Copyleft | Musings

Copyleft and Copyright is the common umbrella term to refer to whether a user or interacting user owns a piece of (usually) media/abstract concept. In the spirit of Copyleft, all of this is CC accredited material apart from this text.

Queen Anne (1685, PD) Jan van der Vaart, Willem Wissing, Scottish National Portrait Gallery

Public Domain

"The public domain is a range of creative works whose copyright has expired or was never established, as well as ideas and facts[note 1] which are ineligible for copyright. A public domain work is a work whose author has either relinquished to the public or no longer can claim control over, the distribution and usage of the work. As such, any person may manipulate, distribute, or otherwise use the work, without legal ramifications. A work in the public domain or released under a permissive license may be referred to as "copycenter"."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_content

"In the early decades of computing, particularly from the 1950s through the 1970s, software development was largely collaborative. Programs were commonly shared in source code form among academics, researchers, and corporate developers. Most companies at the time made their revenue from hardware sales, and software—including source code—was distributed freely alongside it, often as public-domain software. By the late 1960s and 1970s, a distinct software industry began to emerge. Companies started selling software as a separate product, leading to the use of restrictive licenses and technical measures—such as distributing only binary executables—to limit user access and control. This shift was driven by growing competition and the U.S. government's antitrust scrutiny of bundled software, exemplified by the 1969 antitrust case United States v. IBM. A key turning point came in 1980 when U.S. copyright law was formally extended to cover computer software. This enabled companies like IBM to further enforce closed-source distribution models. In 1983, IBM introduced its "object code only" policy, ceasing the distribution of source code for its system software. [...] The historical precursor to FOSS was the hobbyist and academic public domain software ecosystem of the 1960s to 1980s. Free and open-source operating systems such as Linux distributions and descendants of BSD are widely used, powering millions of servers, desktops, smartphones, and other devices. Free-software licenses and open-source licenses have been adopted by many software packages. Reasons for using FOSS include decreased software costs, increased security against malware, stability, privacy, opportunities for educational usage, and giving users more control over their own hardware. [...These were socially droven projects like] the GNU Project in 1983 [... where the] goal was to develop a complete Free software operating system and restore user freedom. The Free Software Foundation (FSF) was established in 1985 to support this mission. Stallman's GNU Manifesto and the Four Essential Freedoms outlined the movement's ethical stance, emphasizing user control over software. The release of the Linux kernel by Linus Torvalds in 1991, and its relicense under the GNU General Public License (GPL) in 1992, marked a major step toward a fully Free operating system. Other Free software projects like FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD also gained traction following the resolution of the USL v. BSDi lawsuit in 1993. In 1997, Eric Raymond’s essay *The Cathedral and the Bazaar* explored the development model of Free software, influencing Netscape’s decision in 1998 to release the source code for its browser suite. This code base became Mozilla Firefox and Thunderbird. To broaden business adoption, a group of developers including Raymond, Bruce Perens, Tim O’Reilly, and Linus Torvalds rebranded the Free software movement as “Open Source.” The Open Source Initiative (OSI) was founded in 1998 to promote this new term and emphasize collaborative development benefits over ideology. Despite initial resistance—such as Microsoft's 2001 claim that "Open-source is an intellectual property destroyer"—FOSS eventually gained widespread acceptance in the corporate world. Companies like Red Hat proved that commercial success and Free software principles could coexist. [...] The free software movement and the open-source software movement are online social movements behind widespread production, adoption and promotion of FOSS, with the former preferring to use the equivalent term free/libre and open-source software (FLOSS). FOSS is supported by a loosely associated movement of multiple organizations, foundations, communities and individuals who share basic philosophical perspectives and collaborate practically, but may diverge in detail questions. [...] By defying ownership regulations in the construction and use of information—a key area of contemporary growth—the Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) movement counters neoliberalism and privatization in general. By realizing the historical potential of an "economy of abundance" for the new digital world, FOSS may lay down a plan for political resistance or show the way towards a potential transformation of capitalism. According to Yochai Benkler, Jack N. and Lillian R. Berkman Professor for Entrepreneurial Legal Studies at Harvard Law School, free software is the most visible part of a new economy of commons-based peer production of information, knowledge, and culture. As examples, he cites a variety of FOSS projects, including both free software and open-source."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software

Copyleft

"Copyleft is the legal technique of granting certain freedoms over copies of copyrighted works with the requirement that the same rights be preserved in derivative works. In this sense, freedoms refers to the use of the work for any purpose, and the ability to modify, copy, share, and redistribute the work, with or without a fee. Licenses which implement copyleft can be used to maintain copyright conditions for works ranging from computer software, to documents, art, and scientific discoveries, and similar approaches have even been applied to certain patents.

