Erect Forms.
(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.
