Historical or Modern which do you prefer and why?

[Brother Robert of Essex]

   I always though corsets and such were constricting and uncomfortable and women hated them? I guess not?  lol 

   I do wonder how people handle bathroom visits under all those layers of clothing. I mean no wonder the nobles had people helping them get dressed, sheesh.

    I find it frustrating enough to put on a suit and tie , if I had to start with all those layers I'm not sure I could handle it lol.

    Of course I suspect the modern renditions of this garb is probably way more comfortable than what was churned out on the old looms and what not?

[gem]

Of course I suspect the modern renditions of this garb is probably way more comfortable than what was churned out on the old looms and what not?

Probably not!  For one thing, most people couldn't afford more than one full set of clothes (with a few changes of things like smocks and sleeves)--which means they were wearing them day in and day out.  They were probably even more comfortably broken in than your favorite pair of jeans!  Secondly, with only natural fibers to work with, no period tailor ever found himself tempted by poly chenille upholstery fabric , and he had better access to wonderful things like wool damask and silk velvet.  Also, *most* people in Renaissance Europe didn't have to contend with the extremes of weather so many of us see during Fair season.* Lastly, these were the comfortable and familiar clothes of the day, not a costume put on at most 20 times a year.  The mere familiarity of wearing the styles would have bred comfort.

*There are exceptions, of course.  While year-round temps in England generally hovered not too far outside the 50s and 60s, it does get quite hot--90s--in parts of Spain, and Mediterranean Italy probably had its share of warm weather.  Also, we tend to forget about the exploration of the New World that was going on all during the Renaissance--you had the French exploring Kansas, Spaniards in Florida, etc, all of whom had to contend with North American weather while garbed up.

[isabelladangelo]

I have yet to find someone that doesn't at least look okay in H/A garb but there are always plenty of people that just look terrible in modern clothing.  Part of the reason is the unreasonable expectations of constraining the modern body to the modern silhouette with just the use of control top pantyhose and sports bras.    Most women have curves.  Most men are not elongated rectangles either.   The modern silhouette calls for both sexes to be nearly indistinguishable from one another in a waif looking silhouette.  The historical silhouettes changed drastically through out the ages but the feminine and masculine silhouettes were always distinguishable from one another. 
What most women think of when they hear you like dressing up in a corset is "pain".  Thanks to years of the uneducated masses stating that you had to be corseted up to an 18" waist in order to be fashionable (let's forget that Queen Victoria was a 55" or so waist), many people simply immediately think that a corset must be painful.  Trying to re-educate and explain that it was a very select few that dared to even attempt such sizes and only for a very small period in history (late 19th c) gets frustrating to say the least! 
Corsets, as many of us ladies know, are not the least bit painful.  If made correctly to your size, they are 1000% more comfortable than any modern bra.  They keep things in place and you never need worry about your stomach sticking out when you sit down.    They do not constrict as much as they hold and give a proper period silhouette.
For men, most men are aghast at a straight man thinking it's okay to put on a pair of hosen or giggle at the idea of a cod-piece.  Little realize the range of clothing styles (t-tunic and pants?  jacket and liene?  doublet and breeches?) that will fit into anyone's current clothing style.  Like shorts and a t-shirt?  Try the doublet and venetians!  Like pants instead?  Try the brais and tunic for the summer weather. 
The problem involves the lack of proper education in our modern (American) society in which the vast majority of historical information comes not from a history book but from Hollywood.  Given shows like "The Tudors" or a book like "The Other Boleyn Girl" in which only the names (which most people can remember from school) are the same and the information is so drastically incorrect to down right pathetically wrong, it's not hard to see why so many people have this misconstructions not only on clothing but on the Renaissance in general.  The most anyone can do is to re-educate and explain, via portraits, how the clothing was actually worn and how it functioned.

Now in response to Sir Robert:

I always though corsets and such were constricting and uncomfortable and women hated them? I guess not?  lol


As I said above, this is a popular mis-conception based on a very small period of time during the Victorian age by a very small amount of people.  This did NOT happen in any way, shape, or form during the 16th century.  Why make something uncomfortable that you MUST wear all the time every day?  It's simple not logical and, unlike today, our ancestors were very logical people.   
The corset of the 16th c contained, not constricted.  It was meant to give a conical (cone) shape, not an hourglass shape (19th c).   It didn't matter what size you were, it mattered that you had the proper, fashionable shape.  The two are so intertwined in the modern silhouette (waif) that it is hard to understand that there is a clear line between size and shape. 