The origin of the term comes from "Li-Chen Wang's Palo Alto Tiny BASIC for the Intel 8080 [first] appeared in Dr. Dobb's Journal in May 1976. The listing begins with the title, author's name, and date, but also has "@COPYLEFT ALL WRONGS RESERVED"."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft

"There have been several attempts to define open source and free software. Amongst the earliest was Free Software Foundation's Free Software Definition, which then defined as the three freedoms of Free Software (Freedom Zero was added later). Published versions of FSF's Free Software Definition existed as early as 1986, having been published in the first edition of the (now defunct) GNU's Bulletin. [...] The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG) was [then] first published together with the first version of the Debian Social Contract in July 1997."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_Source_Definition

"Debian GNU/Linux (/ˈdɛbiən/),[7][8] or simply Debian, is a free and open source[b] Linux distribution, developed by the Debian Project, which was established by Ian Murdock in August 1993. Debian is one of the oldest operating systems based on the Linux kernel, and is the basis of many other Linux distributions. As of September 2023, Debian is the second-oldest Linux distribution still in active development: only Slackware is older."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian

"The concept of applying free software licenses to content was introduced by Michael Stutz, who in 1997 wrote the paper "Applying Copyleft to Non-Software Information" for the GNU Project. The term "open content" was coined by David A. Wiley in 1998 and evangelized via the Open Content Project, describing works licensed under the Open Content License (a non-free share-alike license, see 'Free content' below) and other works licensed under similar terms. The website of the Open Content Project once defined open content as 'freely available for modification, use and redistribution under a license similar to those used by the open-source / free software community'. However, such a definition would exclude the Open Content License because that license forbids charging for content; a right required by free and open-source software licenses. [...] Unlike free content and content under open-source licenses, there is no clear threshold that a work must reach to qualify as 'open content'. The 5Rs are put forward on the Open Content Project website as a framework for assessing the extent to which content is open:

Retain – the right to make, own, and control copies of the content (e.g., download, duplicate, store, and manage)

Reuse – the right to use the content in a wide range of ways (e.g., in a class, in a study group, on a website, in a video)

Revise – the right to adapt, adjust, modify, or alter the content itself (e.g., translate the content into another language)

Remix – the right to combine the original or revised content with other open content to create something new (e.g., incorporate the content into a mashup)

Redistribute – the right to share copies of the original content, your revisions, or your remixes with others (e.g., give a copy of the content to a friend). 

This broader definition distinguishes open content from open-source software, since the latter must be available for commercial use by the public. However, it is similar to several definitions for open educational resources, which include resources under noncommercial and verbatim licenses. [...] In 2006, a Creative Commons' successor project, the Definition of Free Cultural Works, was introduced for free content. It was put forth by Erik Möller, Richard Stallman, Lawrence Lessig, Benjamin Mako Hill, Angela Beesley, and others. The Definition of Free Cultural Works is used by the Wikimedia Foundation. In 2009, the Attribution and Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons licenses were marked as Approved for Free Cultural Works."

So in theory, copyleft operates under the assumption that offering open content freely and publicly as a social community resource will lead to an economy of abundance in a postscarcity economic model of the means of production. (seize the means! lmao)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-scarcity

"Technology has reduced the cost of publication and reduced the entry barrier sufficiently to allow for the production of widely disseminated materials by individuals or small groups. Projects to provide free literature and multimedia content have become increasingly prominent owing to the ease of dissemination of materials that are associated with the development of computer technology. [...] Free and open-source software, which is often referred to as open source software and free software, is a maturing technology with companies using them to provide services and technology to both end-users and technical consumers. The ease of dissemination increases modularity, which allows for smaller groups to contribute to projects as well as simplifying collaboration. Some claim that open source development models offer similar peer-recognition and collaborative benefit incentive as in more classical fields such as scientific research, with the social structures that result leading to decreased production costs. Given sufficient interest in a software component, by using peer-to-peer distribution methods, distribution costs may be reduced, easing the burden of infrastructure maintenance on developers. As distribution is simultaneously provided by consumers, these software distribution models are scalable; that is, the method is feasible regardless of the number of consumers. In some cases, free software vendors may use peer-to-peer technology as a method of dissemination. Project hosting and code distribution is not a problem for most free projects as a number of providers offer these source-code-hosting provider provider free of charge."

For instance, the Open Knowledge Foundation's Open Definition describes "open" as synonymous with the definition of free in the "Definition of Free Cultural Works" (as also in the Open Source Definition and Free Software Definition).[5] For such free/open content both movements recommend the same three Creative Commons licenses, the CC BY, CC BY-SA, and CC0. [...] Any country has its own law and legal system, sustained by its legislation, which consists of documents. In a democratic country, laws are published as open content, in principle free content; but in general, there are no explicit licenses attributed for the text of each law, so the license must be assumed as an implied license. Only a few countries have explicit licenses in their law-documents, as the UK's Open Government Licence (a CC BY compatible license). In the other countries, the implied license comes from its proper rules (general laws and rules about copyright in government works). The automatic protection provided by the Berne Convention does not apply to the texts of laws: Article 2.4 excludes the official texts from the automatic protection. It is also possible to "inherit" the license from context. The set of country's law-documents is made available through national repositories. Examples of law-document open repositories: LexML Brazil, Legislation.gov.uk, and N-Lex. In general, a law-document is offered in more than one (open) official version, but the main one is that published by a government gazette. So, law-documents can eventually inherit license expressed by the repository or by the gazette that contains it."

