stays and other female costume questions...

[Lily Alexander]

I came across this reference in "Corsets and Crinolines"; Nora Waugh; pg 41. Top of page, first paragraph.

"By the middle of the eighteenth century the technical skill of the staymaker had reached a very high standard. Besides the whalebones inserted in the body of the bodice and the separate center front busc bone, there were now extra shaping bones arranged inside the stays (baleines de dressage); two or more curved pieces, of heavier whalebone, were laid across the top part of the front to give roundness to the bust, and straight pieces across the shoulder blades to keep the back flat. The direction of the boning varied, but it was always laid diagonally on the sides of the front to narrow the body. Throughout the whole period the stays were made either fully boned or half-boned. When fully boned the bones were laid close together and might be as narrow as an eighth of an inch in width. When it is remembered that all the stitching was back-stitched done by hand, and all the whalebone had to be cut in strips-the thickness varying according to its position on the body-one cannot but admire the craftsmanship of these eighteenth -century corsets.

Edited January 10, 2009 by Haunting Lily

[michaelsbagley]

I came across this reference in "Corsets and Crinolines"; Nora Waugh; pg 41. Top of page, first paragraph.

"By the middle of the eighteenth century the technical skill of the staymaker had reached a very high standard. Besides the whalebones inserted in the body of the bodice and the separate center front busc bone, there were now extra shaping bones arranged inside the stays (baleines de dressage); two or more curved pieces, of heavier whalebone, were laid across the top part of the front to give roundness to the bust, and straight pieces across the shoulder blades to keep the back flat. The direction of the boning varied, but it was always laid diagonally on the sides of the front to narrow the body. Throughout the whole period the stays were made either fully boned or half-boned. When fully boned the bones were laid close together and might be as narrow as an eighth of an inch in width. When it is remembered that all the stitching was back-stitched done by hand, and all the whalebone had to be cut in strips-the thickness varying according to its position on the body-one cannot but admire the craftsmanship of these eighteenth -century corsets.

Bolding and underlining added by me, middle of the 18th century would be 1750, now I know this thread is about stays in general, but I have been focussing on GAoP stays (1680 to 1720). I have no doubt Waugh's book is THE cat's pajamas as far as corsets and crinolines go, GAoP stays are a different matter.

That said, I took another look at the image of the mid-18th century stays I thought had the running stitch, and it seems the stitching I was looking at was construction stitching, and that indeed the boning channels seem to in fact be backstitched contrary to what I first thought I saw.

I am becoming more convinced that MOST stays were likely backstitched (for boning channels), but I am most skeptical of

blanket statements like " When it is remembered that all the stitching was back-stitched done by hand". One thing I find that is missing from most academic research, is a review of more working class clothing. Of course because next to no working class clothing is preserved from the period (barring a few bog finds of MEN's clothing), and making any absolute statements like "ALL stitching was back-stitched" without fair review of different clothing from different social strati just doesn't sit right with me. We do have limited evidence of woman's working class clothing in the form of art, but art seems to never be detailed enough to show stitching or type of stitching.

And despite all historic evidence, Jessica's stays are still one of less than a handful of GAoP reproduction stays used by re-enactors (that I am aware of) that are actually hand done, whether the exact stitches used are absolutely perfectly correct or not. And I'm proud of her for that, even more so at the fact that she made them in a fraction of the time it took me to make the first set.

Edited January 10, 2009 by michaelsbagley

[Lily Alexander]

Geez Michael, I found a reference in book. Who peed in your cornflakes. :)

You and Jessica should be proud. The passage I quoted was an attempt to answer Lady B's questions.

Edited January 10, 2009 by Haunting Lily

[Capt. Sterling]

Now, now... no one is complaining about Kate's new stays... we are all living and learning and hopefully always will be, as we go along in this hobby... we are all certain that she has done one hell of a job on her first attempt at this and we are eagerly looking forward to seeing the finished product. This is the last crewe that is going to shut out folks or point fingers and shout from the roof tops, "Hey they fucked up!" when it comes to their kit or portrayal. None of us claim to be experts, we are just sharing what we find... tis all. Hey at this point, all we know is that some of the existing corsets/stays from the late 17th/early 18th century were actually back stitched..

Now that Lily was kind enough to post the entire paragraph, I can take it one more step.. the interesting point being, once you take that paragraph out of the entire chapter, it throws that back stitching issue into mid-18th century, but when you take it in the entire context, it reads differently as if she is referring to the entire century.. and we have seen the close up on the pink stays...

Either way, we all do the best we can and if we learn something new, our next garment will be that much better, we all hope....I have produced eighteen coats so far... would be more if I weren't so busy, but no matter how hard I try, not a one is perfect and not a one will ever be... each time I complete the latest, I learn something new... so I chalk it up in my notes and use it for the next coat...

Damnation if we all waited to learn EVERYTHING to make the perfect reproduction prior to taking the field, there should really be NO ONE out there playing at all...

Edited January 10, 2009 by Capt. Sterling

[Silkie McDonough]

me ...I admire anyone who does it by hand at all ...I for one shall continue to use my machine.

