The Tudor Tailor - a review
Dec. 23rd, 2006 05:45 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wendyzskiI thought that I was the only costumer I know who DIDN'T have a copy of this, but apparently not. So since two people so far have asked for a review, .
As a historical overview it's nifty - especially in the area of shirts and men's clothing. It incorporates some new data from items found on the Mary Rose and a from wills in Essex that mentioned items of clothing. The info on women's garments is a little less comprehensive - the authors admit that there is a fair amount of guesswork involved as there are very few surviving examples and portraits are of limited use. The chapter on materials is esepcially fascinating, and includes a table of fabric definitions and an extremely useful photo of the range of colors available from natural dyes of the period.
As a guide to the sewist, it's a bit less user-friendly. There are gridded patterns and instructions, but no in-progress photos or drawings. A fairly high level of sewing skill is assumed. A line of patterns is now available separately, but for some of the garments there are easier-to-follow instructions available elsewhere online - Drea Leed's website for example.
In short - if someone is enough of a costume geek to already own and love either Janet Arnolds Patterns of Fashion and/or Jean Hunnisett's Theatrical Costume for Stage and Screen, they will adore this book. (I spent a fair amount of time going "ooh - THAT's how that works!") If someone is a little less experienced with historical clothing, they will either be wonderfully inspired or woefully intimidated.
I am personally finding it helpful in rooting out some of the lingering assumptions of renaissance-faire costuming that I have been sewing for 20 years. While I may still make and wear separate bodices and skirts with full-sleeved chemises with drawstring necklines, I will now freely admit that they are not likely to be historically accurate and can tell people what kinds of garments are more likely to be.
As a historical overview it's nifty - especially in the area of shirts and men's clothing. It incorporates some new data from items found on the Mary Rose and a from wills in Essex that mentioned items of clothing. The info on women's garments is a little less comprehensive - the authors admit that there is a fair amount of guesswork involved as there are very few surviving examples and portraits are of limited use. The chapter on materials is esepcially fascinating, and includes a table of fabric definitions and an extremely useful photo of the range of colors available from natural dyes of the period.
As a guide to the sewist, it's a bit less user-friendly. There are gridded patterns and instructions, but no in-progress photos or drawings. A fairly high level of sewing skill is assumed. A line of patterns is now available separately, but for some of the garments there are easier-to-follow instructions available elsewhere online - Drea Leed's website for example.
In short - if someone is enough of a costume geek to already own and love either Janet Arnolds Patterns of Fashion and/or Jean Hunnisett's Theatrical Costume for Stage and Screen, they will adore this book. (I spent a fair amount of time going "ooh - THAT's how that works!") If someone is a little less experienced with historical clothing, they will either be wonderfully inspired or woefully intimidated.
I am personally finding it helpful in rooting out some of the lingering assumptions of renaissance-faire costuming that I have been sewing for 20 years. While I may still make and wear separate bodices and skirts with full-sleeved chemises with drawstring necklines, I will now freely admit that they are not likely to be historically accurate and can tell people what kinds of garments are more likely to be.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 01:21 am (UTC)eebil!!
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 01:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 03:21 am (UTC)M
A
O
it's so true.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 03:40 am (UTC)*blink*blink*
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 04:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 05:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 03:35 pm (UTC)