"In academic work, the majority of works are not free, although the percentage of works that are open access is growing. Open access refers to online research outputs that are free of all restrictions to access and free of many restrictions on use (e.g. certain copyright and license restrictions).[24] Authors may see open access publishing as a way of expanding the audience that is able to access their work to allow for greater impact, or support it for ideological reasons.[25][26] Open access publishers such as PLOS and BioMed Central provide capacity for review and publishing of free works; such publications are currently more common in science than humanities. Various funding institutions and governing research bodies have mandated that academics must produce their works to be open-access, in order to qualify for funding, such as the US National Institutes of Health, Research Councils UK (effective 2016) and the European Union (effective 2020). [...[ For teaching purposes, some universities, including MIT, provide freely available course content, such as lecture notes, video resources and tutorials. This content is distributed via Internet to the general public. [...] Open content publication has been seen as a method of reducing costs associated with information retrieval in research, as universities typically pay to subscribe for access to content that is published through traditional means.[9][34] Subscriptions for non-free content journals may be expensive for universities to purchase, though the articles are written and peer-reviewed by academics themselves at no cost to the publisher. [...] Free and open content has been used to develop alternative routes towards higher education. Open content is a free way of obtaining higher education that is focused on collective knowledge and the sharing and reuse of learning and scholarly content. There are multiple projects and organizations that promote learning through open content, including OpenCourseWare and Khan Academy. Some universities, like MIT, Yale, and Tufts are making their courses freely available on the internet. There are also a number of organizations promoting the creation of openly licensed textbooks such as the University of Minnesota's Open Textbook Library, Connexions, OpenStax College, the Saylor Academy, Open Textbook Challenge, and Wikibooks."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_content

Copyright

"In most countries, the Berne Convention grants copyright holders control over their creations by default. Therefore, copyrighted content must be explicitly declared free by the authors, which is usually accomplished by referencing or including licensing statements from within the work. The right to reuse such a work is granted by the authors in a license known as a free license, a free distribution license, or an open license, depending on the rights assigned. These freedoms given to users in the reuse of works (that is, the right to freely use, study, modify or distribute these works, possibly also for commercial purposes) are often associated with obligations (to cite the original author, to maintain the original license of the reused content) or restrictions (excluding commercial use, banning certain media) chosen by the author. [...] Copyright is a legal concept, which gives the author or creator of a work legal control over the duplication and public performance of their work. In many jurisdictions, this is limited by a time period after which the works then enter the public domain. Copyright laws are a balance between the rights of creators of intellectual and artistic works and the rights of others to build upon those works. During the time period of copyright the author's work may only be copied, modified, or publicly performed with the consent of the author, unless the use is a fair use. Traditional copyright control limits the use of the work of the author to those who either pay royalties to the author for usage of the author's content or limit their use to fair use. Secondly, it limits the use of content whose author cannot be found.[10] Finally, it creates a perceived barrier between authors by limiting derivative works, such as mashups and collaborative content."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_content

"The concept of copyright developed after the printing press came into use in Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries. It was associated with a common law and rooted in the civil law system. The printing press made it much cheaper to produce works, but as there was initially no copyright law, anyone could buy or rent a press and print any text. Popular new works were immediately re-set and re-published by competitors, so printers needed a constant stream of new material. Fees paid to authors for new works were high and significantly supplemented the incomes of many academics. Printing brought profound social changes. The rise in literacy across Europe led to a dramatic increase in the demand for reading matter. Prices of reprints were low, so publications could be bought by poorer people, creating a mass audience. In German-language markets before the advent of copyright, technical materials, like popular fiction, were inexpensive and widely available; it has been suggested this contributed to Germany's industrial and economic success.

The concept of copyright first developed in England. In reaction to the printing of "scandalous books and pamphlets", the English Parliament passed the Licensing of the Press Act 1662, which required all intended publications to be registered with the government-approved Stationers' Company, giving the Stationers the right to regulate what material could be printed. The Statute of Anne, enacted in 1710 in England and Scotland, provided the first legislation to protect [publisher] copyrights [rights to copy the text] (but not authors' rights). The Copyright Act 1814 extended more rights for authors but did not protect British publications from being reprinted in the US. The Berne International Copyright Convention of 1886 finally provided protection for authors among the countries who signed the agreement, although the US did not join the Berne Convention until 1989. [...] Copyright laws allow products of creative human activities, such as literary and artistic production, to be preferentially exploited and thus incentivized. Different cultural attitudes, social organizations, economic models and legal frameworks are seen to account for why copyright emerged in Europe and not, for example, in Asia. In the Middle Ages in Europe, there was generally a lack of any concept of literary property due to the general relations of production, the specific organization of literary production and the role of culture in society. The latter refers to the tendency of oral societies, such as that of Europe in the medieval period, to view knowledge as the product and expression of the collective, rather than to see it as individual property. However, with copyright laws, intellectual production comes to be seen as a product of an individual, with attendant rights. The most significant point is that patent and copyright laws support the expansion of the range of creative human activities that can be commodified. This parallels the ways in which capitalism led to the commodification of many aspects of social life that earlier had no monetary or economic value per se. Copyright has developed into a concept that has a significant effect on nearly every modern industry, including not just literary work, but also forms of creative work such as sound recordings, films, photographs, software, and architecture."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

GNU template definition https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software FOSS

SRS BSNSS

 So, I'm away on a business trip atm, so, I'm kinda busy. Which isn't much of an excuse, but some really exciting doors have opened up for me potentially, so we'll see where it all goes. 

Princess Kaiulani in Wafuku (c.1888, PD) Walter Le Montais Giffard

Princess Kaiulani in Yofuku (1897, PD) Anonymous

Lilies (1890, PD) HRH Liluokani

Otherwise, enjoy the images of the Hawaiian princess, Princess Kaiulani. She is one of my favourite royals who deserves more attention to her story.

- A grumpy travelling tomfool.

