Chapter 18 of 24 · 3921 words · ~20 min read

Part 18

All changes in the spring toward the bottom of a coat must be made by reducing the lap between the forepart and the skirt from the side seam forward. Dia. II may be considered to have enough spring for a full flowing skirt of the present style, while the cutaway may be made even at the front, but so that the top of the skirt and the bottom of the forepart run on a gentle curve, after the gore in the forepart is sewed up. That part of the waist seam of a cutaway should be cut like Dia. III, that is, a lap of about ⅜ at the gore upward, and even again in front. Dia. III is made with a gore in the front of the waist seam, but that gore is calculated for a dress coat skirt, which requires the skirt to close in pretty well when the coat is on, and is good for all extreme cutaways. In the production of a dress coat it will again be found handy to have the coat and vest on the same base, because it looks horrid to see such a coat front shorter than the vest.

The back, and the fold between the back and the front skirt, and all over and below the side piece, must be the same on all coats, that is, all must hang straight down. But after all, the back skirt of a cutaway may be cut closer than the skirt in Dia. II, for the reason that a short cutaway cut scant at the bottom of the back skirt will not go apart as easily as it would do if cut, say 10 in. longer.

Dia. II gives a good representation of the run of the bottom, and the lap at the waist seam shows 1 number extra length for the curve of the chest. The skirt of any double-breasted frock coat should be cut so that when done and the front laps over, both the waist seam and the bottom meet.

Now, providing the lengths are all well calculated, it becomes simple to make these points meet, and it is done as follows: In front of the plumb base line make the skirt even length and shape in all respects like Dia. II. From the under arm cut forward, sink the forepart waist seam 1½ at the plumb base line and the same at the front edge. At the bottom drop the front of the skirt about ⅜ to ½. The bottom of the back is ¼ longer at the side than it is behind, or at right angles with the center line of the center of the back. At line 30 the center of the back is thrown out 1 number and that much is again reduced at the side of the back, as a gore. Throwing outside 1 in. and cutting 1 in. away at the side produces the oval shape over the seat. If the center of the back was placed at the base and the sides made even from line 25 down, then the whole back part would appear flat.

The under arm cuts in Dias. II and IV, are based upon the difference of the diameter of the body from side to side, close under the arm and at the hollow of the waist. The diameter of the normal male form may be considered to measure one inch less at the waist than at the chest, both backward and forward and sidewise, and the circumference of such a body may be computed as being one-ninth less waist than the breast on the whole measure, as 36 breast and 32 waist.

Now, it should be observed that Dia. II and Dia. IV are laid out in different squares, and that if Dia. IV were laid out in the same square as is Dia. II, the gore under the arm would be 3¼ at the waist, as it is on Dia. XII. When I say above, that all coats and vests have the under arm cut calculated according to the difference of the diameter of the waist from side to side, I mean a coat laid out as shown in Dias. II and XII, and a vest as laid out as shown in Dias. IV and XI. Each requires about one inch reduction at the waist and at the under arm cut. The coat is simply that much larger over the hips, as the swing of the side piece from a square of 20 to a square of 17½ amounts to.

The square of 18, for either a three-seamed sack, or a frock coat, may be reduced at the waist as shown in Dia. II, and if the diameter of the waist indicates that more space is required at the side, it should be allowed according to that indication. Some men are quite well filled out in the sides of the body and flat in front, while others require more waist proportion in front. The waist proportion on a frock coat cannot be made according to the close measure taken over the vest, but must be made according to the measure over a well-fitting coat when buttoned up, and to be taken as large and as loose, yet as snug, as the coat really requires it to be. Some may call this an actual measure, and some may contend that this measure cannot be taken correctly, but, be that as it may, nevertheless it is a measure, which gives an indication of what is wanted, and also a truer indication than a measure taken tightly over the waist. By the waist measure, I mean the measure at the hollow of the waist and not the waist seam of a frock coat. The hollow of the waist is a permanent point on every human body, but the waist seam changes according to style or notion; and the width of that seam should come pretty near to the actual measure taken over the coat when buttoned up.

