Clothing descriptions

[thecoldembrace]

Descriptions of clothes has for as long as I can remember have been an eternal plague to me. I can describe warriors well enough, because well I know what they need. It is those out of armor that concerns me, and most importantly women. When I describe female clothing it always tends toward the dress or gown because I can't think what they should wear. I don't know fabrics, when and how to describe details associated on clothing.
My world is set in a high Renaissance period with elements of more ancient times. A lot of my story revolves around the class of the very rich and powerful, but I do have my less wealthy people who are central to the story.
If anyone could give me some insights on what I should aim to do, especially with women's clothing it would be an amazing help

-Cold

 

[JRFLynn]

I often feel the same way, I'm pretty clumsy when it comes to clothes. I tend to go all out when it does pop up in writing. If your period is Renaissance, men typically wore doublets and hose, the fashion allowed for puffy sleeves but there were trends that had "eyelets" in both the doublet and pants. They would often wear long robes over this ensemble as well, higher status men also wore short cloaks that cropped at the waist. Don't ask me why, not very practical. The merchant class and wealthy were much flashier. Give them hats with a plume, maybe shoes with bells, who knows. They were pretty crazy in the courts, that's where all the new fashions would pop up As for women of stature, they wore corset dresses and large hoop skirts--contraptions typically of wood. Go all out on the frills, lace, billowing fabric and the wonky hairdos. Even stick a stuffed ferret in there...okay, a bird or something.

If you're wondering when to describe dresses/garb, formal introductions are usually a good place, or maybe there's one person that stands out in particular. If it's a book about political intrigue than I think it's fine to focus on clothes description, as a lord and lady's dress is synonymous with their armor. Extravagance was a way to show their wealth and fashion sense (or intelligence, civility, etc)

For an everyday woman working in a tavern, she at least wore a skirt and blouse, maybe with a loose corset and a jumper over that. Wikipedia might help you too, or a quick search on the period's clothing. I wouldn't be too strict, try and have fun. Maybe you could make up some interesting trends to give it that fantasy flare?

Renaissance Italian Clothing And Fashion (Hope this helps, there's a transcript at the bottom)

 

[wordwalker]

One thing that might help, not about getting the raw data (because it sounds like you do need a lot) but about using it: when you're deciding when to describe how much clothing, think of how it affects the scene's plot or at least tells the character something at the moment.

Yes you could go on for lines about what each person wears, and what it's made up of or what steps are needed to put it on-- and sometimes you want to. But the points you most want to make are about when clothes make someone look richer, poorer, more out of date, more foreign, too military or too party-happy, or any other impression that changes (or foreshadows) how people are going to treat them as the scene goes on. That and when the clothes start physically slowing or tripping them and that affects the rest of it.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I'm with Wordwalker. I only describe clothing with a detail or two (if even that much) and only if it adds an effect to character or story. I much prefer to describe these types of things minimally and let the reader fill in the finer details with their imaginations, from their experience.

Even with physical description, I tend to do the same. I might write about a character with oily black hair and a hook nose. The reader can color the rest in from that base. I believe description rendered in this way involves the reader more. It pulls them into the story because it becomes half my creation and half theirs. Their involvement of their experiences may make the image of a particular character type (like a sniveling and cunning coward, or a blustering bully) more real for them. This can enhance the story.

The same can be true of clothing. Do I need to know what the stitching of a bodice looks like? Maybe, if it says something about status, or perhaps it tells us something of character because our POV notices fine detail.

If you're really aiming to hand the reader deeper, and more complete, levels of description (which is a valid approach), there is at least one custom clothing designer on this site. I won't call them out, but I'm sure if you asked for help in the research forum, you'd likely get assistance.

 

[thecoldembrace]

Do you show differences in clothing?
I have four cultures clashing in my novel, Glassians.. semi-nomadic desert dwellers, the Ordainians the ruling human empire who are a mix of Norse and Roman, my Everholden peoples who resemble the Greeks, and my Trolls who are jungle dwellers with Aztec influences. Would a small description be sufficient in a room with all four cultures?

