Rating system for Plunder

[Captain Jim]

Off topic thought:

She'll no' be puttin' out many fires in that outfit. Startin' 'em yes...

And now back to your regularly scheduled discussion.

[Pirate Petee]

Somebody call 911, I think I smell fire.

[hurricane]

Because if THAT is a pirate coat. Then this is too

GoF

Hey, my mother has this pirate coat. You mean it isn't period? What will I tell her? She's sure Phyllis Diller wore the same one in a pirate skit on TV in the 60s so it must be accurate.

Watch out - might tick those of less thicker skins....

-- Captain

[hurricane]

On a related unrelated note. I have this photo of a painting at Devon House in Jamaica. Now, I know for a fact that it is authentic and period. But I don't know which period. Can my costuming experts help me out? The hat appears on the far right - it has a very high crown, almost pilgrim like.

Thanks!

Hurricane

[Pirate Petee]

My goodness thats a loud coat.

[Fox]

Offhand that looks 1680s ish to me, but the upper-class clothing is more other people's subject than mine. Give me a pea-jacket and I'll tell you what month it was made...

GoF, you forgot one thing:

Is it 19thC? Yes

Here's the Dread Pirate Raffles.

[Gentleman of Fortune]

Hurricane.

Interesting picture.

There are several clues... my gut instinct is that its Pre-1700 and Foxe's steals my thunder with a guess for 1680s.

BUT....

Generally, stockings were rolled over the tops of the breaches until the 1720s when you start seeing them tucked under the breeches.

The smallsword looks like an early style without the D style guard

The coat has vertical pockets... usually seen on the early justaucorps.

He is seen with what looks to be his own hair, not the full wig that would normally be worn during the time frame and for formal portraiture. (unusual)

I would love to see what Kass thinks. She is fresh off of making patterns for all the coats from 1670-1730 so it might be clearer in her mind.

GoF

[Pirate Petee]

Also looks like he got dropped on his head while he was a baby. Look at those eyes.

No offense to anyone who was dropped while a baby or who has dropped a baby.

[Ace of Harbor Bay]

Ah. There lies the real problem.

To you GOF, that coat should not and could not be classified a pirate coat. (and then you post silly images to illustrate, which I'm sure many people here that do consider it a pirate coat to find as insulting as you find me to be a loud mouth ass).

However, just because I personally wouldn't be caught dead in one and you MIGHT wear it only if you had nothing better (kidding!), doesn't mean that there aren't a lot folks here that would and in fact DO wear that same style as, indeed, a pirate coat.

And so there's the rub.

It's all about who gets to make up the proper definition of a pirate coat (as opposed to the definition of a proper pirate coat)

[hurricane]

Thanks Foxe and GoF. That would probably place it about right time wise there. I think, but am not sure, that it is a painting of one of the governors or other aristocrats of Jamaica. I just can't remember. But it is a striking painting, almost lifesize in the dining room of the Devon House. Everytime I go there I just gawk at it, not only for the magnificent attire, but the artistry of the guy who painted it and the patience of the subject to stand there in the tropical heat for hours on end in the outfit.

It is obviously someone of great fortune as that coat would have taken eons to embroider. But I appreciate the detail your point out to narrow down the time. I knew I had come to the right place.

-- Hurricane

[kass]

I would love to see what Kass thinks.  She is fresh off of making patterns for all the coats from 1670-1730 so it might be clearer in her mind.

Hi guys!

Hurricane, I would put a date of at least 1680s and perhaps even 1670s on the clothing in this painting for much the same reasons that Greg points out. The vertical pockets, the lack of wig, the cravat all point to the late 17th century, not the early 18th. The reason I would go so far as to say 1670s is that by the 1680s, we were already seeing wigs and horizontal pockets. This man is obviously someone who follows fashion. Therefore he wouldn't be wearing something this fabulous out of date. The earliest instances of Justacorps in the late 1660s were still worn with petticote breeches. These are not. These are slim breeches, the kind we start seeing in the 1670s.