凰 | ホウオウ | Phoenix | Patterns #24

The phoenix is a bird which is said to be auspicious. According to legend the phoenix is a fantastic flying bird which dies in a ring of fire, burning to a crisp into ashes. This legendary bird is then said to rise from the ashes and is reborn in a cyclic nature, having a long life in the Western tradition, in China the Phoenix simply descends from the heavens.[2] The legend in Japanese folklore see this as a great sign that a ruler will be reborn in a time of great prosperity. This will bring an era of peace, where the Ho-O will do good deeds and return to the stars when it is done.

Lady, Phoenix and Dragon (700 BCE, PD) Hunan Museum

Also a reminder that my highschool drawing style was high art based on the traditional classics, not just my inability to draw hands, feet and proportions correctly

Historically the image originates around China in 6000 BCE, and were used as a form of totemism. Most depictions were made in Jade as burial objects for their owners to use in the after life. During the Han dynasty, they became symbols of the Imperial crown.[1] It was believed the phoenix was female, and the dragon male for some reason.[2] Entering the reportoire of Japanese design in the Nara period. Later editions included Ho-Oh from the Pokemon franchise.[1] Most modern kimono feature designs which are detailed and expensive for Kakemono. These patterns are often good luck for marriage and feature extensive tails to represent this.

Bibliography

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fenghuang

[2] https://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/ho-oo-phoenix.shtml

Socials:

One stop Link shop: https://linktr.ee/Kaguyaschest
https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/KaguyasChest?ref=seller-platform-mcnav 
https://www.instagram.com/kaguyaschest/ 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5APstTPbC9IExwar3ViTZw 
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/LuckyMangaka/hrh-kit-of-the-suke/ 

ヨーロッパのバンヤン | European Banyans | 1639 - 1750 | Essay #15

This essay will explore the European garment known as a Banyan, which originated as a European reaction to Kimono in the 17th century and was popular until the end of the 18th century. The word Banyan originates from Arabic (بنيان | Banyaan), Portuguese (Banian), Tamil (வாணியன் | Vaaniyan ) and Gujarati (વાણિયો | Vaaniyo) loanwords meaning 'Merchant'. Alternative versions saw the item fitted with buttons and ribbons to attach the two front sides together.[1] The Banyan was worn by all genders and was particularly regarded in its first iterations as a gentlemanly or intellectual garment worn with a cap to cover the lack of a periwig, and later adopted by women and greatly influenced how British womens garments were designed with preference for comfort in removal of panniers whilst maintaining luxurious, modest 18th century fashions (see Robe a la Anglaise).

Japanse Rock

Wafuku were first imported into Europe by 1649 into the Dutch Republic, and their scarcity made them a highly sought after commodity among the wealthy who could afford them, like a Birkin bag today.[2] 17th century Banyan can be recognised by their characteristic cut which resembles those of contemporary articles of Wafuku* which reached Amsterdam in the early trading period with Japan as gifts from contemporary Daimyo and Tokugawa Ietsuna (1641–1680), then Shogun. Taking their cut from Kosode of the time, some were sold and worn in the Dutch Republic (1581-1795) after being assembled in Japan and brought over by the VOC ( Dutch East India Company | Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie). European Banyan were most commonly made from Silk, Cotton or Linen.[1] This style of dress was known by the Dutch as a Japanese dress coat (Japanse Jurk Jas) by 1688.[2]

Indian Gownes

Banyan were imported into England by around 1665 and are likely to have been used in the courts of Charles II, brought from Amsterdam by the EIC ( East India Company ). During this time, the fashionable wore their Banyans with the sleeves and collars folded back to expose the luxurious silks used underneath. Earlier Dutch examples seem to more closely follow the imported Kosode styles which due to their padding required a tight closed hem and thus not as easily folded. Samuel Pepys wrote in 1665 of doing his accounting in his nightgown, and was quite happily portrayed in 1666 in the same 'Indian Gowne' which connoted his vast wealth and status in even having one at this early time, demarcating him as a glamourous society figure and fashionable figure at court.[2]

Samuel Pepys in his 'Indian Gowne' (1666, PD) John Hayls

Indian Gowne and Morning Dress was another name for a Banyan[2]

Dutch Man in Banyan (1671, PD) Michiel van Musscher

Merry Vests

The Banyan often was companion to the 3 piece suit which was invented at the court of Charles II in 1666. To promote English trade over French fashions worn by the aristocratic classes of England, Charles began a new fashion of wearing vests at his English court.[3]

[Charles II] hath yesterday in Council declared his resolution of setting a fashion for clothes, which he will never alter. It will be a vest, I know not well how, but it is to teach the nobility thrift, and will do good. - Samuel Pepys 8/10/1666 [3]

The Banyan as a T-shaped garment made from silk for gentlemens loungewear was made in Britain certainly by the 1670s.[2] It was with the advent of the newly fashionable three piece suit that aristocratic men began styling their wardrobes with lavish accents such as gold trim, silk buttons, satire worthy hats and overcoats to match. One of these fashions by 1675 was the Banyan style House coat or even Kimono in rarer instances in which the fashionable late 17th century man of means lounged around in.

'Lord Cockerell' Display Doll in latest London Fashions (c1690, Copyright the V&A**) V&A

The upper proto-middle classes (if we can say that) of the working professionals in the time period had also begun to wear their nightgownes out in the street, unlike the gentry who simply swanned around their estates in them.[2] Both of these two social groups however would have worn these long androgynous gowns over linen shirts and their breeches or stays and chemises for women of the time. At the end of the day, Men would dress as this elegant doll in their Banyan which took the place of their waistcoats by evening. All a byproduct of the complex Restoration periods realpolitik at the English court as a 'mother country'.