[Mary Diamond]

me ...I admire anyone who does it by hand at all ...I for one shall continue to use my machine.

AGREED! Mucho kudos for all the handwork ~

I spread myself too thin, so I, too, will stick with the machine, hand-stitching the visibles. Except Buttonholes.

For Now.

[LadyBarbossa]

Thank ye, Lily, fo' th' info. That's on of the few books I haven't obtained yet.

~Lady B

[Cheeky Actress]

LadyBrower,

I know the pattern of which you speak. My twin sister made them and I know that Mary Diamond also made them for herself. I have worn them, yet my sister did not use cane, she used poly-boning and I highly suggest cane/reed instead.

['LadyBrower' post=336718' date='Jan 7 2009, 06:20 AM]I'm glad someone else has used the pattern...

For those of you who want a better understanding of the construction of the 18th Century Stays that were mentioned earlier, here is a photo of the photo of the 18th Century Stays with the horizontal caning in the front.

Please excuse this content of this shot...Someone I know doesn't care to wear shifts when demoing a newly constructed stays..( )...and no captain...Them ain't ME!

[Cheeky Actress]

LadyBrower,

I know the pattern of which you speak. My twin sister made them and I know that Mary Diamond also made them for herself. I have worn them, yet my sister did not use cane, she used poly-boning and I highly suggest cane/reed instead.

['LadyBrower' post=336718' date='Jan 7 2009, 06:20 AM]I'm glad someone else has used the pattern...

For those of you who want a better understanding of the construction of the 18th Century Stays that were mentioned earlier, here is a photo of the 18th Century Stays with the horizontal caning in the front.

Please excuse this content of this shot...*Someone* I know doesn't care to wear shifts when modeling a newly constructed set of bodies..( )...and no captain...Them ain't ME!

Edited January 11, 2009 by Cheeky Actress

[Capt. Sterling]

LadyBrower,

I know the pattern of which you speak. My twin sister made them and I know that Mary Diamond also made them for herself. I have worn them, yet my sister did not use cane, she used poly-boning and I highly suggest cane/reed instead.

['LadyBrower' post=336718' date='Jan 7 2009, 06:20 AM]I'm glad someone else has used the pattern...

For those of you who want a better understanding of the construction of the 18th Century Stays that were mentioned earlier, here is a photo of the photo of the 18th Century Stays with the horizontal caning in the front.

Please excuse this content of this shot...Someone I know doesn't care to wear shifts when demoing a newly constructed stays..( )...and no captain...Them ain't ME!

Um that pattern is based on a 1780-90s corset, not from our time frame... and that isn't how the "horizontal" boning goes for our time frame... might as well be you.. tis the twin...

Edited January 11, 2009 by Capt. Sterling

[LadyBrower]

Ah.. Mine are actually a little different that that too. I'll try to post a picture, but alas, I am convinced they are not at all for the GAoP. *le sigh* they are FAR too low (as in Ren. Faire cleavage, eek!) I'm going to start a new set this week based on suggestions from this forum. I just received my reed via post today. I have high hopes for this set. I've been practicing my back stitching after reading this thread. =)

[Kate Souris]

[

Still very pretty stays. I had always wondered about that horizontal boning anyway. She's got a teeny waist!

[LadyBarbossa]

Fo'get th' body, I fancy th' stays! LOVE th' fabric! Absolutely lovely!

:::le sigh:::

So, th' reason fo' th' horizontal on some stays as this is... what? Again, fo' those women with "deflated breasts"?

~Lady B

[Cheeky Actress]

Well what the captain is saying, it appears that for our time period ladies, the horizontal boning, as he describes it, lookes to be individually sewn on the inside, lose in a casing, that looks as if it is only attache at the end of the boning case, because it does not replace the vertical bones that are directly sewn into the corset, but is in addition to them and they are in the inside of the corset and not seen on the outside at all. He will post a picture to give us an idea later, when ever he gets his ass out of bed.

[Cheeky Actress]

Still very pretty stays. I had always wondered about that horizontal boning anyway. She's got a teeny waist!

As for Lynn's waist...it is all in the stays, Kate! When both Lynn and I worked at Ren Faire oh so many years ago...we use to be quite small in our waist and bust. Wearing a properly cut/fitted pair of stays can take you for noth'n honey to Ooo WOW... My Eye?!? in a matter of seconds! Sucks...I'll give you TWO (2) good reasons to wear stays if your figure is lacking...

[Cheeky Actress]

Moved to mantua thread. and I have answered your questiong there Lady B

Edited January 15, 2009 by Cheeky Actress

[LadyBarbossa]

My curiosity, Cheeky... why not rabbit fur?

It's a VERY lovely outfit, m'dear. Can't wait t' see it. :)

~Lady B

[LadyBrower]

Well. I received my stays pattern from Reconstructing history and my "play set" is all put together and the reed is in... but now I am having trouble with the binding. There must be an easier way to do this. For the sake of easy, I thought it would be easy to play with double fold bias tape (I'm not going for accuracy of materials so much on these, just trying to get a feel for the construction) and I've ripped it out four times and thrown the whole thing across the room twice.