How'zat?

Back to the grind!

By the way, I think a rating system just gives us another reason to fight. And personally, I'd just rather talk about cool stuff!

Hey Petee! I'm offended by your dropped baby remarks! Don't know why. I just am...

[Ace of Harbor Bay]

The reason I like the rating system is that I think it could keep the bickering back and forth about stuff like this down a bit.

If someone dissagreed with someone's opinion/rating of it they could just rate it themselves.

The thing that seems to always set it all off are the snide remarks or pictures for comparison of how "unpirate-like" something is.

I personally don't mind hearing other's thoughts on stuff as long as it isn't too degrading.

It's all just opinions. And it seems to me that numbers help to keep it a little more sterile than everyone's various choice of words that can easily be taken wrong.

But you might be right and it might not work like that.

As Foxe said, we won't know until we try it.

[hurricane]

I'm not a fan of the rating system because I would miss out on the whys, which are important to me. If something isn't right in general or right for a period, I want the insights.

Thanks Kass! I really appreciate the dating of the garment. I learn so much from you all.

-- Hurricane

[kass]

Well, thanks in return for showing me a picture I'd never seen before. It's always cool to see a new picture from the period.

I'm afraid I'm a little too black and white for a rating system. To me it's either right for the period or it isn't. That's not a judgement on someone's taste. That's just my personal lack of creativity talking.

Personally, I don't notice much bickering in this forum. I think some stuff I wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole gets posted, but other people love it. No problem from my point of view. Different strokes and all that. I would never post "Oh that sucks" in response to something someone really liked. I only answer the posts that say, "Is this appropriate for the GAoP?"

Or the posts that are funny...

[Ace of Harbor Bay]

I'm not a fan of the rating system because I would miss out on the whys, which are important to me. If something isn't right in general or right for a period, I want the insights.

Thanks Kass! I really appreciate the dating of the garment. I learn so much from you all.

-- Hurricane

Right. But isn't that what Twill's is for? In depth discussion of that sort of thing?

And, if something IS accurate then whoever posted would probably point all the good info out.

I'm just saying that if something doesn't happen to be historical or even close but to many might be a fun "piratey" thing. Maybe some people collect pirate bobble heads or the lego ships that don't REALLY look like ships at all, why would someone feel the need to point out that it doesn't look like a pirate but a bit of plastic.

Unless someone is claiming something to be a replica, etc. and it's obviosly not then why the complaints from the historians?

That's really my only point about any of this.

I keep saying that I too enjoy hearing about the historical stuff.

I really can't say anymore about this so I will do Foxe and GOF and the like a favor and shut the hell up. I'm off to play pyrate.

[oderlesseye]

Why does this Pub not have a forum dedicated to re-enactors anyways?

we have plenty of space for Mud-rooms and such so why not?

[Gentleman of Fortune]

SCREEEEEEECHHHHHHHHH!

(that's me slamming on the breaks!)

Ace.... WTFARTA?

To you GOF, that coat should not and could not be classified a pirate coat.

Then you OBVIOUSLY grossly misunderstand me and my stance on historical pirate clothing.

THAT IS A PIRATE COAT.

Now let me qualify this for you. There is no such thing as a "pirate coat" in historical terms. They did not sell them on the street or order them from a catalog....

"Come get your pirate coats, get em while they are hot"....

What pirates wore was what was available and fashionalbe to them at the time. In this case, either sailors clothes, or landsmen's clothes.

The fashionable coat at the time was the JUSTAUCORPS. Now it is called a "Pirate Coat", "Frock Coat", "long coat" and who knows what else by the masses, but historically speaking, its a Justaucorps. Which is French for "to the Body" because the cut of this coat was close to the body' shape and was not baggy like previous clothing.

Now, I have always been a supporter of pirates wearing regular seamen's clothes. Because that is what they were (again, there was no Pirate's GAP or Pirate-Mart for pirate specific clothing.)

