(SEE DIA. VIIIa.)
Although I have said that the backbone never gets longer or shorter in
the same form, we find that whenever a body assumes the position of an
over-erect form the direct distance from the blade to the seat becomes
shorter, and the hollow of the waist becomes deeper and consequently
longer. This can be noticed by anyone who will take the trouble to make
the experiment. Take any form with a well-fitting coat and let him assume
the stooping position, and the alteration for it may be found correct as
described in the preceding article. Now let the same form throw himself
in an over-erect position, and see the result. As the front of the pit of
the stomach opens and becomes longer, it will pull the front of the coat
upward. If we cut the waist through in front and sidewise, this cut will
fall apart in front and at the side, and the back will set smoothly.
But we cannot cut the coat through, and so we must resort to artificial
means, as follows: While the body thus expands in front, and the coat
cannot follow suit unless cut through, the back of the coat will
contract, starting at the side and at the most hollow part of the waist,
and running backward. If we take a few pins and fasten up that surplus
cloth at the hollow of the back, starting with nothing at the sides, we
can readily ascertain the amount of alteration required, and fold up our
pattern accordingly.
On a frock coat said fold is over the entire sidepiece, not at the waist
seam, but at the most hollow part, or at and above line 17½. If it were
lower it could be taken out in the waist seam. This fold, if laid in the
pattern, will produce a sharp turn of the back part of the sidepiece and
must be straightened by giving more width along that kink. The same is to
be done on a sack. If the sack is a three-seamed one, the pattern must be
cut through under the arm upward, the fold laid across the hollow of the
waist, and seams allowed again in the opening, which may be an inch at
the armhole; but what is not used for seams should not be cut away, but
used as an outlet, which will sometimes be found quite handy. See Dia.
VIIIa.
It is true, we can alter such a coat by reducing it somewhere at and
behind and below the arm, and by cutting the armhole forward, so that the
back of the waist can fall backward; but it will take all the life out of
a fit in the back, and make the breast too small. The only remedy is an
outlet under the arm on a frock coat, or in the center of the back, or
in the side seam on a sack. By this operation it will be seen that the
erect form cannot be fitted by carving out the waist behind, but must be
done by contracting the length, and really giving more width. One-half to
five-eighths inches fold may be set down as the average, but the exact
amount cannot be found by measuring. All this depends upon the judgment
of the cutter. One-half to one-fourth inch, one way or the other, will
not spoil a coat if otherwise well-balanced.
Stretching certain parts will accomplish a great deal of good, but all
stretching should be clearly marked by nicks, for a journeyman cannot
always be expected to know just where the stretching is required. Thus,
if we take a regular frock coat pattern, and stretch the sidepiece half
an inch downward on the front and at the hollow of the waist, that is
equal to contracting the sidepiece the same distance at the back seam;
and the erect form is imitated.
The erect form requires the coat short at the hollow of the waist, but
the stooping form requires the coat longer over the shoulder blade.
Erect forms may be fitted by simply taking, say one half inch, from the
curve of the sidepiece, starting at the hollow of the waist, as shown
on Dia. II B, and the contrary may be applied to stooping forms. To fit
the back of the waist for either the erect or for the stooping form, and
taking Dia. II as a model, we must in some way give more spring for the
erect form, and less for the stooping form. Stretching the bottom of
the sidepiece is equal to giving more spring on either side, and it is
better, because the extra width so obtained will divide better all over
the hip. But it would not do to adopt the contrary plan for the stooping
form, and shrink the bottom of the sidepiece. The measure of the waist
being the same, the back part of the waist requires a reduction, but
which reduction on the back must be allowed in front. The reduction of
the back part for the stooping form is best made by reducing, say one
half inch, on the sidepiece and on the under arm gore, and by stretching
the back sidepiece seam about three eighths downward on starting at line
11¼, which operation will leave the whole gore between the back and the
sidepiece undisturbed.
