Trousers drafted from Devere--HELP PLEASE!!

[J-Waters]

I guess the same question could be asked here. How many garments does one make to be called a tailor?

Hi Bevin,

A person who has made even one garment can call him/herself a "tailor".  The question is how many it takes to be a GOOD tailor.  That is a question only you can answer, depending on your personal definition of "good"  .

Thanks,

Jim R.

I don't think somebody who spent five years as an apprenticed and low wages and finally pasted to journeyman would agree. Even those in an apprenticeship can not take the title tailor. I think it is one thing to say I do tailoring and quite another to say I am a tailor. But then, there are different degrees of tailoring- manufacture tailor, alterations tailor, bespoke tailor.

Many bespoke tailors don't consider pants maker and vest makers tailors at all, because there is no tailoring in them at all. Once in awhile a vest will have a little tailoring in it. Granddad said that pad-stitches are tailor-stitches. Before pad-stitches there were no tailors. When guys started doing pad-stitches, those guys were called tailors. Tailoring began around 1354 AD, if I remember correctly.

Nowadays, with hardly any tailors left, anybody is calling anything tailors and tailoring.

[Ian McWherter]

This does also make me more curious than ever to track down an original pair of trousers somewhere nearby and get some detailed measurements from them.  I still wonder if Saundra Altman formed her opinion that "most American trousers were cut with both fronts the same" because dressed trousers merely appear that way when you look at them or if she measured them to verify that they were or not.  I also have to postulate that perhaps while this would be extremely common in custom tailored work, it might not be in mass-produced ready to wear garments.  Would that make sense that the front on a mass produced pair of trousers would not be dressed simply because it would be easier to attain a comfortable fit on a greater number of men?

~Joseph

Saundra Altman has examined countless original garments in collections all around the country and drafted patterns based on actual surviving garments that are identical to the originals in fit when correctly worked up. She also has original trousers in her own collection to further base her opinion on. In addition I believe she has original volumes of Genio Scott's works in her collection (Genio Scott was probably America's most renowned fashion publisher and pattern maker). So needless to say she knows what she's talking about.

I finally had some spare time to measure and examine in detail the original pair of trousers I recently added to my collection. They are completely hand sewn (incredibly fine hand sewing you'd swear was done by machine), fully lined in the legs with cotton silesia and are made from a beautiful twill weave wool (probably kerseymere). I measured the trousers to see if there was a dress side to the trouser fork seam, there was not. Both sides measured equally and there was no sign of any "fulling" of the pieces. In addition I also took the liberty to measure and examine two original trousers circa 1900 from my collection and again, both sides measured equally and there was no sign of any fulling.

It's probably a good hypothesis that ready made men's trousers were cut on the same lines without a dress side and trousers with a dress side would more likely be tailor made. Of course when examining an original pair of trousers it can be very difficult to determine whether they were in fact tailor made or ready made, since ready made men's trousers can be of exceptional quality. The three trousers in my collection that I examined, the mid-19th century one and the circa 1900 ones, are of exceptional quality. Maybe they're high quality ready mades or maybe they're tailor made , there's no definitive way, without provenance, to know. 

[J-Waters]

They are completely hand sewn (incredibly fine hand sewing you'd swear was done by machine),...

Perhaps you could scan some of this hand sewing.

A scanner works better than a camera sometime.

[Ian McWherter]

Perhaps you could scan some of this hand sewing.

No problem, here is a detailed view of the topstitching on the pockets:

This photo was taken up close, so you can see the small variations in the hand sewing, when you back out though and look at this stitching normally, you think to yourself, "Is that hand done?"


Topstitching on the fly:

[Doug Frank]

Ian,

Wow!  That is some very nice topstitching.  Now, time for me to be ignorant.  Is that a backstitch or a running stitch?  There, I've said it...my lack of knowledge is now public knowledge...  What an example to try and emulate!

Doug Frank

[Ian McWherter]

The topstitching on the pockets is done with a full back-stitch while the topstitching on the buttonhole fly is done with a half back-stitch. The great advantage of a half-backstitch is since you're only going halfway back you can make the stitches incredibly tiny, to the point where you'll have a hard time knowing whether they're done by machine or not.

