Before the advent of the sewing machine, all clothes were hand-sewn, and only the wealthy could afford store-bought ones. Because they were so labour-intensive, there was no reason to skimp on materials, so clothes lasted a long time. When fashions changed, the rich would pass their clothes on to their servants, who would wear them or sell them to secondhand stores, where the middle classes shopped. This would go on down the class hierarchy, which is why chimney sweeps are traditionally shown wearing top hats. When clothes were too far gone to wear, they would be sold for rags. By the time of this film, that system was probably still in place. It’s amazing how little was thrown away compared to now, when a cheap t-shirt is worn a few times then becomes landfill.
I have a photo of my grandparents in front of their farmhouse in Manitoba circa 1910. As farmers, they were not rich, but neither were they poverty-stricken. My grandmother is dressed much like the women in the film, but with a magnifying glass it’s possible to see that the hem of her dress is in tatters.
Vegetable based diet. That makes ALL the difference, as any parent who’s been through the transition of introducing meat to their baby’s diet can attest …
I’m only insisting on “perfection” because I know it’s unattainable. Altering documentary footage doesn’t enhance realism, it creates a new “reality,” in this case, to suit the prejudices of the day. On general principle, I’m very wary about this sort of thing.
Reality isn’t real, since it is altered to “suit the prejudices of the day” and the prejudices of the observer. And all recording devices (photos, film, video, pens, pencils, human memory, clay tablets, scratch marks on a stick, …) have their prejudices, and more often than not the mere act of recording alters the thing being recorded.