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Do you show differences in clothing?

If it adds to the story or shows elements of character I likely would. Still, I'd probably describe major differences, not every minute detail.

 

[Rorick]

To reiterate Wordwalker and T.Allen.Smith, my approach tends to be to use as little as possible. An overall flavour suffices. Don't be afraid to let your reader do a little work, after all, the story will be living in their head, not yours.

If there's an absolute need to have something in - a hood to obscure the face, a pair of loose fitting trousers to fall down at an inopportune moment - then do it.

I try to stay light on character appearances too, especially for PoV characters. After all, if you're the narrator, you never think of yourself in those terms.

 

[Penpilot]

How you describe things and what you describe, a lot of it comes down to who your POV character is. A barbarian, a tailor, and baker walk in to a bar. No, that's not the start of a joke. But what does each of them notice and how would they describe things? Most likely they're not going to notice the same thing unless it's something very eye-catching and the verbiage they each use will be different.

If you take the typical archetype of a barbarian like say Conan, they'd probably notice the alcohol first. And if they noticed what the serving girl was wearing they'd probably say it was a dress. They probably don't know or wouldn't care if it was a specific type of dress or pay attention to its quality. To them, its a dress, and that's it. But maybe with the alcohol, that they care about. Maybe they know all the various types of alcohol in and out and will be verbose in describing it.

Now if you take the tailor, and they're all prim and proper, maybe the first thing they notice how everyone is dressed and make a judgement about the person's wealth based on that. Maybe they'll notice the stitching, the quality of the cloth, the embellishments, etc. And they may go in-depth about the cloths all the way down to if the hemline is straight or crooked.

With the baker, they may notice the food. Maybe they can suss out the ingredients simply from the smell.

And for me, you don't go overboard. What you describe and how much detail you give must serve a purpose, expand the world, reveal character, or advance the plot. Once you get the point across, IMHO, you have to be careful about adding more, because more can get you into trouble. It can weight your story down and stop it dead in place. The more details you give and the more in-depth you try to go, the more opportunities there are for you to make a mistake. If you make mistake and the reader notices, it can kick them out of a story, and decrease the credibility of the writing.

It's like when you hear someone talking about something that they obviously don't have any in-depth knowledge about. For example, they misunderstand concepts, apply absolutes when there are obvious exceptions, and they use jargon incorrectly, in the eyes of someone knowledgeable on the subject, they have no credibility.

Sometimes it's better to pick one or two key things, do your research, and go in-depth with those, and then, be a bit vague on everything else. If you get those two things right, it can create the illusion of depth in the things you choose to be vague about.

Like I said, it's about the POV character first. To some, cloths are just pants, dresses, skirts, shirts, and jackets. To others it can be something like an Aline dress, a Tent dress, a Yoke dress, an Empire line dress, a Shift dress, a Dirndl dress, a Sheath dress, a Low or drop waist dress, a Tunic dress, a Princess seam dress, a Blouson dress, a Shirt waist dress, a Wrap around dress, a Peasant Dress, and... I'm sure you get the point. Then, there's the in between.

 

[Miles Lacey]

Here's a list of some of the terms used for fashion during the Renaissance Period (courtesy of historyofeuropeanfashion.wordpress.com):

basquine — boned bodice made of whalebone and leather, gave the appearance of wider shoulders tapering to a tiny waist (women)
beret— thin, loose hats that usually tilted towards one side of the head
bombasting — stuffing for trunk hose, peascod-belly, and leg-of-mutton sleeves, composed of rags, flock, and other materials
bourrelet — wider version of the farthingale adapted in France, more cylindrical in shape rather than conical (women)
bum roll/bolster — roll of padding tied around the hip line to hold the skirt out from the body, less restrictive than the farthingale (women)
camicia — undershirt usually made of white linen (men)
canions — upper stocks worn from the doublet to the knee (men)
chopines — shoes that elevated the wearer, eventually developed into high heels
crescent cap — circular/heart-shaped cap worn towards the back of the head with a velvet veil covering the rest of the hair
codpiece — padded triangle of fabric worn laced to the front of the trunk hose over the groin (men)
copotain — high bell-shaped hat
doublet — man’s bodice
duckbill shoes/scarpines/ox-mouth shoe — large, wide, square-toed shoes often decorated with jewels or slashes (men)
enseigne — disc-shaped hat ornament, usually extremely detailed with jewels/carvings (men)
farthingale — topmost petticoat, hooped to give shape to the skirt (women)
finestrella sleeves — sleeves where the outer fabric was slit horizontally and the sleeves of the undergarment were pulled through (women)
flat cap — flat hat with soft crown and moderately broad brim (men)
funnel sleeves — sleeves that were fitted at the upper arm and ballooned out, fitted tightly around wrist
gorget— neck ornament

