La Bricoleuse

I recently finished reading the excellent new book from fashion historian Alison Matthews Davis, Fashion Victims - The Dangers of Dress Past and Present, and my advice to the readership of this blog is, in short, get your hands on a copy. It's fantastic.

I'm not sure which came first, he book or the eponymous exhibit which ran at the Bata Shoe Museum in Toronto recently--the book is much more than an exhibit catalogue, though it does contain a substantial number of illustrations (129 full color ones!). So perhaps the book begat the exhibit? Regardless, it's an imminently readable volume, hardcover, full-color, a coffeetable book of sorts, well worth the $40 retail price. I'll defer to a quote from the press release for an excellent summary:

A boldly gory and thoroughly illustrated history of death by clothing, from blazing crinolines to mercury-laden fur.

As a major proponent of safe work practices and an instructor who incorporates OSHA/EHS compliance topics into my classes, i found this book at turns fascinating, heartbreaking, gruesome, inspiring, and at times downright disturbing. Yes, the example cases mentioned within are sometimes horrible on their own, but more horrifying are the bits where the author discusses having lab techs at her university run tests on modern-day products easily bought in stores in your own neighborhood--lead content in lipsticks, for example, or radioactive metal used to ornament imported studded belts.

The book is structured so that each chapter focuses on a different class of danger--there's a chapter devoted to the hazards of the hatting industry, then one on flammable tutu net and flannelette, etc. As a sometime-hatmaker, the hatting chapter was particularly sad--one illustration showed examples of hatters' legible signatures as young apprentices contrasted with the unreadable trembling scribbles they signed with after a decade in the trade.

I highly recommend the book in general, but it's a particularly significant read and reference volume for those working in costume archives and in vintage clothing houses, as well as those in academia with study collections or large stocks of antique/vintage clothing.

I've rhapsodized in the past about how thankful i am to work at a professional theatre in residence on the campus of a major university, particularly one that functions in part as a teaching lab for production graduate programs, because safety standards and training are so high. Despite having a CV approximately 10x longer than my arm, PlayMakers/UNC-CH is the first employer i've worked for which had a comprehensive respirator fit-testing program for costume craftspeople[1].

Many theatres and independent production shops and freelance artisans don't have any idea how to implement such a thing or have the resources to do so. We're lucky because the university already has an Environmental Health and Safety department set up to do this kind of training for folks over in the science labs, medical school, and various facilities maintenance areas which work with airborne toxins far more frequently than we do, so for me and my students to piggyback onto the school's existing training and testing setup is not a huge deal.

So, here's something pretty exciting for everyone who wants to learn about respirator fit testing and training but doesn't know how to begin: on November 29th at 1pm, Lab Safety Supply is hosting a free 45-minute webinar about it! They already have a handy online fact sheet, but this presentation will allow you to interact with and ask questions of LSS's safety experts as well.

Register for the webinar here.

Honestly, this is a resource i wish i had access to or had known about fifteen or twenty years ago, and if our theatre and department didn't have the respirator training in place which it currently does, i'd be requiring all my students to register for the webinar and we'd all watch it and participate on the 29th. Hence, passing on the info here. If your company doesn't have a training and fit testing program, or if you freelance and want to educate yourself in this realm, or if it's been a few years since you were trained/fit tested and you need a refresher, check it out!



[1] This is not to say that prior employers of mine were intentionally grossly negligent or anything, rather that the arts industries were largely ignored by OSHA up until perhaps the last decade or so, when they really began to sit up and notice thanks to the efforts of watchdog organizations like ACTS. Even theatres which had training programs for their scenic painters and carps and such, often did not include costume production folks out of an assumption that our work was limited to cut-and-sew processes. But, from dyestuffs to shoe sprays, we know this is not true.

I promise I'll get back to original content soon, but this is another ACTS FACTS reprint because it's been discussed in every industry event i've been to all year, from cocktail parties to conferences. Reprinted in full with permission from ACTS FACTS, the Arts Crafts and Theatre Safety Newsletter, August 2011, Vol. 25, No. 08.