I have seen a great many tailors shrinking the sidepiece in its center
downward, but shrinking a straight piece will always come back to its
original shape. To improve the shape of the sidepiece under the iron must
be done by stretching its edges downward; the front seam for the erect
and the back seam for the stooping form. After a coat is made up, and
it should prove short over the blade by hanging loose at the back, the
back may be made longer over the blade by stretching the front seam of
the side piece upward, starting at the hollow of the waist. I say it may
be so made longer, but the best way to treat such a back, is to give the
whole back and the back part of the side seam a good stretch downward,
over the blade, all of which holds good on a sack coat.
Many coats hang better after three months wear, simply because some parts
have stretched, and can now conform to the shape of the body. It is
always better to have a coat back a trifle short rather than too long. A
short back can easily be stretched one half to five-eighths of an inch
over the blade, say 3 to 4 inches sidewise from the center of the back,
for which reason all back lining should be put in in ample quantity, both
in length and width and on the bias. If, however, the lining is straight
and not longer than the outside, then the lining must be opened and
pieced, for it cannot be stretched.
A skeleton coat of woolen material will fit almost any form, for it will
stretch wherever a strain may exist; for this reason all linings should
be plenty large around the arm and back, and the whole coat should be
made soft so that it will give. This includes even the basting of the
linings on the seams, all of which should be made with large and loose
back stitches.
In connection with this article and that on the “Stooping Forms,” let us
again compare the angle of 15 deg. If a cutter will go to the expense
and trouble to cut and make for himself a skeleton coat, cut over Dia.
III, omitting all seams sidewise, and for this reason reducing the square
of 18 to 17, and using nothing in front and outside of the angle of 15
deg., in fact cutting nothing out except the armholes and the shoulder
seams, and using some stiff material, such as heavy vest padding or
French canvas, he will be able to form for himself a correct idea of the
workings of the angle of 15 deg.; and it will repay him, for he may save
many subsequent alterations. And alterations cost considerable money,
besides a great deal of annoyance between employer, cutter and customer.
In cutting it, the back should be cut pretty short, say 13 on line 9 in
front, or still shorter, in order to assure a smooth back. When such a
skeleton is on the body it will be observed that the center of the back
is on a plumb line from the shoulders down to over the seat and the
bottom of the coat, and that at the side it tapers outward from under
the arm to over the largest part at the thigh, and down to the end of
the coat, but does not touch the hollow of the waist anywhere, running
straight downward. In front it will taper outward but fit the whole chest
above the pit of the stomach; below, it will taper forward and stick
outward in front, as shown in Fig. II.
To reduce the front, means to reduce the front angle of 15 deg. so that
it falls straight downward from the front of the waist the same as it
does at the back of the seat, thus giving stepping room for the legs,
backward and forward, as also shown in Fig. II. Elsewhere the _modus
operandi_ is fully explained.
Now, suppose this angle of 15 deg., as a completed coat, is upon the
body, and without a wrinkle in the back as well as without any reduction
at the hollow of the back of the waist, and let us—_contemplate the
scene_! If we desire to bring the straight back into the hollow of the
body at the side and back, we must do what we have done to bring the back
of the pants in to the body, back and below the seat. We must cut the
waist through, starting at the side and going all around the back, and
over to the other side; and when thus cut through we can push the upper
part in to the hollow of the waist. And it will be found that in so doing
the upper portion becomes too wide for that circle around the body and
must be reduced in width. At the same time the upper part becomes too
short and a wedge must be put in, starting with nothing at the side and
running backward; and the closer we try to fit the waist, the wider the
wedge must be at the back, and the more the back must be reduced in width.
Dia. III demonstrates this fact by the shorter back, and by the reduction
of the back of the sidepiece, and by the wedge between the bottom of the
sidepiece and the top of the skirt. I do not claim that it is just so, by
every fraction of an inch, but I know that Dia. III will produce a coat
that will fit the normal form, and is the same as Dia. II; and if anyone
else would like to see it illustrated in a different way it would merely
show that our ideas are running in different directions. But this would
not change the principle.
