Strange Ponderings

Jan 20, 2005 12:05

So, I've been thinking, (Uh-oh), although I don't have anything clearly formatted yet ( Read more... )

roleplay: misc, costuming, roleplay: settings

Leave a comment

Comments 30

netbard January 20 2005, 17:37:28 UTC
I think more practical issues would probably dominate. To a certain extent, you can wear scoop-neck sweaters both because of social mores and because you don't need to work in the fields for 12 hours a day. Also, the material of your clothing is fairly cheap, as is the production of it.

In a post-apocalyptic word, some of those aren't givens anymore. A large proportion of time would be spent simply getting enough food to eat. Furthermore, you may have serious problems getting fibers to make your clothing - if trade is restricted, then you have to grow everything yourself. And lacking modern mass-production assembly lines, the clothing is probably simpler & more expensive - which means it probably HAS to last longer.

That's not even getting into differing environmental hazards. In a world littered with biological, chemical, and nuclear residues, or in a world where the ozone layer has disappeared, covering the entire body has distinct advantages. In a world that's a constanst 112 degrees in the shade, though, heavy clothing kills.

Reply


lizreay January 20 2005, 17:51:35 UTC
Depends on the social mores of the game, honestly. If the morality of the West (women in the home raising the family and looking pretty, men in the fields/on the plains working to support them) returned, then yes, I think clothing would change accordingly... women's clothing on the frontier was partly practical, partly to look pretty for the hubby when he came off the range. If women were out on the range alongside the men, I think they'd dress rather similarly to men, for practicality's sake if nothing else.

Reply


thecamoninja January 20 2005, 22:38:52 UTC
I'm gonna go with her on that one, think about it... technology may have reverted, but in a society that was used to women coming closer and closer to equality with men in both the workforce and as intellectual beings, i highly doubt such destruction would change that. In fact, the need for people to help with everyday needs would probably override any remaining social stupidities, and the women would probably be very similar to the men.

Actually, I'm going to highly doubt men's clothing reverted either, maybe some things for practicality's sake, but ya work with what you have.

Reply

poleritude January 20 2005, 23:12:33 UTC
Or just paw through some Deadlands books and have a ball :). Who knows what affect post apoc would have on clothing trends. I would assume it would actualy become more diverse. There would be no more "whats in in paris this spring?" People would dress to suit thier needs. I would guess women wouldn't be so driven to "dress up" or "look pretty" unless they had a way of life where that advantaged them somehow.

Reply


riksowden January 20 2005, 23:56:24 UTC
I play in an [odd] 'fantasy' LARP (set in all kinds of things) which is going to be running a post-apocalpse game, and i suspect we'll see female clothing in a similar vein to the main Shards one:

Practicality is the order of the day, for those people who are able covered is good - many women wear skirts, and there is little flesh shown overall, but many others wear much the same as the men. In almost all cases (men and women) there is little flesh shown - for one thing layer[s] of clothing save a person from minor wounds when falling over, for another they're defence against the weather and the elements, for a third the dictates of modesty must be considered...

Does that help any?

Reply

lissa_dora January 21 2005, 02:05:53 UTC
yeah, thuogh, looking at the 5 answers, I'm feeling a big case of "why didn't I think of that?"

Colonial aAmerican women dressed and worked in ways that middle-class women 100 years later would have been horrified at - because of necessity.

Still, I'm not sure about some bits of modesty. I suppose it's going to be stratified - there will always be dance-hall girls and the like, no?

Reply

riksowden January 21 2005, 09:39:59 UTC
Well yes, but i'm certain you'll find that soiled doves and dance-hall girls who weren't working would wear more 'normal' clothing (some/most of the time at least!).

And its not your fault - you're just special ;)

Reply

lissa_dora January 21 2005, 17:21:10 UTC
*Wrinkles nose at you* stop poking fun at my intelligence! (Seriously, I will panic).

Mirw.

I think I've decided that the high-necked ankle-length gibson-girl get-ups are probably slightly inappropriate, but the cowboy gear will probably work just fine.

Reply


btoblake January 21 2005, 03:07:48 UTC
I have these pleasant visions of great chamois leather pants and white button shirts with a golden layer of dust ( ... )

Reply

lissa_dora January 23 2005, 03:21:04 UTC
*absorbs all of this* I like it, yes.

If I had the money to costume myself the way I wanted to, it woudl indeed be chamois pants (or very well-fitting button-fly jeans), a white band-collar dress shirt, straight-line or fitted close but not snug to the body, a vest in brown suede or chamois, and a duster.

For looking pretty... I dunno. A nice cotton dress sounds like a nice idea, though.

What we're looking at is 50, 70 years in the future, after a as-of-yet-completely-described appocalyptic war, with technology reverted to a wild-west level.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up