  I do wonder how people handle bathroom visits under all those layers of clothing. I mean no wonder the nobles had people helping them get dressed, sheesh.
Hardly.  The drawers, even up into the Victorian era, had open crotches to allow bathroom use.   Also, the idea of a fly on Men's garments is nothing new.  The cod piece hid the fly to breeches in the mid 16th c and the fly was buttoned or laced later on.  The only reason the nobles needed help was simply so they did not messy or prick their fingers on the jewels they had on their outfits.  Also, servants were needed to lace them up the back.


    I find it frustrating enough to put on a suit and tie , if I had to start with all those layers I'm not sure I could handle it lol.

The suit and tie come out of the 18th c fashions, not the 16th c fashions.  If you can get your jeans, a t-shirt, and a jacket on, you can wear 16th c fashions.   After all, you are only talking about two layers.  I hope most people wear two layers today!  (Underwear and clothing)

    Of course I suspect the modern renditions of this garb is probably way more comfortable than what was churned out on the old looms and what not?

As Gem stated, nope.   Again, another horrible Hollywood created misconception.  The fabrics even going back to the Vikings were NOT itchy.  There have been silks found from 3000 years ago that are so fine that we can just barely get the same sheerness today on machine.  Our ancestors had smooth linens, soft silks, hemp, and many other fibers that they could weave into any sort of fabric they so chose.  Jacquards, damasks, satins, velvets...all these were well known in the 16th c and earlier.  Fabric pieces that have been found or are still extant show superior craftsmanship and a perfect soft hand.  No one today would find these fabrics the least bit uncomfortable.

[Lady Toadflinger]

I'm with the other ladies, I love to wear my garb, and most of it is comfortable. I hope it is as flattering as I feel it is, too.  I do wear jeans and shirts most of the time, though,as they fit my lifestyle( I live in the country with lots of pets and livestock, and work in a research greenhouse) As far as seeing others in garb, I really enjoy seeing men in garb at Faire, and I love a man in a kilt! ( I even like Utilikilts!) 

[Brother Robert of Essex]

I have yet to find someone that doesn't at least look okay in H/A garb but there are always plenty of people that just look terrible in modern clothing.  Part of the reason is the unreasonable expectations of constraining the modern body to the modern silhouette with just the use of control top pantyhose and sports bras.    Most women have curves.  Most men are not elongated rectangles either.   The modern silhouette calls for both sexes to be nearly indistinguishable from one another in a waif looking silhouette.  The historical silhouettes changed drastically through out the ages but the feminine and masculine silhouettes were always distinguishable from one another. 
What most women think of when they hear you like dressing up in a corset is "pain".  Thanks to years of the uneducated masses stating that you had to be corseted up to an 18" waist in order to be fashionable (let's forget that Queen Victoria was a 55" or so waist), many people simply immediately think that a corset must be painful.  Trying to re-educate and explain that it was a very select few that dared to even attempt such sizes and only for a very small period in history (late 19th c) gets frustrating to say the least! 
Corsets, as many of us ladies know, are not the least bit painful.  If made correctly to your size, they are 1000% more comfortable than any modern bra.  They keep things in place and you never need worry about your stomach sticking out when you sit down.    They do not constrict as much as they hold and give a proper period silhouette.
For men, most men are aghast at a straight man thinking it's okay to put on a pair of hosen or giggle at the idea of a cod-piece.  Little realize the range of clothing styles (t-tunic and pants?  jacket and liene?  doublet and breeches?) that will fit into anyone's current clothing style.  Like shorts and a t-shirt?  Try the doublet and venetians!  Like pants instead?  Try the brais and tunic for the summer weather. 
The problem involves the lack of proper education in our modern (American) society in which the vast majority of historical information comes not from a history book but from Hollywood.  Given shows like "The Tudors" or a book like "The Other Boleyn Girl" in which only the names (which most people can remember from school) are the same and the information is so drastically incorrect to down right pathetically wrong, it's not hard to see why so many people have this misconstructions not only on clothing but on the Renaissance in general.  The most anyone can do is to re-educate and explain, via portraits, how the clothing was actually worn and how it functioned.