In response to inquiries, I'm publishing the Spider-Man citations. They are found under "8 Legged Productions, LLC" on OSHA's web site. All three "serious" citations carry proposed fines of $4500, $4500, and $3500 respectively. The first is under the General Duty clause (1910.5(a)(1)). It read:

The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free of recognized hazards that were caused or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to the hazards of falls or being struck during flying routines when employees fell from an elevated platform and/or struck the stage because of improperly adjusted or unsecured safety harnesses: Foxwoods Theatre a.)On or about September 25, 2001, an employee was injured while performing an aerial routine when he struck the ground in front of the landing platform which was not in correct position in regard to rigging position, b.)On October 19, 2010, an employee was injured while performing an aerial routine when he struck the ground in front of the landing platform, c.) On December 20, 2010, an employee was injured when the employee fell from an elevated scene due to fall restraint system not being anchored properly. Among other methods, feasible and acceptable abatement methods to correct the hazards are to: Comply with Aerial Performers Part 41 of Title 12 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules, and Regulations of the State of New York. Supplementing Part 41 of Title 12 by use of visual confirmation that the fall protection systems are properly attached and anchored and confirmation that the state props and platforms are set prior to allowing stage managers to give approval for the computerized controlled system to perform aerial acts. NOTE: NIN ADDITION TO ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION, THE EMPLOYER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ABATEMENT DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS ITEM, FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY OF $1,000.00 AS PER 29 1903.19.0.

The second citation is under 1910.23(c)(1), Guarding floor and wall openings and holes, which requires guarding of all floors or platforms 4 feet or more above the floor or ground with a standard rail or "the equivalent." The equivalent measures usually allow theatrical producers a lot of options, as long as they can support their belief that their choice of fall protection measures will be as effective as a guard rail. ACTS FACTS has covered a number of similar citations at other theatres and it should remind us that elevated stages must be included in written fall protection programs.

The third citation is for the general requirements for personal protective equipment. This general rule could be used to cover the non-traditional fall protection equipment used at Spider-Man

On the USITT costumers' email list, one member recently asked some relevant questions about dye vats. She's got budget approval to buy one, and wondered whether anyone had strong feelings about wooden paddles (length, type of wood, etc), or had any experience with the Blodgett brand of steam-jacketed vats.

I decided to transcribe my response here, so it'd be Googleable for future researchers of the topic.

On wood paddles:

I have four $12 wood paddles that i use in my two steam-jacketed vats. One of them predates my tenure here so i have no idea how old it is--it has a thin crack running along the wide part of the paddle, which is why i purchased more, thinking it might break off soon. I've been here five years and counting and it hasn't broken yet. I wouldn't use it to paddle delicate fabric down into a bath, just in case it might snag something, but i do use it still on sturdier jobs.

That's the only reason i could think of to justify a costlier hardwood paddle, the lower likelihood of the wood cracking over time after repeated exposure to heat/chemicals, but it's not something on my dream list of equipment or anything. My cheapo paddles work fine, and when they do go, it's easier to find $12 to replace them than $100.

Lengthwise, all four of mine are 36" paddles, and they are fine in the 60-gal Groen.

On vats:

I can't help you on personal experience with the Blodgett brand, in that everywhere i've worked that had a functional vat had Groens or Hamiltons, or used soup tureens on giant heating elements. One shop i worked in had a Blodgett (IIRC) that someone had donated to the facility without investigating whether there was sufficient space/plumbing/ventilation, so it sat sadly in the basement because no one wanted to get rid of it, but no one knew how to find a way (physically or budgetarily) to install it either. I count this as a negative statement about the vat donor and facilities director in that case, rather than the Blodgett brand. :)

I'm going to repost this topic to my blog, since due to my posts on buying dye vats and vent hoods, sometimes it catches some relevant eyes that this email list doesn't--maybe some of the readership will chime in with Blodgett product reviews. In general, if you can find a restaurant surplus supply in your area, you might be able to get a second-hand vat in good condition from them for much less $$$ than brand-new.

Because, not only do you need to plan for the vat but also for ventilation! Which, you may have already investigated that so forgive me if i'm stating the obvious, but it is something that slips people's minds, as evidenced by my tale of the Blodgett in the basement--no plan had been made for plumbing it in/out, wiring a switchbox for it, or locating it somewhere that a vent hood could be installed. That said, you can be creative with this sort of thing, depending on where you are. I know of a shop in the Los Angeles area which has their dye vat outside under a carport roof--utilizing natural ventilation. Of course, i don't know how their neighbors might feel about that choice.