Kennel or Gable Headdress

jerkin— short velvet or leather jacket, usually sleeveless (men)
kennel/gable headdress — pentagonal piece worn over the top of the head with veil/bag cap of dark velvet attached to the back and covering hair (women)
leg-of-mutton sleeves — puffed sleeves that extended the entire length of the arm
neck wisk — a falling ruff that was open at the front, resembling a collar
nether stocks — trunks worn under breeches, long enough so that the bottoms could be seen (men)
pantofles — wooden platforms attached to the sole of the shoe with pieces of fabric to protect them from rain, snow, and mud
peascod-belly doublet — doublet rounded at the abdomen to give the appearance of a filled-out belly (men)
points — resembled shoelaces, used to attach trunk hose to doublets or sleeves to doublets or bodices (lacing/trussing)
pokes — apron-like pockets tied to the doublet (men)
ruff — starched (often with different colors) and wired collar pleated into ruffles, could be made of lace or jeweled, usually had matching cuffs
shoe rose — decoration usually made of lace or jewels that was worn at the front of the shoe
slashing and puffing — slits cut in a garment with fabric from the undergarment pulled through to form puffs
stomacher — stiffened triangular piece worn at the front of the bodice, reaching from neckline to lower abdomen (women)
supportasse — frames of silk-colored wire pinned underneath the ruff to keep it in place
trunk hose/pumpkin hose — ballonish-looking breeches that extended from the end of the doublet to about mid-thigh (men)
Venetians— full breeches that reached the knee
verdingale/farthingale frill — stiff wheel of fabric, often pleated, worn between the bodice and the skirt (women)
wasp waist — deep V-shaped waistline that extended over the skirt
wings — rolled fabric worn vertically around each shoulder, between the sleeve and the bodice
wisk/Medici collar — fan-shaped pleated collar, stiffened with wire and open at the front
zipone — buttoned tunic that reached the knee worn over the doublet (men)
zornea — cape with wide sleeves, belted at the waist (men)

Hope this helps.

 

[ShadeZ]

I tend to not be very detailed about clothes unless their unique. I leave it somewhat open to the readers imagination and use description more than anything else for example is the material soft and smooth or rough and fiberous? Does it have a sleek appearance common of elf clothes or the primitive look of commoner clothes? Here is an example of an outfit my main wears.

She wore jet black clothes that strongly resembled assassin clothing. It was loose fitting to hide dozens of sheathed blades no doubt. It was incredibly smooth and soft which indicated it wasn't made by humans. Their were several straps that held pouches and other gear a dragon slayer might need. No assassin outfit was complete without a hooded shirt or jacket. The black dye made te cloth impenetrable because it was made of dragon scales. Coleson could tell it was made of dragon scales by the slight sheen to it like it was made of black metal fibers.

 

[Miles Lacey]

My preference when describing wardrobes is to avoid any details that aren't relevant. In my WIP this is how I describe my character's wardrobe:

She wore a loose-fitting knee-length blue dress.made from cheap cotton. Her shoes were black with flat soles, which made it easy to run should it become necessary. It was a forgettable wardrobe worn by a forgettable face in the crowd. At night she blended into the shadows. And that's just the way she liked it. In her line of work being forgettable was her most valuable asset.

The world in which this story is set is the equivalent of our world in the 1930s.