Authenticity, Reenactorisms, And Fantasy- A Reconsideration

The subject of historical authenticity is a hot-button issue in recreating historical fashions and it seems that hardly a day goes by that we don’t get a question on this issue. It’s been awhile since we first wrote this post and during that time we’ve constantly re-assessed our position. Furthermore, during this time of enforced isolation, we’ve had a lot of time to consider this issue and in the end, our position hasn’t changed much except perhaps we’ve tried to be open to new ideas and be receptive to change. So without further ado, let’s proceed… 🙂


One of the most frustrating aspects of working with historic costume is when we encounter garments, hats, or other costume items whose creators adamantly insist that they are historically correct when clearly that is not the case. In these situations, one’s social skills are put to the test and while we want to scream “you are clearly wrong!”, our polite response is “That’s nice,” “Wow, that really shows some effort,” or “You look really pretty today.” Kindness wins.

Trying to get things right- studying original garments is part of the game…

While we naturally applaud those who go to the time and effort to create some amazing designs, we also take an exception to those who create “historical” fashions but have clearly done little or no research on their own. We could go on for days finding numerous examples on the internet and then ravaging them for their lapses in historical accuracy but ultimately it’s cruel and counterproductive.

Is it wrong? Is it right? Choices have to be made and sometimes without the benefit of perfect information.

Counterproductive? But shouldn’t one constantly be on guard against the historically inaccurate? Yes and no. For us, the bigger issue is: “are we on the clock?” For example, if we are working on a film where we are being paid to provide historically accurate wardrobe (or as historically accurate as the production designer, director and budget will allow), of course we will act in a swift and sure manner to preserve the integrity of the production.

Trying to beat the clock… 3 am at the atelier…

Being “on the clock” also applies to our historical designs. If there are deviations from what is historically accurate, we are up-front about them. In some instances, we have had to make concessions to modernity due to availability of materials, client preferences, etc. Unfortunately, modern realities are part of recreating historical fashion and in some instances they can not be avoided. In the end, we are not paid to be the “costume police” and it’s a role we would prefer not having and we are not in the business of publicly calling people out. If you ask us privately what we think about a costume, we will be honest and supportive.

 

With that said, let’s look at some of the more common reasons why costumes fall short of the mark for historical accuracy. First, there are “reenactorisms”. Loosely defined, reenactorisms are those practices (for our purposes, as applied to costume) which have their basis in what reenactors or self-styled “living historians” do rather than what was historically done. Perhaps it the particular practice began as someone’s imperfect interpretation of something historical or simply someone making something up because they either didn’t know any better or were too lazy to properly research it. Some examples of reenactorisms often seen at late 19th historical events are ball gowns and evening dresses worn during the day, “saloon girls”, and men wearing far too many weapons.

During my gunfighter days…yes, I’m guilty!

Next, closely related to reenactorisms are those practices that can arise from various sources and are now preserved by “groupthink”. Roughly defined, groupthink is:

…a psychological that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without consideration of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences or groups

While this phenomena is similar to reenactorisms, its scope is more limited to specific groups who, simply stated, “do things a certain way because that’s just the way it’s done” with no regard to whether or not the practice is historically justified. Any attempt to introduce new information that might compel change is extremely unwelcome.

Period hairstyles? Go to the source… 🙂

One example of this that we have witnessed when a small women’s group decided that the only way to portray historically correct hairstyles of the 1870s and 1880s was for everyone to wear wigs. Not only were the wig hair styles historically questionable, but the wigs themselves did not look like any known hairpieces of the era. Unfortunately for the larger organization, this small group’s unfortunate fashion choice then became the de facto standard for a much larger group in which they belonged to. At no point were the use of wigs questioned; people in the larger group simply uncritically adopted the style thinking that it somehow “must be right”. Finally, yes we were asked at several points what our opinion of this practice was and we answered honestly and provided historical documentation but it was largely disregarded. C’est la vie.

Another phenomenon is what I call the “cool factor.” Essentially is a matter of people superimposing their modern sensibilities onto historic portrayals (“Look, I’m a walking arsenal just like in the movie xxx!”). One example of this is when it comes to firearms and especially for those recreating the Old West. Often times, men (and some women) will arm themselves to the teeth (literally in some cases) with multiple pistols, knives, and maybe a shotgun or rifle. Hey, we get it, it’s fun and you get to look larger than life. I too have been guilty of this: when I first started coming to Tombstone, I used to strap on my pistols and a knife or two and walk up and down Allen Street like something out of the movie Tombstone. However, in reality even the most dangerous gunfighter/desperado types rarely carried as much weaponry as modern reenactors even when they were expecting a fight.

Other reasons for costumes lacking historical accuracy can range from lack of research to attempting to take shortcuts in materials and/or construction. While taking shortcuts can be somewhat forgivable, lack of research is not. Now granted, the word “research” sounds somewhat intimidating but it really isn’t- it simply means reading up on the subject (aka “doing your homework”). While information resources were more limited before the advent of the internet, this is no longer the case today and there is a wealth of resources, both online and hardcopy, on 19th Century clothing that are readily accessible. Understanding 19th Century clothing is not difficult but it does require some thought to translate it into recreating garments of the period.

Sometimes one has to study original garments to get those details just right…

As for shortcuts, it’s understandable that people would want to take shortcuts wherever possible and we do it ourselves. However, the thing to remember is that the garment still has to have the correct period lines and details (i.e., the look) and this requires an attention to detail. In terms of materials, this can be more tricky but bear in mind that 19th Century fabrics had very specific uses and that it’s not always possible to get good results with fabrics made from manufactured or synthetic fibers, with a few exceptions, of course ( Blog post for another day!).