And, just in case you haven't come across them in your research, here are links to my two prior blog posts on this, which are sort of buyer guides for the theatrical dyer, to help with research and asking the right questions of vendors and facilities folks:

Dye vat sourcing: http://labricoleuse.livejournal.com/38478.html
Ventilation options: http://labricoleuse.livejournal.com/76739.html

Honestly, if you can't get both the size vat you want and a good vent system, paddles, goggles/gauntlets/etc out of your $10,000 budget, you might save a bundle but still really upgrade your dye facility by looking at 40gal or 60gal non-steam-jacketed tureens and an industrial-sized heating element. That's the route they chose at the LA Opera when they moved into a new costume facility the year before i worked there--tureen/element rather than steam-jacketed vat--and it's what they've got in the dyeshop at Parsons-Meares and at the American Repertory Theatre (or had when i worked there 2 and 6 years ago, respectively). If you want to consider that and price it out, research around about hot plates for drums and stock pots, like these:

http://www.wenesco.com/hotdrums.htm

The difference between the dyebath you get from a tureen and one you get with a steam-jacket is temperature gradation--the heat from the element makes the bath tend to be warmer the deeper it is, so your dyer just needs to be more vigilant and vigorous about stirring to circulate the bath and maintain a more uniform temperature. Which, you want to stir baths anyhow for more uniform color uptake, so that's not a huge deal, really.

I recommend, if you go that route, getting a tureen with a stopcock/spigot at the base, so you can drain it without lifting it.

Today, i'm not the source, i'm just the conduit. Links on a variety of topics of potential interest to follow.


Topical Links for Decorative Arts Class

I'll have images of glove projects to share on Tuesday, but for now, OutsaPop.com illustrates for us in this post some answers to the question, "When is a glove more than a glove?"

And, because we can't get our respirator fit-testing dates scheduled until the end of the month, I'm postponing our shoe unit and we're moving on to parasols next. In that spirit, check out Elena Corchero's solar parasol, which turns into a chandelier after dark. I may have to experiment with this idea myself! Corchero also does a lovely folding fan/flashlight design in the same vein, and some cool reflective lace for trimming delicately frilly sportswear.

Speaking of shoes, here's a cool how-to on Instructables.com for bricolaging a power-generating shoe modification!


Health and Safety

Many of us who make a career out of costume production develop a repetitive stress injury (RSI) at some point. Vigilance and care of your muscles and joints is the key to maintaining a long, successful career without damaging your body beyond repair. I'm big on learning about a range of ways to minimize or avoid RSIs, from technological advances in ergonomics (simple example: spring-action scissors, compression gloves) to physical therapy exercises. On that tip, i was thrilled to run across GreenOptions.com's "Yoga for Crafters" series. So far they've got targeted posts aimed at jewelers, stitchers (they say "seamstresses," but in my industry, i've worked with my fair share of male stitchers, too), & interloopers ("knitters & crocheters", but i think the post applies to all yarn artists, including tatters, nalebinders, macrameurs--wow, i just got really pedantic, there, sorry).


Blogs of Note

FashioningTech.com is a great wearable-art/couture/technology blog exploring the intersection of science, technology, fashion, and attire. I set up a LiveJournal feed for it at fashioningtech, if you're an LJ blogger and want to follow it on your flist. Some of these links above (parasol, shoes) are swiped from there.

Fashion Creation Without Fabric Waste Creation is a patterning-centric blog written by Australian PhD candidate Timo Rissanen, whose passion is garment design utilizing patterns with zero fabric waste (with occasional birdwatching). He's got some great open-source info on his own pattern creations, such as this no-waste hoodie pattern and these no-waste codpieced leggings. I love this concept, not only for its ecological implications, but also because it holds the same appeal as creative writing within a rigid structure, like writing poetry in sonnets, villanelles, pantoums, etc. but in a clothing design paradigm. I also made him a feed on LJ, at 0wastefashion.

On a similar note, if you want a fascinating pattern-theory read (and really, who doesn't?), check out the Julian and Sophie School of Pattern Cutting site, which is the result of a residency at the Royal College of Art. It's mindbending, the way they completely freaktastically puree everything you know about pattern-drafting into these crazily draped garments. One caveat: the photographs of the garments produced are really poor and unilluminating. You can tell from the text that they probably produce visually-intriguing garments, but it's probably something that's going to require practical experimentation to visualize it from a "page to stage" perspective.

Aight, that's me, then. I'm going to wind this up so i can go run around in this lovely autumn sunshine a bit. Have a great weekend, folks!