And all of the pictures that we see of "regular sailors" or even those of period drawn pirates are wearing slop trousers, short jackets, and SHOES.

But if you are going to wear a Justaucorps (Pirate Coat, Frock Coat, etc) then it should be modeled on the one in the picture by Hurricane.

Now that is a serious Gentlemen's Justaucorps. Its made of heavily embroidered Silk, Passementiere buttons, matching breeches etc etc.

Now, A common man or even middle classes would not have such a nice coat, but it would be made similarly but out of wool (possibly linen). But it would try in all respects to mimic that really nice coat.

Now its the fantasy pirates that set themselves up for a fall. The justification for wearing a justaucorp is that they "STOLE" thier Justaucorps from a wealthy passanger that was aboard one of their prizes.

Well if that is the case, you should have one freakin nice Justaucorp if it was worn by the upper classes!

Does that mean that GOF says you can't wear a Justaucorps? NO, it just means that it should probably be a simpler wool version and cut the pretense crap about stolen booty.

Its too hard to make a nice justaucorps anyway (That is a upper class one).

You are not going to find period style trim from Jo-Annes fabrics, the buttons alone would take a year to make (for more info take a look at my website). And period fabric like that can be had but it is several hundred dollars per yard (again see my website for sources).

and lastly

(and then you post silly images to illustrate, which I'm sure many people here that do consider it a pirate coat to find as insulting as you find me to be a loud mouth ass).

Its only insulting to those who have put themselves in a position that they would have to defend someone wearing Joeseph's Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat as a pirate coat because they "Accept" so many other non-pirate coats.

When you go down "Fantasy lane" you really paint yourself in a corner. Since there is no historical basis in what you are wearing, or rules to play by in the fantasy camp, and just about everything is allowed, you can't make a judement about what is "more incorrect".

And heck "we are just having fun anyway", so pink tu-tu pirate coats should be just as acceptable pirate gear as the Black Goth S&M coat that was originally posted as a "great pirate coat".

GoF

[Fox]

I think Hurricane makes a good point about the why, and while I also think that Ace makes a good point about Twill being the place for that, it does make sense that discussions about one particular coat/hat/sword are kept to one thread.

Why not try a rating system, but with each and every poster being prepared to explain their rating if called on to do so, or perhaps in a very short sentence in their initial post:

"***/**

"Nice coat, quite well made, really about a century to late for the GAoP"

I'm in favour of giving anything a go if it will stop the bickering. Being liable to be called on for explanation would a: ensure that all votes are honest (not just voting for mates' gear over others for example), and b: ensure that all responses, whether positive or negative, were actually wanted by the readers of the forum.

Privately, I agree with GoF's stance, but this argument is getting old, and I think that even the best written responses will fail to solve it anyway. On a personal level I agree very much with Kass, if it ain't right then it ain't right, but I know that not everyone follows that ethos.

[Rumba Rue]

I think just by reading all the back and forth here, it's best not to do any kind of rating. The minute you put up some company or person's name who makes whatever, it's going to cause more problems.

I for one would rate a particular site and person who makes things as a big 1 or 0, and then the next thing you know that person is here wringing all hell out.

As for me, I certianly won't do it again, it's not worth the headaches, as some of the other Moderators will tell you.

When someone recommends a site, as was done recently, I immediatly sent a PM to the person informing them why they should not use that person.

I think that's the best way to handle things, in private.

[Pirate Petee]

we have plenty of space for Mud-rooms and such so why not?

Yeah whats up with that, these virtual brothels are spreading all over this site.

[kass]

I'm just saying that if something doesn't happen to be historical or even close but to many might be a fun "piratey" thing. Maybe some people collect pirate bobble heads or the lego ships that don't REALLY look like ships at all, why would someone feel the need to point out that it doesn't look like a pirate but a bit of plastic.

