|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:56 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:46 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 5:22 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 3:33 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:26 am
 |
|
|
 |
Berzerker_prime Chainmaile bikinis. Those things have got to chafe in very uncomfortable places! Sarah T. Foole.
Roetroc +modern tights instead of hose (particularly on men) |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:39 pm
|
|
|
|
Roetroc Well now you've opened a can of worms: +people who used cotton/cotton blends/polyester in their clothes +modern tights instead of hose (particularly on men) +hooded cloaks +cloaks made of really lightweight materials +drinking horn straps attached to belts +tankards attached to belts +T-tunics +non-period shoes (C'mon it's not like it's hard or anything) +people who don't wear wool because they are "allergic". Yes, wool itches, you aren't allergic, true wool allergies are quite rare. +machine made braid. +tartan skirts on men +kilts +plaids (for the most part) +thick belts where there is no eveidence (ie Viking) +corsets that are used to push up the breasts +large girls wearing corsets +corsets in general really +armorial garments wearing worn as everyday wear. +"peasant" clothing with ragged edges +"peasants" in jet black, vibrant red, imperial purples.
Some of us can't afford linen (and in my case, I have to get it from other places because I live in a rural community. No one carries it around here. This is why I don't agree with the Garb Nazis.
In SCA, we make do with what we have. If you have linen and wool running around in scads, that's fine, but not all of us do, and you have to take this into account. I have a surcote that is made from a poly-blend. The material may not be period, but the construction is, and I think if it passes the ten-foot rule, then I'll take it.
Additionally, t-tunics are more than period for several groups (including my beloved East Romans), and that is literally the only garment which a person like me can even hope of making a garment look good (I don't sew well). |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:22 pm
|
|
|
|
Roetroc +tankards attached to belts
I personally like to err on the side of not dehydrating at events, myself...
Quote: +non-period shoes (C'mon it's not like it's hard or anything)
Perhaps not, but for those of us with no talent for leather working, they're prohibitively expensive. I have a pair of ghillies, but I live in Northshield, meaning that I'm not likely to be wearing them in December. I like my toes.
Quote: +people who don't wear wool because they are "allergic". Yes, wool itches, you aren't allergic, true wool allergies are quite rare.
Perhaps, but one has to believe someone when they say they're allergic to something. Very bad things happen to a person when something they're allergic to gets into their system. Hives may be merely unpleasant, but swelling throats and anaphylactic shock are not to be trifled with.
I have no particular beef with your other pet peeves. After all, we're all interested in different aspects of the game. But when it threatens someone's health, I absolutely draw the line. If a tankard on someone's belt is going to remind them to take a drink on a hot day, if the only footwear someone has that is warm enough to prevent someone from getting frostbite are modern, if a synthetic wool is used to prevent an allergic reaction, I'm not going to argue with the person about it. Ever.
Just my two cents on the matter.
Sarah T. Foole. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:20 pm
|
|
|
|
Berzerker_prime Roetroc +tankards attached to belts I personally like to err on the side of not dehydrating at events, myself... Quote: +non-period shoes (C'mon it's not like it's hard or anything) Perhaps not, but for those of us with no talent for leather working, they're prohibitively expensive. I have a pair of ghillies, but I live in Northshield, meaning that I'm not likely to be wearing them in December. I like my toes. Quote: +people who don't wear wool because they are "allergic". Yes, wool itches, you aren't allergic, true wool allergies are quite rare. Perhaps, but one has to believe someone when they say they're allergic to something. Very bad things happen to a person when something they're allergic to gets into their system. Hives may be merely unpleasant, but swelling throats and anaphylactic shock are not to be trifled with. I have no particular beef with your other pet peeves. After all, we're all interested in different aspects of the game. But when it threatens someone's health, I absolutely draw the line. If a tankard on someone's belt is going to remind them to take a drink on a hot day, if the only footwear someone has that is warm enough to prevent someone from getting frostbite are modern, if a synthetic wool is used to prevent an allergic reaction, I'm not going to argue with the person about it. Ever. Just my two cents on the matter. Sarah T. Foole.
Agreed. Ironically, this subject came up on the Calontir Listserv, and my friend Jenna brought up many of the same points.
