hrj | May. 8th, 2009

May. 8th, 2009

Rather than waiting until the books are shipped home, let’s see if I can keep up with them as I buy them. (Besides, you never know when a reader might say, “Hey, pick me up one of those!”)

Malaguzzi, Silvia (trans. Brian Phillips). 2006. Food and Feasting in Art. The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles. ISBN 978-0-89236-914-0

A “look at the pretty pictures” book. Lots of reproductions of food, dining, and cookery in art. Covers antiquity through the modern day, so not a lot of depth for any one era.

Netherton, Robin & Gale R. Owen-Crocker eds. 2009. Medieval Clothing and Textiles 5. The Boydell Press, Woodbridge. ISBN 978-1-84383-451-9

I think I actually managed to hear all these papers when originall presented. It’s nice to see the more formal written presentation (which doesn’t always get produced). Articles on costume in ivory carvings, the French hood, the Guicciardini Quilt(s), putting Vecellio in context, and more. (And one of the book reviews is by yours truly.)

Power, Eileen. 2006. The Goodman of Paris. The Boydell Press, Woodbridge. ISBN 978-1-84383-222-5 (reprint of 1928 edition)

Nothing new or special, I’ve just been meaning to get an edition of the whole text, not just excerpts or only the culinary section.

Fletcher, Nichola. 2004. Charlemagne's Tablecloth: A Piquant History of Feasting. St. Martin's Press, New York. ISBN 978-0-312-34068-1

I wasn’t impressed enough to buy this when it first came out, but remaindered at $10 for the hardcover, it seemed worth it. A variety of essays connected by the theme of feasting.

Pollington, Stephen. 2003. The Mead-Hall: Feasting in Anglo-Saxon England. Anglo-Saxon Books, Hockwold-cum-Witon. ISBN 1-898281-30-0

This makes a nice companion volume to Ann Hagen’s work on Anglo-Saxon foodstuffs. Polligton’s book focuses more on the physical environment of A-S dining: the furniture, the arrangement of the hall, the social organization around eating.

Read, Brian. 2005. Metal Buttons c.900 BC - c. AD 1700. Portcullis Publishing, Langport. ISBN 0-9532450-4-7

Read, Brian. 2008. Hooked-Clasps & Eyes: A Classification and Catalogue of Sharp- or Blunt-Hooked Clasps and Miscellaneous Hooks, Eyes, Loops, Rings or Toggles. Portcullis Publishing, Langport. ISBN 978-0-9532450-5-5

These are highly-focused catalogs of very specific archaeological categories. If you were a metal-worker and wanted an “inspiration book” for making buttons or hooked fasteners (for medieval English costuming) this would be wisely spent money. Not so thorough on the presentation of the context for use. For example, the button book focuses exclusively on metal buttons and doesn’t discuss fabric ones, even when illustrating a discussion with garments that look very much like they have them.

Koch, John T. 1007. An Atlas for Celtic Studies. Oxbow Books, Oxford. ISBN 978-1-84217-309-1

Lots and lots of pretty and detailed maps providing a geographic context for both linguistic and archaeological data.

There are two more books I picked up today from David Brown that will have to be blogged later since one is a pre-publication order and the other they kept as a display copy until the end of the conference. (I got a steal on that one because it was damaged in transit.)

Hey,

anotheranon, I'm guessing you're the vector behind a couple new readers popping up. Thanks for the shout-out. For those who showed up to read the Kalamazoo blogging, I won't be offended if you drop me again after the conference. I'm not usually this content-full.

Session 212: “Can These Bones Come to Life?”: Insights from Reconstruction, Reenactment, and Re-creation

Pure Air and Fire: Reconstructing Medieval Equitation (Michael A. Cramer, Borough of Manhattan Community College, CUNY)

I came in a little late so I’m catching up here. A discussion of evidence regarding martial equitation practices based both on literature (instruction manuals), physical equipment and pictorial evidence (within the limitations of such) particularly for physical techniques as opposed to equipment. While the general focus is on general martial contexts, a lot of the evidence comes specifically from tournament riding and there’s discussion of the evolution of equipment for this purpose (e.g, development of the shield) that might diverge from that used for warfare. One conclusion is that control of the horse seems likely to have been neck reining (obviously not two-handed reining, given the need to hold a weapon), not leg aids, and extremely minimal use of spurs. Despite the apparent extremity of surviving bits (backed by those in art), instruction manuals indicate these were not used for direct control in battle, although there may have been an “attention-getting” function. Presentation of the debate whether medieval tournament riding (and horses) were more similar to that of modern English-style riding (close physical communication between horse and rider, emphasis on constant control, rider balance must be active) or Western-stye riding (more tenuous physical communication, relatively independent horse, rider balance more passive and saddle-assisted).

