I did it!

Jan. 18th, 2022 08:05 am
chocolatepot: Bodice of a woman from a painting by Ingres (Ingres)
[personal profile] chocolatepot
Yesterday afternoon/evening I sat down and used a basic form letter to request permission from every non-Fenimore museum for permission to use the patterns I took there. Oh, not the SLCHA either, though I should. Oh, and I ought to write to Clermont - I took a pattern of a gown there that was supposed to be for someone else to turn into a costume for an interpreter, which never happened, but now I have the pattern. Chapman already got back to me to say yes! So that's all of the patterns I did for their PastPerfect website (remember that? mostly wedding dresses, the Delphos dress, a slipper ...) as well as a couple I did randomly: two chemises, an 1845 fan-front mourning gown, an 1850s tarlatan ball dress, and a pretty basic 1860s day dress that I don't even remember why I bothered. Albany Institute has also said yes.

Drew out the diagram for the overskirt that goes with the Peacock Bodice. That went very nicely in Affinity, but the next step - making up the table to say what width the pieces should be at top and bottom for the different sizes, because I am not going to make enormous skirt pieces print-at-home - is very boring, so I may shelve it for a little bit and work on a fresh pattern ... now that I have a million new options!

I am thinking of doing one of the garments I patterned before we switched to a 1920s costume theme for the section with dressed mannequins in Great, Strange, and Rarely Seen at AIHA; I wanted to publish a little booklet with the patterns of all the dresses in it but this was denied, and then we ended up doing other things anyway, so. The first one was a late 1830s-early 1840s day dress and you know I love that style!! (I should do the crazy no-fastenings Regency dress but it's so complicaaaaaaaated.)

---

Somehow I have ended up down a rabbithole reading about what some people have dubbed "squeecore" - imprecisely defined by the dubbers as quippy and with too much identity-politics (they're coming from the left but a more, um, "class first" left tradition) and dominant either in numbers or SFF awards. The general consensus seems to be that they're describing only a couple of works at best, and mainly drawing together a thing they dislike in this work, a thing they dislike in another, etc. and calling it a movement. Then beyond that I'm reading about the Puppies and all that, blog posts from 2012-2015 because why not.

(One of the dubbers is Raquel S Benedict, who was briefly fandom/writing Twitter's main character some time ago for some condescending tweet thread on writers who got started in fanfiction; she definitely seems a bit cool girl/pick-me girlish and RTs others. Can't help but notice that she calls herself a "dangerous woman" in her Twitter bio just like this person who applied for flair at AskHistorians and turned out to be a TERF, so now I'm mulling over how self-identifying that way seems cool to the doer but looks really pompous and pathetic to others, and how perhaps it signals a kind of "not like the other girls" attitude.)

Some links, which themselves have links to other posts in them:

Is there a dominant mode of current science fiction?
The follow-up to that, Yeah, but
Science Fiction Is Never Evenly Distributed
“Squeecore” and the Cartoon Mode in SF/F

Date: 2022-01-19 12:46 pm (UTC)
atherleisure: (Default)
From: [personal profile] atherleisure
Nice that you've gotten permission for a bunch of patterns so far. Good luck with the rest of the museums.

Date: 2022-01-19 02:51 pm (UTC)
danabren: DC17 (Default)
From: [personal profile] danabren
I initially read "that way seems cool to the doer" as "to the deer" and thought is that the new way to refer to sheeple?

Lovely news from the museums, that is wonderful!

Date: 2022-01-19 05:26 pm (UTC)
danabren: DC17 (Default)
From: [personal profile] danabren
I have been noodling through the links (and links in the links) and first, there are a lot of typos for people who are discussing literature. Next, why does everything need a name? It's like the excruciating sub-sub-genres within the Lolita street fashion community (black, goth, horror, pastel horror, self-harm horror, cute horror) because we can't possibly be in the same genre as Mary, she stole that eyepatch idea from me, you know. Third, without the mention, the response of Squeecore (jesus) to grimdark is a response to Warhammer 40k, which absolutely delights my grimderp little heart.

Finally, just, like, let people have nice things, okay? They may make shitty choices in authors (GRRM defendants I am lookin' at you) but let adults read comics and YA and whatthefuckever. Why does everything have to be a THING.
Edited Date: 2022-01-19 05:28 pm (UTC)

Date: 2022-01-20 01:29 am (UTC)
momijizukamori: Shatterstar from the comic series X-Factor, looking very excited (you mean there's more?)
From: [personal profile] momijizukamori
Oooh, very cool on the pattern stuff!

And I had heard vague mention of 'squeecore' but was disinterested in actually digging deeper, so thank you for the brief summary XD

Date: 2022-01-20 03:11 pm (UTC)
totchipanda: (Default)
From: [personal profile] totchipanda
Proud of you for sending off the letters, and so exciting that some have responded positively! Weee!!

So... squeecore (what.. how...) is an offshoot of the puppies, it sounds like? This may be a tangent but for the love of all things fluffy and adorable I am so *tired* of sf/f catering to a Certain Demographic and the rest of us can go fuck ourselves.

Date: 2022-01-21 06:26 pm (UTC)
dancesontrains: Iris West from the Flash tv show (Iris West)
From: [personal profile] dancesontrains
Lol RS Benedict, she's...an odd one.

Profile

chocolatepot: Ed and Stede (Default)
Enchanted

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314 151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Style Credit

Page generated Jun. 2nd, 2025 11:20 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Most Popular Tags