Safety over the suspension of belief, easily. In fact, at the last event I went to, it was as cold as the low twenties and as warm as the mid-seventies (that's the Midwest for ya). His Majesty wore his mundane fleece vest over his garb because he wasn't warm enough. Another wore New Balance shoes because she lacked stability even in other mundane brands, let alone their medieval counterparts. I even had a battery-powered lantern at the last event I went to because I have bad night vision.
If His Majesty, and the rest of my friends here in Calontir feel we can slip a few modern comforts in to stay warm/safe/stable/etc., then, by gum, I'm going to do what I can to stay safe/warm/etc. Why put the SCA at risk by not taking personal safety precautions first? It just makes sense to do so. It's like our older members that use electric carts to move around the site: do we risk further health issues to them, or do they sign out of the SCA? I vote for the inclusiveness of the SCA, and invite them into the fold, granny carts (which are quite fun to race) and all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:53 am
|
|
|
|
Berzerker_prime Roetroc +non-period shoes (C'mon it's not like it's hard or anything) Perhaps not, but for those of us with no talent for leather working, they're prohibitively expensive. I have a pair of ghillies, but I live in Northshield, meaning that I'm not likely to be wearing them in December. I like my toes.
Well, what do you think someone would do in period if it was winter and the only shoes they owned were bog shoes?
We have proof that they had socks. I'll admit that probably they had one pair per person, but they still had socks. It's period, it's effective, and your feet will be warm. I mean, come on, if you're wearing a long skirt in winter, you probably want nice long socks anyway.
Now, your socks are probably not nailbound, but I'm sure most of us won't hold that against you.
[edit:] Tchipakkan reminds me that in places where they did not have knitting or nailbinding, they would make foot wraps to wear under shoes, which is basically a piece of cloth wrapped around one's foot (I guess that's kinda obvious...) or stuff the shoes loosely with wool, then put your foot in. After wearing them for a day, there will be a foot-shaped lining to your shoe.
If your foot doesn't fit, then take out wool until it does.
If you can't get your hands (or feet, rather) onto loose wool, dryer lint is very warm and effective, and a fairly abundant resource. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:15 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:47 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 1:22 pm
|
|
|
|
If you require a device to remind you to drink water (or similar) when it's hot, then perhaos you shouldn't be outside. If you were fighting I could udnerstand, but one does not fight whilst wearing a tankard (w I woudl assume) and there are far more period alternatives.
On the allergy thing, I do agree that if you do have a strong allergy then don't go near those things. However, the number of things that do have such extreme reactions are few and wool isn't one of them. These people who claim to have an alergic reaction generally are self diagnosed or diagnosed by some 'friend' or other unqualified individual.
There are alternatives to modern options, and it is often through sheer laziness that they aren't a) sought out, or b) utilised. Sure I understand getting sealskin mittens may be tough in some parts of the world, but there are near enough alternatives to wearing ski gloves.
As for wearing modern kit over historical stuff, that is an insult to the ideals of historical recreation. Just because you're king doesn#t me you aren't a git. If you are cold, take the few seconds to take off your outer clothes, bung your modern stuff on and then cover it up. If you can't do that then you really aren't even making a 'reasonable attempt' at anything.
Why is linen always so expensive, in every place I haven't been? It's rarely more than 50% more than cotton, looks better, is actually period, and will last and you will have an outfit that actually looks like it have a chance of belonging in the medieval era. Look around, I've picked up linen cheaper than cotton in the past, simply becasue people don't buy it as it is thought to be expensive. If you are going to spend hours sewing a garment (calculating your labout at even minimum wage) then you can afford a couple of bucks extra for linen. What's more, you'll never go back afterwards.
Really these aren't hard and I've heard all the argument before. Without a doctor's certificate all medical arguments are just hot air. I understand that in my increasing years, I will have to give up some aspects that I love, but that's aging, and I will deal with it. Need spectacles, I'll get a historical pair (regardless of how goofy they look). What's more if the people around me have a penchant for modern trainers, fleece vest, directors chairs and baby carriages, then I'm probably going to to be better off with all that blurry to maintain the semblance of an illusion.