Our Father’s Eggs: The Use of the Paternoster as a Medieval Timing Device (Kathleen Dimmich, Independent Scholar)

Starts off with a recording of a chanted paternoster, timed as about one minute. Different mechanisms for counting different scales of time. Clocks primarily for counting hours but not smaller increments. Instructions for chant tempos include notations like “at the rhythm of a reaper’s scythe”. Based on mensuration and tempo indications, the common prayers would generally have the same performance duration whatever melody was used. This even appears to hold cross-linguistically, with German and English versions of prayers having similar durations (along with Latin). Paternoster and Ave Maria were the most popular prayers of lay people and of a useful duration for micro-timing. Instructions to use the paternoster as a timing device show up explicitly in cooking instructions, e.g., in Epulario an egg-cooking duration (hence the title of the paper). Other examples of explicit use include dying. Some discussion of instructions that give clues to what language the suggested prayers were expected to be in.

Styles of Radical Quill (Paul Werner, School of Visual Arts, New York Univ.)

Quill-cutting, that is. The paper starts out with pop-culture representations of, and interactions with, some medieval practices and artifacts, ranging from quill-cutting to interest in relics. (It’s going to be interesting to see where this is going – at the moment I’m wondering if I wandered into a Pseudo-session paper by accident.) Some underlying themes about “why do medieval things that have no practical use in modern times?” Mentions a hand-bound edition of Karl Marx and an obscure connection between Angela Davis and quill pens. An image of a school computer center as “modern scriptorium”. Ok, I give up on blogging this. If there’s a thread to follow, it’s been tied into macramé. And … we close with a quote from Sartre. No, wait, he said he was closing, but he’s still going … and going … and going …. Do we have a time-keeper? Did someone mention to him that there’s another speaker coming after him? Did he pay extra to get to talk for half an hour as one of four speakers in a 1.5 hour session? Evidently we now need to fit in a quote from Derrida. Please, just shoot me now. Another quote.

Open-Air Museums, Reconstructions, and Re-enactors in Poland (Blazej Stanislawski, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences)

Oh, I guess the fourth speaker scratched. They must have announced it before I came in. I guess I should be generous and assume that the third speaker was told he was allowed to blather on for two speakers’

Session 300: Costume in Medieval Literature

Old Habits Die Hard: Vestimentary Change in William Durandus’s Rationale divinorum officiorum (Andrea B. Denny-Brown, Univ. of California–Riverside)

Alas, scratched.

Raiment of Needlework: Clothing Images in Miracles of the Virgin and the Feast of the Assumption (Laurel Broughton, Univ. of Vermont)

Discussion of visions of the Virgin that dwell in loving detail on her sumptuous clothing. Most descriptions of Mary’s clothing, though, are more restricted to (symbolic) color, or vague generalizations of splendor. General background information on the Feast of the Assumption. And now we get to the pretty slide show! The mantle is a focus of rich decoration, either simply in the intense blue color, or with jeweled gold-brocaded orphreys or powdered with gold decorative motifs. When shown in scenes that include female donor images, Mary does not wear “current fashion” but always “old fashioned” garments of simple, loose cut. So the decoration is the focus of the sumptuousness. (The paper’s author observes that the relationship of Mary’s garments to “modern fashion” bear a stylistic parallel to that of priestly vestments to male fashion. (Mostly we’re simply getting a lot of pretty images now, not a lot of new information.)

Sartorial Strategies in the Roman de Silence (Nicole D. Smith, Univ. of North Texas)

Alas, scratched. Damn. I’m particularly fond of the Roman de Silence. I have vague plans to write a fantasy novelization of it some day (with a slightly different ending than the original).

What’s the Pearl-Maiden Wearing and Why? (Kimberly Jack, Auburn Univ.)