It's a news story that many people might have missed, since it came out over Christmas--the catastrophic coal slurry impoundment breach which occurred December 22nd in Roane County, Tennessee. Despite the epic scale of the disaster--today's revised estimate by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) puts the spillage at 5.4 million cubic yards of slurry (that's around 1.09 billion gallons of soupy sludge)--it didn't make it into many national news sources until Christmas day. Some of this delay might be explained by reduced staff in news services from economic cutbacks and/or the Christmas holiday, or the lack of staggering numbers of human casualties or personal property destruction. No one died in the avalanche/flood, and because of the limited population density only a few houses were destroyed. The devastation is measured in ecological terms: forests and wildlife decimated, fish kills, lakes and streams choked with the muck or completely obliterated.

It's hard to conceive of the scale of this disaster. For comparison, the Exxon Valdez incident was 10.8 million gallons of crude oil spilled, so this is around 100 times as much material released into the Tennessee river system and deluging the countryside.

It is a departure from my topic to write about this in La Bricoleuse--ostensibly my topic being restricted to areas of professional costume craftwork for performance. On rare occasions though (such as this one), I do depart from the subject. I do have a personal concern for what's going on--I grew up in east Tennessee and my family has lived here for generations; I went to undergrad at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, literally just up the highway from the affected area, and had many classmates and friends from the Harriman/Roane County area. My grandparents live a couple counties over. This has happened to a place i call "home."

Really though, this *is* somewhat related to the general focus of La Bricoleuse, because what i want to use the disaster to explore is the idea of hazard information dissemination and evaluation of hazard info in terms of personal precaution and protection.

( Read more... )

There's a buzz right now in the theatre blogosphere about "greening theatre," as evidenced by its gaining mention in the theatre pages of the Guardian. It's an interesting topic, vastly multifaceted, and one i often ponder myself.

Childrens Theatre of Madison's production manager Mike Lawler writes a blog dedicated to the topic called ecoTheater. (In order to more easily follow future posts, i set it up as an LJ syndication, ecotheater, in fact.) He's got a pretty interesting debate started over the amount of air travel that design staff have to do in the current regional theatre paradigm, which crossed blogs into Scott Walters' TheatreIdeas and Praxis Theatre's blog posts as well.

The thing that came out of this that most got me thinking was the idea of a "generalist" theatre professional. (Incidentally, aren't we already generalists, in the tech side of things at least? How many TDs out there are able to step in as carps, welders, run crew, set designers, draftsmen, etc. as needed? How many costumers have built soft goods for props or run wardrobe or functioned as designers, managers, shoppers, dyers, etc.?)

That sort of suggested approach, the "multitalented theatre artisan," is workable for a certain kind of theatre company--it makes ultimate sense for smaller-budget or traveling companies. The problem i have with the concept of the theatre generalist is that it doesn't work for professional theatre companies in residence at a university, where company members have a responsibility not only to the resident theatre, but to the training program that exists alongside it.

To use myself as an example, my duty is first to create all the costume crafts for PlayMakers Repertory Company, but the singular condition of my employment is that i teach in the Costume Production graduate program--one of the best in the nation. In order to be qualified to teach my courses in the program, i need to be the best specialized artist and artisan i can be. What's more, after i've done all the craftwork for the company and taken care of my academic responsibilities, i have literally NO more time to devote to some other aspect of theatre. PRC is certainly not alone in its status as a LORT theatre in residence at a university with theatre staff doing "double-duty"--off the top of my head, it's in good company with the Huntington Theatre at Boston University, the Clarence Brown Theatre at the University of Tennesee-Knoxville, the American Repertory Theatre at Harvard University, to name a few.

It has been my experience that, due to the collaborative nature of theatre, people are willing to work outside their area of primary responsibility as time and need and skill set allows (examples include a costumer dyeing fabric yardage for scene shop scrims, a propmaster casting ornaments for costume armor, a scenic carpenter creating decor for a fundraising event). I'm not so sure we need to write this into our hiring requirements though. As we've seen trying to fill our existing openings in staff this season, it's hard enough to find qualified applicants for positions as it stands--if we then demand that our actors also be drapers or carpenters, and our administrative staff be singers or painters or choreographers, i think the hiring pool only shrinks further til we're parched by professional drought.

Another issue to consider is that this "generalist" concept alienates those artists who are in production careers by discounting the degree of study and expertise they need to function at the top of their field. Certainly, actors pitching in to build flats or run wardrobe is necessary and valuable for theatres functioning in non-union paradigms, for example, and the theatre made can be transcendent and brilliant. Where though is the place in that for the scenic carp whose goal is to work for Cirque de Soleil building highly-engineered circus sets? What of the costumer who dreams of working on technically-challenging, huge-budget productions like new operas, Broadway, or Vegas shows? Because in many of the university programs, these are the students we are teaching in the tech departments.