Ohh another thing I dislike: directors chair. There;s a perfectly good period alternative right underneath it, it's called the ground.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:31 pm
|
|
|
|
Roetroc If you require a device to remind you to drink water (or similar) when it's hot, then perhaos you shouldn't be outside. If you were fighting I could udnerstand, but one does not fight whilst wearing a tankard (w I woudl assume) and there are far more period alternatives.
I do fight and yes, I do wear a tankard on my belt while fighting. One can never be sure what form of dispensation the water-bearers will use and it's just plain handy when there's a hold for water on the field and the marshalls have asked you not to move.
And it's not just outside that you need to drink water. Even inside in the middle of winter, it's a good idea to frequently drink water at events. If I don't keep my throat wet all day, I find it harder to sing in the choir at the end of the day.
Quote: As for wearing modern kit over historical stuff, that is an insult to the ideals of historical recreation. Just because you're king doesn#t me you aren't a git. If you are cold, take the few seconds to take off your outer clothes, bung your modern stuff on and then cover it up. If you can't do that then you really aren't even making a 'reasonable attempt' at anything.
Granted, I've never been royalty so I don't know what it's like behind the scenes. But I've never seen a royal who had just gobs and gobs of time at events. Usually they're booked to the minute. It's also an insult to keep people waiting. And if there's that freak temperature drop in the middle of court, then what? They're supposed to recess, take a whole bunch of time to get out of their garb and put it back on over their warm stuff before processing back in for the rest of court? That kind of thing would sure make me question an oath of service.
Quote: Why is linen always so expensive, in every place I haven't been? It's rarely more than 50% more than cotton, looks better, is actually period, and will last and you will have an outfit that actually looks like it have a chance of belonging in the medieval era. Look around, I've picked up linen cheaper than cotton in the past, simply becasue people don't buy it as it is thought to be expensive. If you are going to spend hours sewing a garment (calculating your labout at even minimum wage) then you can afford a couple of bucks extra for linen. What's more, you'll never go back afterwards.
For one thing, actual 100% linen is hard to find. You can find stuff that says it's linen for those prices and then you look and it's usually a blend. I come from a long line of sewing women in my mundane life and this has been the case for around three generations. 100% linen that cheap has usually "fallen off the back of a truck" somewhere.
And beyond that, there are those people who play the game for whom a couple dollars' difference means actually going to the event you're making the garb for or not. There's not much point in making perfectly historically accurate garb right down to the twist of the thread used to make the cloth if it means you can't afford to wear it anywhere.
And yes. I am one of these people. You do not know my situation. You have no right to say that I am lazy just because I have to use a cheaper alternative. At least I'm sticking to natural fibers and it's not like I'm entering my garb in an A&S competition.
Quote: Really these aren't hard and I've heard all the argument before. Without a doctor's certificate all medical arguments are just hot air. I understand that in my increasing years, I will have to give up some aspects that I love, but that's aging, and I will deal with it. Need spectacles, I'll get a historical pair (regardless of how goofy they look). What's more if the people around me have a penchant for modern trainers, fleece vest, directors chairs and baby carriages, then I'm probably going to to be better off with all that blurry to maintain the semblance of an illusion.
So we're supposed to shun someone for using an alternative to something they say they're allergic to unless they show us a note from their doctor? That's kinda crazy, if you ask me. Not only that, it's none of my business. And I guess I should just run into things and spend the day not being able to see enough to do anything that I love in the SCA because I have to wear glasses and can't get my hands on period specs. Just on the off hand that it might "shatter someone's illusion"? Please.
I have no problem with people who want to be perfectly accurate in everything they wear. In fact, I respect them for it. They've done a lot of research and put a lot of work into it. But when they try and tell me that I'm not playing the game "right" and that it's insulting to them and that I should "either shape up or leave" is when I dig in and draw the line. If I had to do everything you described, it would completely prohibit me from playing at all. But I guess that would be okay since I wouldn't be able to do anything that I do in the SCA and there wouldn't be a point to my even coming.
Anyway, I think this is going to be my last post in this thread. It's starting to feel a little personal...
Sarah T. Foole. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:36 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