In order to observe the difference of the location of waist proportion, let us consider Dia. I, which is laid out in the same position as a vest, although the square is ½ larger. Here we find a reduction of ¾ at the hollow of the back, or between the sidepiece and back; and on line 20 we find a spring of ¾ at the waist seam between the front and sidepiece.

The normal form requires a reduction of 1 in. at the under arm cut, on a vest, and about ½ in front, which ½ is again thrown out behind as a spring over the seat; and which is not waist reduction or waist addition, but must be considered as something to conform with the turn of the body from the pit of the stomach downward and from the hollow of the waist in the back downward. This cut under the arm on a square of 20 is a natural gore for a vest, while for a coat the same spot requires a spring, which is also a natural one for a coat, and both are in their place because the nature of the garment requires it, not the body itself. There are men with quite small and tapering waists, and for such the underarm cut must be made larger, while others with very full waists spread sidewise and require the under arm cut smaller—or no cut at all but a spring.

Now, in making our calculation for the waist proportion according to diameter of the body, the following must be observed: If the full diameter of the waist, from side to side, is 1 in. less than that of the chest from side to side and under the arm, it will throw ½ inch taper on each side; but the diameter covers the double body, and the double garment, or one front and one back on each side, consequently each half back and each half front requires a taper, or a reduction of ½ inch, and for this reason the vest, as a garment cut close to the body, has a reduction of 1 in. under the arm, and which 1 in. is to be taken away on the forepart as being the best shape.

On a vest, I find that all waist allowances may be divided between the side and front with very satisfactory results, but extremes should have a trifle more in front than at the side. On a coat, the most of waist allowances should be at the side, because surplus cloth at the front of a coat will produce too much skirt below, while on a vest it will not show, because the vest is cut off or ends a few inches below the waist.

The cut between the sidepiece and back of a frock coat should never be changed for waist proportion. This cut is not made or calculated according to waist proportion, but is made for convenient cutting. However, this must be observed: Short men require the waist higher up than the scale produces, and in consequence the hollow, or the turn of the sidepiece, should be where the hollow of the waist actually is, and not at line 17½, as shown in Dia. II. Therefore just the contrary must be observed on tall and slender persons. I find that the difference of the length of the waist between short and tall persons is about this: If the style allows the waist seam to be located at line 20 for the normal form, then a short person may have that seam at 19 and a tall one at 21, while the hollow of the waist is 2½ higher, all of which can be measured on each customer.

[Illustration]

LARGE WAISTS AND THE NORMAL FORM.

This article includes all sizes, from the smallest child to the largest man, and is to be applied on all forms whose whole waist measure is more than one-ninth part less than breast. When a child is born its waist is larger than its breast. The normal growth of the waist is a constant reduction of its relative proportion to the breast, until we may find, at the age of 20, a waist of about four inches less than breast. After that age the waist has a tendency to become larger again, more or less, until we again find some individuals with the same waist proportion as when they were born.

Now, is not a child with its waist larger than its breast, of normal proportion? Is not a man who measures 48 breast and 50 waist, of normal proportion? The present conception of a normal form, as being four inches less waist than breast, is wrong. This proportion is found in the medium sizes, as 36 breast and 32 waist but it can be called a normal form for that size only. We may find 44 breast and 40 waist, but they are exceptions, though I have found one 43 breast and 37 waist. The child of 24 breast and 20 waist is not to be found; consequently the normality of the proportion of four inches less waist than breast is a myth as far as cutting garments is concerned, and cutters must make calculations for each individual customer; or, as in cutting for ready made clothing, the different sizes must be classified according to their normal conditions.