I wonder if the generalist model isn't something that's emminently workable in the realm of the actor-director-administrator, but less workable when taking the technical fields into consideration. Within our company, many of our professional actors also direct, write, produce, carry full teaching loads, and/or work in other outreach and development capacities. If i were working as a dramaturg, i might welcome an actor as a research assistant. If i'm building a set piece, i don't think i want an actor who can swing a hammer over a career carpenter who can throw the whole thing together herself/himself without hand-holding. We already collaborate--i talk with the scenic production folks when i need something welded or some carpentry project done--but let's not stretch demands beyond the bounds of what's reasonable and safe.

In the course of browsing links in these blog discussions, i came across a couple other sites that spawned some mixed response on my behalf as well. Mo'olelo's Green Theatre Mission and GreenTheaters.org. Both of these sites advocate costume-related "greening" measures that strike me as limiting, short-sighted, or ignorant of costuming as a field. Specifically, here are some quotes, with my responses after:

From Mo'olelo:

• Rent costumes from other theaters and actors, or purchase from thrift stores before purchasing new items
  
• When possible, using thrift shops for costumes

From GreenTheaters.org:

• Consider reusing costume pieces rather than building new ones.
  
• In the laundry room, strive to do laundry as rarely as possible, perhaps giving actors the option to some items [sic] less frequently. Hang-dry, if possible, to reduce the huge amount of energy used by electric dryers.

Renting

Renting is certainly one means of costuming a show, but when a company invests its costume budget in the rental of a show, it receives exactly no return on that money--none of the costumes go into its own stock for potential reuse on future pulled shows, and all of the shop's labor goes into alterations, upkeep, alterations reversal (because anything you do to the rentals, you must undo), and cleaning of another company's property, as well as the expenditure of transportation costs--costumes are heavy, particularly period costumes, and incur high shipping and insurance charges, nevermind the fuel expenditure, whether shipping or driving to pick them up.

Often the companies renting them require them to be packed in particular ways for protection of their property, such that for some specialty items (like hats) it makes no sense to rent, since you could make the item on-site for much less time, money, and effort than the packing and shipping and dealing with red-tape of rental. (Or, i could, at least.) It seems to me that if an organization wants to avoid the transportation costs of flying in NYC or LA designers, they'd feel the same way about flying in their costumes.

In the long-term view, a company is better off investing in well-made costumes which they will retain in their stock after the performance, as the more costumes a company owns, the more they can pull from for future shows. It's been my experience that a well-made costume can typically be utilized in at least five productions at your typical regional LORT theatre before it needs major overhaul, or moves into a second life as a decon/reconstructed costume or distressed/beggar-class costume.

Here's a real-life example: we are not renting any of our costumes for Pericles, a huge show which has probably around 50 costumes in the version we're doing. We're making about 8 costumes, which will go into stock at the end of the run, and the rest are pulled from stock, altered, reconstructed, and/or dyed/painted or otherwise embellished. We could have rented the whole show and spent all our time and effort on doing reversible alterations on rental costumes; at the end, we'd have had to undo all the alterations and spend another few days after everything came back from the cleaners (since rental companies usually require confirmation of dry-cleaning of all items before returning them) packing them up and shipping them all. Instead, we make a few, alter the rest, and keep everything. I won't say NO labor is wasted--it's theatre, things will get cut--but far less labor goes toward something that has no longterm benefit to the company. After all, if you make it, even a costume that gets cut during tech still goes into stock.

Perhaps it's better to look at this rental issue from the other way around: might a company reap the benefit from establishing a means for conducting rentals of their own stock? Oregon Shakespeare Company is a great example of a company that's made this work very successfully--they are a primary rental source for theatre costumes and take in a certain amount of revenue from their rental department. Opera and ballet companies who build on-site also often operate with a rental component--they invest in making a whole opera or ballet, then reap the benefits of renting it as a batch to other companies staging the same show later on.


Thrifted costumes

Thrifted costumes can be the only option sometimes for student groups, church theatre, no-budget productions, and if you are making theatre on a shoestring, you make do with what you can. However, in terms of professional theatre, in my experience, 9 times out of 10 when a costume designer brings in some clothing s/he has purchased at a thrift store for costumes, the amount of labor that goes into alterations and making them stageworthy is comparable to that of having gone ahead and made the item from scratch.

