Wow. Where to begin?
I had the joy of attending 'Beyond Boom Boom Sticks and Fancy Dress Balls: Women's Life in 18th Century America,' a Symposium, yesterday. Held at the lovely Washington Crossing State Park in Pennsylvania (a stone's throw from Jersey, LOL) it was skillfully conceived and orchestrated by the talented Kimberly Boice of Mrs. Boice's Historie Academie and the Friends of Washington Crossing Historic State Park. And before I go any further, please allow me to express my delight and thanks to Mrs. Boice for running everything so beautifully. Great venue, excellent speakers, good food and nibbles, and fascinating attendees. What more could anyone ask for?
And so to the meat of it: the presentations. There were four, and I do not mind telling you that two of them were very far outside my wheelhouse. Yet the speakers' obvious passion for their topics kept me interested and certainly informed. (The two mentioned were about women re-enactors in U.S. Army regiments and about weaving. Those of you who know me know my camping and hiking days are behind me LOL, and that my sewing or weaving ambitions extend to re-attaching buttons and creating rather knobby knitted scarves. Therefore, you can understand why these immersive experts' presentations really gave my brain a workout!)
I could write thousands of words about every aspect of the Symposium, but I will instead focus on the presentations, with emphasis on the two I found most directly applicable to my avocation as a docent at The Oldest House and my new position as a Board Member at French Azilum, Inc., both here in Northeastern PA.
Mary Miley Theobald, author of 'Death by Petticoat and Other Myths About Women in Early America,' was the first speaker, giving us a tantalizing sample of her list of de-bunked myths. I recommend her book, 'Death by Petticoat' and her website and blog to anyone who, like me, gives tours to visitors at historic homes or museums. We are probably all guilty of perpetuating untruths--all in good faith!--told to us by more experienced guides and docents, but this book can help us stick to the truth.
For example, 'sleep tight' may not really be exclusively from the tradition of making sure rope beds were tautly stretched to provide good support, although it is a logical assumption. I have often, in showing visitors to The Oldest House, pointed out our 1830's cannonball rope bed and repeated this very maxim. However, Theobald noted Saturday that the adjective 'tight,' used as early as the 1570's to mean 'drawn or stretched,' is however related to the Middle English word 'thight,' meaning dense or compact and by association, well put together or healthy. Her argument is that 'sleep tight' is really a wish for a healthy, refreshing night's sleep rather than a cautionary statement regarding the bed's rope suspension. The truth may be that the logic of the taut rope association combined with the original sense of the Middle English word, but that the latter was lost as the meaning of 'tight' in the language altered through time. Thus the modern myth that 'sleep tight' is entirely due to the need to have tightly strung bed ropes was born. It's an applicable side note that, although rope beds are as old if not older than the Greek civilization, tighteners specific to the rope bed were not invented until the 18th century and were expensive, so only the wealthy could afford them. For all we know, 'sleep tight' may at one time have meant a wish for the person retiring to sleep as well as the wealthy people who could tighten their beds with just a flick of the wrist.
Other myths, more specifically about women, were also addressed--no, women in the Victorian Era did not have a couple of ribs removed to create a tinier waist. First, there is no account anywhere in primary historical sources such as diaries or journals about such an operation. Also, and perhaps more convincingly, such surgery at that time would probably have resulted in death if not sepsis and deformity. This myth, Theobald asserted, is clearly a modern misinterpretation of a past situation. Yes, women's waists were smaller 150 years ago than they are now, generally speaking. Women (and men) were also a lot shorter then. It is only since WW II that people have attained, in general, the height and girth of today's population.
Corsets were tightly laced and medical study has proven that constant lacing did rearrange internal organs to some degree. How could it not? But no one had ribs removed to make the waist smaller.
Theobald's study ranges through a panoply of myths, some surprising, some we may dismiss out of hand as ridiculous. Both her blog and her book are well worth investigating.
The next two speakers awed me with the scope of their knowledge and experience, so far out of my area of expertise. Carrie Fellows, a member of the Augusta Co. Militia and Executive Director of the Hunterdon County NJ Cultural and Heritage Commission spoke on 'Best Practices for Women of the Army.' Noting that women in the armed forces are sadly under-represented in both art and writing of the period, Fellows spoke of her real experiences as an extremely authentic re-enactor--as with anything, there is a range of authenticity in re-enactments and re-enactors--with humor and veracity.
She recommends front lacing stays (corset) for obvious reasons, since this is the most practical if one must dress oneself, as women in the Army did.
And no, women in the Army were not always prostitutes. Although ladies of pleasure certainly were in evidence, Fellows pointed out that wives could and did choose to follow their husbands on march, even bringing their children at times, in order to keep the family together. And to perhaps keep their husbands from seeking 'pleasure' with those other ladies! The term 'camp follower,' which is generally a term of denigration, should not be, because women in the Army were most often wives, laundresses, sutlers and folks in other similar and respectable positions.
