Reflections on Back Lacing Being Back in the 21st Century

It seems as though most of March and April I spent in earlier times--or at least, dressed for earlier times! Between Downton Abbey themed events (Victorian, Edwardian), Titanic themed events (Edwardian) and regular Queen Victoria's Court Victorian teas, lunches, fashion shows, et cetera, each weekend brought at least one, and in one grueling but fun case THREE, events, each requiring (because I'm me) a different ensemble.
Yeah, yeah, I could just wear the same thing. But wouldn't that be, well, dull? And one thing my best friends will tell you: I am NOT dull!
So on with the corsets and petticoats and chemises and pantalettes and walking suits, gowns, tea dresses, gloves, fans, reticules and hats. And hair ornaments. And parasols. Whew.
If you think getting ready in today's world takes time, it's a breeze compared to what one has to go through and coordinate to dress in the style of centuries past!
This summer I will be helping out at the LaPorte House at French Azilum, in addition to my docenting at The Oldest House. The latter will be limited because of our foundation project at the House, which will give me time to ease my way in to the French Azilum routine. I hope that by next season, when I'll be docenting and curating period clothing exhibits at both homes, I'll be easy and adept at both.
But pursuant to the volunteering at Azilum--and if you don't know what I'm talking about, please google 'French Azilum' and find out about the refuge planned and built in the late 1700's for Marie Antoinette, would she have been able to successfully escape France. She did not, nor did her husband, Louis XVI, or their children. And although nothing but a foundation remains of the scores of little rustic houses built to house the Queen, and which did house some of France's nobility who did successfully escape, French Azilum is a thriving non profit historical site unique in the world. It also boasts the John LaPorte House, built in 1833-36 and quite grand for a house stuck out in the middle of nowhere.
Anyway, pursuant to that activity at Azilum I have been expanding my Georgian and Regency wardrobe because the Regency, of course, suits the LaPorte House (although, like The Oldest House, it was inhabited for decades and generations, and virtually any period of clothing from Regency through WW I or even later if you really want to be 'modern' would be suitable for a docent giving tours). Although the Georgian is too early for the LaPorte House it certainly works for the whole Marie Antoinette vibe. So I plan to wear both, depending on how energetic I feel and the weather.
Energetic, you wonder? Yes. I dress myself because I do not have a lady's maid. So I've made a couple of adjustments to the fastenings, in particular, of my gowns, so that I can get into them solo. Actually, getting out of them is more difficult, but that's another blog!
And while I'm at it, please allow me to weigh in on the subject of back lacing. My new Georgian gowns are both back laced. I like it. And I've figured out a way to do it without a lady's maid, a way which was unavailable to women back in the 18th century.
But--back lacing. This has recently reared its ugly head, due in large part to the popularity of the Starz series Outlander, taken from Gabaldon's books. The story is set in the Georgian period in Scotland and France, thus far. Several women are portrayed wearing back lacing gowns, jackets, dresses, etc. A couple of historical fashion mavens, who no doubt know a lot more about historical fashion than I do, have begun reaming the fashion designers of the program because they included back lacing gowns. So I have to have my say.
First, although I'm sure we've all studied hundreds of extant gowns, dresses, jackets, etc that have survived from this period, none of us lived then or time traveled back to that period. At least that I've heard of. So although we deduce from careful study, we do not empirically KNOW.
Having said that, let's also remember the constraints costume designers are working with, including time, and budget.
Also, I was once told by a woman whose grandmother had told her (and at the time this lady told ME, she was in her 90's) that women wore back lacing corsets and back fastening dresses and gowns ON PURPOSE to show that they were wealthy enough to employ a ladies' maid. Think about it: you cannot really properly do yourself up in a back lacing anything. You can try, but it won't be right. You need someone to lace you up and securely fasten the laces. So back lacing garments, according to this lady's grandmother, who had been born before the Civil War, in 1850, became a status symbol.
And finally, don't we think, honestly, that people back in 1750 or 1780 or whenever were as varied and individualized about their clothing as we are today? I do. They didn't all wear the same things. Yes, advances in dyeing and weaving in later decades made more choices available, and advances in indoor plumbing made washing oneself as well as clothing much easier, and both of these meant that brighter colors, patterns, etc. as well as whites became more usual by the later Victorian period. Wealth and status still drove--and still do-- how many outfits a woman had and what color and what material she could afford to choose for her clothing. But given their individual constraints of money and status don't you think that woman would have tried to have as many outfits of as many types and colors as they could?
So: back lacing. Why not? If a woman could afford a maid, or had a nanny, or even sisters who could help her to dress, why not wear a fashion that was just that much more special? I bet that fact made the wearer, especially if she was not born to wealth, feel particularly grand.
Just like the diatribes I read about front lacing bustier type garments not being worn: I doubt that they were worn by women of, well, of good reputation. But by serving wenches in busy portside taverns who perhaps plied another trade besides serving ale to earn some extra money? Sure: front lacing corset type garments are easy to undo and re-do and their very resemblance to undergarments is titillating--no doubt the reason behind the fashion.
So too, I doubt that back lacing gowns and dresses and corsets were usually worn by women from the working classes and lower classes: they were only worn by ladies who were dressed by someone, i.e., their maid or nanny. With some exceptions, see above.
Why aren't there very many back lacing gowns still around? Who knows? Maybe there were comparatively fewer of them because they were reserved for the elite, and so fewer have come down to us.