Isaac Newton in a Banyan (c1709, PD) James Newton Thornhill

As this style progressed, buttons became a must and frogging was also a key feature of 18th century first quarter British Banyans to prevent the garment trailing along the floor, a workaround for the lack of Obi it seems. By the 1730s, in London alone there were five general tailor stores or Warehouses which specialised in selling ready-to-wear Banyans made using European and Chinese silks. Other Banyans also had attached waistcoat inserts sewn into Banyans to give the illusion of a waistcoat as well for recieving visitors in the Banyan.[2] 

Thomas Weston (1723, PD) M Dahl

A Rake's Progress (1735, PD) William Hogarth

Figure third from right here wears a Banyan style

Banyan should be regarded as European garment made for European usage, but are distinctly part of European KTC in the sense that they were made, worn and used by Westerners. Banyan were regarded as a sort of unisex loungewear for the well to do about the house, which often co-orded with the furniture.[2] By the 1730's, they were given an intellectual veneer as men of letters often wore them to have their portraits painted in their well endowed libraries. Gentlemen would recieve visitors in them, and as is seen in the Rakes Progress, became the equivalent of a woman in rollers and sweats going to the shop for milk at 11:00PM. Add a fitted collar, and the Rake could be deemed as almost acceptably dressed to go out in public.[2] 

Robe a la Anglaise (English nightgown) Dress (c1785, PD) LACMA

Banyan were also adopted as a form of nightwear by women to worn before dressing in daywear by this time adopting a ribbon or buttons to fasten them.[1] Womens Banyan otherwise were the same shape, a sort of cloak. Womens Banyan often had pleated and broader backs than Mens, and are certainly far scarcer in todays collections. By 1740, the Banyan peaked in popularity and the grammar nazi Samuel Johnson himself noted it in 1755 as a 'Bannian'. Extant examples of the 1760s show the development of a 'Banyan pleat', which consists of 3 inverted box pleats along the spine and sides of the garment to reign in the fabric. These were also made into dresses and were the forerunner of the Robe d'Anglaise fashion which took the pleats from the waist rather than in a backless gown. The 1790 Close bodied (Anglaise) style also revealed the front petticoats, much like the overturned Banyan hems of menswear a century before.

Coromandel Banyan (c1750, PD) Sharon Sadako Takeda

Other countries also assisted in the production and thererby acculturation of these garments, principally China and India.[2] The above garment was a Coromandel (India) Banyan made for the gentleman at home and were popular until the late 18th century when the vogue became more fitted garments once more. This may be due to the popularity of the Banyan as loungewear expanding to wider portions of the Continentals who wanted the look, but didnt want the excess fabric. No, excess fabric ist zur exotisch fur die Kontinentals. Non, they wanted smoking jackets. In this stead, Indian tailoring techniques were also adopted into Banyans and became more fitted and adopted high necklines and tighter sleeves from similar Mughal court dress.

British fitted Banyan (c1780, PD) Andrew Bolton

A merry party (c1850, PD) Dorotheum

Instead by around 1780, the Banyan silhouette became more slimmed down and the back of the garment was still incredibly loose, acting as more of a coat than a robe, though retaining the social function as home loungewear. Due to the power of the Ottoman Empire though, new styles began to come into vogue.  Based on Middle Eastern styles, the smoking jacket became more popular by the 1840s. Banyan were still worn however until 1860 as a robe albeit without the excess trailing fabric in the sleeves or length of the 17th century edition. Rather than radical luxury, the Banyan or dressing gown was now the form we use today.

Conclusion

In context the overall picture we can gather of the Banyan is that as a European component of KTC, the Banyan was actively influenced by Kosode design and tailoring from 1665-1720 as an accompaniment to English fashions. 1720-1780 saw this continue with an emphasis on comfort which in France was the Robe Volante style. 1780-1860 saw the inclination towards East and Central Asians styles dominated the designs of Banyans, particularly those in Silks and Brocades.[2] After 1835 in particular, we clearly see the Banyan vogue fading in favour of the smoking jacket style in menswear, and with a similar pleated consensus in womenswear albeit by 1760, evolving into the Close bodied gown style by 1780.

Banyans began as a European alternative to the ludicrously rare Kosode of the mid 17th century and became known by 1700 as the grandfather of the modern dressing gown. Banyan acted as signifiers of taste, wealth and fashionable attire in England and the Dutch Republic at the height of their popularity, amid a time where the landed gentry sought and bought for the Japanese effect, rather than from primary sources such as Japanese artists, unless we are discussing the items were brought by the VOC at the time. The influence thus of Japanese KTC on  European textiles was in allowing greater freedom of movement, comfort and in providing an early form of androgynous or unisex tailoring in Western European tailoring and silhouettes, altering Western aesthetical conceptions of how the body interacted with cloth and space in acceptably modest forms.[2][4]

Additional Examples:

 - https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O1244844/night-gown-unknown/ (1720-1750 Banyan)

Bibliography

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banyan_(clothing)

[2] http://www.fashioningtheearlymodern.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Banyans-21.pdf | Object in focus: Man’s banyan, Moira Thunder, 2012, Victoria and Albert Musuem for the Europeana Project

[3] https://vogue.sg/history-of-the-three-piece-suit/

[4] https://fashionhistory.fitnyc.edu/robe-a-langlaise/ 

*I use 'Wafuku' instead of Kimono, as always, becuase the term 'Kimono' originated among Japanese people in reaction to the need for a word to distinguish Wafuku and Yofuku becuase foreigners asked for one; without which otherwise there would be difference prior to the 1860s, the Kimono as a social construct only entering global culture after 1918. 