The “Pearl-maiden” who appears in the dream-vision of the text’s narrator wears garments and a headdress featuring … guess what? … pearls, in addition to bearing the “pearl of wonder” on her breast, a symbolic feature of the text. But there is disagreement as to the likely construction of her garments, apart from their decoration. Her gown is described as “blazing white”, open at the sides, bordered with pearled bands. The garment is describe as a “bleaunt” (but not to be identified with the “bliaut” of the early 12th century – the Pearl text is from the 14th c.) but also as a “beaumys”. Bleaunt can also be a type of fabric (a very fine linen or silk) as opposed to a garment name. “Beaumys” is emended in various edited editions as “beau amys”, “beau amice”, “beau biys”, or even “bleaunt of biys”. Another description provides “with lappes large”. One suggested interpretation for this is tippets. But this creates a problem with the description “vpon at sydez” (open at the sides) if one interprets that as referring to the sideless surcoat, as the two fashions, while present during a similar period, do not coincide. “Open at the sides” might refer to a slit in the overskirt, but visual evidence from the era doesn’t support the existence of such a garment. So perhaps the “lappes large” interpretation is wrong? Another possible reading of “lap(pe)” could be a skirt or any part of a garment loose enough to be raised, folded, or seized. The sideless surcoat does sometimes have full, loose skirts that would fulfill this definition. Following on, the garment has a double border of precious pearl “in porfyl py3t; Py3t watz poyned and vche a hemme; At hond at sydez, at ouerture”. This is interpreted as “purfled”, i.e., edged with an expensive fur (the continuation of a lining fur, but using a more precious fur where it shows externally). The areas where this purfling is described are consistent with a sideless surcoat. Furthermore, the positioning of the “wonder pearl” on the maiden’s breast would then correspond to the jeweled ornaments typically seen on high-end sideless surcoats on the front plastron. As discussed in detail by Robin Netherton [me: who is sitting next to me during this, nodding energetically], at the time of this work, the sideless surcoat had become symbolic of queens and other prominent women, rather than an ordinary garment, and also a feature of funerary images. These features come together in the symbolism of the Pearl maiden as well.

Session 320: From “Clothing” to “Fashion”: When Did Change Begin to Matter? (Roundtable Discussion -- Carole Collier Frick, Southern Illinois Univ.; Sarah-Grace Heller, Ohio State Univ.; Desiree Koslin, Fashion Institute of Technology; and Laurel Ann Wilson, Fordham Univ.)

Sarah-Grace Heller presents the background on what is meant by a “fashion system”. [me: her work on the topic was what got me ruminating on fashion and medieval culinary literature a while ago.] The basic principles are: a relative down-playing of the value of the past; a society-wide desire for constant, systematic change; a use of fashion for individual expression and social imitation; a medium of self-enhancement via consumption and appearance; change focus on superficial forms vs. major ones; a theme of excess and exaggeration; the establishment of what is and is not fashion is performative with privileged individuals able to define fashion; change is driven by criticism and disapproval; value is placed on pleasure; when a fashion system is established, it shifts society towards an equalization of appearances. She gives specific examples from a 12th c. French romance which focuses on a male fashion plate.

Desiree Koslin reviews the necessary preconditions for fashion: innovative social change, commodity markets, and a cycle of critical review and dis/approval of personal expressions. Presents examples from 1st millennium China. Note that some of the sartorial details (in their underlying structure, not the superficial details) are the same ones elaborated by other fashionable societies at other eras. More details and examples. Concludes with point that “fashion” also produces “anti-fashion”, as with ascetic orders (example being S. Clare’s ragged mantle).

Carole Collier Frick discusses ways of dodging sumptuary laws, e.g., if a law forbids a specific named garment or style, simply invent a new one with a new name. Discusses the ebb and flow of fashion, the inconsistency in whether men or women drive it. Reiterates similar prerequisites for “fashion” as previously mentioned.

Laurel Ann Wilson traces the male/female differential as an indicator of fashion, as well as pointing out that as men’s hemlines rose and fell, the conservative critics of fashionability derided both equally in their turn (often for similar reasons), making it clear that it was the fashion/change dynamic that they disapproved of rather than specific styles. Agrees that fashion is defined by rapid and unnecessary change, change that re-shapes the body, complexity, choice.

Overall, pretty solid agreement on what constitutes a “fashion system”, but then this isn’t surprising given that the panel was organized around that particular theoretical construct. (I think it makes a lot of sense, but that doesn’t mean I don’t recognize it as a theoretical construct rather than an eternal verity.)