Hood story is going to have to take liberties, so that's easy for me to accept.
12/10/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
Alas, movies just use wigmakers. And as far as I can tell, they make hairstyles look much, much more awesome than in photos from back when women folk were compelled to twist their hair into buoyant coifs. Oh fine, men folk too--mutton chops look like a pain in the ass to maintain.
[I just read your post on hair pins and hair collecting below, which was fascinating! I second that you write a book. I just love this stuff.]
12/08/09
Yeah, I figured on the wig front. It's kind of disapointing. I love John Water's original Hairspray BECAUSE the hair stylist actually used Rikki Lake's real hair and didn't go for a wig. (I'm fairly sure most of the hair was natural in that movie and sans wigs other than the obvious/intentional one) And her hair in that movie looked great and totally natural and cool.
Haha, yes, I really should one day. I love the social history of how women did their hair, makeup, and fashion in different times and regions. It's fascinating to see how these changes intersected with cultural changes at large.
12/08/09
12/09/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
Oh, I will be dreaming of that silk tonight...
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
Also, I love your name!
12/08/09
And thank you! It took me ages to come up with it, sadly enough.
12/08/09
We have a lot of old Victorian buildings here (Oil Boom did my area well), and the ones that are still standing were usually fairly well to do families. A lot of times when houses go on the market or when someone dies, instead of sorting though the masses of things in the nooks and crannies they just sell in lots.
Best finds: A whole box full of objects from the 1900s, 1910s, and 1920s that no one had paid attention to because at the top of the boz\x were what looked like scraps. Turned out to be a set of half pinned together leg-o-Mutton Sleeves in a thick black velvet (think wealthy widow)! Also in the box were a couple of silk blouses that were late 1910s, a pair of (absurdly tiny) white kidskin boots, some sadly damaged beyond repair gloves to match the boots, and Jewelry from the 1920s.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
In addition, my grandmother is the coolest person to ever walk this planet.
12/09/09
Your grandmother sounds like the bomb! I had one of those, damn I miss her.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
Yes! Why dont they have all have mouths from the Big British Book of Smiles?
Also, did they have bobby pins in the 17th century? How did they get such big elaborate hairdos to stay without a litre of hairspray?
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
Also, did they remove hair? Because my mustache would quickly have disqualified me from a husband back then.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
Yes, there were many hair pins of different sizes readily available either plain or extravagantly adorned. Depending on how much money you had. Like with anything else in any period, the more money you had the better your hair was dressed. If you had money you probably had a maid to do your hair every morning and most lady maids were highly sought after for their ability to do hair. If you didn't have a maid you probably got your sister or mother to do your hair when it needed to be really nice and made do by themselves on a day to day basis. (Much like women of today)
Also, hair wasn't the same consistency as it is now. Modern shampoo and conditioners have made hair more soft and supple. A woman's hair in that time period would have been naturally more coarse and more malleable. (And more frizzy. Movies never get the frizz thing right)
Also, fun fact, women of more modest means frequently collected their own hair from their combs and often made hair pieces out of them to help fill in their elaborate styles when they weren't big enough for their taste. (Women with money just bought it or wigs) And, yes, many different greases, elixirs, and more natural methods were used to give hair shine in all periods, some of which are still used today.
Women were doing crazy shit with their hair looooong before hair dryers, hair sprays, curling irons, or any modern hair instruments were invented.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
I'm in deep awe of the spinning/weaving process and how long it took to make dresses and other clothing we take for granted back in the day.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/09/09
Though clad in unwashed layers, I'm willing to bet you don't smell like a rancid parade float on a daily basis.
Back in Marie Antoinette's time, they just kept perfuming the layers of funk.