Now, I will refer to the different effects produced if the wearer throws
himself into a stooping or over-erect position when the garment is cut
through at and across the hollow of the waist. By observing the backward
and forward movements of the different forms, it cannot fail to show to
the most critical observer that most all changes between the stooping and
the erect form can be made by reducing the width and giving more length
for the stooping, and by reducing length and giving more width for the
erect form at the hollow of the waist; and no other change is required,
unless a combination of abnormal conditions exists. The gore between the
back and the sidepiece at the waist is an artificial gore, and should not
be much changed for any form.
Most all changes between the stooping and erect forms may be made at the
under arm seam, as follows: For the erect form, allow say ½ to ¾ inches
at the side, and before sewing that seam up stretch the sidepiece say ¼
to ⅜ inches, which will shorten the back seam that much and throw the
extra width behind where it belongs. For a stooping form, take off the
same width at the side, and stretch the back seam of the sidepiece at,
and just above, the hollow of the waist, but never enough to show the
back full. The reason why I am opposed to changing much on the back seam
of the sidepiece is, that that seam is always on a curve and it is very
long, reaching clear down to the bottom of the coat, and is apt to be
thrown clear out of gear by changing it. But the under arm cut is nearly
straight, and short, and can better be managed. If a vest can be thrown
in by that seam surely a frock coat can also. If the back is a trifle
full at the sidepiece, and at the hollow of the waist, a coat will be
made the better by it, and in no case should the back be stretched there.
If the back requires shortening, it must be obtained by stretching the
sidepiece on the forepart downward, or by folding up the pattern at the
back of the sidepiece. The form of alteration depends upon the time it is
to be made, either before the coat is cut, or after it is made.
To this article of erect forms may be added something about straight
backs, at the neck, or from the shoulder blade upward. A long neck may
lean forward and may then be classed among stooping forms, and must be
stretched accordingly; that is, by lengthening the back only. But a
long neck may shoot nearly straight up behind, in which case it must be
classed among the erect forms.
Between a long neck leaning forward and a long neck shooting nearly
straight up behind, there must be a difference in the shape of the top
of the back. We all know that the top of the center of the back must be
higher or at least as high as the side of the back, when the coat is on
the body; still when the pattern is spread out on a flat surface, the
neckhole is nearly a circle, and it will be a still more complete circle
when the garment is on the body. It must run nearly in a circle because
from the chest, shoulders and shoulder blades the body runs upward to a
point, as shown in Fig. I, but the garments are cut off at the neck. The
broader the top of the back is cut, the more center sinks down behind, as
shown in Dia. V.
Now, the cutting down of the top and center of back must be done, because
we intend to cut the shoulder seam where fashion requires it should be.
As far as the fit is concerned, we might run the shoulder seam to within
½ in. of the center of back, in which case the center of the back would
be the highest point. As backs are cut, the sides are the highest point
on the flat table, but when on the body the center of back is the highest
point, and we may just as well say that the top and center of back are
the highest points, that this is the starting point, and that from this
point the whole neckhole is thrown forward and downward, where it forms
in a complete circle around the neck.
I am writing here about the neckhole proper, and not of the length of
the back over the blade; and the above explanations are made to show
that the so-called front shoulder point is anywhere we please to locate
the shoulder seam, and again, I want to show that a straight back, or a
straight neck behind, requires the top and center of back higher than a
neck which leans forward.
Mr. J. B. West, in his “_Grand Edition_,” page 30, claims that the
principle alteration from a normal to a stooping form consists in raising
the center of the top of back (somewhere up to line A.) I certainly
will not dispute the merits of Mr. West, but I must say that, like
all mortals, he made mistakes, and the above is a “_Grand Mistake_,”
especially when we read on page 5, that the problem he has worked on
for fifteen years is now solved, and complete, and will stand without
improvement, or alteration, as long as there is no change in the
construction of the human form.
About thirty years have passed, and the human form has not changed, and
still I claim, that the above alteration must be made in just a contrary
way; that is, that the circle for the neckhole over the back must be
more complete toward the center of back for a person who drops his neck
downward and forward, and that the erect form or the straight form on
the back of neck requires the circle straightened over the center of
back, and will here repeat, that on the angle of 135 deg. a neckhole can
be cut and fitted with a complete circle as seen in Dia. XI and XII. That
part of the circle which passes through the back, say 2½ in. wide, sinks
about ⅝ at the center of back, and this part must be straighter behind
for a straighter neck, and may be made entirely straight for extremely
straight backs.
