Friday thoughts

[gurdymonkey]

 I can't prevent stupid people from putting stupid, half-assed, undocumented bullshit on the 'net and calling it research. I can only combat ignorance from the ramparts of Wodeford Hall.

Though when A Certain Outlands Samurai gave me the link to the Cunnan Wiki and begged me to do something about the state of their articles on Japanese clothing over there, I did. 

I went back and forced myself to look at the badness that sullies the Fettburg site and the kimono definitions - 99% of which refer to styles or garments that post-date the SCA period.

Wodeford Hall needs a Japanese clothing/textile glossary. Obviously this is a post-Pennsic project, but I think it would be a useful addition. Some of the material in the out-of-print book by Amanda Meyer Stinchecum about the Nomura collection kosode is really excellent and bears repeating. Effingham-sensei has some good stuff on his website - but he also has a lot of pages that have been under construction for at least the past four years and show no signs of ever being anything else.

There's just one problem.

I am hesitant to include terms for things that did not come into fashion until after 1600. Fashion does not exist in a vacuum. I like the idea of one-stop web-surfing and having something useful and comprehensive out there. On the other hand, I don't want to get bitten in the ass by someone who insists on reading something the wrong way. I am still cringing over the fact that  someone who took a discussion of namban art and twisted it to justify creating a garment that never existed because she obviously heard different ones coming out of my mouth than the ones I'm pretty sure I said. I can just see someone saying, "But it was on your website, so I thought it was OK."

Trying to formulate a plan of attack on the forces of ignorance here....

Comments

[kass-rants.livejournal.com]

Am I missing something here? It seems simple to me to not include terms for things that didn't come into use until after 1600s. Use the earlier terms. Only discuss pre-1600 clothing and accessories. Stop there.

Coming from you, this is funny.

[gurdymonkey.livejournal.com]

You're no fun. ;-( How the hell am I supposed to take over the world with thinking like that?

Re: Coming from you, this is funny.

[kass-rants.livejournal.com]

Okay. Colour me stupid. I don't get it...

Re: Coming from you, this is funny.

[gurdymonkey.livejournal.com]

I was referring to Kass, The Goddess Of All Historical Clothing Periods. Er, um, Goddess Of Very Many Historical Clothing Periods.

[czina.livejournal.com]

I think that limiting your discussion of items to pre-1600 is good, but it may not help people just starting out, without a page that discusses how things -changed- after that.

On a separate page, you may want to follow the trends of Japanese fashions, with a distinct break that says 'THIS is pre-1600, THAT is post-1600' - with any information (or links to information) about why things changed.

As a English analogy: Corsets are pre-1600, yes. But corsets worn in the Tudor/Elizbethan Era look different from the ones worn in the Baroque/Colonial Era, both of which are different from the ones worn during the Victorian Era. Showing/telling people the differences between the different eras, and WHY a Victorian corset won't work well with their Elizabethan gown is very helpful.

While you may not want to be the 'All Japanese History, all through the ages' site - a brief explanation about what parts of 'traditional' Japanese garb are pre-1600 and which are not would help those who are interested in the culture but haven't gotten down to the 'nitty gritty', like you have. I would always encourage people to do their own research, but covering the basics of 'This is the basic look, this is not, here's why' is a good place for people to start.

Note - I know VERY little about Japanese culture in ANY Era, so this could be unfeasible for your site.

Hope this helps.

[gurdymonkey.livejournal.com]

See, the thing is that I don't just get inquiries from the SCA. I get cosplayers. I get people in France who are looking for modern kimono that will fit a modern Western physique.

Perhaps a mythbusting page for the SCA explaining why you don't wear wide obi and chopsticks are not hair ornaments. Urtatim did a Middle Eastern Myth page for her website that's a very nice bullshit free zone.

Or perhaps a directory of links to resources on modern traditional kimono for people who are looking for that. I've already got a resources page for SCA Japanese links....

[kass-rants.livejournal.com]

You mean like this: http://www.reconstructinghistory.com/japanese/tigau.html

[gurdymonkey.livejournal.com]

Oh, good, it's still there. You keep re-arranging the furniture on RH.

Might do it a little differently. Period artwork. Me in bad wafuku with a big DON'T DO THIS in flashing red letters. I dunno.

[kass-rants.livejournal.com]

To extend czina's analogy, you could state emphatically that what we consider "corsets" were not called corsets in the Elizabethan period or in the Baroque period. They were called bodys/bodies and stays, respectively. You could even do a chart of terms with headings like "pre-1600" "post-1600" and "Modern" and list terms for the same (or similar) things in each column. Almost like a translation table.

[mamapduck.livejournal.com]

Part of explaining what *is* period/appropriate is explaining what isn't.

When we tell people what fabrics are good, we also tell them what fabrics are bad. "Linen and wool" is not as good an answer as "linen and wool but not synthetic fibers or calico prints." If you say "narrow obi" it's not going to sink in as well as "narrow obi, because they didn't start wearing the wide ones you see in Gilbert and Sullivan until the year Umpteen." Being specific about things that are wrong is a good way of helping people see more clearly what is right.

Besides, as you said, you get coplayers who might look at your stuff and go "oh, wide obi are okay because I'm aiming for post-Umpteen" but will have seen your site and wear a Their Period Appropriate obi instead of one that is totally wrong. If you can help make 18th century Japanese costuming more accurate as well as SCA, so much the better.

[gurdymonkey.livejournal.com]

The Tousando forum in particular attracts some people who want to do Edo period stuff. I've actually gone looking for answers to their questions on occasion. I even found evidence of a particular style in a painting that was a good 100 years earlier than I'd expected to find it based on what the Named Authorities In The Books said.

[reynardine.livejournal.com]

First, I like the idea of a "mythbusting" page for SCA. Like others have said, if you want to include Edo (or even modern!) information, split it out onto another page. Personally, I think it's a good idea to include Edo-era since a lot of the media (movies, tv shows, anime) that people are exposed to is set either in the Edo or early Meiji period, so it's natural that someone just starting would be confused.

[vsct-caius.livejournal.com]

OK, so we'll go out to Alameda (where herself lives), I'll get a beret, and we'll start blowing up folks who don't understand what period means! YEAH!

Oops. Did I say that in my outside voice? Bad bear.

[gurdymonkey.livejournal.com]

Ahem. I HAVE a beret, Old Bear.

[vsct-caius.livejournal.com]

Well, so do I.

Do we duke it out as to who gets to play which part or do we trade off?

[gurdymonkey.livejournal.com]

Hey, I wanna be Kari, the cute redhead.