That's kinda my point, Ace. I don't think a rating system would have any use here. Some people want only historical stuff. Other people want plastic pirate toys. And yet others want a little bit of each. Are you really going to listen to my opnion on the historical accurate of a Lego boat? You shouldn't. I don't know much about period ships at all. I just love Lego!

And I can't agree with you about the purpose of Captain Twill, though. That forum is for the discussion of academic things. Plunder is the forum for advertising and asking where one can acquire things, historic or not.

Which further supports my thoughts on no rating system -- how exactly do you rate how cool something is? It's really objective and I'd rather just read everything posted here. And rate things mentally for myself.

[greenighs]

I understand Foxe and GoF's points, about intervening and protecting folks who are new and inexperienced so they don't plunk down $600 on a shabbily made item that is not even close to resembling anything a real pirate ever saw in his lifetime. I also understand the frustration with hit and run self-promotion. On seahorse.org, we send a PM to the person "selling" the thing explaining that we have a policy about commercial posts (as in, you get permission from an admin or moderator first, your post is in a specific vendor forum, and your goods and/or services will be subject to free exchange of opinion by our membership). If the vendor doesn't agree and comply, the post is deleted. Period.

Without a rating system, and without a clear and enforced policy on commercial posts, comments like, "Not GoA period, and I wonder about the fabric," or "Well made, but too costumey for renactiment, more appropriate for stagewear," are fine. Make a point, don't freak out the seller or discourage the buyer.

OR remember that if you make a commercial post among pirate reenactors, you'r fair game?

OR remember if you're a play pirate, you're gonna have to suck up some criticism from folks who really know their stuff.

I'm learning, I'm just a little slow in the beginning.

[Capt Grey]

Wow! Sorry I wasn't around to moderate this debate. But I must say you all handled yourselves very well. This is an easy board to moderate because we all respect one another.

Here is what is says under PLUNDER:

Pyrate and nautical related stuff to outfit your salty lifestlye. Where to get it, how to make it, and all about it. You're welcome to post FOR SALE/TRADE and WANTED ads here. You can also link to your ebay auction, so long as you start the title with "ebay:"

This forum is open to all, regulars or one-timers, to post their plunder for sale or trade. It would be nice if the poster added details under the main topic title, but ultimately it is up to the reader to make a judgement on the contents of the topic. The old saying "Buyer Beware" is still a good rule of thumb.

I have to say that I agree with Rumba and Kass on this, that a rating system would only cause more disagreements between members. Gentleman of Fortune, Hawkyns, Kass, and Foxe are all recognized for their knowledge of this subject and anyone who reads the posts can tell that we respect them for their diligence to period accuracy and consider them experts. The same goes for people like Ace and others who like to recreate the movie pirates and spend lots of time and money to get the costume and props exactly right. Both groups deserve our respect and grattitude.

When it comes to historical accuracy, I ALWAYS steer people the the "Captain Twill" forum because it clearly states the discussion is about historically accurate pirate information. And that is where it should stay.

A person new to the board has a responsibility to check out the ENTIRE board to see what the different forums contain. If they are interested in historically accurate costuming they should spend their time in the proper forum for that. If they like the play pirate, like I do with my "fantasy" gear, then they can judge for themselves what a "great" pirate coat is. All PLUNDER does is give advertising space.

So I hope I haven't muddied the waters at this late date (I was on vacation until yesterday), but I don't think a rating system would work in this case. You are all free to post comments about a particular item for sale, and in doing so will help potential buyers.

[Fox]

Hope you had a good vacation!

I think there is a slight issue with which is the correct forum sometimes. Granted: discussions about historical accuracy belong in Captain Twill, and discussion about items for sale belong in Plunder. BUT, what about discussion on the historical accuracy of items offered for sale?

[Capt Grey]

A good point, Master Foxe.

I'm thinking of adding a statement asking potential posters to define their item as "historical" or "fantasy" or to refrain from making either definition and letting the readers decide.

Again, those who know historical details would be providing a service by pointing out (nicely) why said item is/is not historically accurate.