Part 19

This constant backward and forward movement of the neck, waist, and shoulders is one of the greatest studies any cutter will be obliged to go through, as it is, in fact, the only variation to be found in the normal form which cannot be measured, but must be taken by the trained eye of the cutter, and his practical knowledge of how to alter. Actual measurement, by whatever measure or name it may be called, is a delusion, for all so-called long or short measures around the shoulders, neck and arms must be taken close over a body which we do not intend to fit as snugly as the measure itself. As a rule, said measures are seldom applied, or transferred to a flat pattern on the same line as they have been taken over the form itself.

For illustration, we will examine the so-called upper shoulder measure, from the top of the center of the back to around under the arm and back again to the place of beginning. Said measure is always to be taken close, because any slack would again cause great variation in the hands of different cutters. By taking it close the tape will not strike the body of the coat under the arm at all, because the armhole is lower than the body itself, but the tape pulls the sleeve up and passes above the armhole. If cutters will go to the trouble and make a line on their patterns over which they transfer that measure, and then draw stitches in, they will find that when the coat is on the body they cannot even follow said stitches with the tape line, unless it is fastened every _few inches_. If that be the case, _what good is the measure_? If that measure is to do a cutter any good he must be able to follow a certain trail on the pattern, as he does on the coat when on the body, but that cannot be done. There is no one so blind as he who does not want to see.

If the pit of the stomach contracts or expands, that is no proof that the shoulder and arms also draw out of their normal position. If the breast measure be taken correctly, as directed in this work, passing over the point of the shoulder blades, then the round shoulders of a stooping form, and the flat ones of an erect form are included within the measure. Consequently nothing can be added to the blade for a round back nor taken away for a flat back—the change must be above or below, notwithstanding the appearance of Dia. II B. The round back requires his armhole more forward, and what is taken out in front of the armhole is again allowed on the back, making the back broader. If the back of the armhole is not supplied with what is taken out in front, the under and back sleeve will drag and pull backward. Because the stooping form may throw his arm forward, is no indication that his arms becomes larger, but it demonstrates that his armhole must be located more forward.

But again: Because a man is stooping is no indication that his back must be round. A man may throw his neck downward in front, but may also throw his arms backward, and stand very erect in the waist. Such a form requires his neck hole downward in front but does not require his armhole forward. The front and back of the armhole may be located as for the normal form, or even for the erect form.

Further: Because a man is classed among the erect forms is no proof that his back must be flat. We find plenty of so-called erect forms who throw their arms forward, and their backs become very straight in length.

The terms _normal_, _stooping_ and _erect_ are very indefinite, and I do not believe that any man is, or ever will be able to describe a stooping form alone in all its variations and combinations. All that can be done is to point out certain forms; and the cutter who starts out on his cutting tour through life must always be on his guard, and study his customers, and imprint their forms upon his own brain.

Now, as the breast measure contains the full size of a round as well as a flat shoulder blade, we must come to the following conclusion: That the stooping form requires simply more length in the back, or less length over the front, and years of experience teaches me that ½ to ¾ extra length over the blade is enough for the extreme stooping form, but such a form requires its length in the center of the back, or from the blade upward; and whatever the back is made longer on top must be shortened at the front, as is shown in Dia. IX, which illustrates the long as well as the short neck, and also the stooping form.

But there is no law to prevent a cutter from adopting a middle way, by leaving the forepart as it is and to make the whole back, say ½ longer and reducing that length again somewhere at the armhole, because a back that becomes longer behind requires no extra length at the side. This alteration is even to altering the back as for a long neck, leaving the front as it is for the normal form. If a coat fit at the neck but swings off at the waist, reduce the back of the side piece, say ¼ in., at the waist and stretch it downward to make it again long enough—all of which is required to lengthen the back ½ in. But if the stooping form should require his armhole further forward, ¼ is enough for the extreme. Point 8 remains the center for the back sleeve, all extra length being allowed on top.

In the conclusion of this article, I will say that I have given different views as to the making of alterations, because while cutting we can alter as we please; but if a garment must be altered after it is made, it must be altered as best we can, and if a garment is worth altering at all it is worth altering right. I will here again point to the fact that coats for stooping forms usually have a tendency to swing off at the back of the waist, and such garments can most always be brought to the body by giving the center of the back and the back seam of the side piece a good stretching under the smoothing iron from a point over the shoulder blade downward.