But taking 36 breast and 32 waist as normal for that size, we find also that it means a waist which is one-ninth part less than the breast, and if we make a diagram to fit that size and enlarge it to size 54, it will fit a waist one-ninth less than that breast, or a waist of 48; but such forms are not in existence as far as I know. If we diminish it to breast size 27, it will fit a waist of 24, which may come pretty near to a great many boys of that size; but the great majority of that size have fuller waists, and the younger the child is the larger its waist proportion will be found to be.

But before we proceed further, remember that in trying to fit coats in the back according to the waist proportion, more garments are spoiled than made better; for, in the first place, the smallness of the back part of a coat does not depend on waist proportion at all, as shown elsewhere. The hollow of the waist behind is not to be fitted at all, but passed over; and its proportion is of no account until it is almost as large as the breast. Breast 40 and waist 37 requires no addition to the waist.

Breast 42 and waist 45 (with seat 45) I find I can fit very well by omitting the gore under the arm, and in place of the gore lapping the side piece and front ¾ in. at the waist seam, and adding 1¼ in front, which will allow 3 in. extra width for a waist that is 6 in. out of proportion on the whole. And it is further accounted for as follows: The 1 in. omitted gore and the ¾ lap makes 1¾, and the 1¼ in front make 3 in. in all, or only one-half of the actual measure, which may appear as too small, but we must consider that the hollow of the waist for the normal form is not to be fitted but passed over, and a larger waist will fill it out better, that is all. To obtain a correct waist proportion on a coat is quite a trick, and cannot be learned from the books; and a cutter must consider each customer well. A correct waist measure may be taken over a well fitting coat when buttoned up, and the coat made precisely like that measure—all seams and lap for buttons and button holes to be taken into consideration.

One thing should be observed: The front angle of 15 deg. is 5 numbers wide at line 20, where the waist seam is located. But on a large form the waist is higher up, say at line 18, and the width of the front angle (as 5 at 20) must be re-established at, say 18; that is, we must go outside of the front line of 15 deg. The same thing ought to be done at the side, and the lap of ¾ made at the waist seam and not at line 20. Line 17½ is established for the hollow of the waist, and line 15 as the turning point of the body in front. Line 20 as indicated is for the top of the hips, and the waist seam for a frock coat regardless of style or fashion.

But on corpulent men, these lines stand too far down, and on slim persons they are too far up; consequently, these lengths must be measured, and as the waist seam runs at right angles with the back, as on a square of 17½, and as a point for line 20, take the outside of the elbow, and for line 17½ take the inside of the elbow. The elbows are a sure guide, for they always fit into the hollow of the waist, and no man can strike both of his hip bones with both of his elbows at the same time. As a general rule, I claim that the angle of 135 deg. will cover every form of large waists, providing the sides and the shoulders fit. Every cutter can try this by cutting the double angle of 135 deg., neck and all, and put it on as a cape by closing it in front. To imitate the large waist simply lift the front edge forward—and notice the result. Or it may also be tried on a corpulent form, when it will be found that the angle of 135 deg. will cover it. A piece of pattern paper will do for that purpose, or even a piece of muslin. But coats are not made from sheet iron, and if otherwise well balanced can stand a great deal of abuse at some places. Therefore, no cutter will fail if he divides the extra waist proportion intended to be allowed into three equal parts and place two parts at the side and one part in front, starting all at the armscye lines.

On coats all allowances should be scant in front, because plenty allowance there would throw too much skirt in front. A vest is cut off a few inches below the turn of the body a trifle more will not show, and may be balanced again by cutting a gore in the middle of the forepart below the pockets, particularly if the abdomen turns very abruptly. A vest is better ½ in. too large in the front of the waist than that much too small.

On a frock coat, extra waist proportion can be given by dividing it all over the front and side of the forepart; but on a three-seamed sack the side seam is too far behind to be of much help. And it is best to enlarge the square of 18 numbers to the amount of waist proportion required, and reduce it again by a cut under the arm upward, as a five-seamed, for both under and overcoats.