**I presume the object is under the public domain down to age, the file itself is purely used to illustrate on educational content of contemporary fashions and is used here specifically in a non-commercial function. I do not intend to represent the views of the V&A, nor claim any affiliation, nor speak nor write on their behalf but am operating under the fair use clause of the 1988 UK copyright legislation, intentionally in an educational, non-commercial function under good faith. Having read the T&C's, I cannot find a specific license for these images, and thus presume the file is copyrighted and do not condone any third party actions usage of this file. All copyright again belongs to the Museum, not myself and if you wish to use the file, please see the Musuems T&C for use.

Socials:

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/LuckyMangaka/timono/

飛鳥美人画 | Asuka Bijin | 538-710 | Bijin #14

The Asuka Bijin or Asuka Beauties (538-710) refer to a series of burial paintings depicting a number of beautiful people dressed in contemporary beautified attire. They are thought to have been made by a Korean artist due to their dress matching descriptions of contemporaneous Korean national dress, given that Japan had developed trade relations with the proto-Korean nations of Baekje, Silla, Gaya and Goguryeo.[1] It is thought that the tomb is most likely an ode to one of Emperor Tenmu's (c.631CE-686CE) relatives, Isonokami Ason Maro (640–717) or for the Japanese-Baekjean nobleman Kudara no Konikishi Zenkō (617CE-700CE).

Asuka Bijin (c650 PD) Maculosae tegmine lyncis, Wikimedia Commons

When we are seeing the aesthetics of the Asuka Bijin, we can see how these when compared to similar time period works  display the Asuka sense of beauty in relation to ideals about Buddhism, modesty, Asian ideology such as Confucianism, wealth and hierarchy. Whilst a lot of the information about the aesthetics of this period are lost to us with the passage of time, we can see that modesty clearly played quite a large role in how the body was adorned in particular, and how an almost excess of fabric, long trains, props, fans, dyed fabrics and coiffed duck hairstyles all played into the hierarchical aesthetic of portraying the Asuka aesthetic of having or being wealth adjacent.

Ruqun Han (c25CE, PD) Anonymous, Ws227

These depictions of beauties can be taken as part of a wider Pan-Asian acculturation of dress, adapted initially from the Chinese Ruqun. The Ruqun being a Chinese garment made of a lower top and skirt worn from the bust down. This was also the official court dress of Korea when Goguryeo became a tributary state to the Celestials in 32CE. Goguryeo courtiers received the official uniform every time they got a new king, and this system was known as the Gwanbok system, becoming the Korean Hanbok. The official set of garments worn in Goguryeo became known as the 'Ochaebok' becoming more fixed by around 200CE under the influence of the Han dynasty.[3]

Woman in Paofu Model (c206) 

The Han brought about many standardised and alternative Hanfu accessories we might say which included the Paofu, shown above. 

Gwanbok Ochaebok of Korea (c371, PD) Wikimedia Commons

During this time, with the rise and fall of many paperwork kingdoms and dynasties, the Ruqun changed forms to adapt to new climates in the Celestial Empire of the Middle Kingdom (Old China). When the court of the Northern dynasties ruled (around 300-550CE), this saw the introduce of the Durumagi, a type of overcoat worn by courtiers to keep warm.[3] By 360CE, this was introduced into the Gwanbok system from Chinese refugees fleeing civil wars and worn in Goguryeo.[3][4] By this time, the Han dynasty had fully developed and all of Gwanbok court attire was derived from their Hanfu (Han clothing) style of dress.

Admonitions of the Instructress to the Court Ladies (c.370, PD) Ku K'ai-chih

Guiyi style from back (c406[copy c.1279], PD) Anonymous

Another style which gained popularity in this manner at the same time, was the Guiyi (Swallow-Tail Flying Ribbons) garments.[3] This became the Guipao (one piece) and Gui-Chang (two piece) styles. The predominantly popular style was the Gui-Chang at the time, and it was this form of royal attire which was heavily worn by the courts during the first millenia which is the form of clothing the Asuka Bijin, most likely heavily influenced by their allies the Goguryeo court and their form of Ochaebok Gwanbok dress system wear. 

Durumagi bedecked  APEC goers (2005, CC3.0) Le Kremlin

By around the year 550CE, this form of dress developed in Japan into the Wafuku style of the Durumagi atop the Guiyi style bottom. At this point, Confucianism was on the wane in the China in lieu of Lao Tzu, Buddhist translations from Northern India, Humanitarian Philosophy and Taoism amongst lower nobles which caused infighting with the upper court nobles, resulting in lower nobles pursuit of Xuanxue (mysterious learning, or Chinese semantic arguments about Dao) to lead an almost aesthetic lifestyle of seeking for comfort and beauty as per their mysterious new philosophy.[4] In this 300 year timespan (200-500CE) we see how Chinese court attire was transmitted via cultural acculturation over from Imperial China via Goguryeo to Japan by the beginning of the Asuka period in 538CE.