[Dean McElroy]

..well,on the subject of apprenticships,I've served an actual apprenticeship for 4 years in the early '80's at a Cadillac dealership here in Northern Va....you can tell when you are approaching the competency required for status of journeyman  when you start recieving more "paying customer work" from your master...and you get the requisite accolades from him or the organisation you work for(e.g "well done" or "you are doing a really good job",ect.)...a downside I've experienced is if your master can see your development as a form of rivalry for his position,especially if its a trade that anyone can be trained for..and ..a lot of these tradesmen come from "poor" backgrounds and aren't skiled at teaching whatsoever or dealing with people at all..sort of like going to university where none of the professors know how to communicate with there students..in a university environment students have an expectation of the faculty from which they will recieve tuition..however,it is not the case in the "manual trades"...needlework and tailoring are "manual trades";one could wind up being a helper for a complete idiot,in which case your work life will be misereable,its even worse if they are alchoholic,which is something you will contend with regularly in the manual trades...but if you can survive all this then one could make it journeyman status..then you have to start all over again because you aren't someones helper..you are on your own..and you may have to work for a different company or many companys if  somehow one gets fired(it can be for absolutely any reason,just make sure you leave with a good reference,this is crucial when you are an hourly employee)...more later

-DM

[Jim_Ruley]

The great advantage of a half-backstitch is since you're only going halfway back you can make the stitches incredibly tiny, to the point where you'll have a hard time knowing whether they're done by machine or not.

I won't take issue with the "tiny-ness", but you can always tell a half-backstitch from machine stitching, at least conventional lock stitching.  The ends of machine stitches always touch where the bobbin thread loops through.  Half-backstitching is always interrupted by "spaces".  However, a skilled seamster can make it every bit as regular as machine work, as seen on these fine trousers.

Thanks,

Jim R.

[Ian McWherter]

I won't take issue with the "tiny-ness", but you can always tell a half-backstitch from machine stitching, at least conventional lock stitching.  The ends of machine stitches always touch where the bobbin thread loops through.  Half-backstitching is always interrupted by "spaces".  However, a skilled seamster can make it every bit as regular as machine work, as seen on these fine trousers.

Thanks,

Jim R.

I never have a problem telling original hand stitches from machine stitches, because I know what I'm looking at, though sometimes I have to squint hard, they can be really neat and small. Many people aren't familiar with all the various hand stitches, and most reenactors have no idea just how finely sewn original citizen clothing is. The perception is that hand sewn civilian clothing, like the hand sewn military uniforms most reenactors are very familiar with, must be crude and simple, only a rich man could afford finely hand sewn clothes. It just isn't the reality though. I've shown finely hand sewn original civilian clothing to fellow military living historians (some who claim to be quite the experts) in the past who look at the topstitching (even when it's half back-stitched) and they tell me like I don't know, "that's machine sewn!"

[J-Waters]

..well,on the subject of apprenticeships,...
-DM

That is why there are/were guilds and later unions. They decide what journeyman status is, and when somebody reaches that point, and how the lessons go so that person reaches journeyman status within a reasonable amount of time. When you don't have a group for over-site then there will be problems. Even laws were implemented.

I worked with a guy who was an apprentice for body-shop (auto) and the guy started cheating him, so he quit.

[J-Waters]

Ian, thanks for the pictures.

In the past these tailors sewed so fast their hands were a blur, while keeping the quality. Since these guys were competing, and he who sews the straightest gets more business, so can charge higher- they were very good. I have been told and read that the best started very young (there are exceptions). My Granddad came from a group that said you have to start the apprenticeship before the age of six; this group finally accepted sewing machines around 192x. In my opinion a hand sewn garment, when done properly, is by far better than one where a sewing machine was used. Some seams contribute more comfort and strength, more so than others, when hand sewn. Tiny stitches have some places, but are not best everywhere. And hand stitches are best loose, so to say, the garment is hung together and not nailed together. Loose stitches move with the weave of the cloth, a hidden straight.

[Joseph Stevens]

Saundra Altman has examined countless original garments in collections all around the country and drafted patterns based on actual surviving garments that are identical to the originals in fit when correctly worked up. She also has original trousers in her own collection to further base her opinion on. In addition I believe she has original volumes of Genio Scott's works in her collection (Genio Scott was probably America's most renowned fashion publisher and pattern maker). So needless to say she knows what she's talking about.

I don't in any way want it construed that I'm saying Sandra Altman is incorrect or that she does not "know what she's talking about."  Quite to the contrary, I have a large amount of respect for her and her work and the research that she has put behind it to give us all the quality of product that we have come to expect from her company.  As far as "experts" go, I would say that she is probably an extremely knowledgeable source.  That being said, however, where I am coming from with my original posting that you quoted is to question in which context that statement from Saundra was made.

For example, lets assume purely for sake of conversation here that Saundra's main bulk of research into period trousers was with the aim to produce a pattern that replicates a ready-made garment that would be more easily produced by today's sewers with no prior historical sewing experience than a tailor-made pair.  If that is the case, then her main objective is going to be to search out the garments which fit that description; ready-made trousers, and perhaps some tailor-made to observe finer construction techniques for purposes of comparison.  Assuming that were the case, then her statement is slightly skewed in comparison to our discussion of the topic.  And if we accept it fully at face value, no questions asked, we reach a conclusion that wasn't originally intended.