All alterations between the stooping and the erect forms can be better comprehended if we consider a well-fitting coat on a normal form as follows: Consider the coat cut through from each side to each back, and to each front, and consider the sides as on hinges, and then consider what the result would be if the form imitates the so-called erect or stooping positions. In that case the cuts across the hollow of the waist would open in front or back, as the case may be, and contract at the opposite. The result of the backward and forward moving of the body must be imitated by contracting or folding the pattern, just as a coat will full up in the back when the body becomes erect. Under the head of stooping forms also belongs the so-called “hunchback,” and to fit such forms will always be a hard job.

To fit them is not the right term in my opinion. They do not want to be fitted, for to fit them would just show their deformity, which should be hidden by his coat, at least in the back of the waist. Such forms are often very erect ones, and most of them throw their arms and shoulders up, making them extra square, and may be at right angles with the side of the neck. If the armhole is left, as for the normal form, as it should be, then the angle of 135 deg. must have a gore cut at the neck, and in the shoulder seam, of at least 1 in., and the top of the back placed say 1 in. lower, and the front of the neck 1 in. lower, while the side of the neck may be widened ½ in. only. This will not disturb the armhole and sleeve. The top of back and the top of front must be shortened, because there is no slope of the neck; the cloth runs straight over, and for this reason the side of the neck is to be cut out more, while there is no change whatever at the armhole.

Now, while the upper part of the back must be made shorter, that part of the back which passes over the shoulder blades and which is in this case extremely large, must be made longer, as far over as the enlarged shoulder blade requires it. But at the armhole the back requires the normal length only. On a frock coat such length may be given in the back, and that length again reduced by a larger gore between the side piece and the back. But on a sack coat this cannot be done, as no seam runs over to that point, and in consequence the extra length must be put in otherwise, and I will here give the best way to do it, but it may not be the shortest way.

If the back requires say 1½ in. extra length over the haunch, cut the whole back ¾ longer in the portion of the back armhole, and reduce ¾ at the shoulder seam toward the armhole again, which will leave the balance of the armhole as it was before. Next, stretch the center of the back ¾ over and along the shoulder blade, and over toward the arm, say about 4 to 5 in. each way, or as far over as the enlarged shoulder blade requires it.

In the article on “Center of Back and Front,” it is shown why the center of the back can be fitted on straight lines, and this is true of the back of a hunchback, though a modification may be made for such a form and some taken off above or below the hunch, or something be thrown out over the center behind. But it is not width, that such a coat wants; it is length over the blade, not over and clear across to the armhole, but only as far over as the deformation requires. In this respect let me allude to an article and diagram in “THE AMERICAN TAILOR AND CUTTER” of August, 1890, pages 34 and 35:

“That pivot, from the armhole across to the center of back, which must be done on straight lines, can not work, unless the body of a man is first pressed flat from side to side, leaving the center of front and the center of back on a sharp edge, or what would be the same illustration: on a form cut from a one-half inch board, the sides being flat. In this case only, the form can be fitted from back to front, and on curved back and front centers. But as long as we must fit men having the present form the back must be fitted from back to side and on straight lines at the center of back. The opening of the lines over the back, as shown in that illustration, is too straight, it will make the back either too long at the center, or too short at the middle of the back, and may fall smooth over the middle of the back, but will draw at the center and at the armhole.”

The above should receive the attention of every cutter, as the term “Hunchback” is simply a combination of extremely stooping and extremely erect forms.

To sum up the whole stooping form: The back of such a form does not become longer, but it bends and produces a larger curve over the blade, and consequently the coat back will go with the body and requires no extra length. But the front contracts either all over the chest or at the pit of the stomach, and the coat must be contracted or shortened there, but as there is no seam there we must fall on to the next best place where we can find a seam, and here we find the shoulder seam in which the surplus length of the forepart may be taken up. Now, if we use Dia. II or Dia. VIII as a model, we simply lap the shoulders toward the blade, the same as for the normal form, but omit the lap toward the neck. This is the most reasonable way of altering for the stooping form.

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

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.