"Steampunk is the SCA of Victorian costuming." [1]This caused a definite twitchy reaction, although at the time, I wasn't really sure why. But I had an entire afternoon to wander and ruminate.
Perhaps the term "authentic" is too wibbly-wobbly. If we define authentic as "genuine, real, entitled to acceptance or belief because of agreement with experience", then this can apply equally to that which is either a high-fidelity faithful reproduction of a period item, or to a visual impression that communicates a reality, no matter how alternative. In the art of creating personal adornment, this might mean a gown made from a pattern in Godey's, but could equally apply to a Harry Potter universe wizard's robe.
The Steampunk community seems to pretty universally identify itself as Neo-Victorian, and further as fantasy/science fiction Victorian. For many of us, "authentic" is the goal, if a faithful reproduction is not. In most cases we're pretty upfront about that. Yes, we typically use nineteenth century silhouettes (and from a wide variety of cultures), but I doubt that anyone would call themselves authentic Victorian when wearing a visible corset. Okay, maybe someone who is terribly new to the scene, or fundamentally without knowledge about what Victorians wore.
On the other hand, the definition of "authentic" in the SCA depends largely on who has created it. It's not at all uncommon for the typical SCA-er to label something as "authentic" when it really isn't, because it passes the ten-foot-rule, because if they had it, they'd have used it, because poly/cotton is cheap, or because everyone loves barbecue. Even more commonly, the SCA sponsors events which have very little to do with period practice, simply because they're fun. All of which lends an atmosphere if intellectual dishonesty to the entire group.
Like most sweeping generalizations, this isn't really a fair assessment of the SCA as a whole. There is a body of us who are very focused on creating faithful reproductions of period artifacts. We use materials that were used in our period of study, and follow the period forms for the items. Amongst so called authenticity mavens, a Oseberg-type loom is far preferable to an inkle loom, (an 18th century development), and chauses and braes are much more pleasing than peasant pants.
Neither is it a fair assessment to characterize Steampunk clothing as intellectually dishonest Victorian attire. (Even more jarring to your author is to call either of them "costume", which entirely negates the concept of authentic.) In short, calling a spade a spade is the very epitome of intellectual honesty. A barbecue isn't a feast, so just call it a barbecue. If you use an inkle loom for cardweaving because it's convenient, then don't say that your loom is period, even the product is.
A visible corset isn't Victorian, so call it Steampunk.
[1] At least I think that she used the "c" word; Sheila can correct me if I am in error.
Actually, I think she said, "Victorian re-creation..." :)
ReplyDelete