Thrift store clothing is already secondhand--it's already been worn in someone's everyday life, laundered, sometimes damaged. Thrift store clothing is also most often mass-manufactured clothing and has not been constructed with alterations in mind--picking apart a seam sewn with a five-thread overlock machine is maddening, and there's nothing in its seam allowance to let out if the garment is too small. When thrifted costumes go into your stock after the run of a show (provided they survive it), you can count on them to hold up through perhaps 1-3 more shows, as opposed to the 5-8 shows you can expect with a new item. Depending on the state of the item when purchased, thrifted costume pieces make more long-term sense than rentals do, in that you do wind up with a certain number of costumes that go into your stock afterward, but often what you save in materials costs you spend and then some in labor.


Reusing costumes

Now here's one i can get behind...to a degree. I mean, actually, to a great degree, because pulled shows mean crafts-heavy labor, which means yay, work for me! But, that's something to figure into your evaluation when you decide to costume a show largely or entirely by pulling from stock.

Stock consists of all the costumes in still-wearable condition, from all the shows a company has ever done and then some (i.e., including donations). These things are every imaginable shape, size, and color...but the trouble is, sometimes the thing that fits or can be made to fit is not the right style or color so something has to be done to accommodate that. Whenever a show is designed from stock, a large part of what makes it a visually-cohesive show falls to the crafts artisan--costumes get dyed to conform to the show's palette, accessories are constructed to "pull together" the look of a chorus or collection of characters, distressing or toning or other paint effects are the "glue" the holds the show together design-wise. It's not just crafts--stitchers and first hands add trim and appliques, refurbish or decon/reconstruct things and deploy other tricks to make these disparate costumes from a dozen previous unrelated, unconnected shows hang together as a whole--but the point is, a pulled show still requires labor and expenditure of resources, often more than people think. There's a lot you need to do beyond pulling your reused costumes in order to mount a professional show with them.

Or, you don't do any of that and it looks like you rag-picked your show from a dumpster and a dress-up box. Which is maybe what you are going for, but 9 times out of 10, it doesn't stop with a pulled costume as-is. I'm just saying, with reuse comes a whole new set of costuming issues, and particularly if you are thinking about conservation, dyeing is a big one to weigh, in the scheme of things.


Laundry minimizing and hanging-dry

With all due respect to whomever wrote this, it's not even a valid suggestion. Actors Equity won't allow wardrobe to just "skip" laundering costumes--if you aren't operating an Equity house, okay, ask your actors if they are willing to wear sweaty, dirty, rank costumes for several shows running. Good luck with that. The rest of us are required to do laundry of launderable items after every performance. As for hanging dry, if you have a sunny day and a clothesline and the time to sit and watch over the costumes to make sure someone doesn't run off with the lead actor's pants, okay, give it a shot. As a general rule though, Equity houses have to do lots and lots of laundry, and that laundry is done in washing machines and dryers. Use responsible laundry soaps and softeners, buy energy efficient and low-water appliances, but don't tell me NOT to do laundry in my wardrobe department; it's naive at best and downright absurd.


I don't mean to suggest that i am against making the theatre industry more ecologically responsible--i'm saying that there are no simple solutions and that more consideration and weighing of impact is necessary than simply making a list of brainstormed ideas and implementing them without further investigation.

You can't pull shows if you don't also invest in adding valuable items to your stock.

You can't run a union house without laundry appliances.

You can't rent entire shows and feel proud of how ecologically-sound that decision was, nevermind what it does in terms of pissing away your budget.

You can invest in quality, well-made costumes that can be used again and again.

You can run a dyeshop with a mind to water and energy conservation.

You can impress upon your designers the impact of their decisions (for example, "Every time you purchase a fabric to be custom-dyed, that utilizes up to 200 gallons of water in the process," or "If you spend your entire budget on rentals, we will not be investing our costume budget back into our own stock.").

I think the most ecologically sound theatre is street Butoh in trash-picked attire. Theatre done in the actors' own clothes on grassy clearings in public parks is the next rung up, and then there's what we call "sweatsuits in a black-box by ghostlight". If we're going to do theatre with any kind of advanced production values though, we've got to compromise and make sensible, well-thought-out long-term choices, and we've got to include everyone in the conversation. It's clear to me that these costume-related suggestions listed by these organizations are either aimed at theatres who do not aspire to high technical production values, or were dreamed up by people who didn't run them by an actual costumer first.

And honestly, the first nail in the coffin of any regional theatre company is a lack of communication and mutual respect among departments. Which is weird, because talking's free, and so is demonstrating respect for one another's art and artisanship.