Sourcing the right fabric- sometimes it’s easy, sometimes not so much…

We have identified some of the sources behind why historic costume can miss the mark in terms of accuracy and while by no means is this survey exhaustive, it does offer a cautionary tale for anyone with a sincere desire to recreate historic fashions of the 19th Century (or any other period for that matter). Essentially, to have the right look, one must not only inform themselves about the subject, but they must also be willing to alter their beliefs as to what is correct in light of new information. We can never achieve total accuracy for the simple reason that we are not living in the all-encompassing world of the late 19th Century; a world that is impossible to completely recreate for a variety of reasons. To one degree or another, how we approach historical costume is affected by our modern beliefs and the best that we can do is to work around them. In short, we’re all a work in progress.

Adam1

We always aim to be on target… 🙂

In the end, we believe that it’s essential to be true to oneself and understand and accept that one must constantly be learning, open to new ideas and to admit be ready to adapt and new information is discovered that changes how we view things. We looking forward to what the future brings.

Life Outside Of LA…

Are you all planning as to what you will do when “Shelter in Place” /”Safer at Home” is finished? I’m planning to take a truck load of things to #11 in Tombstone and start hanging draperies and leaded glass pieces in the windows! The big piano is going to be moved to the opposite wall, and that pretty gold settee and two ruby velvet chairs are going to take that place. In the corner, there will be a side table with some antique lamps. I know…getting ahead of myself here, but there *is* life outside of LA. I could use some wide open spaces. 🙂

Tombstone Meets Star Trek…

And for something a bit different today…Star Trek meets the Gunfight at the OK Corral! This was a popular post a few years back so I thought I’d bring it up again. And for bonus points, here’s a behind-the-scenes picture of our favorite Vulcan going “heeled”… 🙂 Enjoy!


Spectre7

Today we return briefly to Tombstone through the medium of television and specifically the episode of the original Star Trek television series entitled “Spectre of the Gun.” First aired on October 25, 1968, the episode centered on the inhabitants of planet Theta Kiokis II using an episode out of earth history, the gunfight at the OK Corral, as a means of punishing Captain Kirk for attempting to establish contact with the Melkotians in spite of being warned away by them.

The sets are somewhat surreal with incomplete walls, clocks and pictures that hand in mid-air, etc. because the Melkotians are using Kirk’s thoughts as the basis for Tombstone and the gunfight to recreate them as an illusion. The premise is a cleaver one and one can see it reflective of the spirit of the late 1960s with references to Man’s tendencies towards violence and killing, often for little reason.

In terms of props and costumes, this was no doubt easy to put together since Paramount Studios still had a large collection of wardrobe and props suitable for Westerns (after all, this was the tail end of the heyday of the television Western). Also what is interesting is that while this was filmed on a soundstage, they actually have a live horse or two as background- nice touch that you probably would not see if it were filmed today.

Turning to the costumes, it’s pretty much television B-Western stuff but in context of this being a Star Trek episode, it works. Here are some shots of Ensign Chekhov with Sylvia, the love interest:

Spectre3

Spectre5

Spectre6

We first meet her in a saloon girl style dress that’s right out of B-Western Central Casting. Unfortunately, I could not get a good screen shot of the whole dress but it’s short and the color is appropriately bright and gaudy.

Spectre12

Chekhov with his love interest Sylvia.

Here we see Sylvia in something more demure, a generic bustle dress. Once again, I was unable to secure a screen shot but it’s a pretty generic B-Western look for the 1870s or 80s. Like much of this costuming of this era, the actresses did not wear any period undergarments (like say, a corset) and it’s evident in this picture. The hat appears to be something from the 1930s or 1950s that’s been reconditioned.

Next we have the Enterprise landing party. No surprises here and they’re all wearing the stereotypical buscadero rigs for their guns, a look that was invented for Hollywood in the early 1920s. The web belt on Spock is interesting though- no doubt they all were simply dug out of the prop room with little thought except that they fit.

Kirk_and_landing_party_in_Tombstone

Now let’s take a look at some of the other characters:

Spectre15

The Earps, from left to right: Wyatt, Morgan, and Virgil.

Morgan_Earp

Morgan Earp

320x240 (1)

Virgil Earp

Spectre_of_the_Gun_097

Wyatt Earp

And of course no gunfight at the OK Corral is complete without:

Spectre11

Doc Holliday

And we can’t forget:

Spectre14

Johnny Behan

Kind of a contrast to this: 🙂

johnbehansherrif1

Johnny Behan as portrayed in the movie Tombstone.

And for a few more shots:

Spectre9

Doc Holliday and Dr. McCoy

images

The “walkdown” to the OK Corral.

0306_a

Morgan is about to get his chance to settle the score….

The above shot of Morgan Earp, framed by lightning is very effective in revealing his character, a manic individual who is bent on a gunfight no matter what.

Spectre13

The OK Corral complete with live horse as background set dressing. 🙂

Star-Trek-The-Original-Series-DeForest-Kelley-s-script-for-Spectre-of-the-Gun-4

No getting out of it now…

TOS3x06g

And the fight is on!

From a costume perspective there’s not a lot going on here but as a Star Trek episode, it was imaginative and fresh for the time. In some respects it hits on themes that are still relevant in later film versions of the Gunfight at the OK Corral and the events leading up to it.