I’ve already mentioned Showtime will be starting up their Smexy History Hour after the The Tudors by replacing it with The Borgias, about a family so smexy they can’t even handle each other.

Lucrezia Borgia, sensing that the casual “So have you read Flowers in the Attic yet?” conversation with her brother has taken a turn.

But today’s I’m less concerned with the intricacies of their family tree, and more about the intricacies of their costuming. Though not a lot of photos have been released, what’s available is interesting enough that I’ve decided to just start judging the crap out of them, rather than waiting and judging the crap out of them later in one big batch.

Under the cut, let’s costume-nerd some Borgias!

Eyes front, Borgia siblings.
Continue reading

So, last night was the Oscars, that gleaming bastion of class and merit, where they will give a woman an Oscar for directing the best film of the year and then play “I am Woman” before throwing to commercial. In keeping with this grand tradition, Hollywood takes the opportunity to go all-out, lining up for the fashion police in a glittery, flawless parade.

I am kidding. It was a disaster. This face says it all:

And when Kristin Stewart speaks for all of us, you know something is wrong.

It’s a sad, sad day.
Continue reading

It’s the beginning of Halloween season! I’ll be nerding out at regular intervals between now and then, navigating the dangerous maze of commercial costumes and costume patterns.

Today’s Costume: Tudor Lady.

Two reasons this dress has a lot of vague knockoffs: it’s expensive and time-consuming to make; also it’s hot as BLAZES, oh my GOD, if you go outside with one of those on any time before October 31 you are basically a ticking time bomb of heatstroke.

In previous years, Simplicity has tried to get you to believe this is Tudor wear.

Simplicity was wrong. This is like The Other Boleyn Girl level of costuming.

However, they have stepped up their game recently. This is their Tudor offering this year.

NICE.

Let’s look closer.

There are some nitpicky things here; there are princess seams on the bodice, but they’re hidden under the arms, so I’m fine with it. The separate undersleeves look great, and the underskirt is separate and has a false front, and looks like it’s cartridge pleated, even, so really, I’m pleased as punch.

Part of the reason it looks so good is because of the suggested undergarments:

IT’S A CHEMISE IN THE WILD, YOU GUYS.

Ignorance Alert: I know nothing about historical costume, compared to anyone who’s actually studied it. That said, from a glance at this, I have a feeling that it’s cut a little low; in the portrait of Mary Tudor I’m using, it looks like there are tiny dots of blackwork above the neckline of the gown, where the chemise is visible.

Besides that little nitpick, this is PRETTY AWESOME. If you look at the envelope back , they even have Ye Olde Arme Gussets (the little triangle insets in the armpits that let you lift your arms):

(Ignore the hoop skirt. We can only make so much progress in a year.)

Please note I know nothing about costume, and this could all be totally incorrect, and it turns out Mary Tudor would cut a bitch before she would ever put on a tight-sleeve chemise. However, I do think that puffy sleeves became more fashionable in the Elizabethan era, when you had a more exposed cuff and upper sleeve than the Tudor sleeve, which is just like a coat for your arm or something, I don’t even know who decided you should drag three yards of fabric around on each arm, I don’t make the rules. If I did, we would have costume museums, all of which would be titled Pajamas Through the Ages.

So, long story short: Tudor ladies this season should be picking up those Simplicity patterns pronto. Happy sewing! Post pictures! I will be at home in my pajamas, waiting to see how it went.

So, the Emmys happened! I don’t care who won. I came for the dresses.

This entry is ENORMOUS. Dial-up is not safe beyond this cut tag.

The good, the bad, and the ugly!
Continue reading

Three of the most useful LJ entries ever made:

19th Century Fashion, 1800-1829

19th Century Fashion, 1830-1859

19th Century Fashion, 1860-1897

People who write stories set in the past (and located in America and/or Western Europe), check briefly the year of your story’s setting against the costumes here. Some serious shit goes down in the 19th century, okay? In 180mumble, your character could be dressed with elegance. By 1820, she better have something else happening on that dress. Hint: ruffles and poufs, and sleeves that are wider than her head. (Don’t look at me, I just report the news.) By 1850, if she didn’t have a hoop skirt on, don’t even ASK what would happen. (Mostly because I don’t know. Fahsion police?)

Every time I glance at the scope of silhouettes in 19th-century fashion, it’s boggling how many silhouettes they actually went through, as if they were trying to make women as uncomfortable (yet decorative!) as possible and kept trying different methods until women revolted. Then it was time for a NEW uncomfortable silhouette!

Also, in the late 1820s and early 1830s, it was illegal for a woman to have shoulders. Fact. You showed up with a shoulder seam? A month in the brig. (There were nothing but brigs back then, too.) By 1840, you could have a shoulder as long as it was halfway to your elbow. According to these pictures, looks like women finally earned back the right to natural shoulder seams around 1873.*

* None of that is true. Except the shoulder seam parts.**

** And the brig parts.