Breast 48 and waist 50 can be fitted by enlarging the square from 1 to 1¼ in.—1 in. often yields excellent results. But by enlarging the square for any purpose, we ought to consider this: If we enlarge the square 1 in., point 13½, as on a sack, and on line 9 in front will sink down ¼ of the 1 in., which will make the back that much shorter on line 11¼. This is very little, but it ought to be known to the cutter that a short back is always better for a large waisted form than a long back. (See Dia. X.) Bear in mind that an under coat for a large waisted form is about the same thing as an overcoat that fits the normal form.

There is always a class of men found who complain that they seldom have a coat large enough in the armholes, unless the coat is too large all over. Such persons are usually well filled up at the side of waist and hips, and require their coats large there, and if this is not done, the sewed up back cannot give, and consequently the coat must give in front, and the whole of it is drawn backward, taking the armhole with it, and striking the front of the arm, while the back of the armhole shows too much cloth. A coat which swings loose at the back and around the side of the waist will never cut the front of the arm; it may be small all around the armhole, but it will only feel close and will not saw on one spot only.

[Illustration]

STOOPING FORMS.

(SEE DIA. IX.)

Stooping forms have so many variations that it is impossible to describe them all. The term “stooping” is generally applied to persons with prominent shoulder blades. We find them combined with long and short necks, large and small waists, hollow or flat in the back and front of the waist, and arms thrown backward or forward. All of these conditions must be observed and separately calculated, and a cutter will be kept constantly busy and on the watch. It is only where a cutter is thoroughly acquainted with the workings of this system of bases that he will be able to fit all forms as near as he is expected to do. All kinds of measures have been devised, and all sorts of imaginary bases have been adopted to fit the forms of a man; but where one cutter succeeds with a certain appliance, others utterly fail. The fact is, even if all measures should give the correct amount, the body itself could not be fitted except on a few specified points, and all defects should be covered up in place of imitating them. To fit the stooping form in all its details would result in a misfit from the start, particularly when the back of the waist is very hollow.

If we take a coat that fits a normal form, and put it on a stooping form of the same size, and button it under the chin, the neck will fit, but will stick out behind at the waist and spread apart in front. A reasonable way of altering it is to reduce the back seam of the side piece from the blade down, which will produce more curve over the blade and give more length to the back; and what is taken off behind at the waist is allowed in front. It is generally taken for granted that a stooping form requires his armholes more forward, but this is not always the case, for some of them throw their arms backward; and we find the contrary in a great many erect forms, who throw their arms forward—all of which the cutter must observe.

Now, suppose we permit the coat to be loose under the chin, and button one or two lower buttons. In this case we shall find that the coat will fit in the back of the waist, but at the neck it will be too loose and will gape all around the front. If we gather the wrinkles together in front we can make the breast fit the form, although the top of the back may be too short. So we can make our alteration on the spot again, always providing, however, that we are altering the pattern only, by starting at the front sleeve nick and laying a fold forward to the amount of whatever the fullness of the coat may indicate. This again will alter the pattern from that direction. It makes the front shorter in place of making the back longer. This last is the most reasonable way to alter a coat for the stooping form, for it must be remembered that in both erect and stooping forms the change proceeds from front to back, and at the waist.

The backbone is solid, although it bends, but it never becomes longer or shorter on the same form. If the body throws itself forward into a stooping position, the back bends and the front contracts at the pit of the stomach. If the body throws itself upward in a more erect position, the back bends the other way and the front expands at the pit of the stomach. The front only expands or contracts at the pit of the stomach. The backbone must be considered a hinge on which the whole body swings, just like a door on its hinges; and all alteration may be made from that point, either by stretching some parts or by folding up the pattern before the garment is cut.

If a stooping form throws his arms forward, then the armholes must be further forward of the front sleeve base. But in that case the front sleeve base must be just as much advanced. And again: Whatever the front of the armhole has been advanced must be added to the back of the armhole, for a stooping form has no larger arm than an erect form. The armhole must be moved forward, but made no larger.