Author and
Authority: Creating Fashion Trends in Historical Re-enacting (Probe on
Foucault’s ‘Author’)
As I begin
my own process towards authorship, I have been thinking a great deal on how we
create authorities out of persons who share their research. This has held exceptional resonance with me
in my own work on Eighteenth Century fashion and how it is viewed by the
community of re-enactors I belong to.
When I began as a historical interpreter and costumer, I knew about the larger community, but did not
feel a part of it. In Nova Scotia, we
were a small group who did our own research and shared it with our friends,
discussing and shaping ideas within a very small group (at that time, about 100
total members). With the dawn of the
internet, and social media beginning with email list serves, our scope grew
larger, we were now included within the larger, North American community. At that time, there were few opportunities
for non-academics to publish their research.
Some were able to write and publish books about and through their own
local museum collections, others published articles in community newsletters. At that time, the status of the author rose
to dizzying heights, they became superstars within the community and began to
be noticed by the academic community.
The research they published was copied extensively throughout the larger
North American community with little regard to situational and cultural
dynamics.
Fashion
doesn’t exist in a vacuum, but neither does it exist as a wide spread
phenomena. Even today, there are
cultural differences in how we dress ourselves, even here in Canada. The cut of our jeans will be different in
Nova Scotia than it is in Alberta, not only because our bodies are differently
shaped but also because of how we wear clothing culturally. These differences relate to genetics, weather
patterns, religion, and culture. In the
18th century, those cultural differences can be highly insular. What a person wore in Pennsylvania Deutch
country would be different than what a Protestant Loyalist refugee would have
worn on their way from New Jersey to Nova Scotia. Don’t get me wrong, fashion existed, and was
not as stagnant as would first appear, but there are cultural, weather,
situational, and religious differences at play.
A person interpreting a figure from Nova Scotian history cannot just
copy an outfit from ‘Fitting and Proper’ (Burnston, 2000) and be entirely
correct.
Since the
publication of this book, Sharon Burnston has become an authority on 18th
century clothing. She has been given
star status within the community. Others
who achieved such status through early publication were not as considerate in
their research though, and that research has proven to not be as reliable as Burnston’s
book. Other books published in the same
time frame include ‘Costume Close Up: Clothing Construction and Pattern,
1750-1790’ (Baumgarten, 1999), ‘Whatever
Shall I Wear’ (Riley, 2002) , and ‘Tidings from
the Eighteenth Century’ (Gilgun, 1993) . All these authors achieved star status, or authority, save for Mara Riley, despite
her research being considerate and strong.
Each of
these publications created fashion trends within the hobby. How can this be, when members of the
community should be considering the context of the research and how it relates
to their own interpretations of historical figures? It seems that modern capitalism and desire
can influence how we interpret histories, and that when a woman wants a new
dress, what is new and ‘fashionable’, even in research, can sway a decision in
what the seamstress creates. Through our
actions, we in the community have given authority to these authors. The fact that some hold higher status as
authors than others may have a lot to do with the status of the publication,
the paper used in the printing, the institution that houses the collection
studied, the use of colour, even the gloss used. When we look at the collections of garments
studied themselves, are there photographs taken, or were artist’s drawings used?
What was the quality and care given to the renderings? Are patterns included?
Are they easy to use? Are the garments themselves stunning to the eye, or are
they very plain-Jane? All of these
considerations will make or break a fashion trend, or create authority for the
author. And so, with each publication,
copies of the fashions that were published appeared at re-enactment events
across the Eastern Seaboard, whether they were appropriate for the
interpretation or not.
In the
intervening years, more and more research has been published. Members of the community have been actively
working with museums and in academia, and the research and scholarship has
grown stronger with each author. Through
online communities, care has been taken to ensure that people are interpreting
their historical figures with considerations of time, place, culture, religion,
and political status. And yet, fashion
trends continue.
When Neal
Hurst’s Bachelor’s Honors thesis was published, Hurst was working in the men’s
tailoring shop at Colonial Williamsburg.
Entitled ‘Kind of
Armour, being peculiar to America: The American Hunting Shirt’ (Hurst, 2013) , the paper set off a
flurry of men wanting to own hunting shirts.