Quite straight backs are usually long necks, and for such the center
of back must be raised, whereas a short straight neck would require
the sides lowered. How much more or less all this may be, must depend
upon the judgment of the cutter, and as the whole thing turns within
five-eighths of a number, a cutter cannot go far out of the way; but he
should observe that a collar one half or even one quarter inch lower
behind than at the sides, is a spoiled collar, and that a collar which is
too high is easily cut down, but when it is too low it is hard to bring
it up, unless there are outlets.
Some cutters may say that I am mentioning things which will do them no
good, because they cannot go into all the details. This I admit, but
others again will be glad to have a thing figured down, so that they
need not bother their heads about it. But to illustrate: Let us suppose
we have before us a round wooden pole 5 in. in diameter, representing
the neck of a man. If we cut it straight through we can fit a collar to
it with a square piece of cloth or paper. Such a square piece fits to
the circumference of a pole, if wound around on horizontal lines. Next,
let us suppose that we cut one end down, about 3 in., representing the
forward and downward slope of the neck, and we find that a straight
piece will not fit that slope, but must be hollowed out. Now, if we
build shoulders to it, and a chest and shoulder blades, in fact take
the form of a person for our model, we find that the neckhole of a
garment goes around the top of a body sloping upward from all sides,
though irregularly, but that a complete circle from the point of the
angle of 135 deg. will fit the neck after 45 deg. have been taken out
from its center, all of which will form an irregular circle or curve,
while in any shape on the flat table; but will form an almost complete
circle when sewed together and placed on the body. The neck itself is
almost a complete circle, and the point of the angle of 135 deg. must
be considered as the center of the neck, which is round, but to which
cloth must be brought by irregular approaches. Now if we find a straight
neck behind, with hardly any incline from the back forward, the garment
must run straight up, too, and the circle for the neckhole must be
straightened as far as the back goes; but if the neck slopes forward, the
garment must turn forward also, and the edge of the circle over the back
must form a more complete part of a circle.
But I must make another illustration: Take a piece of stiff paper, and
cut out of it a half circle of say 4½ in. whole diameter, representing
the neck of a 36 breast measure, or thereabouts. Take that circle and
fit it to the neck of a man on horizontal lines, and the circle will fit
the neck no matter where you apply it. Next try to fit it to the neck
from the side, but on the slope of the shoulders, and the circle will be
too round for the neck. Again, try to fit it from the slope of the back,
and the difference between neck and circle will be still greater. Next,
take a stove-pipe of 4½ in. diameter and try to fit it on that, and on
perpendicular lines, and you will find that the circle cannot be used
at all, but that a square piece must be used for that. If the neck were
as wide as the shoulders, and the chest and the blades, that is, if the
body would run straight up from these points, then the top edge could be
fitted with nothing else but a square piece of cloth.
After all, the above pros and cons let me say that if Dia. II is used for
the stooping form, place height of back ¼ to ¾ higher, and reduce the
back of the sidepiece ⅛ to ¼ more, at the waist, and that is about the
best alteration which will result from the description of the stooping
form. Contrary: Placing height of back at 14½, and giving ⅛ to ¼ more
spring at the waist will give a good proportion for the erect form. As
to the difference of 1¼ numbers more or less back length over the blade,
between the stooping and erect form, each cutter must judge for himself,
for it cannot be measured on the human form.
Short persons with short necks and very flat shoulder blades, may be
fitted with a height of back of 14¼ above line 9, and top of back at 3¾
and side of neck at 4. (See Odd Forms I.) Erect forms who throw their
arms backward can be fitted by using a pattern one or two sizes too
small, and by allowing the difference of ½ to 1 inch, as the case may
be, on the front of the breast. If a cutter will put a coat, say two
sizes too small on such a form, he will find that the back, the shoulders
and the armhole fit, but that the front of breast is too small, and the
extra size must be allowed there. This rule will work both ways, and the
contrary may be applied for stooping forms.
[Illustration]