Now in response to Sir Robert:

I always though corsets and such were constricting and uncomfortable and women hated them? I guess not?  lol


As I said above, this is a popular mis-conception based on a very small period of time during the Victorian age by a very small amount of people.  This did NOT happen in any way, shape, or form during the 16th century.  Why make something uncomfortable that you MUST wear all the time every day?  It's simple not logical and, unlike today, our ancestors were very logical people.   
The corset of the 16th c contained, not constricted.  It was meant to give a conical (cone) shape, not an hourglass shape (19th c).   It didn't matter what size you were, it mattered that you had the proper, fashionable shape.  The two are so intertwined in the modern silhouette (waif) that it is hard to understand that there is a clear line between size and shape. 


  I do wonder how people handle bathroom visits under all those layers of clothing. I mean no wonder the nobles had people helping them get dressed, sheesh.
Hardly.  The drawers, even up into the Victorian era, had open crotches to allow bathroom use.   Also, the idea of a fly on Men's garments is nothing new.  The cod piece hid the fly to breeches in the mid 16th c and the fly was buttoned or laced later on.  The only reason the nobles needed help was simply so they did not messy or prick their fingers on the jewels they had on their outfits.  Also, servants were needed to lace them up the back.


    I find it frustrating enough to put on a suit and tie , if I had to start with all those layers I'm not sure I could handle it lol.

The suit and tie come out of the 18th c fashions, not the 16th c fashions.  If you can get your jeans, a t-shirt, and a jacket on, you can wear 16th c fashions.   After all, you are only talking about two layers.  I hope most people wear two layers today!  (Underwear and clothing)

    Of course I suspect the modern renditions of this garb is probably way more comfortable than what was churned out on the old looms and what not?

As Gem stated, nope.   Again, another horrible Hollywood created misconception.  The fabrics even going back to the Vikings were NOT itchy.  There have been silks found from 3000 years ago that are so fine that we can just barely get the same sheerness today on machine.  Our ancestors had smooth linens, soft silks, hemp, and many other fibers that they could weave into any sort of fabric they so chose.  Jacquards, damasks, satins, velvets...all these were well known in the 16th c and earlier.  Fabric pieces that have been found or are still extant show superior craftsmanship and a perfect soft hand.  No one today would find these fabrics the least bit uncomfortable.

Wow, very educational thanks! I'm learning a lot about how it REALLY is/was - I'm glad I stopped in here!

[Master James]

I love wearing my garb but it is pretty impractical for day to day here in the modern world unfortunately.  Swords get in the way and walking into an airport carrying one can get you arrested these days!   

So I make a comprimise.  I own a UtiliKilt and wear it darn near everyday I can.  I can't really wear it to work as the boss doesn't look to kindly on it but the minute I get home it goes on!  I love it and prefer it to jeans or shorts.  Gotta get me a few more so I don't wear this one out too quickly!  LOL

[Brother Robert of Essex]

  haha! I thought about a kilt but I don't think I could pull off the accent to go with it.

  Not to mention I probably don't have the legs for it!

[Adriana Rose]

I am on the i would wear a corset every day if I could boat, I have back problems and it makes my back feel fantastic! But seeming how I am a stay at home mom I stick to my comfy cloths. But I do wear some of my garb day to day I love my bloomers and my skirts.
Heck one day on a whim I tightend my Victorian corset till I could not take it any more and I made it to 18 inches granted I could barely breath and had to get help out of the damn thing less than 5 minutes after that but I did it, I will never do it again!

So to stick to the topic I am in the middle of the road on this but I love my garb!

[Randal]

Part of the problem with modern day clothing is that most of us tend to dress like peasants most of the time; jeans and a tee shirt with sneakers. Of course we're going to look better when we dress in garb, unless we're wearing peasant garb, in which case there won't be much change.

As for complaining about the number of layers, let's compare apples to apples here. Consider what a well dressed modern day business man wears: Boxers/Briefs, Undershirt, Long-Sleeved Shirt, Necktie, Trousers, socks, Stylish shoes, Belt, Vest, and Jacket. Now add wallet, watch, PDA/Cell, briefcase, Class Ring, and Wedding Band. Vary the cut of a few of those items for a business woman. Now compare that to the garb of a Pirate Captain, or an English Noble. Not that different, is it?

My avatar picture was taken at TRF during the start of the season while it was hot. I was dressed as lower middle-class, wearing a shirt, pants, socks, shoes, undergarments, a belt, a pouch, and a hat. Exchange the pouch for a wallet and Cell, and you have what I wear pretty much every day. Later on in the season, when it cools, I'll layer on a doublet and possibly a cloak. Of course, IRL, I will have added a sweater and possibly a jacket to my daily wear. Still works out to about the same thing. It's really only when I move up a class that I add more layers.

Just my 2 cents,
Randal

FYI, I love my garb, but it's because I'm also putting on a role when I put on the clothes.

[Lady Briana]

I adore my garb. I, like many others who have posted, am curvy, and my garb is the only clothing I put on and think "I look so good". I bought an Irish Tudor gown this past weekend, and it was instant love. I was sucked in, supported, the skirt hid my legs (one of my *wince* areas confidence wise) and gave me a beautiful figure. And when I'm done being sucked in, there's the romantic, billowy chemise to curl up on the couch in.

[Dev]

I prefer the historical version of femininity rather than the modern.

I've yet to wear a proper dress to a faire, though I may eventually go H/A slavic, but my boyfriend can't figure out why I'll "puppyfluff" at the faire, but he (let alone anyone else) never sees my chest below my shoulders outside of either a faire or his house.

Until the 1800s, mens and womens clothes were more cognates of each other than now - for nobles at least.




Except for fit and a few small alterations, the top halves were very similar - the laced doublet somewhat analogous to a bodice.  Displaying "assets" was more egalitarian - women had corsets, men had codpieces - today, women show everything and men just wear a lot of baggy stuff.

[Cormac]

I enjoy my garb for the faire and it would be just fine in terms of comfort for everyday wear.  For the most part at the faire I wear a kilt, shirt, boots, belt, and sporran.  I think I look pretty sharp.  It's plenty comfortable and on a hot day beats the heck out of pants.  If I have some sort of mental lapse and wear pants they are just as comfortable.  I haven't tried tights yet but may have to give it a go next season.  Not sure the tights would go over too well in the office though.

For both faire and everyday I would prefer natural fibers.  Wool is by far my favorite.  It wicks well and light weight wool is plenty cool in hot weather and heavier weights will handle a pretty good chill.  If it is really nasty cold a heavy felted wool is tough to beat.

If given the choice I would much prefer to see ladies dressed in the historical over modern.  As mentioned by others there is a distinct feminine quality to the historic.  The historic also gives an aire of confidence to most who wear it.  Most modern styles seem to be tailored to a size zero world and that just isn't reality.

I will add that I have a personal preference for ladies that have shape and curves.  The historic flatters and accentuates the female form unlike a majority of the modern styles.

[Dev]

Most modern styles seem to be tailored to a size zero world and that just isn't reality.

I will add that I have a personal preference for ladies that have shape and curves.  The historic flatters and accentuates the female form unlike a majority of the modern styles.

There's the case of custom-tailored vs. mass-produced.  Until very recently, clothes were self- or custom-made, so there wasn't the problem of someone trying to put a size 9 weed puller in a pair of size 0 jeans simply to say they can wear a size 0 (another case of "just because you can doesn't mean you should").  I'm 115 lbs and can't get a size 0 up my LEGS, so that should say something.

If clothes are custom-made, there's not a big ordeal about whether your clothes flatter or not because you don't have to fit into one-size-fits all.  While someone can wear size 0 for vanity, if your bust is 40 you can't just chainge it.

[Lady L]

Please don't throw rocks at me, but I am a Tshirt/sweatshirt and jeans person. I love my faire garb, which I made all of it myself, but I don't want to wear it all day everyday. I don't wear my other good  clothes every day either. No one sees me anyway, so I don't think it really matters what I wear.

[FireFaerie]

I love my garb, and I wish I could wear them all the time! And I will take ANY excuse to wear one of my corsets. Seriously. Party at so-and-so's house? Well, let me just throw on this here corset...

I agree with all the people who said corsets make them feel more feminine. I mean, it's enhancing the feminine shape! And it's like a big long hug. And I never have to worry about muffin-top, lol.