Were they appropriate to all walks of life? All areas of North America? These were important questions that needed to
be reflected upon before having a seamstress or tailor create one for a given
interpretation. Hurst’s authority on the
subject is well earned though, as this was not a simple undergraduate
thesis. Hurst has the academic and
employment credentials to back up his research, and that paper was well
documented and written. Even he will
exclaim though, that this garment is not appropriate for everyone in the hobby,
and he would cringe if it were to become a fashionable trend in the community.
With ladies wear,
these trends can be even more drastic.
The men in our community, for the most part, belong to military units
that have fairly strict codes of dress.
Uniforms can be researched and recreated to the year, month, even the
battle. Women, because they are a
civilian population, do not have such restrictions, and so follow fashionable
trends a bit more closely. Fashion
trends that are regularly brought to mind include items like silk bonnets,
printed cotton jackets, stripes, silk gowns, and brightly coloured or printed
gowns. When each of these items listed
comes into fashion within the community, or comes around again as fashionable
in the community, questions of authenticity follow. Who would have worn these items? How would they have been worn? Is that printed cotton originally a bed
hanging (upholstery fabric), or was is the lining on the hem of a quilted
petticoat? What class/culture would have
worn that garment? And even, is that
fabric appearing to be too 1980s instead of 1780s? Who first wears a new style has influence on
how it will become a fashion trend. Do
they have authority? Have they been published? Do they have name fame? These are all considerations when considering
a fashion trend within the hobby.
Recently, a young woman in New England has entered the hobby, and
quickly developed a following. She was
well turned out from her very first event.
Jennifer Wilbur studied fashion photography at the Fashion Institute of
Technology (academic word fame amoung fashion people). Her clothing and interpretation is well
researched and thought out. She seeks
out talented individuals to create her wardrobe, even spending top dollar for
historically accurate shoes from the UK that many longtime community members
are hard pressed to consider. Even
though her wardrobe reflects that of a lower situational Loyalist woman on the
march with the army, I suspect she too will create a fashion trend amoung women
in the hobby. She is considered an
‘authentic’ or ‘progressive’ member of the community, names given to
‘fashionable’ young people in the organization that are pushing research and
interpretation beyond the comfort levels of the older generation.
Jennifer Wilbur, Loyalist woman on
the march: One of her first events
So as I embark on
my own explorations in the fashion of the 18th century, I am
considering my own authorship, my own authenticity, and my own word fame. Amoung my smaller provincial group, I have
long been considered ‘progressive’ with regards to the clothing I create and
wear. Will this name fame be carried
over into the larger North American community?
How will my own research hold up, to scrutiny and to time? I will have to consider carefully my
reader. I will also have to consider the
extant pieces I will chose to include in the published document, were they a fashion
‘trend’ of their time? An anomaly, or
widely worn? What was the cultural,
class, religious, and political ramifications behind the garment, if any? I will also have to consider how my research
is published. Will I choose a high gloss
paper, a hard cover or paper back, colour photographs or the original garments,
or line drawings? How will all of this
play a role in how authentic my research is viewed, and how enduring it will
become? Will I have the authority to speak and be heard?
Bibliography
Burnston, S. A. (2000). Fitting and Proper.
Scurlock Pub Co .
Foucault, M. (1980). What is an Author. In Lanuage,
Counter-Memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews. Ithaca: Cornell
University Press.
Foucault, M. (1998). On the Ways of Writing History.
In Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology. Essential Works of Foucault,
1954-1984 (pp. 279-96). New York: New Press.
Gilgun, B. (1993). Tidings from the Eighteenth
Century. Scurlock Pub Co.
Hurst, N. (2013). Kind of Armour, being peculiar
to America: The American Hunting Shirt. Williamsburg Virginia: College of
William and Mary.
Linda Baumgarten, J. W. (1999). Costume Close Up:
Clothing Construction and Pattern, 1750-1790. Colonial Williamsburg
Foundation.
Riley, M. (2002). Whatever Shall I Wear? A Guide
to Assembling a Woman's Basic 18th century Wardrobe. Graphics and Fine
Arts Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment