A Boudoir for Three (Bodices and Boudoirs)
Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device.
You can download and read online A Boudoir for Three (Bodices and Boudoirs) file PDF Book only if you are registered here.
And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with A Boudoir for Three (Bodices and Boudoirs) book.
Happy reading A Boudoir for Three (Bodices and Boudoirs) Bookeveryone.
Download file Free Book PDF A Boudoir for Three (Bodices and Boudoirs) at Complete PDF Library.
This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats.
Here is The CompletePDF Book Library.
It's free to register here to get Book file PDF A Boudoir for Three (Bodices and Boudoirs) Pocket Guide.
Adding them into a cat or article makes it easier for other users to find and use them.
Find a Book
Thank you! Maybe you can have "corsets by year" as your own personal private little playground, but to be able to find things and organize things for the purpose of having content on hand when needed, decade categories are pragmatically much more useful than year categories for the rest of us. Please don't mess things up again.
Churchh , 11 January UTC. Your latest ungrammatical "contribution" to my User talk page was more comprehensible, but also more counterfactual.
How it can be "hard" to find images which are sorted into a few broad decade categories, as opposed to images which are sorted into numerous tiny little individual year categories each one of which may actually contain very few images??? If your principle of organization were followed, then a user looking for fashion images from a year period would have to tediously and slowly look through separate categories to find what she wanted, whereas according to my principle of organization, she would only have to look at one or two decade categories, and then would be done.
And perhaps even more importantly, the individual year organization of Categoryth century fashion still stands for everything after the late 's mainly because I have very little interest in re-categotrizing hundreds of corset images, many of which are of rather poor quality or have little meaningful relevance , and very little of your 19th-century stuff is from before the late 's. I can tolerate the current situation because my interests are mainly before the late 's. As I said before, if you want to establish your own little private playground for your corset images, by all means feel to free to do so create "Years in Corsetry", or whatever you want, and go hog wild , but PLEASE do not disrupt the efforts of people who have a broad general interest in fashion history which you in fact DON'T and are trying to establish a well-organized resource on general broad fashion history.
Churchh , 1 March UTC. I have no idea what year in the second half of the decade of the 's this comes from, and since it's not conventional high fashion, reference to fashion plates of individual years won't help much Your latest round of comments on my talk page are extremely cryptic again, but if you're trying to challenge the primacy of Imageempire-bra-vie-parisienne-henri-montaut. Churchh , 13 March UTC. What does that graph mean??? I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons see copyright tagging below.
If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i. If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too.
You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Why is that? Haabet, if you really knew something about overall fashion history instead of corset fetishism , then it would be fairly obvious -- the woman on the left has short sleeves, long white gloves, a lowish neckline, somewhat fragile-looking trimming, an elaborate hairstyle but no head-covering , and is carrying a folded fan; while the woman on the right is attired for outdoors in a bonnet and something like a short "spencer" jacket.
And no, eveningwear wasn't always longer than daywear -- especially if it was intended for dancing dancing dresses could have hemlines as high as an inch or two above the ankles during the general Regency period.
Full text of "Womans World, Vol. 3"
And most important of all, if you would provide proper categories etc. Churchh , 8 May UTC.
- Best Vintage at <3 images in | Vintage, Vintage fashion, Vintage love.
- GodFusion: Inner Destination: Inspiration in a World of Confusion?
- User talk:Haabet/Old.
- Welcome To My Victorian Dolls, Victorian Traditions, The Victorian Era and Me Blog.
- Cassini at Saturn: Huygens Results (Springer Praxis Books).
- Download PDF A Boudoir for Three (Bodices and Boudoirs).
Haabet, all I did was translate the word "Trauerkleid" into English. And no, widows didn't wear always veils -- in fact, at that period, I think they rarely did though they almost always wore caps when indoors.
A Matter of Formality
Haabet, it was pointless of you to repeat almost exactly the same queries on my User talk page when I already answered them as best I could above — and for someone who is rather stingy, partial, and dilettantory about including meaningful information on the images you upload, your sudden attack of stringent demands for exact sources is somewhat inconsistent not to say perhaps hypocritical. I derived the general appellations "daywear" and "eveningwear" from applying my knowledge of the period and a little common sense to the content of the images themselves, and put them in because chose YOU chose not to provide any significant description of the content or context of these images when you uploaded them.
Since I'm the main author on the article en in fashion , I currently seem to be the main wiki-active expert on the fashions of the period right now, but I'm sure that PKM the only other signifcant author on en in fashion would probably back me up.
If TrauerkleidLaMode. Haabet, I really don't have any more time to spend on this matter, until and unless you have some new information to bring to bear on the issue rather than just repeating yourself again without listening to what I have to say. Haabet, I scanned my stuff in from a variety of sources some scanned as long ago as , and I didn't always write down where I found a reproduction of a nineteenth-century image nor is this info generally necessary for Wikipedia. But if you have a specific question about a particular image, then I may or may not be able to help Churchh , 9 May UTC.
Haabet, ImageTherepository. It's big, but it's a big piece of crapola. Why not just link to Image:Morning-dress-Ackermanns-ca Churchh , 11 May UTC. Haabet, no sooner had I gotten Categorys fashion into such moderately satisfactory shape that I linked to it from article ens in fashion , then you started trying to sabotage it.
I really don't care what you do with your hundreds of corset images and crudely-crayon-colored patent illustrations, but I want to put actual real 19th century fashion illustrations in the decade categories, where people can actually find them without clicking on numerous tiny pointless individual year categories.
Churchh , 19 May UTC. It's true that the decade of the 's is not a "natural" fashion epoch, but that definitely doesn't mean that English Wikipedia article ens in fashion is going to be deleted at any time in the forseeable future since decades are as convenient a classification system as any, and since no strong desire has been expressed among Wikipedia contributors to try to divide the 19th century fashion articles into "natural" epochs. These would very often be difficult to dcetermine, in any case -- would you put the end of the bustle era in , , or ? All such transitions were of course gradual, and dividing into decades avoids the problems of subjectivity or periodization conflicts.
And when you were trying to write fashion articles, all you did was succeed in writing 5 or 6 individual year stubs " in fashion" etc. Your vision of a hundred individual year articles from " in fashion" to " in fashion" has not been accepted by those working on the "History of Western fashion" series. Churchh , 21 May UTC.
- Cecil B. DeMille and American Culture "d0e".
- Le Chant de locéan (French Edition);
- Similar authors to follow?
Thanks for uploading Image:Dannebrog. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. Valentinian talk , 31 May UTC. Hi, I was wondering what the source is for the image Image:Beautiful teeth. It's an interesting image but it would be useful to know what explanatory text went with the numbers on the image. The dark green thing in the painting is a kind of Continental European peasant-woman bodice thing the same as in image Image Churchh , 18 June UTC.
All Stays and many old corset was over her clothes. The bul start in Directoire era, and been longer by the time. Haabet, what is your evidence for the assertion that corsets were worn on the outside of clothing before ? There was a brief semi-minor trend towards women wearing short bodices on the outside of their clothing as part of high fashion in the second half of the s though this trend was by no means as prominent as some people -- such as the costume designer on the movie Die Marquise von O -- think it was , but even in this ephemeral fashion, the bodices would not really have been true "stays" -- they would not have had busks or stiffening, nor tabs at the bottom, etc.
Other than that, I'm really not too sure what you're talking about -- I'm flipping through the 18th-century women's chapter of Blanche Payne's "History of Costume" 1st edition , and I don't see any women wearing corsets on the outside of their clothes Churchh , 20 June UTC. The problem is that.
Thats have two lacings. All class used that.
The normally fashionable pair of stays , do have many stays, as it look solid! And this have the same fabric and the same trimmings as the skirt. This have only one lacing. Only the rich used that, and only the by special events. Yes, you can say as the pair of stays been a body part of that dress. Many many books is upper-class books and the writers despise the ordinary fashion, and only write about the fashion in upper-class by the special events. That have also the best sources, and have the greatest quick changes.
Commons is international and you have need to see the fashion in a wide perspective. We do not talk about the same fashion. As for Image:Lady17hundreds. And finally, my understanding of Image:Womanbabystays. In any case, it certainly isn't at all typical of what upper and middle-class women wore in Western Europe during the 18th century, so its relevance may be rather limited Churchh , 29 June UTC.
A Primer on Regency Era Women’s Fashion
Why does that image have "Punch" in its name? Punch was a humor magazine, and didn't publish fashion plates as such, nor did it ordinarily publish in color during the nineteenth century. In love with the sheer novelty of femaleness, Philip is easy prey — and Rachel does not hesitate to take advantage.