The other day i stocked up on some protective gear at the drugstore, and thought i'd make a post about it--not the sort of things you automatically think of as requisite in a costume craftsperson's work (like particle masks, rubber gloves, waterproof aprons, heat-resistent gloves, a respirator, etc), but occasionally necessary nonetheless.

( Read more... )

And, i also have some useful links to pass on!

This link to grist.com is ostensibly an advice column about the ethics of antique and vintage fur. Personal politics aside, theatre costume stocks are often packed with a rack or more of donated vintage fur coats, wraps, and other items. If not properly stored and cared for though, fur will rot and disintegrate. It's easy to cull most of your stock if you have the time and inclination to host a costume sale or donate a bunch of excess garments to charity, but furs are far more difficult to "get rid of." The end of that article though lists several organizations that will accept old furs, some taking even unwearable ones.

The same advice column has a pretty interesting article on footwear, specifically the comparison of ecological damage done by the leather shoe industry vs. the vinyl shoe industry.

And, speaking of shoes, there's a cool article in the Seattle Times on custom cordwainers Melinda and Louis Whisler, of the bespoke shoemaker boutique Rubaiyat, located in downtown Seattle. Some excellent shoe photos accompany the article.

I'll do a comprehensive overview of The Little Prince craftwork soon, once i get the photos back (covering hats, masks, "wig" effects, the Fox macropuppet, and the trick parasols), but i wanted to do a quick post about a couple of notable safety issues.

First, in the most recent edition of ACTS Facts is an article of note for everyone in a workplace where personal protective equipment (such as goggles, gloves, respirators, and protective attire) is required:

EMPLOYERS MUST PAY FOR PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT
BNA-OSHR, 37(45), 11/15/07, P.1007 & 72 FR64341-64430, 11/15/07

Eight years after it was first proposed, a standard that requires employers to pay for employee personal protective equipment (PPE) has been published in the Federal Register. The standard does not require employers to provide PPE where none has been required before. Instead it stipulates that the employer must pay for the PPE required by current regulation, except for the following:

• Non-specialty safety-toe protective footwear, including steel-toe shoes or boots, and non-specialty prescription safety eyewear if the employer permits such items to be worn off the job site.
  
• If the employer provides metatarsal guards but allows employee to use shoes or boots with built-in metatarsal protection, the employer is not required to reimburse employees for the shoes or boots.
  
• Logging boots.
  
• Everyday or ordinary clothing, such as long sleeve shirts, long pants, stret shoes, and normal work boots, or skin creams and other items used solely for protection from the weather such as winter coats, jackets, gloves, parkas, rubber boots, and hats.
  
• Lost or intentionally damaged PPE does not have to be replaced at the employer's expense.
  

According to OSHA, with the exception of footwear, employers for "nearly all industries" already pay for more than 90 percent of their employees' PPE. But now, it is the law. The law becomes effective February 13, 2008. After that, employers have until May15, 2008 to be in compliance.

[Reprinted from ACTS Facts, Monona Rossol, Editor, 181 Thompson St. #23, New York, NY, 10012-2586. Email: ACTSNYC@cs.com]



The other issue i'd like to mention is repetitive strain injury, a risk that's gotten a lot of attention with respect to office workers typing on a computer all day, but which is also a threat to those of us who work with our hands on fine motor tasks.

Any time you are doing something that requires you to repeat the same motion for literally hours on end, you run the risk of this kind of injury. I first developed it working as a freelance cutter for a costume shop in Los Angeles, for which i cut out dozens of pattern pieces a day without taking regular breaks; one of my students developed it from doing ages of threadmarking.

It can be painful and debilitating, but you can educate yourself in its prevention and treatment to minimize its effect on you. I have a range of wrist braces and compression gloves (like the ones on this page) that i wear as soon as i begin to feel its effects, and the most important part of treating mine is wearing a splinted brace on the affected arm/hand/wrist as i sleep.

I found myself in the position of having to cut out twelve parasol canopies (eight pieces per canopy) in a single afternoon, and this caused my RSI to recur. A few days of working with a compression glove and wrist splint, plus sleeping in a brace, has rectified the situation. Until i developed RSI though, i never gave it much thought, so i wanted to be certain to mention it here.

naeelah asks:

I'm hoping to start teaching myself more about shibori (and other resist dying techniques) as well as silk painting. It's easy enough to find resources on the dye techniques, but I'm feeling a bit clueless about the actual dyes, so I just wondered if you can recommend any particular dye brands or if you have any tips for setting up a home dye shop. (I think I'll mostly be working with smaller pieces of fabric and narrow pieces that are a few meters long.)