This is the point I am trying to convey here:  I have no problem accepting information from reputable "experts" in whatever field of study they may come from, but even that often needs to be taken with a grain of salt unless the exact particulars behind it are known.  This fully supports the notion that you've often expressed of individuals needing to research subjects more fully on their own; it doesn't happen if we accept statements from "experts" at face value with no further questioning.  It in no way questions Saundra's validity as a source of information in her field; it merely helps to put perspective and focus into the information we're assimilating here.     She could have focused on ready-made, she could have focused on tailor-made, she could have focused on both, from a narrow time period to a very broad one.  Hence why I'm asking what brought her to the conclusion that was quoted here.  Not to discredit her at all, but to seek further clarification and possible avenues to further research as well as make sure that the quote attributed to her is presented in its original context.

I finally had some spare time to measure and examine in detail the original pair of trousers I recently added to my collection. They are completely hand sewn (incredibly fine hand sewing you'd swear was done by machine), fully lined in the legs with cotton silesia and are made from a beautiful twill weave wool (probably kerseymere). I measured the trousers to see if there was a dress side to the trouser fork seam, there was not. Both sides measured equally and there was no sign of any "fulling" of the pieces. In addition I also took the liberty to measure and examine two original trousers circa 1900 from my collection and again, both sides measured equally and there was no sign of any fulling.

Thank you for taking the time to do this and sharing!  Between work and personal life I haven't had a chance yet to check with friends and acquaintances with originals nearby to examine myself.  And being smack dab in the middle of the Willamette Valley I'm not very close to large collections of original clothing that I can get to as far as I know so input like this is invaluable.

It's probably a good hypothesis that ready made men's trousers were cut on the same lines without a dress side and trousers with a dress side would more likely be tailor made. Of course when examining an original pair of trousers it can be very difficult to determine whether they were in fact tailor made or ready made, since ready made men's trousers can be of exceptional quality. The three trousers in my collection that I examined, the mid-19th century one and the circa 1900 ones, are of exceptional quality. Maybe they're high quality ready mades or maybe they're tailor made , there's no definitive way, without provenance, to know. 

Agreed.  Provenance is definitely the kicker here, and I guess is the one thing that plagues everyone    Thank you again for sharing your resources with us, Ian.

~Joseph

[Dean McElroy]

..let's hear it for Mr. Stevens on displaying supreme moxy on drafting a pair of pants on skiffle and illuminating the concept of a "dress side" tailoring device for men's trouser's..impressive to say the least..it has saved me countless hours of fathom and study on the subject ( what is a "dress side"?)..when one is new to tailoring it pays to simply sit back and listen to what the "Jour" have to say..(BTW,"Jour" is a 19th century trade term for Journeyman)and "skiffle" is the term for a "wait job".

..I am,however, somewhat dismayed at what I see as folks taking on more than they can handle initially..having served an apprenticeship myself,my employers never let me take on any work as large as a ,in our case here,a coat or trousers order. We,as apprentices, performed the  very basic elements of our craft first.

In the case of "tailoring as a hobby",well,you can do as you please,but bear in mind,you'll set yourself up for failure if you don't fully understand any of the concepts of this challenging craft. Gain theoretical knowledge first,maybe even gain a historical knowedge of the craft of tailoring..also understand what the craft of sewing is..(in the case of football,V.Lombardi knew that football was a essentially a "hitting" sport and that dancing was a "contact" event.Try to determine what the sewing craft is. I apprenticed for guys who could execute but could never articulate their knowledge and it is hard to work for someone like that,especially if you don't know whats going on either,and as an apprentice you are going to pay for that,not the guy you are working with.So the more one knows and can execute when you get there the better it is all around. As it will be for sewing.

..a possible template for starting might be..learn theory(as much as possible) ...set up your sewing machine and operate it...learn the handstitches effortlessly..seams..pocketing..pressing. And based on some of the research I've done men's trousers should be a first project(it's not set in stone,however,as some of the books I've looked at give simple jackets and other items as "firsts") cotton is also a good beginners fabric. Give yourself a couple of years to get all of this under your belt if one can maintain their interest that long..plus one can pick up small commissions along the way(I've got a couple on pair of women's unmentionables to repair. Even though they are new the elastic has split at the back and I've got to research the best stitch to join same and a blanket that needs new blanket stitching) So you see,one doesn't need or should'nt bang out the sexy coat gigs first but concentrate on building a foundation,initially.