I look forward to the summer and swanning around French Azilum in my panniers (I have two types, cage and solid!) wearing my Georgian gowns with their stomachers and high fashion back lace design. I greatly enjoyed my Victorian and Edwardian dresses, gowns and suits, corsets and hats and gloves and fans and reticules...the number of pieces is astounding!
But this morning, as I pulled on my camisole, tied a scarf around my neck and shrugged into my jeans and linen blazer I smiled, because it felt so very easy to be back in the 21st century.

Update on Period Clothing Exhibit...s...PLURAL! And a new gown, and a new BOOK!

Well, if that headline isn't enough to get you reading this post, nothing is.
Hello. We have survived winter here in the Northern Hemisphere, and it was quite a mild one. However, our spring is being interrupted by a last smack from Winter: a couple inches of snow, some stiff breezes, and more cold temps. But it will not last. And I have hope.

So...update on the Period Clothing Exhibit. S. Plural. Yes. As most of you know, I own rather a nice amount of period clothing items, from 1770's through to the 1920's. The majority of this is on display at The Oldest House, along with a few items the House itself owns. I change things out seasonally, although the things owned by the House do not change.
I was recently honored by being asked to join the board of another Historic Home Museum in our area, French Azilum. You may not know it, and you probably won't believe it (I didn't at first) but here in northeastern Pennsylvania was the site where French Royalists built a little village for Queen Marie Antoinette to flee to, if she could escape France.
Well, she didn't. And the original structures in the village are gone. But the land is still there, and another Frenchman, LaPorte, built a nice, big, quite fancy house there in 1826--the LaPorte House. And as I am on the Board, I'll be bringing my expertise such as it is in period clothing to the items the LaPorte House and French Azilum, Inc. own.
I took a cursory view a few weeks ago, and they have some very nice things. The plan is to do this year more or less what was done last year, perhaps with a couple of small exceptions or additions: it depends. But next year, in 2017, I hope very much to be able to mount a clothing exhibit using mostly what French Azilum owns. I'll fill in with some pieces from my own collection, and a it's a very different sort of house to The Oldest House, the display at the LaPorte House will be quite apart from the Oldest House display.
I think this will be great fun, and I am absolutely gobsmackingly honored to think that I am now curating TWO Period Clothing Exhibits in this region. What an honor, truly, and I promise to do my best.

Ok, New Gown! Thanks to my friend Diana, I have discovered an absolute genius hidden away here in the Endless Mountains: this lady is a superb seamstress, but not only that, she knows how to work with antique fabrics! And...she LIKES that stuff! So last night one of the period clothing pages I follow posted this lovely shot of a gown from the late 1800's all embroidered at neck and hem with bees. There's lace and other stuff as well, but it was the bees that caught my eye. They may have been used by Napoleon (we won't discuss him, as I am descended from Louis VII of France, and so am clearly a Royalist!) but my name means 'bee.'
It was a no brainer, and half jokingly I sent the pic to my genius seamstress, Jean, and said, wanna make this for me?
Her reply: sure. Love it. Might be a little expensive tho.
My reply: full steam ahead! We've determined that we will bring the design forward a couple of decades, to about 1912, and give it more of an Edwardian than Victorian feel. I've sent her a rough sketch/photo of what I think I'd like and will have to set up a meeting with her soon so we can get started. It would be splendid if I had it to wear some time this year!

So that almost makes up for the fact that because of the aforementioned snow, I was unable to travel north (more snow, really awful roads and high winds) to the English Country Dance Brunch and Dance yesterday. Well, ECD classes resume the end of April, and there's a dinner in June, so I hope I'll be able to make that!

And finally...the new book. Yes, I'm on the last steps for the current murder mystery work in progress, due out late this summer. The newest murder mystery will be published the end of this week. But meanwhile, I've been thinking about what to do with Izzy ever since I left her in a rather precarious predicament at the conclusion of A CHRISTMAS IN TIME. All I can tell you is, I'm one chapter in, and having fun. When will this book publish? Probably this autumn. We hope the foundation project at The Oldest House will begin fairly soon now that our state budget is in place (that's another topic for another blog). With luck, we'll be able to have the annual Fancy Fair in October, and I'd like to try to have the new book...called CORRIDORS IN TIME...ready then. We'll see.

So, as always, thanks for reading. Find me on twitter at @LadyCourville, on Facebook as Deborah deBilly dit Courville and my page as Deborah L. Courville. Leave a comment, send me pictures, whatever. Thank you!