I'll be using mostly silk and cotton. One of the only big dye stores I'm aware of is Dharma Trading (.com), so I'm looking at their catalog, but if you know of any others, I'd be happy to hear them. Their catalog is nicely split up by dye techniques, and they have a lot of information on their dyes, but that can only tell me so much.

I hesitate to go into specific dye brands because i'm holding out for a sponsorship contract like basketball stars get with shoes, or rockstars get with guitar manufacturers.

Ok, i'm BS-ing, but i do feel like i can't necessarily recommend one brand over another, as i've not tried every brand out there. What i can do is tell you what i typically use, though, and maybe that'll be a good starting point for dipping into home-dyeing.

For shibori techniques in your home, i would suggest using fiber reactive cold-process dyes. They're fairly straightforward in processing, and you can do them in crappy buckets in a basement or backyard and don't have to deal with them in a kitchen situation, which is essential for home dyeing. (It freaks me right out when people dye in the same space they cook food in.)

I always use Pro Chemical's Fiber-Reactive MX dyes, and usually buy them straight from the manufacturer: http://www.prochemical.com/ ProChem's website is really excellent to surf through--they have great instructional write-ups on how to use all their dyes that are structured like a recipe, and all the Material Safety Data Sheets for their products are accessible online. The MX dyes in particle form are harmful to breathe, so if you go this route make sure you mix them in a ventilated space with particulate respiratory protection. Read through the instructions fully before you order stuff, because depending on what fiber you are dyeing you will need to order and add different chemical additives (soda ash, urea, etc).

Dharma carries the ProChem MX dyes, and can be a good place to order from if you want to also order other brands/supplies/chemicals, blank garments, equipment, etc. I like Dharma--i've been ordering from them since 1993, and they are always really helpful about recommending products, good service, and great about rectifying any problems (lost packages, wrong product, etc).

For silk painting--something i'm doing literally right now (it's hanging to dry) and will write up in a future post once our next show opens--i use Presist water-soluble resist and Dye-Na-Flow silk paints. I use these products because they are easy to use, fast, and clean up quick, all of which is of primary concern in theatre. There are other methods and products out there that are similar (Jacquard silk paints, water-based gutta) that i've used too and work well, and others that are more time-consuming and difficult to deal with. The more you get into it and the more time and effort and artistic detail you might want to put in, maybe you'd want to branch out. For a beginner, the flowable silk paints and water-based resists are probably easiest to try.

The only other company i order from is Aljo, who have a crappy website and i use them only for super-toxic scary synthetic dyes (not something you'd be doing in the home anyhow).

Regarding dyeing in the home, again, i think the cold-process dyes are a good choice because you can do them outdoors or somewhere that's NOT your kitchen. I think if you want to do hot-process dyes at home where you need to boil a bath or something, you are better off taking a dedicated dye-pot and a tabletop stove-eye and plugging it in out in the garage than you are dyeing on the same stove you cook dinner on. You will probably want to invest in some tarps for the floor, some gloves and a rubber/pvc apron, maybe some splashproof goggles. You will want a clothesline or folding clothes dryer to hang things on, some dedicated measuring spoons and cups, some tongs and a big spoon--none of which should come from the kitchen. You'll also want some bleach, so you can run an empty "bleach load" through your washer after you use it to rinse your dyed fabrics; this'll keep your subsequent actual laundry from getting speckled or weirdly dingey or whatever from residual dye. Most of this can be found at the Dollar General or similar so it's not a big $$ outlay to do it up safely.

You didn't ask about resources for technique, but i do want to plug the book Shibori: The Inventive Art of Japanese Shaped Resist Dyeing by Yoshiko Iwamoto Wada. It's an AWESOME resource full of great instructive photos (albeit black and white ones) for all kinds of techniques. It's IMO the best book out there on the subject.

On LJ, you might want to check out the communities dyeingfiber and fiber_dyeing, the former of which focuses on dyeing raw fiber for spinning and the latter on dyeing in general. They can be good communities for posing questions to folks of all degrees of expertise, but always research safety questions yourself through the MSDS for products--i find that the degree of laxity when it comes to safety, particularly with home crafting, is alarming online. Folks think that because something is marked "non-toxic" they can eat it, or because it makes them feel "funny" when they inhale vapors that is somehow cool and not inviting brain tumors and lung cancer or similar.

Hopefully this answers your questions!