Asuka Bijin

Japanese Wafuku only distinguished itself as distinctive ethnic clothing in the face of European questioning and a move away and onwards in a distinct cultural sense from their neighbours in the late 16th century. The particular painter of the Takamatsuzuka Tumulus is thought to have been from southern Goguryeo.[2] These four figures comprise of the four serving maids of a procession for the owner of the tomb, and are half of the procession which follows Ancient Chinese celestial symbols around the mound interior.[2] Thus they are wearing a Gui-Chang and Durumagi dress style, adopted from the Goguryeo courts, in turn adopted from earlier Northern Chinese Dynasty styles.

Another distinctive element of dress reform was the inclusion of long sleeves over the Paofu (one piece floor length robe) which closely resembles the modern kimono, but the Kimono distinctly comes later and as more of a Heimin item than aristocratic one, hence Paofu being the Heimin derivative and Guiyi the aristocratic equivalent whose legacy in Japan is the Junihitoe.[4][5] The Paofu was originally simply an overcoat for the Shenyi, an older form of Ruqun. It seems to be in this sense that the Paofu was an early indicator of the Kosode, that is as an outer layer visible to the naked eye which wraps around the body, ties asymmetrically and would have used a belt to hold its place.

The Wa Bijin

In context we can see how the court dress of Imperial China and Ancient Korea has been passed down into the cultural Acculturation of the Kimono as one variety of Pan-Asian ethnic clothing. We can also see how this makes the Kimono rather more transnational and polycultural than some ethnocentrics would have us believe, and show how as a cousin of the Hanbok and granddaughter of the Ruqun, the Kimono developed during the early Asuka period. This acculturation of the Ruqun, Paofu and Guiyi styles of China into the Gogoryeo courts with the fleeing of Chinese refugees from the tumultous warring states period of China show how these ideas were transmitted to the early fiefdoms and leaders of Asuka period society by Far Eastern cultures, distinct from our modern understanding of them, in the national sense into Wa by 538CE. It is this context which allows us to comprehend what a beautiful person could look like in the area known as Wa at this time, and that this was based heavily on Chinese-Korean models, aesthetics and beauty ideals.

Bibliography 

[1] See Fabrics #3

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takamatsuzuka_Tomb#History

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwanbok#Goguryeo

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swallow-tailed_Hems_and_Flying_Ribbons_clothing

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paofu

Bijin Series Timeline

11th century BCE

- The Ruqun becomes a formal garment in China (1000 BCE) [Coming Soon]

8th century BCE

- Chinese clothing becomes highly hierarchical (771 BCE) [Coming Soon]

0000 Current Era

7th century

Asuka Bijin (c.699); The Wa Bijin

8th century

- Introduction of Chinese Tang Dynasty clothing (710)

- Sumizuri-e (710)

- Classical Chinese Art ; Zhou Fang (active 766-805) ; Qiyun Bijin

- Emakimono Golden Age (799-1400)

15th century 

- Fuzokuga Painting schools; Kano (1450-1868) and Tosa (1330-1690) 

- Machi- Eshi painters; 1336-1650? [Coming Soon] 

16 century 

- Nanbanjin Art (1550-1630) 

- Wamono style begins under Chanoyu teachings (c1550-1580)

- Byobu Screens (1580-1670)

 - End of Sengoku Jidai brings Stabilisation policy (1590-1615)  

17th century  

- Land to Currency based Economy Shift (1601-1655)

- Early Kabuki Culture (1603-1673) ; Yakusha-e or Actor Prints

- Sumptuary legislation in reaction to the wealth of the merchant classes (1604-1685) 

- Regulation of export and imports of foreign trade in silk and cotton (1615-1685)  

Iwasa Matabei (active 1617-1650) ; Yamato-e Bijin  

The Hikone Screen (c.1624-1644) [Coming Soon]

- Sankin-Kotai (1635-1642) creates mass Urbanisation  

- Popular culture and print media production moves from Kyoto to Edo (1635-1650); Kiyohara Yukinobu (1650-1682) ; Manji Classical Beauty

- Shikomi-e (1650-1670) and Kakemono-e which promote Androgynous Beauties;

 Iwasa Katsushige (active 1650-1673) ; Kojin Bijin

- Mass Urbanisation instigates the rise of Chonin Cottage Industry Printing (1660-1690) ; rise of the Kabunakama Guilds and decline of the Samurai

- Kanazoshi Books (1660-1700); Koshokubon Genre (1659?-1661)

- Shunga (1660-1722); Abuna-e

Kanbun Master/School (active during 1661-1673) ; Maiko Bijin 

- Hinagata Bon (1666 - 1850) 

- Ukiyo Monogatari is published by Asai Ryoi (1666) 

Yoshida Hanbei (active 1664-1689) ; Toned-Down Bijin

- Asobi/Suijin Dress Manuals (1660-1700)

- Ukiyo-e Art (1670-1900)

Hishikawa Moronobu (active 1672-1694) ; Wakashu Bijin

- Early Bijin-ga begin to appear as Kakemono (c.1672)  

- Rise of the Komin-Chonin Relationship (1675-1725)

- The transit point from Kosode to modern Kimono (1680); Furisode, Wider Obi 

- The Genroku Osaka Bijin (1680 - 1700) ; Yuezen Hiinakata

Sugimura Jihei (active 1681-1703) ; Technicolour Bijin 

- The Amorous Tales are published by Ihara Saikaku (1682-1687)