As far as the cutting books go..yeah..you could look at them..but don't get yer knickers in a twist if you can't figure out what is going on right away..but if it's something that you pick up on quickly..well that's great and it's another tool for your arsenal and stimulate interest. Then ,at some point you'll recognise your own competence and then later still you'll discover what you are really good at.

-DM

[Jim_Ruley]

Well, apparently we're not the only ones who get wrapped 'round the axle over terminology.  Take a look at Thomas Mahon's blog (scroll down below the February 12th entry):

http://www.englishcut.com/

Some of the leading London tailors are arguing over who gets to use the term "Savile Row tailor"!  To an absurd extent:

I also hope that the remaining two parts will not only be centered around the members of the Savile Row Association. The latter is a nice idea, and there are some great houses in the club...  But I've been told it's an organization that stipulates you have to be on the actual Row, or within a hundred yards of it to be a member.

I do find this odd, and not just because I'm settled up in Cumbria. I know that one of the houses, Anthony J. Hewitt Limited, one of the best in the trade, has had its membership formerly questioned because it's one hundred and ten yards away from Savile Row- a mere 10 yards past the limit.

This is astonishing, as I know Mr. Mr Hewitt and Ravi Tailor personally, who between them have worked on Savile Row for over eighty years!

Their new home in 11 St. George Street, is one of the best examples of a real, classic, West End tailors. I presume I have to call it "West End" from now on. Apparently it's no longer "Savile Row", correct? Even though Ravi, Mr Hewitt and the other tailors based in the shop have God Knows how much experience between them. They have proper cutting rooms upstairs and wealth of experienced tailors making down below. To me, apart from the fact that they're no longer within the arbitrary perimeter [They're technically within 100 yards as the crow flies, but about 10 yards outside it via foot, by my reckoning] what more could anyone expect from a traditional "Savile Row" tailors? The shop is simply beautiful, and for all the right reasons. But the club doesn't seem to agree with me.

The term "Savile Row" has always been commonly used since the earliest days to describe the community of the best suit makers in the world, who congregated around Mayfair [Because, frankly, back in the old days, that's where all the well-heeled customers actually lived]. As with any random bit of history, the community of tailors ended up being named collectively, "Savile Row". They could have just as easily named it something else, and not a single thread on a single suit made in the last 200 years in that neighbourhood would have been any worse for it...

Savile Row will survive into the next generation, not because of "Brand Savile Row", but because we find enough young people over the long haul, tailor and customer alike, to carry on the traditions properly. Whether this happens on the Row, 110 yards from the Row, or yes, perhaps even in Cumbria, it's the skill and the love that matters. That's why we do it. If we just wanted to be on Savile Row for the money, we would have gone into property development.

For my part I agree with Mr Mahon's last point.  The skill and attitude are all that really matters, not labels.  Whether you've served a formal apprenticeship or learned everything from a book, do the best you can and learn all you can.  As DeVere says, "Sell nothing you are ashamed of", and learn from your mistakes.

Thanks,

Jim R.

[Dean McElroy]

...I agree with Thomas' opinion on the Row..however I feel that the Row may be eclipsed by "time" meaning that it proabably isn't going to matter,in the end, where one gets his suits made,say, as it did in the 1930's..and everything is just so darn expensive anymore..none of the french Couture houses make any money on their handmade original clothing..they have to pay out all of this money to the unionised workroom hands(mains)..so they knock off their originals and sell to the Neiman Marcus/Nordstroms stores throughout the world to make up their overhead on the handmade originals produced mostly for the oil money customers...and yes,just do the best you can and folks will come to you...already I'm getting the little stuff..though it is modern work..some of the other orders I'm getting include a wrap skirt(their material,when they buy it) and a pillow for a couch(I'm trying to convince them of the poly/brocade material I have,though it is earmarked for my vest projects.)
-DM

[Nicole Hansard]

Many people aren't familiar with all the various hand stitches, and most reenactors have no idea just how finely sewn original citizen clothing is.

Elisabeth McClellan in Historic dress in America thinks men’s clothing of the 1860’s was “Ugly” yet she acknowledges “a great deal of attention was bestowed on them everywhere.”  And adds:

“Poole, the celebrated English tailor, is said to have been accidentally discovered when the French actor, Fechter, was playing “Robert Macaire” in a coat apparently of rents and patches, the Prince was looking on and we are told ‘his keen eye quickly noted that the garment was singularly well cut.  After the play, the Prince sent for Fechter and asked him the name of his tailor, and the next day sent for Mr. Poole who from that hour was a made man.’”