(no subject)

[sistawendy]

After two library outings and a little searchery I must reluctantly conclude that nobody really knows what Queen Esther would have worn. I've been charged with costuming us all for Purim, and for me there's only one way to do it: the anal-retentive way. Her Nibs tried to talk me into doing Esther without a corset and makeup. As if that's ever going to happen. I might even have to make myself a new corset because I don't have any that are white or neutral.

Apparently I tortured my son with sleep deprivation by ironing to groovy music (KEXP Expansions) until 10:30. Aww! Poor boyboy. We go floppy tonight.

Seattle Jewish Film Festival flicks: we saw "Nowhere In Africa", which while well acted and written was a little predictable. I wouldn't have gone if Her Nibs hadn't wanted to. Tonight, "Divine Intervention", which is a comedy -- if you can believe it -- about the intifada that's gotten really good reviews. Watch this space.

Comments

Guten Abend, SistaWendy

[ex-skarrin.livejournal.com]

I'm that strange little man the Princess hurled at you last Thursday evening.

Anyway: have you heard of/seen "Trembling Before God"? According to my (extremely Orthodox now, back-then-very-SF-Anglican) ex, it's heart-stoppingly beautiful/disturbing/worth seeing.

I, being the skeptic (especially in the face of his now-obscenly-smug conversion to the One - the ONLY One - True Christianity), would like an opinion from a Jewish person who has experience living outside the "established sexual identity norms", ahem. IF you wouldn't mind.

:)

(No, I'm never ever this stuffy in person; I'm just overly-caffienated and verbose.)

I will ask Mother

[staxxy.livejournal.com]

Mother being the proffessional costumer and historical buff that she is, she will know. I will get back to you with this information in the next 2 days. I am certain that her nibs is *right*, however, Esther would *not* have worn a corset. They did not have them at that time. They used other methods of breast bondage instead.

anyway, details to come as soon as I can get them.

Re: I will ask Mother

[sistawendy.livejournal.com]

Thanks! Yes, of course she didn't wear a corset, but she had a reasonable waist naturally, unlike yours truly. Hence the neutral or white corset to be worn (*gasp*!) as underwear.

Re: I will ask Mother

[staxxy.livejournal.com]

um, *no* she didn't. That's a myth from hollywood. Back in the darker ages, before supermarkets the more attractive and wealthy women were larger, no reasonable waist. I spoke to Mother. She would have worn formal Byzantian. I have photos I can get to show you, I need to go down to Mother's and pick them up from her. She made a costume that is the exact style and such that you need for Esther. I will show you the photos, perhaps my Seestor will even be kind enough to let me borrow her scanner so I can just paste them up for you. :)

Re: I will ask Mother

[sistawendy.livejournal.com]

Yay photos! I can't wait!

One thing you can be sure Esther had that I don't is a big difference between hip and waist. Yeah, I could pad instead of cinch and have my lower body more in proportion with my shoulders, but I'd rather cinch because a) I'm not sure I have the time to experiment with padding, which I've never made before, b) I could use a corset in a different color for another costume, and c) cinching is more fun. :D

I keep hearing that the feminine ideal was much larger in antiquity, but after spending the last several days looking at second millenium B.C.E. art I'm not sure I buy it. Sure, these women weren't Kate Moss, but few if any of them are bigger than the current average (and given how that's increased in recent decades, most of them might be smaller). Consider the past and present Middle Eastern preference for young brides: women -- girls, really -- whose figures haven't had much time to spread.

Re: I will ask Mother

[staxxy.livejournal.com]

consider that in Esther's time the average lifespan was around 40 years. Most of the art of Esther's time was done of average women or slave girls, they worshiped the larger form. BCE? Are you talking about Egyptian art? They had a totally different asthetic than the rest of the region.

Something else you need to be aware of before throwing yourself into a corset for *this* costume is that your waist will *not* show. it hangs from the shoulders and chest. You would do well to create a fake chest of reasonable size for your height instead. Wanting a new corset because you like them is *not* the same as needing it for a particular costume baby. ;)

Re: I will ask Mother

[sistawendy.livejournal.com]

I meant first millenium, but I saw a lot of second millenium stuff too. I did notice the difference between the Egyptians' eerily modern esthetic and everybody else's; maybe that's an indication that famine wasn't much more common in ancient Egypt than it is today. Much of the first millenium B.C.E. art from Persia consists of rock carvings where depictions of women of any class were relatively scarce. If you look at women in Persian art before and after the period I'm talking about (5th or 6th century B.C.E.), they still don't exactly look like Reubens.

Re: I will ask Mother

[staxxy.livejournal.com]

most of the models the artists used were *poor* too. But, the middle eastern frame is also slighter than the more solid european stock. My biggest point is that, as a Queen, Esther would have been affluent enough to have a bit more girth than most of the girls in her era/region. Svelte is not the ideal for this costume as such. Rotund is not the ideal *either*. But cinching your waist in to form the flattering figure would not be accurate, that's the main thing.

As for the Egyptian thing... They were advanced in many ways when it comes to the modern aesthetic. Make up for instance. They had a different belief system when it came to food intake than the rest of the region as well. *shrug* They really were in their own little world for the most part, it just happened to intersect the world it was near frequently.

Re: I will ask Mother

[sistawendy.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah: the shorter life span would be a good reason for both sexes to get married younger, but not for ten-year-plus age differences between spouses.

Re: I will ask Mother

[staxxy.livejournal.com]

that was more a matter of insuring virginity, also younger girls were more docile and believed to be more fertile. Older men were able to pay the dowries for women. Because in those days, you *paid* for your bride.