Hishikawa Morofusa (active 1684-1704) [Coming Soon]

- The Beginning of the Genroku Era (1688-1704)

- The rise of the Komin and Yuujo as mainstream popular culture (1688-1880) 

- The consolidation of the Bijinga genre as mainstream pop culture 

- The rise of the Torii school (1688-1799) 

- Tan-E (1688-1710)   

Miyazaki Yuzen (active 1688-1736) ; Genroku Komin and Wamono Bijin 

Torii Kiyonobu (active 1688 - 1729) : Commercial Bijin

Furuyama Moromasa (active 1695-1748)

18th century

Nishikawa Sukenobu (active 1700-1750) [Coming Soon]

Kaigetsudo Ando (active 1700-1736) ; Broadstroke Bijin

Okumura Masanobu (active 1701-1764)

Kaigetsudo Doshin (active 1704-1716) [Coming Soon]

Baioken Eishun (active 1710-1755) [Coming Soon]

Kaigetsudo Anchi (active 1714-1716) [Coming Soon]

Yamazaki Joryu (active 1716-1744) [Coming Soon]

1717 Kyoho Reforms

Miyagawa Choshun (active 1718-1753) [Coming Soon]

Miyagawa Issho (active 1718-1780) [Coming Soon]

Nishimura Shigenaga (active 1719-1756) [Coming Soon]

Matsuno Chikanobu (active 1720-1729) [Coming Soon]

- Beni-E (1720-1743)

Torii Kiyonobu II (active 1725-1760) [Coming Soon]

- Uki-E (1735-1760)

Kawamata Tsuneyuki (active 1736-1744) [Coming Soon]

Kitao Shigemasa (1739-1820)

Miyagawa Shunsui (active from 1740-1769) [Coming Soon]

Benizuri-E (1744-1760)

Ishikawa Toyonobu (active 1745-1785) [Coming Soon]

Tsukioka Settei (active 1753-1787) [Coming Soon]

Torii Kiyonaga (active 1756-1787) [Coming Soon]

Shunsho Katsukawa (active 1760-1793) [Coming Soon]

Utagawa Toyoharu (active 1763-1814) [Coming Soon]

Suzuki Harunobu (active 1764-1770) [Coming Soon]

- Nishiki-E (1765-1850)

Torii Kiyonaga (active 1765-1815) [Coming Soon]

Kitao Shigemasa (active 1765-1820) [Coming Soon]

Maruyama Okyo (active 1766-1795) [Coming Soon]

Kitagawa Utamaro (active 1770-1806) [Coming Soon]

Kubo Shunman (active 1774-1820) [Coming Soon]

Tsutaya Juzaburo (active 1774-1797) [Coming Soon]

Utagawa Kunimasa (active from 1780-1810) [Coming Soon]

Tanehiko Takitei (active 1783-1842) [Coming Soon]

Katsukawa Shuncho (active 1783-1795) [Coming Soon]

Choubunsai Eishi (active 1784-1829) [Coming Soon]

Eishosai Choki (active 1786-1808) [Coming Soon]

Rekisentei Eiri (active 1789-1801) [Coming Soon] [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ukiyo-e_paintings#/media/File:Rekisentei_Eiri_-_'800),_Beauty_in_a_White_Kimono',_c._1800.jpg]

Chokosai Eisho (active 1792-1799) [Coming Soon]

Kunimaru Utagawa (active 1794-1829) [Coming Soon]

Utagawa Toyokuni II (active 1794 - 1835) [Coming Soon]

Ryūryūkyo Shinsai (active 1799-1823) [Coming Soon]

19th century

Teisai Hokuba (active 1800-1844) [Coming Soon]

Totoya Hokkei (active 1800-1850) [Coming Soon]

Utagawa Kunisada Toyokuni III (active 1800-1865) [Coming Soon]

Urakusai Nagahide (active from 1804) [Coming Soon]

Kitagawa Tsukimaro (active 1804 - 1836)

Kikukawa Eizan (active 1806-1867) [Coming Soon]

Keisai Eisen (active 1808-1848) [Coming Soon]

Utagawa Kuniyoshi (active 1810-1861) [Coming Soon]

Utagawa Hiroshige (active 1811-1858) [Coming Soon]

Yanagawa Shigenobu (active 1818-1832) [Coming Soon]

Utagawa Kunisada II (active 1844-1880) [Coming Soon]

Toyohara Kunichika (active 1847-1900) [Coming Soon]

Kano Hogai (active 1848-1888) [Coming Soon]

Tsukioka Yoshitoshi (active 1850-1892) [Coming Soon]

Toyohara Chikanobu (active 1875-1912) [Coming Soon]

Kiyokata Kaburaki (active 1891-1972) [Coming Soon]

Goyo Hashiguchi (active 1899-1921) [Coming Soon]

20th century

Yumeji Takehisa (active 1905-1934) [Coming Soon]

Torii Kotondo (active 1915-1976) [Coming Soon]

Yamakawa Shūhō (active 1927-1944) [Coming Soon]

Social Links

One stop Link shop: https://linktr.ee/Kaguyaschest

https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/KaguyasChest?ref=seller-platform-mcnav 

https://www.instagram.com/kaguyaschest/ 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5APstTPbC9IExwar3ViTZw 

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/LuckyMangaka/hrh-kit-of-the-suke/