Tat link was uncomfortable!
Posted by P. Bingham on August 27, 1998 at 01:13:12:
In response to Excessive narrowness, written by The Mysterious H.C. on August 26, 1998 at 22:23:20
Yes, when you compare the two, of course the Edwardians have it hands down. I believe the lady meant certain Empire dresses and that not being the overall norm, and I've seen some early ones narrow enough to be uncomfortable, but not nearly so as much as Edwardian examples. And by uncomfortable, I mean, practical for the leisure classes who are more inclined to be standing or sitting, but not working or otherwise exercising the legs. I believe the Empire epoch was more interested in getting lighter and drapier than narrower, as they were trying to actually copy a certain look they believed to be Grecian. Once that look appeared to be achieved, the dresses gradually widened again. But don't you think that, for these women at that time, that the look was rather excessively narrow? I mean, compared to what they had been used to in the past. I can't imagine the older ladies at that time allowing their daughter's dresses to come any closer to the body than it had, considering there was so comparitively little between the limbs and the dress. And the dress being so thin itself. And so, if you look at it that way, the dress got as narrow as it could possibly get. For the Empire-type dress that is. Edwardians had more room to come in and there was still much between they body and the dress to hide the shape of the legs, etc.
- more thoughts on narrowness... P. Bingham 15:37:29 8/27/98
(0)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.