Any help would be appreciated.

[michaelsbagley]

Well. I received my stays pattern from Reconstructing history and my "play set" is all put together and the reed is in... but now I am having trouble with the binding. There must be an easier way to do this. For the sake of easy, I thought it would be easy to play with double fold bias tape (I'm not going for accuracy of materials so much on these, just trying to get a feel for the construction) and I've ripped it out four times and thrown the whole thing across the room twice.

Any help would be appreciated.

Double fold bias tape is essentially edge binding, but what exactly are you having trouble with? What do you mean you've ripped it out four times? Have you sewn it and not been happy with the results and removed it? Have you been sewing it and pulled too tightly and torn it out by accident?

Expand and we'll seee if I or anyone else has some helpful advice to give.

Cheers

[Mary Diamond]

Well. I received my stays pattern from Reconstructing history and my "play set" is all put together and the reed is in... but now I am having trouble with the binding. There must be an easier way to do this. For the sake of easy, I thought it would be easy to play with double fold bias tape (I'm not going for accuracy of materials so much on these, just trying to get a feel for the construction) and I've ripped it out four times and thrown the whole thing across the room twice.

Any help would be appreciated.

I know what you mean ~ It was my fourth set of stays before I had a method down for binding. Machine sewing isn't worth the time or set-up, IMHO. I now stitch by hand, one side for a length of thread, then catch up the other side with a second length of thread (back and forth, front and back). The second biggest problem was the "turns" of the tabs ~ I found it to be most consistent and attractive with only 3 stitches (shoulder, top, shoulder) for each turn, resuming normal stitching in between.

[LadyBrower]

I was not happy with the way it looked at all. I first was sewing it down with a top stitch, and then it looked terrible, so I tried sewing it in the crease to fold over and it wasn't looking well. It was deffinately the curve of the tabs that was giving me trouble.

So, Mary, when you do the tabs, what way are you sewing the binding on, on the top or so that you fold over and whip stitch the back? what is the "period" way?

Thanks for the help. This is my first "corset" with tabs and I am starting to think I don't like them. hehe

[Mary Diamond]

I was not happy with the way it looked at all. I first was sewing it down with a top stitch, and then it looked terrible, so I tried sewing it in the crease to fold over and it wasn't looking well. It was deffinately the curve of the tabs that was giving me trouble.

So, Mary, when you do the tabs, what way are you sewing the binding on, on the top or so that you fold over and whip stitch the back? what is the "period" way?

Thanks for the help. This is my first "corset" with tabs and I am starting to think I don't like them. hehe

I use a blind stitch for attaching the binding. When finished, the stitch is tiny, and runs at a 90 degree angle to the binding edge. Then the needle runs under the fabric at an angle to the next point, where it comes up and out of the binding, re-enters the stays, repeat ~

This might help to explain: http://www.quilterscache.com/StartQuilting...iltingfour.html

Regarding what is the period way ~ not sure. I am just happy to get the stays finished at that point. I would drive myself crazy otherwise.

[LadyBrower]

Ah... Now why didn't I think of that. *tehe* Thank you so much. I'm going to rip out my most recent attempt. About how wide do you make the edging? I feel like mine is too wide and that is part of the problem.

Thanks again for the help!

[CrazyCholeBlack]

I was not happy with the way it looked at all. I first was sewing it down with a top stitch, and then it looked terrible, so I tried sewing it in the crease to fold over and it wasn't looking well. It was deffinately the curve of the tabs that was giving me trouble.

I'm getting the feeling that some of your frustration might be from the bias tape. Not so much the material etc, but in trying to use the pre-ironed folds in the tape to conform to the edge of the stays. My best advice is to iron the tape flat & use it that way. Trying to get those folds to match your piece is near impossible. Once the tape is flat it will be much easier to decide where *you* want it to fold over to the inside.

For the tabs they are just fiddly & take time! Don't underestimate the importance of pins. I like to focus on each individual tab, sewing the tape to the outside of one before moving on to the next & then folding the tape to the inside. It can be pretty overwhelming trying to get the tape perfect on all the tabs at once. Doing them individually means you don't have to shift any of the others to fiddle with the one you're working on.

Best of luck.

Chole

[lady constance]

always and forever trying to find a fast way---

here is what i discovered---

AFTER all the channels for the boning are stitched in... PLACE THE BIAS TAPE ON THE TOP-- RIGHT SIDES TOGETHER--- MACHINE STITCH THE BIAS TAPE ON TO THE FRONT-- THERE YOU CAN GET THE CURVES PERFECT---

then

insert boning/ reed

THEN attach/sew the bias tape by hand to the back of the stays.......... there you can cut in / fold the curves fabulously!!!

***** i know my sewing machine will easily stitch thru boning without breaking the needle.... use a ball point titanium needle........****** this also keep the boning in place and never comes thru the casing or moves on you { i have a few a hair too short as i used plastic boning