A valuable tip from Fellows about sources to use when researching women of the lower and working classes and their clothing was to use primary sources like newspapers, and consult the 'runaway ads.' These usually contained description of the runaway's clothing; Fellows mentioned that while wild color combinations were common, the re-enactor wishing to be authentic is encouraged to stay with colors that could have been obtained from natural dyes--all that were available until the middle of the 19th century. She also recommended Paul Sandby's drawings for insightful portraits of the average woman in Colonial times.
One thing Fellows didn't mention, probably because she did not have time to, were women who disguised themselves as men to serve in the Army. Incidences of this have been documented and while it wasn't common, it was perhaps more common than commonly thought!
Fellows stressed bringing only what you could carry yourself, and gave examples of the various bags and totes and sacks women of the period used--and which she herself uses when she is on march re-enacting--to carry belongings and supplies. Fellows also pointed out the need to adhere to modern safety and health practices while attempting authenticity while re-enacting. One example is that she will carry electrolyte 'Gatorade' type tablets with her on a long march because, as she says, 'people go down.' Not period correct, but you don't want to be so authentic a re-enactor that you become unconscious and ill from dehydration.
The third speaker was Mara Riley, and her topic was weaving in 18th century North America. While her myriad examples of various types of cloth along with their jaw-droppingly peculiar names like 'fustian' and 'shalloon' had me giggling and scribbling notes, my big take away from her presentation was the fact that spinning and particularly weaving in the 18th century was largely a proto-factory type of enterprise. In this sense, Riley echoed Theobald by de-bunking the myth of the Colonial housewife happily spinning at her large wheel before a cozy fire. Riley claimed that the spinning wheels visitors see in every historic home or museum, and I must say, The Oldest House has two of them, are often products of the late 19th century's Colonial Revival, not Colonial originals. And around those spinning wheels, she said, arose the mythos of the Colonial housewife spinning at the hearth.
Some women did spin wool into yarn, but they would have brought their yarn to a weaver or weaving enterprise to be made into cloth. They probably would have also brought their yarn to a dyer, since coloring yarn was another aspect of fabric making that quickly attained proto factory status. This does not mean that no housewives ever spun, dyed or wove their own cloth, she said, but the fact was that commercially available cloth was cheaper and certainly easier to obtain than doing it yourself.
Boggling--to me--details about the weft and the warp, for which one needs a wheel, were followed by a discussion of drop spindles or hand spindles. Also known as 'distaffs,' these items were in essence portable pre-spinning tools, meant to hold the flax or wool in an untangled manner so it would be ready for spinning. Certainly, Riley said, women couldn't drag a whole spinning wheel, even a small one, out with them if they were keeping a flock of sheep or doing other work, so the distaff became a ubiquitous accessory of the rural working classes.
I'm still a bit confused as to what's a weft and what's a warp but I do know that 'fustian' is made of a cotton weft combined with a linen warp. And 'shalloon' is a light weight twill.
The final speaker, if I had my toes put to the coals and were forced to pick just one, was the most inspiring. Kirsten Hammerstrom from Providence, RI's John Brown House (1786) discussed a relatively new approach in the presentation of historic house museums: immersive first person interpretive history experiences. Combined with vignettes composed of mannequins appropriately dressed and surrounded with artifacts and furnishing which immediately tell a story, this immersive approach allows docents and tour guides to assume the identity of someone who lived or worked in the historic home. (She was most adamant that anyone living in a house more than a one room shack would have had at least one servant and probably more than that, even if they were not especially wealthy people).
In this method, docents greet and interact with the visitors taking the tour through this adopted persona. If well done, Hammerstrom said, the approach gives visitors an unforgettable experience and an exciting impression of the home they are touring. Certainly, the competition for tourism dollars is part of every docent's awareness, so anything to give an edge is a good thing.
Certainly, this approach takes more time, and a bit more gumption perhaps, than just giving the rote speech: 'the house was built in blah blah by blah blah' and so on. But what an opportunity!
I have toured a couple of historic homes where this approach was taken, sometimes very successfully and sometimes less so. Often, the docents 'broke character' to make a comment or clarify something but this did not detract from their presentation, at least in my opinion. But Hammerstrom's talk really has inspired me to take this approach, at least when I give tours at The Oldest House in upcoming seasons.
Hammerstrom mentioned ways of building the character you choose, and suggested using newspapers and any diaries available to find out what was happening at various times in the past. This, she explained, would enable the docent to tie him or herself to the past quite firmly by discussing these events, and would also bring the visitors back in time, as it were, as well.
So, an invigorating, inspiring day, with lots of great people and tons of references--I've been busily downloading and ordering books etc. all day! I highly recommend Mrs. Boice's Historie Academie to anyone in the historical house/museum field and they have a Facebook page as well.
This year when I give tours at The Oldest House, you may possibly meet, well, me. But it's more likely that you'll meet Elizabeth Skinner Sturdevant, or Emma Lacey Mauselle Williams, the two female owners of the House who most 'speak' to me an an historical interpreter.
I would also like to take this approach when training tour guides at French Azilum's LaPorte House. However, I have more research to do and other work to complete before I can tackle that mission.
So, see you later...I'd best get busy researching!
No comments:
Post a Comment